تحلیل نحوۀ اختصاصی شدن فضا، به‌مثابۀ پیامد تجاری‌سازی خیابان‌های شهری؛ مطالعۀ موردی: خیابان شهید فیاضی تهران

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناس ارشد برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشکدۀ معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار دانشکدۀ معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران، تهران، ایران

چکیده

اهداف و پیشینه: فضاهای عمومی شهری، ازجمله خیابان‌ها که یکی از مهم‌ترین انواع فضای شهری هستند، ممکن است به‌دلایلی برای ورود برخی از افراد و گروه‌ها محدودیت‌های عینی یا ذهنی داشته باشند و پذیرش همگانی آنها از دست برود. یکی از عواملی که ممکن است به اختصاصی شدن خیابان‌ها منجر شود، تجاری‌سازی و ایجاد فضاهای تجاری لوکس در مجاورت خیابان است. تجاری‌سازی خیابان‌های مناطق برخوردار شهرها، به‌دلیل توجیه اقتصادی برگشت سرمایه، اغلب شامل فعالیت‌های لوکس تجاری می‌شود که می‌تواند از اَشکال کالایی شدن فضاها باشد. ازجمله پیامدهای این نوع تجاری‌سازی، محدودیت دسترسی کاربران خیابان حتی از منظر ذهنی است؛ به‌طوری‌که خیابان، به‌منزلۀ فضایی عمومی، با تجاری‌سازی و حضور اقشار خاصی از جامعه در آن، به فضایی با دسترسی محدود تبدیل می‌شود. در پژوهش حاضر تأثیر تجاری‌سازی بر دسترسی همگانی به فضا بررسی می‌گردد و بدین‌منظور، خیابان شهید فیاضی (فرشته) شهر تهران به‌دلیل موقعیت جغرافیایی (واقع در منطقۀ یک و شمال شهر) و اقتصادی (از نظر وجود مراکز تجاری لوکس) نمونۀ مطالعاتی این مقاله در نظر گرفته شده است.
 
مواد و روش‌ها: داده‌های مورد نیاز بر پایۀ مطالعات اسنادی و پیمایش میدانی گردآوری شده است. به‌منظور بررسی عمومیت فضای خیابان شهید فیاضی از آزمون تی تک‌نمونه‌ای و همچنین به‌منظور بررسی نقش فضاهای تجاری در عمومیت این خیابان از مدل تحلیل عاملی استفاده شد که درنهایت 22 شاخص در 3 عامل دسته‌بندی شده‌اند.
نتایج و جمع‌بندی: یافته‌های تحقیق نشان می‌دهد سه عامل «دسترسی ذهنی و عینی»، «فضاهای مصرفی لوکس و کنترل‌شده»، و «موقعیت و ارتباطات» سبب مصادرۀ فضای این خیابان به نفع گروه‌های خاص اجتماعی و اقتصادی شده است. به بیان دیگر، فعالیت‌های بدنۀ فضای این خیابان به‌نحوی شکل گرفته که عملاً طبقات کم‌درآمد از حضور در فضا احساس راحتی نمی‌کنند و کسانی که چندان قادر به خرید و مصرف نیستند، دسترسی نمادین (رفتاری و ذهنی) خود به این فضا را از دست داده‌اند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

An Analysis of the Appropriation of Space as a Consequence of Urban Streets’ Commercialisation; The Case of Fayazi Street in Tehran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nazanin Mostafavi Esfahani 1
  • Mohammadsaleh Shokouhibidhendi 2
1 MSc. Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor,Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning,Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran Somaye Rashvand Avee
چکیده [English]

Background and objectives: Street commercialisation in affluent districts of the citiesoften includes commercialised luxury activities, due to high capital returns. This can be seen as a form of spatial commodification which, inter alia, constrains street users’ access, even mentally. So, streets as public spaces become limited-access spaces just for special (wealthy) groups of society.
 
Materials and methods: In this research, Fayazi Street (aka Fereshte) is studied due to its prime location in Tehran’s affluent District 1, complete with high-end commercial centres, bank branches, and other luxuries. The effects of commercialisation here have been analysed using the factor analysis method in SPSS software.
 
Results: Findings show that luxury commercial uses are effective in limiting the use of Fayazi Street. By using the factor analysis method, three factors were extracted, which we call ‘subjective and objective accessibility’, ‘Luxury and controlled consumption spaces’, and ‘location and connections’. These factors have resulted in spatialseizure in favour of the wealthy.
Conclusion: This article shows how access to public spaces can gradually be restricted for some social groups. In other words, many less wealthy people have actually found the street uncomfortably unaffordable, and thereby miss the sense of symbolic accessibility of the street, be it behaviour-wise or mentally.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Limited spaces
  • Commercialisation
  • Commercial streets
  • Fayazi Street
  • Tehran
Aghaei, P., et al. “Production and Reproduction of Space in the Second Cycle of Capital Accumulation; A Critique of Everyday Life in Lived Space”. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 16(80) (2020): 29-40.
doi: 10.22034/bagh.2019.151034.3799 (In Persian)
Akkar, M. “Less Public than before”. In Whose Public Space? International Case Studies in Urban Design and Development, edited by A. Madanipour, New York: Routledge, 2010. 21-50.
Alya, Mutiara N. and A.H. Fuad. “Commodified Public Space: The Enforcement of Authority”. Energy, Communities and Cities, 2020.
Amjadi Hasannejad, M., et al. “Assessing the Role of Malls and Commercial Centers for Changing Urban Regions in Terms of Consumerism: A Case Study on Tabriz Metropolis”. Urban Structure and Function Studies, Vol. 8, Issue 29, 70-96. (In Persian)
Apostol, Ieana. The Production of Public Spaces: Design Dialectics and Pedagogy. Faculty of the graduate school university of southern California, Doctor of philosophy (planning), 2007. DOI: 10.1080/02673030500391114 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673030500391114
Benn, S. and G. Gauss, eds. Public and Private in Social Life. London: Croom Helm, 1983.
Brenner, N. and N. Theodore. “Cities and the Geographies of ‘Actually Existing Neo-Liberalism’”. Antipode, 34 (3) (2002): 349-379.
Byers, J. “The Privatization of Downtown Public Space: The Emerging Grade-separated City in North America”. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 17(3) (1998): 189-205.
Carmona, M. and F. Wunderlich. Capital Spaces. Abingdon, 2013.
Carmona, M., C. De Magalhães, and L. Hammond. Public Space: Managerial Dimensions, Transl. I. Asadi and M. Abbaszadeh. Tehran: SAMT Publications, 2017. (In Persian)
Carr, Stephen, et al. Stone. Public Space. Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Franck, K. and L. Paxson. “Women and Urban Public Space”. In Irvin Altman and Ervin H. Zube, Public Places and Spaces, Academia. edu., 1989, 121- 146.
Gehl, J. “Life between Buildings Using Public Space, Arkitektens Forlarg”. Skive, 11-16 (1996): 17-40.
________ . Life in the Space between Buildings. Transl. Sima Shasti. Jihad-e Daneshgahi Publications Organization. (In persian)
________ . Public Spaces and Urban Collective Life in Adelaide. Transl. A. Ghaffari & MS. SohiliPour. Shahid Beheshti University Publications, 2002. (In persian)
Grange, Adrienne La, Chin-oh Chang & Ngai Ming Yip. “Commodification and Urban Development: A Case Study of Taiwan”. Housing Studies, 21(1) (2006): 53-76.
Harvey, D. The Urbanization of Capital: Studies in the History and Theory of Capitalist Urbanization, transl. A. Aghvami Moqaddam, Akhtaran Publishing, 2013. (In Persian)
Iranian Association for Cultural Studies and Communication. “Explanation of the Role of Public Spaces in Relation to Social Capital (Case Study: Amol)”. Quarterly Journal of Socio-cultural Development Studies, 3(4) (2015): 185-212. URL: http://journals.sabz.ac.ir/scds/article-1-217-en.html
Khalili, S. “Understanding Commercial Complexes and the Necessity of Social Interactions in Shopping Centers”. National Conference on Basic Research in Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Planning, Tehran, Iran, 2018. https://civilica.com/doc/789614 (In Persian)
Langstraat, Florian and Rianne Van Melik. “Challenging the ‘End of Public Space’: A Comparative Analysis of Publicness in British and Dutch Urban Spaces”. Journal of Urban Design, vol. 18, Issue 3 (2013): 429-448.
Lopes, M, S. Santos Cruz, and P. Pinho. “Publicness of Contemporary Urban Spaces: Comparative Study between Porto and Newcastle”. J. Urban Plann. Dev., 146(4) (2019): 04020033.
Lopes, M, S. Santos Cruz, and P. Pinho. “Revisiting Publicness in Assessment of Contemporary Urban Spaces”. J. Urban Plann. Dev., 145(4) (2019): 04019013.
Loukaitou-Sideris, A., and T. Banerjee. Urban Design Downtown: Poetics and Politics of Form. Berkeley, CA: University of California, 1998.
Lynch, K. “The Openness of Open Space”. In City Sense and City Design: Writings and Projects of Kevin Lynch, edit by: T. Banerjee and M. Southworth, Cambridge Mass, MIT Press, 1991. 396 - 412.
________ . The Openness of Open Space. AbeBooks, 1965.
Manouchehri Miandoab, A. “An Analysis of the Urban Space Production Cycle in Iran Case: Tehran Metropolis”. Geographical Urban Planning Research (GUPR), 9(2) (2021): 387-415. doi: 10.22059/jurbangeo.2021.313591.1404. (In Persian)
Mean, M. and C. Tims. People Make Places: Growing the Public Life of Cities. London: Demos, 2005.
Mehta, Vikas. “Evaluating Public Space”. Journal of Urban Design, 19(1) (2013): 53-88. DOI: 10.1080/13574809.2013.854698
Mousavi, SY. and A. Samadi. “Analyzing Social and Economic Inequality in Access to and Use of Urban Public Spaces (Case study: Tehran city)”. Urban Sociological Studies, 26(8) (2018): 194-226. (In Persian)
Nemeth, Jeremy and Stephan Schmidt, “Publicly Accessible Space and Quality of Life: A Tool for Measuring the Openness of Urban Spaces”. Quality-of-Life Community Indicators for Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, 1970, 41-66.
Nemeth, J. and S. Schmidt. “The Privatization of Public Space: Modeling and Measuring Publicness”. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 38(1) (2011): 5-23.
Nezhadbahram, Z. and S.M. Jalili. “Explanation of “Urban Power” and Its Effects on the Development Process of Tehran City”. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, 13(33) (2021): 269-280. doi: 10.22034/aaud.2020.208096.2037 (In Persian)
Pelin Ekdi, F. and H. Çıracı. “Really Public? Evaluating the Publicness of Public Spaces in Istanbul by Means of Fuzzy Logic Modelling”. Journal of Urban Design, 20(5) (2015): 658-676. DOI: 10.1080/13574809.2015.1106919.
Pourahmad, A., K. Ziari, H. Hataminejad, and H. Rezaeinia. “An Analysis on the Nature of Public Space in Large-scale Urban Tourism Projects based on ‘Social Production of Space’ Theory (case study: Tehran)”. Urban Tourism, 5(2) (2018): 135-159. doi: 10.22059/jut.2018.251169.441 (In Persian)
Razavian, M.T., Z. Fanni, and P. Aghaei. “A Critique of the Ccurrent Structure; Pseudo-Capitalist Economy and Spatial Disintegration (Case study: Region 3 of Tehran Metropolis)”. The National Congress of Pioneers of Progress, Tehran, Iran, 2017. https://civilica.com/doc/742402 (In Persian)
Saeedifard, F., M. Razavian, and M. Ghourchi. “The Reflection of a Rentier Economy on the Spatial Organization of Metropolitan Urban Planning with an Emphasis on Human-centered Approach (Case Study: Region 1 Tehran)”. Researches in Earth Sciences, 9(2) (2018): 145-164. doi: 10.29252/esrj.9.2.145 (In Persian)
Serin, Bilge, Harry Smith, and Chris McWilliams. “The Role of the State in the Commodification of Urban Space: The Case of Branded Housing Projects, Istanbul”. European Urban and Regional Studies, 27(4) (2020): 1-17.
Sharepour, M. Urban Sociology. Tehran: Samt Publications, 2012).
Soja, Edward W. Seeking Spatial Justice (Globalization and Community). University of Minnesota Press, 2010.
Sorkin, M. Variation on a Theme Park, The New American City and the of Public. New York: Hill & Wang, 1992.
Short, J. Renée. Urban Theory: A Critical Evaluation. Transl. H. Mahdenazad, et al., Tehran University Press and Publications Institute, 2012.
Tonekaboni, B., P. Shahabian, and A. Modiri. “Recognition and Analysis of Socio-cultural Changes and Transformations in Tehran’s Urban Public Spaces”. Cultural Sociology Research Quarterly, vol. 8, no. 4 (2017): 133-158. (In Persian)
Varna, George and Steve Tiesdell. “Assessing the Publicness of Public Space: The Star Model of Publicness”. Journal of Urban Design, 15(4) (2010): 575-598.
Varna, Georgiana and D. Cerrone. “Making the Publicness of Public Spaces Visible: From Space Syntax to the Star Model of Public Space”. Conference: EAEA 11At: Milan, 2013.
Varna, Georgiana M. Assessing the Publicness of Public Places: Towards a New Model. PhD Thesis, 2011. http://theses.gla.ac.uk/2999/
Whyte, W.H. City: Rediscovering the Centre. New York: Doubleday, 1988.
Zebardast, E., A. Khalili, and M. Dehqani. “Application of Factor Analysis Method in Identifying Dilapidated Urban Textures”. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning18(2) (2013): 27-42. doi: 10.22059/jfaup.2013.50524 (In Persian)