بازکشفِ مردم در برنامه ریزی هم کارانه (ارتباطی) به میانجیِ انگاشتِ آغازِ سیاست

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

چکیده

برنامه ­ریزی هم­کارانه به ­عنوان رهیافتی نوین در نظریه ­ی برنامه ­ریزی، به دلیل نادیده گرفتن روابط قدرت و ساز­و­کارهای آن در جامعه، از سوی برخی صاحب­نظرانِ برنامه­ ریزی به­ عنوان ابزاری برای تسهیل پیاده ­سازی اید­ئولوژی نئولیبرال مورد انتقاد قرار گرفته است. منتقدین بر این باورند که به دلیل کژشماریِ بنیادین، مردم واقعی یعنی توده ­های بدونِ سهم در جامعه، از فرآیندِ این نوع برنامه ­ریزی طرد می ­شوند. هدف این مقاله کشف عرصه­ های ناشناخته ­ی برنامه ­ریزی هم­کارانه، با به ­کارگیری انگاشت آغاز سیاست به­ مثابه ­ی صورت­بندیِ جدید از سیاستِ واقعی و رهیافت نوین به ­منظور بازکشفِ مردم است. با توجه به چارچوب انتخاب شده در این مقاله، معنای حقیقی سیاست در انگاشت آغاز سیاست، استقلالِ سیاست از دولت است. استقلال یاد شده، برسازنده ­ی پیش ­بینی ­ناپذیری در عرصه­ ی سیاسی و اجتماعی است و سبب ارجاع دوباره به انرژی سیاسی مردم می ­شود، موضوعی که در برنامه ­ریزی هم­کارانه رُخ نداده و انرژی سیاسی در فرآیند مشاوره و همکاری با گروه­های درون قدرت و صاحبان سرمایه مستحیل می ­گردد.   

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Re-exploring of People in Collaborative Planning through the Mediation of the Beginning of Politics Concept

چکیده [English]

Collaborative planning is considered as a progress in the procedural planning theory. Critics believe that the public in this kind of planning has been become to private sector partners for the reproduction of capital and the real people- no part morass in society- excluded from this kind of planning. The goal of this paper is to discover the unknown areas of collaborative planning with the application of the beginning of politics concept as a new formulation of real politics and an approach for the rediscovery of people. Exploring of the casual relationship of research subject-collaborative planning and the application of the beginning concept for criticising it- constitute the basic framework of paper and this matter shows explanatory nature of this paper. Also exploring the unknown areas of the collaborative planning represent the explorative essence. The independence of politics from government construct contingency characteristic of politics and social field. This fact result in the reference to people politics energy which has not been revealed and this energy has solved in the intra power groups and the capital owners and prevents the immanent movement. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • The Bginning of Politics Concept
  • Collaborative Planning
  • Miscounting
  • Politics
الف) منابع فارسی
ارسطو .(1378). اخلاق نیکوماخوس، ترجمه ی محمدحسن لطفی، تهران: طرح نو.
کیوی، ریمون، کامپنهود، لوک وان. (1391). روش تحقیق در علوم اجتماعی، ترجمه عبدالحسین نیک گهر، تهران: انتشارات فرهنگ معاصر.
دانشپور، زهره. (1378). درآمدی بر نظریه های برنامه‌ریزی با تأکید ویژه بر برنامه‌ریزی شهری، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
رانسیر، ژاک و دیگران. (1392). نام های سیاست، ترجمه و گرآوری: مراد فرهادپور و دیگران، تهران: انتشارات بیدگل.
ب) منابع انگلیسی
Agamben, G. (2000). Means without end, University of Minnesota press.
Alexander, E. (1997). A Mile or a Millimeter? Measuring the Planning Theory–Practice Gap, Environment and Planning, 24 (1).
Allmendinger, P. (2001). Planning in Postmodern Times, London: Routledge.
Baeten, G. (2009). Regenerating the South Bank: Reworking community and the emergence of post-political regeneration, In: Imrie R et al. (eds), Regenerating London, London: Routledge.
Bengs, C. (2005). Planning theory for the naïve? European Journal of Spatial Development, available at: http://www.nordregio.se/EJSD/-ISSN 1650–9544 (accessed 2 September 2009).
Bickerstaff K, Walker G. (2005). Shared visions, unholy alliances: Power, governance and deliberative processes in local transport planning, Urban Studies, 42(12): 2123–2144.
Brand, R. and Gaffikin, F. (2007). Collaborative planning in an uncollaborative world, Planning Theory, 6(3).
Campbell, H. (2006). Just planning: The art of situated ethical judgment, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 26(1).
Cowell, R. and Owens, S. (2006). Governing space: Planning reform and the politics of sustainability, Environment and Planning, C 24(3): 403–421.
Fainstein, Susan. S. (2000). New Directions in Planning Theory, Urban Affairs Review, 35(4), 344–70.
Faludi, A. (1973). Planning Theory, Oxford: Pergamon.
Faludi, A. (1987). A Decision Centered View of Environmental Planning, Oxford: Pergamon.
Feldman, M. (1995). Regime and Regulation in Substantive Planning Theory, Planning Theory, 14(2).
Fischer, F. and Forester, J. (eds) (1993). The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning, London: UCL Press.
Forester, J. (1989). Planning in the Face of Power, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Forester, J. (1999). The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Friedmann, J. (1987). Planning in the Public Domain, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Habermas, J. (1984), [1981]. Theory of Communicative Action Volume One: Reason and the Rationalization of Society (Book), Translated by Thomas A. McCarthy, Boston, Mass: Beacon Press. ISBN 978-0-8070-1507-0.
Miraftab, F. (2009). Insurgent Planning: Situating Radical Planning in the Global South, Planning Theory, February 2009, vol. 8, no. 1 .
Healey, P. (1997). Collaborative Planning, London: Macmillan Press.
Healey, P. (2003). Collaborative Planning in perspective, Planning Theory, 2(2).
Healey, P. and McDougall, G. and Thomas, M. (eds) (1991). Planning Theory: Prospects for the 1990s, Oxford: Pergamon.
Hillier J. (2003). Agonizing over consensus – Why Habermasian ideals cannot be ‘real’. Planning Theory, 2(1).
Hillier, J. (2005). Straddling the post-structuralist abyss: Between transcendence and immanence?, Planning Theory, 4(3).
Hillier, J. (2007). Stretching Beyond the Horizon, Aldershot: Ashgate.
Hillier, J. (2008). Plan (e) speaking: A multi planar theory of spatial planning, Planning Theory, 7(1).
Innes, J. E. (2004). Consensus Building: Clarifications for the Critics, Planning Theory, 3 (1), 5-20.
Jackson, J. (2009). Neo-liberal or third way? What planners from Glasgow, Melbourne and Toronto say, Urban Policy and Research, 27(4): 397–417.
Laclau, E. (1996). Emancipation(s), London: Verso.
Laclau, E. (2000). Identity and hegemony. In: Butler J, Laclau E, and Žižek S. (eds). Contingency, Hegemony, Universality, London: Verso.
Laclau, E. (2005). On Populist Reason, London: Verso.
Purcell, M. (2009). Resisting neo liberalization: Communicative planning or counter-hegemonic movements, Planning Theory, 8(2).
Rancier, J. (1998). Dis- agreement: politics and philosophy, translated by Julie Rose, university of Minnesota press.
Reade, E. (1987). British Town and Country Planning, Milton Keynes: Open University Press
Sager, T. (2005). Communicative planners as naïve mandarins of the neo-liberal state?, European Journal of Spatial Development, available at: http://www.nordregio.se/EJSD/-ISSN 1650–9544 (accessed 2 September 2009).
Soja, E. (1997). Planning in/for Postmodernity, in G. Benko and U. Strohmayer. (eds). Space and Social Theory in Interpreting Modernity and Postmodernity, Oxford: Blackwell.
Swyngedouw, E. (2007). The post-political city, In: BAVO (ed.) Urban Politics Now, Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, 58–76.
Taylor, N. (2009). Tensions and contradictions left and right: The predictable disappointments of planning under New Labour in historical perspective, Planning Practice and Research, 24(1): 57–70.
Thomas, M. (1982). The Procedural Planning Theory of A. Faludi, in C. Paris. (ed.). Critical Readings in Planning Theory, Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Tiesdell S, Allmendinger P. (2001). Neighbourhood regeneration and New Labour’s third way, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 19(6): 903–926.
Underwood, J. (1980). Town Planners in Search of a Role, Occasional Paper, No. 6, School for Advanced Urban Studies, University of Bristol.
Yiftachel, O. (1989). Towards a New Typology of Urban Planning Theories, Environment and Planning, 16(3).
Žižek, S. (1999). the specter of ideology, In: Wright E, Wright E. (eds). The Žižek Reader, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Žižek, S. (2000). Holding the place, In: Butler J, Laclau E, and Žižek S. (eds). Contingency, Hegemony, Universality, London: Verso.
Žižek, S. (2006). Afterword, In: Rancière J. (ed.). the Politics of Aesthetics. London: Continuum.
Žižek, S. (2007). Some politically incorrect reflections on urban violence in Paris and New Orleans and related manners, In: BAVO (ed.) Urban Politics Now. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers.