كليدواژه :
قدرت , منفعت عمومي , تحليل انتقادي گفتمان , طرح هاي شهري
چكيده فارسي :
شيوه اثرگذاري مناسبات قدرت بر ابعاد گوناگون فرايند برنامه‌ريزي و طرح‌هاي توسعه‌ي شهري در دهه‌هاي گذشته همواره موضوعي پرابهام و مناقشه‌برانگيز بوده است. همچنين پيوند ناگسستني مفهوم منفعت عمومي با برنامه‌ريزي، ناگزير منفعت عمومي را تحت تأثير روابط قدرت قرار داده است. با اين‌كه تلاش‌هاي بسياري براي تبيين مفهوم منفعت عمومي در برنامه‌ريزي صورت گرفته، اما همچنان چگونگي اثرگذاري روابط قدرت بر صورت‌بندي منفعت عمومي در طرح‌هاي توسعه شهري چندان روشن نيست. در اين راستا پژوهش حاضر كوشيده است با ارائه رويكردي گفتماني به برداشت راديكال از قدرت، شيوه اثرگذاري روابط قدرت بر صورت‌بندي منفعت عمومي را تبيين كند. در اين رويكرد، گفتمان به مثابه قدرت نامرئي به صورت ايدئولوژيك خواسته‌ها و تمايلات افراد و گروه‌ها را شكل مي‌بخشد. براي فهم اين موضوع از روش تحليل انتقادي گفتمان مبتني بر چارچوب فركلاف بهره گرفته شده است؛ روشي كه ماهيت روابط ديالكتيك قدرت و گفتمان را در چارچوبي انتقادي بيان مي‌كند و آن را در بستر اجتماعي كنش گفتماني تفسير مي‌نمايد. يافته‌هاي اين پژوهش نشان مي‌دهد كه در طرح ساماندهي خيابان قيام يزد، مناسبات قدرت راديكال به برساختن برداشتي فايده‌باور و محدود از منفعت عمومي انجاميده كه در جريان گفتمانيِ غالب توسط گفتمان رقيب به چالش كشيده شده است. اين چالش اگرچه جايگاه هژمونيك برداشت فايده‌باوري را چندان تغيير نداده است اما توانسته به گسترده‌تر شدن مفهوم عموم و دموكراتيزه شدن نسبي فرايند اجراي طرح بيانجامد.
چكيده لاتين :
How is power exercised in planning practice? This “inevitable question” has been around in planning theory for many years, and many researchers have addressed this issue in different ways. Still, the impact of power relations on various aspects
of the planning process and city development plans is remained controversial and ambiguous. Also, the inseparable links
between public interest and planning have to affect public interest by power relations. Although many efforts have been
made to explain the public interest in planning, the impacts of power relations on formulating the public interest are blurred.
In this regard, this paper seeks to explain the influence of power relations on public interest's conformation by providing a
discourse approach to the radical conception of power. According to this approach, the discourse as an “invisible power”
ideologically shapes individuals' and groups' wants and desires. Based on Gaventa’s “cube of power,” the authors applied
the mentioned approach to modify Lukes’ “radical view” deficiencies. To investigate this issue, Fairclough's framework
is used for critical discourse analysis (CDA), which states the nature of the dialectic of power and discourse in a critical
framework and interprets it in the context of its social practice. A controversial live local TV talk show was selected as
the text of critical discourse analysis. The participants of this TV program were from significant principal players in the
Qiam street improvement plan. This case study's results, based on the improvement plan of Qiam street of Yazd, show that
the invisible power plays a notable role in the conformation of public interest’s substance. This role is manifested in how
various orders of discourse combine and bring about discursive and social change. Two discursive mixes were identified:
one dominant and one competing discursive mix. Findings show that the competing discursive mix has challenged the
limited and utilitarian perception of public interest represented by the dominant discursive mix. This conception of public
interest which represented by proponents of the plan, defines interests mostly in economic and monetary terms and insists
on the value that the plan will bring about. Similarly, the opponents of the improvement plan adopted such a bounded
conception of public interest too. They opposed the plan because its implementation was interfering with their business.
While the dominant discursive mix included rational planning discourse, project management discourse, expert-official
and economic interest discourses, the competing discursive mix is shaped by activism and participation discourses. As
Fairclough indicates, these re-articulations of the orders of discourse are both a means and a sign of discursive and social
transformation in a relatively creative way. In the case of Qiam street, these transformations led to a broader concept
of ‘the public’ but they could not transform the conception of ‘the interests’ very much. In conclusion, even though this
transformation has not changed utilitarianism’s hegemonic position, it has extended the concept of 'the public' and relatively
democratized the planning process. Therefore, it can be expected that future urban design practices, at least in Yazd’s old
city, would consider some forms of participation in the implementation phase.
