Policymaking of key factors and influencing variables on the institutional capacity of urban management, a case study of Tehran

Subject Areas : Urban policy

Seyed Mahmoud  Mousavi Mirkalae ¹ (Department of Urban Planning, Ahvaz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz, Iran)
Mohammad Ali  Khaliji ² (Assistant Professor, Department of Urban Planning, Ahvaz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz, Iran)
Sadegh  Sadeghi ³ (Department of Urban Planning, Shoushtar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shoushtar, Iran)

Received: 2023-03-03 Accepted : 2023-05-22 Published : 2023-10-23

Keywords: Tehran metropolis, urban management, Policy Making, institutional capacity,

Abstract :

AbstractTehran metropolis does not have a specific, defined and formal system for managing the institutional capacity of urban management; But this system is managed and transmitted by relying on the structures, methods and common norms of urban and rural governance. The fragmentation and fragmentation of urban management in the city of Tehran due to the different institutions and organizations that originate from the city government model, the lack of capacity for inter-institutional and intra-institutional interaction can be seen as the result of the official dominance of the power institutions and the non-alignment of informal institutions with their policies and programs. The purpose of the research is to policy the key factors and variables affecting the institutional capacity of urban management. The research method, from the point of view of the goal, is of the type of applied-developmental research, in terms of the main research methods, it is in the category of descriptive-analytical research. Also, the type of data in the research is a survey, and the main tool used to collect data is interviews with managers, experts of Tehran municipality and university professors in the form of a questionnaire, which is a suitable narrative tool. The sampling method in this study was simple random sampling and the sample size was determined to be 100 people with a measurement error of ten percent. The findings of the research show that the strongest component of the desired institutional capacity is the readability and transparency of laws and regulations, with an average of 3.37, and the lowest average belongs to the component of inter-institutional capacity, which indicates the weakness of the institutional capacity in Tehran metropolis. The results show that the components of communication resources and the ability of institutions have a far greater contribution compared to other components in predicting the dependent variable, such that a unit change in the standard deviation of communication resources and the ability of institutions causes the standard deviation of the variable to increase. dependent (institutional capacity of urban management) to change by 28 and 18 percent. While a unit change in the standard deviation of participation only causes the standard deviation of the dependent variable to change by 2%.Extended AbstractIntroduction:      Considering that the focus of this study is the urban management system of Tehran, in the urban management system of Tehran, we are faced with numerous organizations with diverse missions such as transportation and traffic, urban, cultural and social services, financial and urban economy, technical and civil engineering, etc., which serve the population of the capital. And they provide services to the biggest metropolis of the country. Naturally, for a city of this size, we need an institutional and integrated approach to define, implement and achieve a valid model that can be used by city managers in policy making. But how is this approach designed and implemented? The problem of this research comes from this: in the current method, policies are formulated without the presence and participation of urban and regional agents and experts, and management is tied to autocratic management, traditional planning (with a top-down approach). The actors of the private sector and specialized associations, non-governmental organizations do not have a place and role in the political decisions of Tehran's urban management, and the continuation of this situation will have no consequences except for the aggravation of the gaps. Therefore, in this research, in addition to identifying key factors and variables affecting the institutional capacity of urban management and creating changes in the formulation of urban policies, paying attention to upstream documents and the participation of actors, it has the attention of all civil institutions in synergy and interaction in the policy-making process and reducing interference. The government wants to make decisions. During such a process, all managers (macro, medium and small) should consider themselves as participants in the network of power and decision-making and policy-making and participate in Tehran's development plans and programs. With these interpretations, this research seeks to answer the question, what are the key factors and variables affecting the institutional capacity of Tehran metropolis management?Methodology:      From the point of view of the goal, the research is of the type of applied-developmental research, in terms of the main research methods, it is in the descriptive-analytical research. Also, the type of data in the research is a survey, and the main tool used to collect data is interviews with managers, experts of Tehran Municipality and university professors in the form of a questionnaire, which is a suitable tool for narrative. These people are generally those who have been active for many years in the field of research in the relevant headquarters and organizations of the Tehran Metropolitan Municipality, or have been in relevant institutions, research institutes and urban management organizations, or have been in related executive responsibilities. The response scale was completed and weighted in the form of Likert in 5 degrees. The sampling method in this study was simple random sampling and the sample size was determined to be 100 people with a measurement error of ten percent.Results and discussion:       In the background variables which in this research are sex, age and education, using frequency distribution tables, the results are as follows; The distribution of respondents according to gender is 45 women, 55 men and the average age is 37.5 years. The percentage of respondents' education is 28.6% bachelor's degree, 36% master's degree and 35.4% doctorate respectively. The respondents' answers were presented in the form of a 5-point Likert scale (very dissatisfied, dissatisfied, relatively satisfied, satisfied and very satisfied). The overall assessment of institutional capacity indicates that 2.06% of institutional capacity variables are very satisfied, 8.19% are satisfied, 24.03% are relatively satisfied, 44.78% are dissatisfied and 20.94% are very dissatisfied. The findings of the research in Table 3 show that the components of readability and transparency of laws and regulations, legality, intra-institutional interaction among the components have the highest average, respectively. Also, the inter-institutional capacity component has the least importance with an average of 3.35. Regarding the significance of the test, it can be said that the components are significant at the 95% level.Conclusion:      Tehran metropolis does not have a specific, defined and formal system for managing the institutional capacity of urban management; But this system is managed and transmitted by relying on the structures, methods and common norms of urban and rural governance. The fragmentation and fragmentation of urban management in the city of Tehran due to the different institutions and organizations that originate from the city government model, the lack of capacity for inter-institutional and intra-institutional interaction can be seen as the result of the official dominance of the power institutions and the non-alignment of informal institutions with their policies and programs. Tehran metropolis has institutional potential in formulating, regulating laws and regulations, effectiveness of activities and measures and success rate of urban management in relation to institutional processes. The sustainability and human-centeredness of the future development of this complex requires building the capacity to accept new forces in the management organization of the region by referring to the teachings of the urban governance approach and strengthening the sense of trust and cooperation among all these actors. More than ever, the development of the metropolises of the country, especially Tehran, the way of planning the management of the regions is dependent on the institutional capacity and somehow tied to it. In the absence of urban management policies and trans-sectoral approach, inter-institutional challenges and transparency, accountability, and capacity building have become much more pronounced and do not show a decreasing trend.The components of communication resources and the ability of institutions have a far greater contribution compared to other components in predicting the dependent variable, such that a unit change in the standard deviation of communication resources and the ability of institutions causes the standard deviation of the dependent variable (institutional capacity) to increase. urban management) to change by 28 and 18 percent. While a unit change in the standard deviation of participation only causes the standard deviation of the dependent variable to change by 2%. Also, the components of institutions-ability, transparency, internal-interaction, legality, inter-institutional-interaction and inter-institutional-capacity, because the significance level is higher than 0.05, show that they do not have a significant effect on predicting the institutional capacity of urban management.

References:

• Abdi Daneshpour, Z., Ebrahimnia, V., & Mahmoudpour, A. (2014). Devising a Knowledge Management Framework for Integrated Policy-Making in Tehran. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi, 19(1), 57-70.


• Abniki, H. A. (2007). Institutionalist approach to political decision-making process. Domestic Policy, 1(2), 7-34.


• Ali ahmadi, A., & mirabedini, Z. (2019). Examining the Public Policy Making Process in Tehran's Urban Management (2012-2018). Iranian Journal of Public Policy, 5(1), 75-98.

• Bank, W. (2016). Making politics work for development: harnessing transparency and citizen engagement: The World Bank.


• Bettini, Y., Brown, R. R., de Haan, F. J., & Farrelly, M. (2015). Understanding institutional capacity for urban water transitions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 94, 65-79.


• Brown, R. R., & Farrelly, M. A. (2009). Delivering sustainable urban water management: a review of the hurdles we face. Water science and technology, 59(5), 839-846.


• Chakrabarty, S., & Bass, A. E. (2014). Corporate governance in microfinance institutions: Board composition and the ability to face institutional voids. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 22(5), 367-386.


• Chen, D. C., Maksimovic, C., & Voulvoulis, N. (2011). Institutional capacity and policy options for integrated urban water management: a Singapore case study. Water Policy, 13(1), 53-68.


• Cheraghi, R., Ghaedrahmati, S., Meshkini, A., & Ghadermarzi, H. (2021). The role of institutional capacity in the competitiveness of middle cities of Iran (Case: Sanandaj and Zanjan cities). Human Geography Research Quarterly, 53(116), 427-451.

• Dehghani, M., Haghighatnaeini, G., & Zebardast, E. (2021). Institutional Capacity Analysis of Isfahan Knowledge-Based Urban Development. Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning, 13(31), 5-22.


• Desalegn, A., & Solomon, N. (2022). The Interrelationship among Institutional Capacity, Infrastructure Governance and Equity, and Nation-Building Process in Ethiopia. Public Organization Review, 22(3), 627-647.

• Dodman, D., & Satterthwaite, D. (2008). Institutional capacity, climate change adaptation and the urban poor.

• Duas, Hassan. (1999). Survey in social research, translated by Hoshang Naibi, Tehran, Nei Publishing, 17th edition


• Erfani, A., & Talebbeydokhti, A. (2019). Evaluating and Comparing the Welfare Performance of Different Regimes of Policy Making in Iran's Macroeconomics. Macroeconomics Research Letter, 13(26), 101-122


• Fricke, C. (2020). Locating Urban Issues in German Policy-Making: Metropolitan Regions and Urban Development Policies in a Multi-scalar Context. In S. Armondi & S. De Gregorio Hurtado (Eds.), Foregrounding Urban Agendas: The New Urban Issue in European Experiences of Policy-Making (pp. 167-184). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

• Hale, T. N. (2008). Transparency, accountability, and global governance. Global governance, 73-94.


• Healey, P. (1998). Building institutional capacity through collaborative approaches to urban planning. Environment and planning A, 30(9), 1531-1546.


• Hollyer, J. R., Rosendorff, B. P., & Vreeland, J. R. (2019). Transparency, protest and democratic stability. British Journal of Political Science, 49(4), 1251-1277.

• Jajarmi, H. (2016). Critical study of urban development policies and plans in Iran. Quarterly of Social Studies and Research in Iran, 5(1), 79-102


• Jalili, S. M., & Kazemian, G. (2016). An Analysis of Meso level Policy Making Environment in Tehran’s Strategic-Structural (Comprehensive) Plan (1997-2011). Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi, 21(1), 29-40.

• Kazemian, G., Farajirad, K., Eftekhari, A. R., & Pourtaheri, M. (2013). Explanation the Relation between Institutional Capacity and Sustainable Regional Development (Case study of Boukan and Oroumiyeh Counties). Geography, 11(38), 153-169.

• Kazemian, G., Rad, Kh. F., & Portahari, M. (2012). Assessment of the Regional Institutional Capacity and Formulating of the Appropriate Strategies (Case Study: Boukan and Orumiyeh County). Motaleate Shahri, 1(2), 23-39.

• Khorshidi, K. M., Sharifzadeh, M., & Abdollahzadeh, G. (2019). An Assessment of Institutional Capacity of the Rural Cooperatives in Sari County. Iranian Agricultural Extension and Education Journal, 15(2), 101-117.


• Mayshar, J., Moav, O., & Neeman, Z. (2017). Geography, transparency, and institutions. American Political Science Review, 111(3), 622-636.

• Molaie, K. K., Koozegar Collegi, L., Razavian, M. T., & Tavakolinia, J. (2021). Assessing institutional capacity and its role in achieving urban peripheral sustainable development (Case: Bojnourd government Institutions). Preipheral Urban Spaces Development, 3(1), 19-36.


• Moslemi Mehni, Y. M. (2018). "urban policy in iran:introduce an applied model:case study:metropolis kerman city." Political Quartely 48(1): 145-155.


• Rabeiei, H. (2021). "Assessing the desirability of urban management policy (case study ، performance of gorgan city Council and Municipality (1392-1396) according to exports of social scientists ، urban health and green space." Iranian Journal of Political Sociology 3(4): 682-695.


• Rezaei, E., Ebrahimzadeh, D., & Eskandari Sani, D. (2019). Critical Analysis of Urban Water Policies in terms of Institutional Capacity (Case Study: Birjand City). Geography and Territorial Spatial Arrangement, 9(31), 73-92


• Sajadian, M., Firoozi, M., & Pourahmad, A. (2022). Assessing the Institutional Capacity for the Perform of a Smart City in the Metropolis of Ahvaz. Geography and Development, 20(69), 34-59.


• Sarvar, R., & Khaliji, M. A. (2021). Urban policy in the field of wicked problems. Urban Environmental Planning and Development, 1(1), 1-16.


• Spyra, M., Kleemann, J., Calò, N. C., Schürmann, A., & Fürst, C. (2021). Protection of peri-urban open spaces at the level of regional policy-making: Examples from six European regions. Land Use Policy, 107, 105480.

• Tabrizi, L., Abdollahzadeh, G., Sharifzadeh, M., & Ghezel, A. (2021). Assessment of Institutional Capacity in Participatory Water Management:Case of Payvand Cooperative of Aqqala County. Co - Operation and Agriculture, 9(36), 275-300.