تمرکززدایی دولت و حکمرانی خوب شهری در ایران (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
امروزه به واسطه رشد و توسعه شهرها، مواجهه با مسائل شهری پیچیده تر شده است. از این رو، کشورها درصدد واگذاری اختیارات و مسئولیت ها به واحدهای مادون ملی و تقویت مشارکت مردم در اداره امور منطقه خود هستند. با مشارکت مردم، واحدهای محلی به تطبیق برنامه های حکومت مرکزی با شرایط محلی و پذیرش خط مشی ها از سوی شهروندان منطقه، مبادرت می ورزند. تمرکززدایی، به اصلاح ساختار سیاسی و ساختار فضایی قدرت از طریق شکل گیری دولت های محلی و تحقق حکمرانی خوب توجه دارد. تمرکززدایی برای حکمرانی خوب اساساً از طریق افزایش تصمیم گیری عموم مردم است. بنابراین تمرکززدایی از یک سو قدرت دولت مرکزی را کاهش می دهد و از سوی دیگر مشروعیت دولت را افزون می کند . سؤال اصلی پژوهش حاضر عبارت است از چرا تمرکززدایی و حکمرانی خوب شهری در ایران تحقق پیدا نکرده است؟ با روش نهادی اداره عمومی و با ابزار کتابخانه ای- اسنادی فرضیه اصلی پژوهش را چنین تبیین داشت که با کاربست راهبرد تمرکززدایی و حکمرانی خوب شهری در ایران می توان با اصلاحات ساختاری و نهادی در بستر سیاسی، اجتماعی و فرهنگی، به توسعه اقتصادی و مسئولیت پذیری بیشتر در سطح مادون ملی مبادرت ورزید اما به لحاظ نوع نگرش نخبگان سیاسی، فقدان مرجعیت بخش، فرهنگ سیاسی و فرهنگ دیوان سالارانه، درآمدهای نفتی، سنت حکمرانی و نوع نگاه امنیتی دولت به جامعه باعث شده تمرکزگرایی تداوم یابد و حکومت محلی در عمل چندان قدرتمند نباشد. چارچوب مفهومی پژوهش به کارگیری دو مفهوم حکمرانی خوب شهری و تمرکززدایی است.State Decentralization and Good Urban Governance in Iran
IntroductionThe complexity of governing countries, coupled with changes in the roles and functions of governments, has led to a more complex administrative and managerial structure. At the dawn of the 21st century, two main currents have shaped development policy worldwide: globalization, which integrates private sector interaction and trade relations, and localization, which is the process of devolution of roles, financial responsibilities, and management from central government to a subnational unit. Administrative systems are considered the executive arms of political leaders in society. Administrative systems can be divided into two categories: centralization and decentralization. Centralization is a type of administration under a single command. In a centralized system, a country's affairs are managed from a central location by ministers who are the highest decision-making authorities in the government and are usually based in the capital. Decentralization is a system in which the authority to make decisions about matters is devoted to authorities who are more or less independent of the central authority. In other words, they have a degree of administrative independence and freedom of action.Decentralization is used in many countries as one of the principles of good governance and is a means of promoting political, economic, civil, and managerial governance. Intending to find solutions to problems in cities such as poverty, unemployment, inflation, and environmental pollution, a transformation has occurred in the urban development management system, the basis of which is the focus on a decentralized approach in organization. In this approach, the concept of urban governance is first used, meaning the simultaneous and joint participation of people, local institutions, and government and non-governmental organizations as actors in urban development.In Iran, with the growth of cities, their management and administration have also faced various challenges, as meeting the demands of different groups of citizens requires interaction with various institutions. Metropolises have sought good urban governance to be managed correctly and appropriately, in which citizens have the opportunity to freely agree and establish various social, economic, political, and cultural relationships without violating the rights of othersResearch Question(s): Why has decentralization and good urban governance not been realized in Iran?Literature ReviewBy reviewing the background of conducted research, the fundamental gap observed is the lack of a coherent study examining the simultaneous causes of the failure of decentralization and good urban governance in Iran. The author aims to fill this research gap concerning decentralization and the delegation of powers to formal sub-national, as well as good urban governance, since the failure to achieve these two has led to unfavorable consequences at the urban level in Iran.MethodologyThis research is Institutionaly (Public Administration) approach. The data collection tool is a library-documentary approach, referring to books, articles, official reports, and electronic resources.ResultsHistorically, Iran's administrative system has been characterized by a strong hierarchical structure, reflecting a deep-rooted cultural emphasis on obedience and authority. This hierarchical mindset, evident in the bureaucratic culture, has its roots in centuries of centralized governance. The Iranian state has traditionally been structured around a unitary political center, with power concentrated at the national level. This centralized model, while providing a degree of stability and control, has often hindered local initiative and responsiveness to diverse regional need. In this tradition, decision-making processes were given less consideration, and executive authorities preferred broader government powers to enable rapid decision-making on various issues at all levels of the territory. The concept of decentralization first emerged during the Constitutional Revolution. After the Islamic Revolution, decentralization, administrative deconcentration, and the council system were also given attention, and the Constitution explicitly mentioned the council-based governance of the country. Urbanization has been on the rise in Iran, with the urban population increasing from 54.3% to 74% between 1986 and 2016, according to post-revolutionary censuses. The number of cities has also grown from 199 in 1956 to 1431 in 2022.To achieve good urban governance, certain requirements are necessary, based on global lived experiences, whereby decision-making powers are delegated to sub-national institutions. Among the most important factors influencing the strength or weakness of good urban governance are the political elites' perspective on the delegation of powers, their understanding and vision of sub-national governance, political culture, the historical background of governance, the social and class base of the state, and the geopolitical position of the state.Iran's political elites' perspective, lack of a Referential, political culture, bureaucratic culture, oil revenues, the tradition of governance in Iran, and the government's security-oriented view of society have all contributed to the continued centralization, leaving local governance not particularly strong in practice. The consequences of centralization and the failure to achieve good urban governance in Iran can be summarized as follows: reduced civic participation, reduced transparency, reduced accountability, Disruption, and inefficiency in service delivery, Increased government intervention and complex bureaucratic processes, and Growth of corruption.ConclusionAn evaluation of urban planning and management experiences in Iran indicates a centralized approach. In a centralized political management system, planning is influenced by the overall thoughts and programs of the government and central institutions. The Iranian government, with its oil revenues excessive independence from society, and the dependence of social classes on it, has focused on centralized decision-making. To successfully decentralize at the urban level, there is a need for a strong will among high-level government officials to share power, authority, and financial resources with sub-national entities.
تبلیغات
