An Integrated Method for Evaluation of Detailed Plans by Using Plan Process Result (PPR) and Process Policy-Plan/Program Implementation (PPIP) (Case Study: Region 6 of Shiraz Detailed Plan)
محورهای موضوعی : Sustainable Development
1 - Phd. In Urban Management, Faculty of Fine Arts, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran.
کلید واژه: Plan Process Result, Process Policy-Plan/Program Implementation, Region 6 of Shiraz Detailed Plan,
چکیده مقاله :
This article provides an overview of the ongoing debate on evaluation within the field of urban planning. It begins with a state-of-the-art review that is organized into three interrelated parts. The first examines the historical evolution of evaluation theories and methods, highlighting how approaches have shifted from traditional cost–benefit analysis and rational models toward more complex, participatory, and context-sensitive frameworks. The second part addresses the contemporary planning debate, which is shaped by diverse paradigms such as communicative planning, collaborative governance, and sustainability-oriented strategies. Special emphasis is placed on the practice of evaluation in planning, with particular reference to Public Participation in Planning (PPIP) and Participatory Planning Review (PPR) as mechanisms that attempt to bridge technical expertise with local knowledge and community priorities. the second section of the article turns to the application of these methods across different planning systems, with a particular focus on the Iranian context. Here, the discussion critically evaluates the reliance on positivist theories in the preparation of detailed plans, questioning both their relevance and their limitations in addressing contemporary urban challenges. Through an extensive review of literature and case-based evidence, the study identifies the key strengths and weaknesses associated with the preparation and implementation of detailed plans in Iran. finally, the article suggests that establishing a set of general principles for evaluating the implementation of urban plans can strengthen the legitimacy, effectiveness, and inclusiveness of planning practice. The findings underscore the importance of enhancing citizen participation and integrating evaluation more systematically into the theory and practice of planning.
This article provides an overview of the ongoing debate on evaluation within the field of urban planning. It begins with a state-of-the-art review that is organized into three interrelated parts. The first examines the historical evolution of evaluation theories and methods, highlighting how approaches have shifted from traditional cost–benefit analysis and rational models toward more complex, participatory, and context-sensitive frameworks. The second part addresses the contemporary planning debate, which is shaped by diverse paradigms such as communicative planning, collaborative governance, and sustainability-oriented strategies. Special emphasis is placed on the practice of evaluation in planning, with particular reference to Public Participation in Planning (PPIP) and Participatory Planning Review (PPR) as mechanisms that attempt to bridge technical expertise with local knowledge and community priorities. the second section of the article turns to the application of these methods across different planning systems, with a particular focus on the Iranian context. Here, the discussion critically evaluates the reliance on positivist theories in the preparation of detailed plans, questioning both their relevance and their limitations in addressing contemporary urban challenges. Through an extensive review of literature and case-based evidence, the study identifies the key strengths and weaknesses associated with the preparation and implementation of detailed plans in Iran. finally, the article suggests that establishing a set of general principles for evaluating the implementation of urban plans can strengthen the legitimacy, effectiveness, and inclusiveness of planning practice. The findings underscore the importance of enhancing citizen participation and integrating evaluation more systematically into the theory and practice of planning.
1. Behzadfar, Mostafa. (2009), Urban planning plans and programs, Tehran: Honar Publications
2. Pourahmad, Ahmad; Hataminejad, Hossein; and Hosseini, Hadi. (2006). Pathology of state urban development plans. Geographic Researches, 167, 38-180.
3. Secretariat of the Supreme Council of State Urban Planning and Architecture. (2004). Collection of approvals of the Supreme Council of State Urban Planning and Architecture. Tehran: Secretariat of the Supreme Council of State Urban Planning and Architecture
4. Dalir, Karim; and Maleki, Saeed. (2007). Investigations of Occupancy Changes of Urban Lands in comprehensive and detailed plans of Ilam during 1993-2003. Journal of Geography and Regional Development, 8, 93-65.
5. Rezaee, Mohammadreza; and Rahimi, Esmaeil. (2013). Investigating the causes of changing the occupancy of lands in detailed urban plans and its effect on municipal services Case study of Marvdasht. Urban Research and Planning 13, 96-77.
6. Zista, Consulting Engineers. (1993). Comprehensive urban assessment plan of Iran (Maragheh, Arak, Yazd, Bandar Abbas, Shiraz, Zahedan, Rasht). Tehran: Plan and Budget Organization.
7. Saeednia, Ahmad. (2004). Green Book, Guide of Municipalities (fifth volume), Urban Plans in Iran. Tehran: State Municipalities and Rural Municipality.
8. Sharmand, Consulting Engineers. (2000). Methods of Implementing Urban Development Plans. Third Volume. Tehran: Publications of State Municipalities Organization.
9. Shafiee Dastjerdi, Masoud. (2013). Renovation of worn tissues and the need to change attitudes in the preparation and implementation of comprehensive and detailed plans (Case study: Isfahan). Bagh-e-Nazar. 24, 91-104.
10. Shahr-va-khaneh, Consulting Engineers. (2004). Reviewing the comprehensive plan of Shiraz. Volume 1. Shiraz: Fars Province Road and Urbanization Dept.
11. Saremi, Hamidreza; and Tootzari, Soheila. (2014). Assessment and assessment of the level of enjoyment of urban areas of Tehran using TOPSIS technique. City Identity. 18, 47-60.
12. Tabibian, Manouchehr; Asoodeh, Ali. (2014). The application of Plan, Process, Result (PPR) in assessing urban plans. Urban Environment. 4, 35-50.
13. Azizi, Mohammadmehdi; Abooyi Ardakan, Mohammad; and Noori, Nasrin. (2012). Investigating the role of actors and urban management tools in the integration of Tehran management. City Identity. 10, 5-16.
14. Farnahad, Consulting Engineers. (2004). Review of the detailed plan of District 6 of Shiraz Municipality. Shiraz: Fars Province Road and Urbanization Organization.
15. Farivarsadri, Bahram. (2014). Developments of urban planning in Iran in contemporary era. Tehran: Azarakhsh.
16. Gharagzeloo, Zahra. (1986). The role of assessment in the process of urban and regional planning and its common techniques. Tehran: Tehran Building and Housing Research Center.
17. Urban Coordination and Planning Deputy Dept. (2014). Shiraz Municipality Statistical Yearbook. Shiraz: Statistics, Information and Computer Services Dept. of Shiraz Municipality.
18. Moosavi, Seyedali; Rafieian, Mojtaba. (2004). Assessing the feasibility of comprehensive and detailed plans of cities in East Azerbaijan province. School of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Tabriz University. 17, 201-177.
19. Naghsh-e Jahan-e-pars, Consulting Engineers. (1995). Detailed Plan of District 6 of Shiraz Municipality. Shiraz: Fars Province Road and Urbanization Organization.
20. Noorian, Farshad; Vahidi Borji, Goldis. (2015). Assessment of Land Occupancy planning in urban development projects based on needs assessment and location indicators (Study sample: Bojnourd city). Amayesh Sarzamin. 1,49-69.
21. Alexander, E. (2006). Problems and prospects: dilemmas in evaluation and directions for the future. Evaluating and Planning. Evolution and Prospects (pp. 267-276). USA: Routledge press.
22. Alexander, E. R., & Faludi, A. (1989). Planning and plan implementation: notes on evaluation criteria. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 16(2), 127-140.
23. Berke, P., Backhurst, M., Day, M., Ericksen, N., Laurian, L., Crawford, J., & Dixon, J. (2006). What makes plan implementation successful? An evaluation of local plans and implementation practices in New Zealand. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 33(4), 581-600.
24. Faludi, A. (2000). The performance of spatial planning. Planning practice and Research, 15(4), 299- 318.
