@phdthesis{Javanmardi,
  author    = {Javanmardi, Leila},
  title     = {URBANISM AND DICTATORSHIP. A Study on Urban Planning in Contemporary History of Iran, Second Pahlavi: 1941-1979},
  doi       = {10.25643/bauhaus-universitaet.4597},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:gbv:wim2-20220224-45971},
  school      = {Bauhaus-Universit{\"a}t Weimar},
  pages     = {237},
  abstract  = {The evolution of urbanism under dictatorship forms the core of the current research. This thesis is part of a research network at Bauhaus-Universit{\"a}t Weimar, which studies the 20th century's urbanism under different dictatorships. The network has provided a cross-cultural and cross-border environment and has enabled the author to communicate with other like-minded researchers. The 2015 published book of this group 'Urbanism and Dictatorship: A European Perspective' strengthens the foundation of this research's theoretical and methodological framework. This thesis investigates urban policies and plans leading to the advancement of urbanization and the transformation of urban space in Iran during the second Pahlavi (1941-1979) when the country faced a milestone in its history: Nationalization of the Iranian oil industry. By reflecting the influence of economic and socio-political determinants of the time on urbanism and the urbanization process, this work intends to critically trace the effect of dictatorship on evolved urbanism before and after the oil nationalization in 1951. The research on the second Pahlavi's urbanism has been limitedly addressed and has only recently expanded. Most of the conducted studies date back to less than a decade ago and could not incorporate all the episodes of the second Pahlavi urbanism. These works have often investigated urbanism and architecture by focusing merely on the physical features and urban products in different years regardless of the importance of urbanism as a tool in the service of hegemony. In other words, the majority of the available literature does not intend to address the socio-economic and political roots of urban transformations and by questioning 'what has been built?' investigates the individual urban projects and plans designed by individual designers without interlinking these projects to the state's urban planning program and tracing the beneficiaries of those projects or questioning 'built for whom?' Moreover, some chapters of this modern urbanism have rarely been investigated. For instance, scant research has looked into the works of foreign designers and consultants involved in the projects such as Peter Georg Ahrens or Constantinos A. Doxiadis. Similarly, the urbanism of the first decade of the second Pahlavi, including the government of Mossadegh, has mainly been overlooked. Therefore, by critically analyzing the state's urban planning program and the process of urbanization in Iran during the second Pahlavi, this research aims to bridge the literature gap and to unravel the effect of the power structure on urban planning and products while seeking to find a pattern behind the regime's policies. The main body of this work is concentrated on studying the history of urbanism in Iran, of which collecting data and descriptions played a crucial role. To prevent the limitations associated with singular methods, this research's methodology is based on methodological triangulation (Denzin, 2017). With the triangulation scheme, the data is gathered by combining different qualitative and quantitative methods such as the library, archival and media research, online resources, non-participatory observation, and photography. For the empirical part, the city of Tehran is selected as the case study. Moreover, individual non-structured interviews with the locals were conducted to gain more insights regarding urban projects.},
  subject      = {Stadtplanung},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{ManzanoGomez,
  author    = {Manzano G{\´o}mez, Noel A.},
  title     = {The reverse of urban planning. Towards a 20th century history of informal urbanization in Europe and its origins in Madrid and Paris (1850-1940)},
  doi       = {10.25643/bauhaus-universitaet.4569},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:gbv:wim2-20220119-45693},
  school      = {Bauhaus-Universit{\"a}t Weimar},
  pages     = {350},
  abstract  = {The objective of this thesis was to understand the 20th-century history of informal urbanisation in Europe and its origins in Madrid and Paris. The concept of informal urbanisation was employed to refer to the process of developing shacks and precarious single-family housing areas that were not planned by the public powers and were considered to be substandard because of their below-average materials and social characteristics. Our main hypothesis was that despite being a phenomenon with ancient roots, informal urbanisation emerged as a public problem and was subsequently prohibited in connection with another historical process occurred: the birth of contemporary urban planning. Therefore, its transformation into a deviant and illegal urban growth mechanism would have been a pan-European process occurring at the same pace that urban planning developed during the first decades of the 20th century. Analysing the 20th-century history of informal urbanisation in Europe was an ambitious task that required using a large number of sources. To contend with this issue, this thesis combined two main methods: historiographical research about informal urbanisation in Europe and archival research of two case studies, Madrid and Paris, to make the account more precise by analysing primary sources of the subject. Our research of these informal areas, which were produced mainly through poor private allotments and housing developed on land squats, revealed two key moments of explosive growth across Europe: the 1920s and 1960s. The near disappearance of informal urbanisation throughout the continent seemed to be a consequence not of the historical development of urban planning—which was commonly transgressed and bypassed—but of the exacerbation of global economic inequalities, permitting the development of a geography of privilege in Europe. Concerning the cases of Paris and Madrid, the origins of informal urbanisation—that is, the moment the issue started to be problematised—seemed to occur in the second half of the 19th century, when a number of hygienic norms and surveillance devices began to control housing characteristics. From that moment onwards, informal urbanisation areas formed peripheral belts in both cities. This growth became the object of an illegalisation process of which we have identified three phases: (i) the unregulated development of the phenomenon during the second half of the 20th century, (ii) the institutional production of "exception regulations" to permit a controlled development of substandard housing in the peripheral fringes of both cities, and (iii) the synchronic prohibition of informal urbanisation in the 1920s and its illegal reproduction.},
  subject      = {Stadtplanung},
  language  = {en}
}