Volume 10, Issue 2 (3-2022)
JRIA 2022, 10(2): 146-166 |
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:
khani H, mirgholami M. A Study of the Intellectual Roots of Negotiation Planning and Its Analysis from the Perspective of Western Democracy and Religious Democracy. JRIA 2022; 10 (2) :146-166
URL: http://jria.iust.ac.ir/article-1-1567-en.html
URL: http://jria.iust.ac.ir/article-1-1567-en.html
islamic art university
Abstract: (2409 Views)
Planning is one of the basic tools to achieve optimal living conditions. In the meantime, negotiation is one of the most important approaches in the new planning systems, which has a special place in the current era of urban planning and governance. Negotiation planning or in other words discourse is one of the new methods in urban studies that is widely used, especially in advanced democratic societies. Jane Hillier, as the author of this theory, has used the theories of thinkers such as Habermas and Foucault to explain the principles of this theory. In the Islamic perspective, consultation and negotiation have a sublime and special place. In the verses of the Qur'an and the school of religious leaders, the role of consultation has been very important and people and their views on various social, governmental and other issues have had a great place. This research seeks to study the theoretical roots of the negotiation planning approach and extract its intellectual processes to study its structure and finally the characteristics and principles of this type of planning from the perspective of teaching. To study Islamic theories and theories of contemporary Islamic thinkers on the subject of government and religious democracy and democracy. According to the overlapping topics in this case study, from the method of document analysis and content analysis and logical reasoning, as well as qualitative and descriptive methods and conducting interviews with experts (interviews with 14 academic experts in the fields of urban planning and sociology, as well as Field professors) has been used to express the research results. Finally, by comparatively comparing the principles and rules of this type of planning with the criteria of Islamic urban planning and the principles and rules of democracy and the council from an Islamic perspective, the strengths and weaknesses of this type of planning are examined and stated in the planning approach. Negotiation relies solely on the views and opinions of the people and has nothing to do with religious norms. Therefore, it seems that this approach can be effective only in those parts of urban management that have people-centered plans. On the other hand, the approach of religious democracy is more focused on religious values and the opinion of the people is of secondary importance. On the one hand, this issue makes sure that the plans and programs are based on religion and Sharia, but on the other hand, it has nothing to do with humanist and humanistic plans. Therefore, it can be said that if in urban studies, it is based only on the opinions of the people, its competence can not be confirmed from the perspective of religion, but if in the management of urban issues, the opinion of the people along with religious and jurisprudential principles and rules and based Formed, they can help run a city and an Islamic community.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Analysis of art and architectural schools based on Islamic view
Received: 2022/01/3 | Accepted: 2022/04/6 | Published: 2022/04/9
Received: 2022/01/3 | Accepted: 2022/04/6 | Published: 2022/04/9
References
1. Canfild, Robert, (2015), "Referendums and deliberative democracy Lawrence "LeDuc University of Toronto, Canada Electoral Studies 38, Pp, 139-148. [DOI:10.1016/j.electstud.2015.02.007]
2. Elstub, S. (2010). "The Third Generation of Deliberative Democracy" The Journal of Political Studies Review, 8(3): 291-307 Article first published online: June 8, 2010; Issue published: September 1, 2010 [DOI:10.1111/j.1478-9302.2010.00216.x]
3. Falleth, E. (2010). Challenges to Democracy in Market-Oriented Urban Planning in Norway, European planning studies, 18(5): 737-753 [DOI:10.1080/09654311003607729]
4. Gutman, A., & Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. Gutman, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why deliberative democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6. Habermas, J. (2001). The postnational constellation: political essays (M. Pensky, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Hamdi, N. (2004). Small change; about the art of practice and the limits of planning in cities. London: Earthscan.
8. Hamdi, N. (2010). The placemaker's guide to building community. London: Earthscan. [DOI:10.4324/9781849775175]
9. Hanberger, A. (2006). 'Evaluation of and for Democracy' in Evaluation, 12 (1):17- 37. [DOI:10.1177/1356389006064194]
10. King, L.A (2003). Deliberation, Legitimacy, and Multilateral Democracy, The Journal of Governance, (16)1, 23-50 [DOI:10.1111/1468-0491.t01-1-00203]
11. LeDuc, Lawrence. (2015) "Referendums and deliberative democracy Lawrence" LeDuc University of Toronto, Canada Electoral Studies 38 139e148. [DOI:10.1016/j.electstud.2015.02.007]
12. Libii, Mohammad Javad, (1999), " Liberal Democracy is an unfinished dream", Tehran: Publisher Afkar.
13. Mansbridge, J.; Bohman, J.; Chambers, S.; Christiano, T.; Fung, A.; Parkinson, J.; Thompson, D. and Warren, M.E. )2012(. "A Systemic Approach to Deliberative Democracy." In Deliberative Systems - Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale, edited by J. Parkinson, J. and J. Mansbridge, 1-26. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139178914.002]
14. Mouffe, Chantal (2000). Deliberative Democracy or agonistic pluralism, institute fur Hoherstudien (Ihs)., Wien institute for advanced studies, Vienna.
15. Mouffe, Chantal (2005)." The Limits of John Rawls's Pluralism, Politics, Philosophy and Economics Journal 4 (2): 221-23. [DOI:10.1177/1470594X05052539]
16. Mouffe, Chantal (2007). 'Artistic activism and agonistic space', Art and research, a journal of ideas, context and Methods, Vol. 1, No. 2.
17. Purcell, M. (2002). Excavating Lefebvre: the right to the city and its urban politics of the inhabitant. GeoJournal, 58(2-3), 99- 108. [DOI:10.1023/B:GEJO.0000010829.62237.8f]
18. Purcell, M. (2003). Citizenship and the right to the global city: reimagining the capitalist world order. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(3), 564-590. [DOI:10.1111/1468-2427.00467]
19. Purcell, M. (2013). Possible worlds: Henri Lefebvre and the right to the city. Journal of Urban Affairs, 36(1), 141-154. [DOI:10.1111/juaf.12034]
20. Purcell, M. (2016). For democracy: planning and publics without the state. Planning Theory, 15(4), 386-401. [DOI:10.1177/1473095215620827]
21. Purcell, M. (2007). City-Regions, Neoliberal Globalization and Democracy: A Research Agenda, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 31(1): 197-206. [DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00714.x]
22. Purcell, M. (2009). Resisting neoliberalization: communicative planning or counter-hegemonic movements? Planning Theory Journal, 8(2): 140-165. [DOI:10.1177/1473095209102232]
23. Wates, N. (2000). The community planning handbook; how people can shape their cities, towns and villages in any part of the world. London: Earthscan.
24. Wates, N. (2008). The community planning event manual; how to use collaborative planning and urban design events to improve your environment. London: Earthscan
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Journal of Researches in Islamic Architecture is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
