به سوی نظریه سرمایه مجتمع زیستی
محورهای موضوعی : معماری
هوشنگ امیر احمدی
1
(استاد برنامه‌ریزی و توسعه منطقه‌ای در دانشکده برنامه‌ریزی و سیاست گذاری عمومی دانشگاه راتگرز، نیوجرسی، امریکا)
کلید واژه: فضای اجتماعی, Social Space, سرمایه مجتمع زیستی, رشد درون زا, جامعه فراگیر, Community Capital, Endogenous Gowth,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف از این مقاله معرفی مفهوم جدیدی در برنامه ریزی به نام "سرمایه مجتمع زیستی"1 است. به طور یقین در برنامه ریزی کمبود مفاهیم وجود ندارد. این مفاهیم که از ایده های متنوع نشأت می گیرند، دیدگاه های متفاوتی از برنامه ریزی ارائه می دهند. اهم آنها عبارتند از: 1- فرایند یا روشی برای رسیدن به وضعیت آینده مطلوب- اصطلاحاً نظریه های برنامه ریزی؛ 2- ایده هایی که برنامه ریزی را به عنوان مجموعه ای از نظریات محتوایی2 برای تشریح چگونگی پیدایش، تکامل، رشد، و افول جامعه انسانی مشاهده می کند- اصطلاحاً نظریه ها در برنامه ریزی؛ 3- ایده هایی که برنامه ریزی را به عنوان ابزار یا وسیله ای برای هدایت تغییرات به سوی یک هدف یا اهداف مشخص می بیند- اصطلاحاً نظریه ها برای برنامه ریزی. این مقاله با رویکردی تحلیلی به بررسی و تدقیق مفهوم نظریه سرمایه مجتمع زیستی، نقش، اهمیت و جایگاه آن در طرح ها و برنامه های شهری پرداخته است. به عبارت دیگر توجه را به سوی دارایی های مورد نیاز برای ساخت یک مجتمع زیستی موفق دعوت می کند.
This paper argues that globalization has localized its polarization effects and operational requirements largely because of growing significance of information technology and the emergence of knowledge-based, or “learning,” communities. This paper proposes “community capital” an organizing concept for the field of community development. While the concept of capital is not new, “community capital” is novel in that it is larger than the sum total of economic capital, human capital, social capital, physical capital, digital capital and the like. The concept brings together the core concepts of the four disciplinary pillars of planning – matter, value, institutions, and space -- into a single interdisciplinary conceptual framework. Thus, applying the concept of community capital helps resolve a key cause of the failure of territorial planning. The paper then examines the concept of “community capital” by underscoring its key advantages. First, “community capital” has a built-in spatial dimension, but here “space is community,” and as such it is an element of societal unity. Second, the societal concept of space allows for time-space integration, creating the context for material, social, institutional, and spiritual advancement of community life. And third, the built-in capital conception of “community capital” captures the significance of many otherwise underutilized and embedded community assets, including the non-codified knowledge that is often exchanged at various community places and gatherings.
1- Becattini G. (1990), “The Marshallian industrial district as a socio-economic notion” in Pyke F., Becattini G. and Sengenberger W. (eds.), Industrial Districts and Inter-firm
Cooperation in Italy, ILO, Geneva.
2- Benko, Georges, Dunford, Mick and Heurley, Jennifer (1997), “Les districts industriels, vingt ans de recherche”, in Espaces et Societes, No. 88/89.
3-Camagni R. (1991), “Local milieu, uncertainty and innovation networks: towards a
dynamic theory of economic space”, in R. Camagni (ed.), Innovation networks: spatial perspectives, Belhaven-Pinter, London.
4- Camagni R. (2002), “On the concept of territorial competitiveness: sound or misleading?” Urban Studies, n. 13.
5- Camagni R. (2004), “Uncertainty, social capital and community governance: the city as a
Milieu”, in R. Capello, P. Nijkamp (eds.), Urban dynamics and growth: advances in
urban economics, Amsterdam, Elsevier, 2004.
6- Camagni R., Villa Veronelli D. (2004), “Natural resources, know-how and territorial
innovation: the apple production system in Val di Non, Trentino”, in Camagni R., Maillat
D., Matteaccioli A.
7- Capello R. (2001), “Urban Innovation and Collective Learning: Theory and Evidence
from Five Metropolitan Cities in Europe”, in Fischer M.M. and J. Froehlich (eds.),
Knowledge, Complexity and Innovation Systems, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.
8- Coleman J.S. (1990), Foundations of social theory, Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge
Mass.
9- Dosi, G. (1982), “Technological paradigms and technological trajectories”, Research.
Policy, n. 3
10- European Commission (2005), Territorial state and perspectives of the European Union,
Scoping document and summary of political messages.
11- Grootaert C., van Bastelaer T. (2001), “Understanding and measuring social capital: a
synthesis of findings and recommendations from the social capital initiative”, World Bank, Social Capital Initiative Working Paper n. 24, April, Washington D.C.
12- Krugman, Paul (1993), Geography and Trade, MIT Press.
13- Lucas R. (1988), “On the mechanics of economic development”, Journal of Monetary
Economics, vol 22.
14- Malmgren H.B. (1961), Information expectation and the theory of the firm, Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 75.
15- Nelson, R., Winter, S. (1982), An evolutionary theory of economic change, Cambridge,
Mass., Harvard University Press.
16- North D. (1990), Institutions, institutional change and economic performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
17- Oates, Wallace E. (1972), Fiscal Federalism, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
18- OECD (1991). Strategic Industries in a Global Economy, OECD Publications, Paris.
19- OECD (2000), Cities and Regions in the New Learning Economy, OECD Publications, Paris.
20- OECD (2001), Why Territorial Politics Matter, Chapter I in OECD Territorial Outlook, OECD Publications, Paris.
21- OECD (2001), The Conceptual Framework, Chapter III in OECD Territorial Outlook, OECD Publications, Paris.
22- Porter, Michael E. (2000), “Clusters and the New Economics of Competition”, in Garten, Jeffrey E.: World Views, Harvard Business Review Books.
23- Putnam R. D. (1993), Making democracy work, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Romer P. (1990), “Endogenous technological change”, Journal of Political Economy, vol.98.
24- Scott, Allen J. (1998), Regions and the World Economy, Oxford University Press.
25- Williamson O. (2002), “The lens of contract: private ordering”, American Economic
Review, Papers and Proceedings, vol. 92, 2, 438-453
_||_