| چکیده انگلیسی مقاله |
The 19th century was the time when the colonization of Eastern and African nations by Westerners expedited and became promoted under the title of development and civilization. The literal meaning of colonialism signifies civilization and development, and this conceptualization per se has a positive connotation. Since the consequences of alleged civilization were revealed to the colonized nations, colonialism has turned into a term with a negative connotation. The colonization had consequences for local communities while benefiting the colonists. The term development faced the same destiny. When the classical colonial method came to an end, superpowers pursued the same goal in the guise of development companies. In the twentieth century, development programs were ordered to make weak countries ready for the consumption of Western goods. The desperate desire to accrue benefits from raw resources resulted in a variety of pollution and unwarranted consumption of resources between generations. The Western world, which was the main culprit of unbalanced development and successive damage to society and the environment, attempted to alleviate the environmental damage caused by development programs. For this purpose, more precise conditions were defined for development from the middle of the twentieth century and slowly addressed social and cultural disorders with a new definition of development. A century ago, succeeding the coup of Reza Khan, Iran was reigned by a modern government whose concern was development. This incident coincided with the discovery of oil and the special importance of Iran's geopolitical position for the United States and the Soviet :union:. Except for some details, the development programs of Iran followed the same trend in the first Pahlavi period, the National Government (1920-32), the second Pahlavi period, and the Islamic Republic. Despite the striking difference in political attitudes in each period, the rationale for this can be justified by the ambiguity of the concept of development which has been defined as an absolute matter that can be addressed by any method. During those periods, a variety of development including economic development programs were prepared under the advice of Western countries or implemented under the guise of socio-economic development programs. After a century when the development was introduced, its remained calamities have become so tangible that the public demands a change in development.
Since the 1960s, sustainable development as the flagship of desirable development has been newly discovered. Reforming the conceptualization of development, highlighting human life material survival, and the environment, has had desirable achievements. Over two decades, attempts have been made to have an all-inclusive interpretation of sustainable development by focusing on social and cultural aspects of development. For this purpose, supplementary and existing documents have been prepared. That means that the deficiencies of the development methodology are met through separate annexes. This method has been practiced by the current regulations of Iran for development projects under the title of environmental, social, and cultural annexes.
This effort has had only a little impact on the harms of development in Iran and the calamities of development in neglected scales still exist. The reason is that the annexes are based on the components that directly deal with the subdivision issues of the annexes rather than adopting a holistic view. Subdivision development views the land independently from its context parts including discrete items lacking wholeness. Thus, the environment in this approach is regarded as the biological field, the social aspect is limited to selected indicators, and the cultural dimension just presents civilizational symbols.Even though development projects all over the country have been successful in terms of economic aspects, they have had harmful peripheral effects on the land and human society. Such consequences are attributed to the persistence of the ex-form of development in Iran. These harmful projects continue to exist while concealing the association between the suffering of the local community and the development program.
Camp B in Imam Khomeini Port is a neighborhood that remained from Mahshahr Petrochemical Company fifty years ago, which was the place in which Japanese workers were settled. Through several stages, war victims and immigrants were accommodated there and the residential part of the port was formed in the historical heart of Sarbandar. This area was a residential place when Sarbandar was just a wasteland. Today, compared to other areas that have average standards of living, Sarbandar is undeveloped due to the imposed uncertainty over land ownership. The government has not provided the needed conventional infrastructure and the city’s wide and out-of-scale streets are suitable for the traffic of heavy petrochemical machinery. The interpretation of the fifty-year management of Camp B suggests that this neighborhood was not built for human life but for the settlement (or housing) of petrochemical workers; the residents are treated as a commodity aligned with the interests of the authorities (petrochemicals), the other necessities and commodities of this huge project have received the same treatment. The practicality of the commodity (here, the residents) is not the concern, but rather the ownership interests determine the amount of services residents are provided with. It can be said that the residents and large parts of other stakeholders have a passive and minor (objective) role in the creation and activity of the development project, and their rights and independence, which define their active role and subjectivity, are secondary.
Recently, during another development program, under the guise of supporting the deprived residents of Camp B, the Housing Foundation, in a unilateral, centralized, and unconcerned process, has taken the initiative to renovate the neighborhood, which has imposed double hardship on the residents. It has demolished the shacks of one group under the name of in-situ construction and another group in exchange for land, and by implementing a plan that does not conform to the conditions of the area, it has started a large project that neither the residents nor the residents can complete. The new conditions of the neighborhood are far from the shantytown that it was during the
As shown by Negin Bojani in the photo on the cover, the new neighborhood Kapar is a more flimsy shelter than before, which has been bestowed upon a citizen in the wasteland of development and the concrete skeleton of the brigade. This oppressed citizen has lost his neighbors but is also coerced to dwell in a house that is called permanently temporary in a provisional bed with no complete infrastructure. This is a kind of gradual death that is the fatwa of the development program. Amendment of such conventional corruptions of development using the annexation method is impossible. The subject of development must be a single category and subdivision project development should be avoided. The "place" is the unity of geography with its civilization, which is called the territory, and can be the subject of development. In this case, subdivision projects will be considered measures of the macro and unitary development process in which the preservation of the interests of the territory is the criterion of their amendment. |