Explaining a Communication-Oriented Functionalism Model for Achieving Participation in Urban Regeneration: The Case of Javadiyeh and Imam Hadi Neighborhoods in Bojnord
Keywords:
Urban Regeneration, Citizen Participation, Communicative Planning, Communication-Oriented Functionalism, Participatory Governance, BojnordAbstract
This study aimed to explain the role of participation in urban regeneration and develop a context-specific model integrating functionalism and communicative planning to promote effective participation in the Javadiyeh and Imam Hadi neighborhoods of Bojnord, Iran. This qualitative study adopted an exploratory-deductive strategy grounded in social constructivism and interpretivism. Participants included managers and experts from governmental and urban management institutions, university researchers, private-sector actors, investors, facilitators, and representatives of the local community. Participants were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling, and interviews continued until theoretical saturation was reached, resulting in 21 semi-structured interviews. Data were additionally obtained through content analysis of urban regeneration documents concerning Bojnord and relevant higher-level laws and regulations. Qualitative data were analyzed through thematic analysis involving open, axial, and selective coding with MAXQDA software. Data triangulation, member checking, peer review, and thick description of the research context were employed to enhance the trustworthiness of the findings. The analysis revealed a fundamental gap between the participatory discourse articulated in official documents and actual urban regeneration practices. The dominant model was characterized by functionalist, technical-managerial, and top-down orientations, with citizen participation largely restricted to symbolic and instrumental mechanisms. Interview analysis indicated that effective participation should instead constitute a multistage, reciprocal process involving citizens actively in planning, implementation, and monitoring. The absence of sustainable institutional platforms, centralized urban management, insufficient social trust, and weak intermediary mechanisms emerged as major barriers to genuine participation. The local scale was identified as the most appropriate context for effective participation. Moreover, neither pure functionalism nor communicative planning alone adequately addressed the complexities of participation; their integration provided a more appropriate framework for the studied context. The proposed “communication-oriented functionalism” model, founded on institutional reengineering, stakeholder empowerment, and the design of an incentive system, can facilitate a transition from symbolic toward sustainable and influential participation. By strengthening trust, social capital, local institutions, and dialogue-based processes, this model offers a viable framework for improving participatory governance in urban regeneration.
Downloads
References
1. Roberts P, Sykes H. Urban Regeneration: A Handbook. London: Sage Publications; 2008.
2. Arnstein SR. A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners. 1969;35(4):216-24.
3. McDonald S, Malys N, Maliene V. Urban Regeneration for Sustainable Communities: A Case Study. Technological and Economic Development of Economy. 2009;15(1):49-59.
4. Battisti A, Barnocchi A, Iorio S. Urban Regeneration Process: The Case of a Residential Complex in a Suburb of Rome, Italy. Sustainability. 2019;11:6122.
5. Jin E, Lee W, Kim D. Does Resident Participation in an Urban Regeneration Project Improve Neighborhood Satisfaction? A Case Study of 'Amichojang' in Busan, South Korea. Sustainability. 2018;10:3755.
6. Aminzadeh B, Rezabeigi Sani R. Evaluating the Role of Participation in Urban Landscape Plans to Propose an Appropriate Process for Regeneration of Distressed Urban Fabrics. Fine Arts Journal: Architecture and Urban Planning. 2012;17(3):29-39.
7. Ahmadifard N, Movahed A, Tavalaei S, Soleimani M, Rahimi M. Evaluation of the Results of Public Participation in the Urban Regeneration of Tehran District 12: The Case of Cyrus Neighborhood. New Perspectives in Human Geography. 2015;8(1):81-94.
8. Barati N, Heydari F, Sattarzadeh Fathi M. Toward a Democratic Process in Urban Planning and Design: Assessing the Status of Citizen Involvement in Urban Plans and Projects in Iran. Bagh-e Nazar. 2019;16(76):5-20.
9. Forester J. Planning in the Face of Power. Journal of the American Planning Association. 1989.
10. Healey P. The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory and Its Implication for Spatial Strategy Formation. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design. 1996;23:217-34.
11. Alavitabar A. Examining the Pattern of Citizen Participation in Urban Administration. Tehran: Municipalities Organization of Iran, Urban Planning Office of the Ministry of Interior; 2003.
12. Michels A. Innovations in Democratic Governance: How Does Citizen Participation Contribute to a Better Democracy? International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2011;77(2):275-93.
13. Othengrafen F, Reimer M. Embeddedness of Planning in Cultural Contexts: Theoretical Foundations for the Analysis of Dynamic Planning Cultures. Environment and Planning A. 2013;45:269-1284.
14. Abdidaneshpour Z. An Introduction to Planning Theories with Special Emphasis on Urban Planning. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University Press; 2018.
15. Rafieian M, Maroufi S. The Role and Application of the Communicative Planning Approach in Contemporary Urban Planning Theories. Armanshahr Quarterly. 2011;4(7):113-20.
16. Innes JE. Information in Communicative Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association. 1998;64(1):52-63.
17. Booher DE. Consensus Building as Role Playing and Bricolage: Toward a Theory of Collaborative Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association. 1999;65(1):9-26.
18. Sharifzadegan MH, Shafiei A. Communicative Planning as a Proposed Approach for Urban Planning at the Neighborhood Scale: The Case of Farahzad Neighborhood in Tehran. Social Welfare Quarterly. 2014(56):281-313.
19. Alexander E. Public Participation in Planning—A Multidimensional Model. Planning Theory & Practice. 2008;9(1):57-90.
20. Laurian L, Shaw MM. Evaluation of Public Participation: The Practices of Certified Planners. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2009;28:293-309.
21. Savini F. The Endowment of Community Participation: Institutional Settings in Two Urban Regeneration Projects. Urban and Regional Research. 2011;35(5):949-68.
22. Bailey N. Understanding Community Empowerment in Urban Regeneration and Planning in England: Putting Policy and Practice in Context. Planning Practice & Research. 2010;25(3):317-32.
23. Engberg LA, Larsen JN. Context-Orientated Meta-Governance in Danish Urban Regeneration. Planning Theory & Practice. 2010;11(4):549-71.
24. Maginn PJ. Towards More Effective Community Participation in Urban Regeneration: The Potential of Collaborative Planning and Applied Ethnography. Qualitative Research. 2007.
25. Doering H. Competing Visions of Community: Empowerment and Abandonment in the Governance of Coalfield Regeneration. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 2014;38(3):1003-18.
26. Calthorpe P, Fulton W. The Regional City: Island Press; 2001.
Downloads
Publication Timeline
- Submitted
- Revised
- Accepted
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Mahsa Zamiri (Author); Behnaz Aminzadeh

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.