Volume 2, Issue 8 (9-2026)
مکتب نقدنظر 2026, 2(8): 0-0 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
jafari S. From Building Neighborhoods to the Possibility of Neighborhood Becoming: A Critique of Historical Representation and Neighborhood-Oriented Administrative Policies in Iran. , مکتب نقدنظر. 2026; 2 (8) : 2
URL: http://jcr-sj.com/article-1-70-en.html
URL: http://jcr-sj.com/article-1-70-en.html
Department of Landscape Architecture, School of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Iran.
Abstract: (483 Views)
In Iranian architecture, urban planning, and urban policy literature, the neighborhood has simultaneously been understood as a historical legacy and as an instrument for addressing contemporary urban challenges. Within part of this body of literature, the traditional neighborhood is represented through concepts such as social cohesion, place attachment, face-to-face interaction, and local centrality, with its revival proposed as a means of restoring collective urban life. Conversely, neighborhood-oriented policies often redefine the neighborhood as an administrative unit with fixed boundaries, a physical center, and formal governance structures. Adopting a critical perspective, this article examines these two dominant approaches and argues that, despite their apparent differences, both assume the neighborhood to be a pre-existing entity that can either be reproduced or deliberately constructed. The article contends that the neighborhood is neither a historical form to be recovered nor a managerial unit to be created; rather, it is a relational, temporal, and plural process emerging through the continuity of presence, lived experience, and collective action. Accordingly, neighborhood-oriented policy should move beyond attempts to engineer local communities and instead focus on creating the conditions for neighborhood becoming by expanding public agency, ensuring equitable access, and fostering enduring opportunities for social presence and interaction.
Article number: 2
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2026/07/21 | Accepted: 2026/08/8 | Published: 2026/09/1
Received: 2026/07/21 | Accepted: 2026/08/8 | Published: 2026/09/1
References
1. مسجد باید به دولت محله تبدیل شود. (اردیبهشت، ۱۴۰۵). ایسنا. https://www.isna.ir/news/1405020100612
2. پایگاه اطلاع‌رسانی ریاست‌جمهوری. (۱۴۰۴). مدیریت محله‌محور، نگرشی نو به حکمرانی محلی با مشارکت مردمی است. ۱۲ خرداد ۱۴۰۴. مراجعه شده در تاریخ 13 تیر 1405. https://president.ir/fa/159569
3. الگوی حکمرانی محله‌محور در مسیر تعمیم به سراسر کشور. (خرداد، ۱۴۰۵). روزنامه ایران. https://media.irannewspaper.ir/newspaper/1405/03/30/f308b2449a472b66f40bd6baa2a83714.pdf.
4. Ahmadi, M., Soleimani, M., Shamai, A., & parizadi, T. (2021). Spatial adaptation of the neighborhood to the characteristics of the community in the metropolis of Tehran (Case study: Shemiran No neighborhood). Geographical Engineering of Territory, 5(1), 141-156. https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.25381490.1400.5.1.10.0
5. Amin, A. (2002). Ethnicity and the Multicultural City: Living with Diversity. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 34(6), 959-980. [DOI:10.1068/a3537]
6. Azizi, M. M., & Pircar, R. (2023). The Role of Public Spaces within the Neighbourhood in the Improvement of Community Participation: The Case of Kooy-e Nasr District, Tehran. Soffeh, 33(3), 79-98. [DOI:10.48308/sofeh.2023.229956.1222]
7. Ghaderi, S., Fazeli, M., & Pakseresht, S. (2016). Neighborhood development strategies: comparing the performance of neighborhood management in Iran and Britain. The Journal of Community Development (Rural-Urban), 8(1), 57-88. [DOI:10.22059/jrd.2016.61180]
8. Hosseini, S. F., & Soltani, M. (2018). A comparative investigation and analysis between the neighborhood concept in the traditional urban system in Iran and its similar patterns in contemporary period. Bagh-e Nazar, 15(60), 15-28. [DOI:10.22034/bagh.2018.62761]
9. Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House.
10. Lofland, L. H. (1998). The Public Realm: Exploring the City's Quintessential Social Territory. Aldine de Gruyter. [DOI:10.4324/9781315134352]
11. Luo, X. I., Hipp, J. R., & Butts, C. T. (2022). Does the spatial distribution of social ties impact neighborhood and city attachment? - Differentials among urban/rural contexts. Social Networks, 68, 374-385.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2021.10.001 [DOI:10.1016/j.socnet.2021.10.001.]
12. Massey, D. (1991). A global sense of place. Marxism Today, June, 24-29. https://banmarchive.org.uk/marxism-today/june-1991/a-global-sense-of-place/
13. Massey, D. (2005). For Space. Sage Publications. http://www.sagepub.co.uk/booksProdDesc.nav?prodId=Book227109
14. Monirifar, S., Esmaili, R., Haghighatian, M., & Imani Jajarmi, H. (2021). examines the social and cultural impacts of the neighborhood management plan on the lives of citizens in Tehran. Journal of Research and Urban Planning, 12(450. 137-150. [DOI:10.30495/jupm.2021.4359]
15. Mouratidis, K., & Andersen, B. (2024). What makes people stay longer in the densifying city? Exploring the neighbourhood environment and social ties. Housing Studies, 39(9), 2399-2420. [DOI:10.1080/02673037.2023.2185593]
16. Qi, J., Mazumdar, S., & Vasconcelos, A. C. (2024). Understanding the relationship between urban public space and social cohesion: A systematic review. International Journal of Community Well-Being, 7, 155-212. [DOI:10.1007/s42413-024-00204-5]
17. Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. Pion.
18. Robaeyst, B., Baccarne, B., De Meulenaere, J., & Mechant, P. (2022). Online neighborhood networks: The relationship between online communication practices and neighborhood dynamics. Media and Communication, 10(2), 108-118. http://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v10i2.5129 [DOI:10.17645/mac.v10i2.5129]
19. Saghatoleslami, A., & Aminzadeh, B. (2009). An Analytical Approach to Cognition of the Concept of Neighborhood in Contemporary Iranian Cities: The Case Study of Mashhad. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning, 1(39), 81-92. [DOI:10.22059/jfaup.2018.68323]
20. Talen, E. (1999). Sense of Community and Neighbourhood Form: An Assessment of the Social Doctrine of New Urbanism. Urban Studies, 36(8), 1361-1379. [DOI:10.1080/0042098993033]
21. Talen, E. (2000). The problem with community in planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 15(2), 171-183. [DOI:10.1177/08854120022092971]
22. Üblacker, J., Liebig, S., & Hamad, H. (2024). Catalysts of connection: The role of digital information and communication technology in fostering neighbourhood social cohesion-A systematic review of empirical findings. Urban Studies, 61(16), 3167-3186. [DOI:10.1177/00420980241281502]
23. Wang, Y., & Kemeny, T. (2023). Are mixed neighborhoods more socially cohesive? Evidence from Nanjing, China. Urban Geography, 44(5), 803-823. [DOI:10.1080/02723638.2021.2021714]
24. Wellman, B. (2001). Physical place and cyberplace: The rise of personalized networking. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25(2), 227-252. [DOI:10.1111/1468-2427.00309]
25. Wohl, A., & Blit Cohen, E. (2025). The dark side of community development and place attachment in a diverse neighborhood. Community Development, 56(3), 317-334. [DOI:10.1080/15575330.2024.2313534]
26. Young, I. M. (1986). The ideal of community and the politics of difference. Social Theory and Practice, 12(1), 1-26. [DOI:10.5840/soctheorpract198612113]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |