Planning in the face of diversity: A re-orientation of power relations

Abstract

This paper explores the individuals' lived experiences of living next to different others. Its main focus is on diversity which signifies possible ways of working with differences. Hence, the analysis aims to explore individuals’ perceptions of diverse neighbourhoods, manifestations of differences’ co-existence and the procedure called planning for diversity. To these aims, a qualitative study encompassing interviewing 95 individuals in five neighbourhoods of Tehran, which is one of the most diverse cities in the middle east, is conducted through a phenomenographic approach. Results indicate that individuals' perceptions of diversity are location-based and related to structural inequity or welfare they experienced. Managerial, functional, sociological and physical aspects are the four main perceived pillars of a diverse neighbourhood, which as a spatial unit not only sets the scene for numerical and hierarchical representations of differences but is tolerant of differences. Nevertheless, residents’ lived experiences suggest that diverse populations in Tehran caused individuals' hunkering down – rooted in constrict theory – in general, although intergroup contacts – rooted in contact theory – are also frequent in neighbourhoods where diversity exists in all of its dimensions. Economic diversity is introduced as a catalyst for social diversity that can let outgroup interactions emerge whereas wealth concentration and indifference to differences are two primary components for the emergence of individualism in Tehran. Moreover, Conscious efforts through planning for diversity, which is people-oriented and procedural and looks for a reorientation of power relations, could let differences work, intergroup interactions form and interest-based identities, which introduce neighbourhood as ends, not means, emerge. Therefore, planning for diversity is more based on becoming ontology and is rooted in radical planning theory. Differences, which have always been run through a bottom-up approach, take the initiative and voice policy, set interest-based identities and try to reach them; that is how differences find the opportunity to be reunited.