1. Mohammadzadeh Titkanlu H. Transformation in urban planning theories and its effect on evaluation methods. Planning and budget quarterly. 1999; 4 (9): 47-68. [Persian] https://jpbud.ir/article-1-729-fa.html [Article]

2. Sharifzadegan MH, Shafiei A. Communicative planning as a proposed approach for urban planning at the neighborhood scale in Farahzad neighborhood of Tehran. Social welfare . 2014; 15(56): 281-313. [Persian] http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-2081-fa.html [Article]

3. Hedayat H, Rafian M. To Assess the effectiveness of resulted changes from the municipality proceeding to improve quality of space around Metro Stations (Sadeghiyeh subway station). Urban Management Studies. 2015 Jan 21;6(20):2-14. https://ums.srbiau.ac.ir/?_action=articleInfo&article=9143&lang=fa&lang=en&lang=fa&lang=en [Article]

4. Daneshvar M, Ghaffari A, Majedi H. A Grounded Theory Approach to the Application of Structural-Strategic Plans in Iran’s Urban Planning Syste. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development. 2019 Aug 23;12(27):155-65. https://www.armanshahrjournal.com/article_92458.html?lang=en [Article]

5. Irazábal C. Realizing planning's emancipatory promise: Learning from regime theory to strengthen communicative action. Planning Theory. 2009; 8(2): 115-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095209102230 [Article] [DOI]

6. Dadashpour H, Rafiyan M, Haqjo MR. The necessity of applying the concept of rationality in strategic spatial planning, Space Planning and Development. 2017; 22(1): 52-22. [Persian] https://hsmsp.modares.ac.ir/article-21-14015-fa.html [Article]

7. Mashayekhi A. The 1968 Tehran master plan and the politics of planning development in Iran (1945–1979). Planning Perspectives. 2018 May 24. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/shareview/10.1080/02665433.2018.1468805 [Article]

8. Rafieian M, Rahmati Z, Dadash Pour H. Explaining Power Mechanism in the Preparation and Implementation of Urban Development Plans; The University of Tehran Development Plan as a Case Study. Quarterly Journals of Urban and Regional Development Planning. 2022 Mar 21;7(20):41-83. https://urdp.atu.ac.ir/article_14184_en.html [Article]

9. Bintari A, Akbar I. Collaborative planning in policy-making process in Bandung City. InUnhas International Conference on Social and Political Science (UICoSP 2017) 2017 Oct (pp. 30-33). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/uicosp-17.2017.9. https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/uicosp-17/25883881 [Article]

10. Huxley M, Yiftachel O. New paradigm or old myopia? Unsettling the communicative turn in planning theory. Journal of planning education and research. 2000 Jun;19(4):333-42. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0739456x0001900402 [Article]

11. Du G, Kray C, Degbelo A. Interactive immersive public displays as facilitators for deeper participation in urban planning. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction. 2020 Jan 2; 36(1):67-81. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2019.1606476 [Article] [DOI]

12. European Institute for Public Participation (EIPP). Public Participation in Europe an international perspective [Internet] 2009; Available from: http://www.partizipation.at/fileadmin/media_data/ [Article]

13. Brand R, Gaffikin F. Collaborative planning in an uncollaborative world. Planning theory. 2007 Nov; 6(3): 282-313. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095207082036 [Article] [DOI]

14. Bäcklund P, Mäntysalo R. Agonism and institutional ambiguity: Ideas on democracy and the role of participation in the development of planning theory and practice-the case of Finland. Planning theory. 2010 Nov; 9(4): 333-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095210373684 [Article] [DOI]

15. Rafian M, Pourmohammadi M. Evaluating Environmental Quality around the Holy Shrine of Hazrat-e Masoumeh Using Exposure-based Approach. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development. 2013 Mar 1;5(9):323-31. https://www.armanshahrjournal.com/%20http:/www.armanshahrjournal.com/article_33269.html?lang=en [Article]

16. Ruknuddin Eftekhari A, and Behzadnasab J. Communicative planning, a critical approach to planning theory (with emphasis on rural development planning). Modares Humanities, 2013; 8(1(consecutive 32)): 1-22. [Persian]. http://hsmsp.modares.ac.ir/article-21-2855-fa.html [Article]

17. Rafiyan M, Maroufi S. The role and application of communication planning approach in modern theories of urban planning. Utopia Architecture and Urbanism, 2011; 4(7): 113-120. [Persian]. https://www.armanshahrjournal.com/article_32687.html [Article]

18. Naghshizadian S, Rafieian M, Saeideh Zarabadi ZS, Majedi H. Formation of Entrepreneurial Places Based on Interaction of Urban Regeneration with Urban Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Using the Meta-Synthesis Method (2010-2020). International Journal of Architectural Engineering & Urban Planning. 2024 Jan 1;34(1). https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=22287337&AN=178166817&h=zIfnGF0mM5VSSsIPHtrOLrJODn0snQ0XKyTiLK%2FUP3F1PFP2x4%2BDNRVxwxxhQNT6NDl6JahTCcllyMYO%2Binxaw%3D%3D&crl=c [Article]

19. Tajbakhsh K. Creating local democracy in Iran: State building and the politics of decentralization. Cambridge University Press; 2022 Jul 21. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=8vF4EAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=mojtaba+rafian&ots=JNLrQa2_JB&sig=kgJOZ-3J6d6j0VK2QThcNm68I-0 [Article]

20. Schmithals J. Citizens' participation in urban planning and development in Iran. Dienel HL, Shirazi MR, Schröder S, editors. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group; 2017 May 12. https://api.taylorfrancis.com/content/books/mono/download?identifierName=doi&identifierValue=10.4324/9781315572154&type=googlepdf [Article]

21. Sediqi B. Anthony Giddens' theory of construction: theoretical and methodological consequences and its practical application in sociology, Social Research, 2009; Volume 3 (Number 9): 167-141. [Persian].

22. Mokhberi M. An investigation on the influence of landscape of buildings on citizens' perceptual characteristics. QUID: Investigación, Ciencia y Tecnología. 2018(2):53-63. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6562898 [Article]

23. Hedayati Fard M. Analyzing the necessity of using collaborative environmental planning in the six districts of Tehran Municipality as a case study. Armanshahr Architecture and Urbanism, 2014; 8(15): 369-383.[Persian]. https://www.armanshahrjournal.com/article_34154.html [Article]

24. Firoozi MA, Sajjadian N, Alizadeh H. Prioritizing the application of John Friedman's non-Euclidean planning theory criteria in urban planning in Iran. Geospace, 2015; 16(53), 1-21. [Persian] SID. http://geographical-space.iau-ahar.ac.ir/article-1-2346-fa.html [Article]

25. Motusoli M, Haji Ali Akbari K. collective action; The connection point of institutional thinking and communication planning approach. Planning and budget quarterly. 2016; 21 (4): 15-45. [Persian]. https://jpbud.ir/article-1-1358-fa.html [Article]

26. Zeynab S. Empowering informal settlements around metropolises (Case study: District 19 of Tehran, Iran). Ukrainian Journal of Ecology. 2020;10(2):156-64. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/empowering-informal-settlements-around-metropolises-case-study-district-19-of-tehran-iran [Article]

27. Mokhberi M, Partoi P. Analysis of institutional requirements to realize communication planning in Tehran. Urban Management Studies, 2016; 9(32): 53-67. [Persian]. https://ums.srbiau.ac.ir/article_12574.html [Article]

28. Alinaghipour M, Pourramzan I, Molaei Hashjin N. Explaining Environmental Livability of Rural Settlements around Rasht Metropolis. Human Geography Research. 2021 Mar 21;53(1):1-22. https://jhgr.ut.ac.ir/article_66826_en.html?lang=en [Article]

29. Karimzadeh D, Dawoodpour Z. Democratic approaches in urban planning and the emergence of controversial theory (agonism). Urban Structure and Function Studies, 2017; 5(16), 111-128. [Persian]. https://shahr.journals.umz.ac.ir/article_2014.html [Article]

30. Rezapour M, Bahraini SH, Tabibian M. Evaluation of the relationship between communication and urban sustainability (case study: Tehran). Human Geography Research, 2019; 52(1): 89-109 [Persian]. https://jhgr.ut.ac.ir/article_66150.html [Article]

31. Sabermanesh A, Ahmadi H, Barati N. Explaining the components of urban planning education with an emphasis on the relationship with the professional learning community. Urban and Regional Development Planning Quarterly, 2021; 6(17): 147-178. [Persian]. https://urdp.atu.ac.ir/article_13522.html [Article]

32. Nasiri Y, Daudpour Z, Moinifar M. The theory of participatory urban planning and the conditions for its realization in the urban planning system of Iran. Quarterly Journal of Geography (Regional Planning), 2021; 11(42): 693-714. [Persian]. https://www.jgeoqeshm.ir/article_130378.html [Article]

33. Pourmohammadi M R, Khaleghi A. Analyzing the existing inadequacies of local rural planning based on the theory of communication planning in East Azarbaijan province. Local Development (Rural-Urban), 2022; 14(1): 141-169. [Persian]. https://jrd.ut.ac.ir/article_86999.html [Article]

34. Zargari Marandi E, Soltani A. Analyzing the fundamental dualities in the concept of public interest in urban planning and policymaking. Danesh Shahrsazi, 2016; 1(1): 21-36 . [Persian]. https://upk.guilan.ac.ir/article_2798.html [Article]

35. Hudson BM, Galloway TD, Kaufman JL. Comparison of current planning theories: Counterparts and contradictions. Journal of the American planning association. 1979 Oct 1;45(4):387-98. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01944367908976980 [Article]

36. Mansouri M. restoring the cultural-social identity of Khayam neighborhood of Ilam city with the approach of participatory urban development, Farhang Ilam, 2017; 19(58-59): 133-154. [Persian]. https://www.farhangeilam.ir/article_78706.html [Article]

37. Valdebigi S, Habibian H. comparative study of supportive and participatory urban planning theories with an emphasis on the concept of social justice. environmental studies of Haft Hesar, 2014; 4 (14): 25-34. [Persian]. https://hafthesar.iauh.ac.ir/article-1-296-fa.html [Article]

38. Fainstein SS. New directions in planning theory. Urban affairs review. 2000 Mar;35(4):451-78. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/107808740003500401 [Article]

39. Chevalier JM. Participatory action research: Theory and methods for engaged inquiry. Routledge; 2019 Feb 12. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9781351033268/participatory-action-research-jacques-chevalier [Article]

40. Balestrini M, Rogers Y, Hassan C, Creus J, King M, Marshall P. A city in common: a framework to orchestrate large-scale citizen engagement around urban issues. InProceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems 2017 May 2 (pp. 2282-2294). https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3025453.3025915 [Article]

41. Cornwall A, Coelho VS, editors. Spaces for change?: the politics of citizen participation in new democratic arenas. Zed Books; 2007. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=LB-dw7DX0KMC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=participatory+urban+planning%3B+A+theoretical+exploration+in+the+conditi&ots=wpOObqJjLI&sig=nIPydzqqk9cpeAa5zI8Dpd3wSCo [Article]

42. Rafieian M, Ajilian S, Ahgasafari A. Principles, dimensions and variables concerning the residential satisfaction in Mehr housing project (the case study of Mehregan town). Motaleate Shahri. 2016 Aug 1;5(19):27-36. https://urbstudies.uok.ac.ir/m/article_33396.html?lang=en [Article]

43. Gagliardi D, Schina L, Sarcinella ML, Mangialardi G, Niglia F, Corallo A. Information and communication technologies and public participation: interactive maps and value added for citizens. Government Information Quarterly, 2017; 34(1), 153-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.09.002 [Article] [DOI]

44. Flacke J, Shrestha R, Aguilar R. Strengthening participation using interactive planning support systems: A systematic review. ISPRS international journal of geo-information, 2020; 9(1), 49. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9010049 [Article] [DOI]

45. Mostafavi Esfahani N. Identifying and analysis the speculative factors affecting land use changes and activity (Case study: Gisha street in Tehran). Journal of Applied researches in Geographical Sciences. 2025 Feb 10;24(75):292-312. https://jgs.khu.ac.ir/browse.php?a_id=4103&sid=1&slc_lang=en [Article]

46. Margerum RD. Evaluating collaborative planning: Implications from an empirical analysis of growth management. Journal of the American Planning Association, . 2002; 68(2), 179-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360208976264 [Article] [DOI]

47. Tewdwr-Jones M, Thomas H. Collaborative action in local plan-making: Planners' perceptions of ‘planning through debate’. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 1998; 25(1), 127-144. https://doi.org/10.1068/b250127 [Article] [DOI]

48. Hanberger A. Evaluation of and for Democracy. Evaluation, 2006; 12(1), 17-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389006064194 [Article] [DOI]

49. Healey P. Collaborative planning in perspective. Planning theory, 2003; 2(2), 101-123. https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952030022002 [Article] [DOI]

50. Sager T. Deliberative planning and decision making: An impossibility result. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 2002; 21(4), 367-378. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X0202100402 [Article] [DOI]

51. Schroeter R. Engaging new digital locals with interactive urban screens to collaboratively improve the city. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative work, 2012, February; (pp. 227-236). https://doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145239 [Article] [DOI]

52. Yetano A, Royo S, Acerete B. What is driving the increasing presence of citizen participation initiatives?. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 2010 Oct;28(5):783-802. https://doi.org/10.1068/c09110 [Article] [DOI]

53. Alilou M, Mahdavinejad M. The Effect of CCT on Vitality and Population Absorption in Urban Area: Case Study of the Safavi Bridge Urban Area in Karaj, Iran. Light & Engineering (Svetotekhnika), Moscow. 2022 Sep 1;30(5): 81-91. Available at: https://l-e-journal.com/en/journals/light-engineering-30-5/light-engineering-30-5-2022-paper-version/ [Article]

54. Forester J. On the theory and practice of critical pragmatism: Deliberative practice and creative negotiations. Planning theory, 2013 Feb;12(1):5-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095212448750 [Article] [DOI]

55. Brownill S. The dynamics of participation: modes of governance and increasing participation in planning. Urban Policy and Research. 2009 Dec 1;27(4):357-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/08111140903308842 [Article] [DOI]

56. Abelson J, Forest PG, Eyles J, Casebeer A, Martin E, Mackean G. Examining the role of context in the implementation of a deliberative public participation experiment: Results from a Canadian comparative study. Social science & medicine. 2007 May 1;64(10):2115-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.01.013 [Article] [DOI]

57. [57] Sayad N, Saidi Rizvani N. Shart, a way to participate in urban design. Urbanism and Environmental Identity Architecture Research Quarterly, 2019; 1(3): 1-16. https://www.ei-journal.ir/article_107525.html. [Persian]

58. Vatani M, Kiani K, Mahdavinejad M, Georgescu M. Evaluating the effects of different tree species on enhancing outdoor thermal comfort in a post-industrial landscape. Environ. Res. Lett. (Environmental Research Letters). 2024 May 10; 19(064051):1-14. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad49b7 [Article] [DOI]

59. Ebdon C, Franklin AL. Citizen participation in budgeting theory. Public administration review. 2006 May;66(3):437-47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00600.x [Article] [DOI]

60. Sorayaei T, Ranjbar E, Mahdavinejad M. A Systematic Review of Place-related Psychological Dimensions of Outdoor Thermal Comfort. Urban Design Discourse, a Review of Contemporary Literature and Theories. 2024 Feb 10;4(4):30-68. Available at: http://udd.modares.ac.ir/article-40-64865-en.html [Article]

61. Mahdavinejad M, Shaeri J, Nezami A, Goharian A. Comparing universal thermal climate index (UTCI) with selected thermal indices to evaluate outdoor thermal comfort in traditional courtyards with BWh climate. Urban Climate. 2024 Mar 1;54:101839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2024.101839 [Article] [DOI]

62. Mahdavinejad M, Bazazzadeh H, Mehrvarz F, Berardi U, Nasr T, Pourbagher S, Hoseinzadeh S. The impact of facade geometry on visual comfort and energy consumption in an office building in different climates. Energy Reports. 2024 Jun 1;11:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.11.021 [Article] [DOI]

63. Campbell H, Marshall R. Utilitarianism’s bad breath? A re-evaluation of the public interest justification for planning. Planning Theory. 2002 Jul;1(2):163-87. https://doi.org/10.1177/147309520200100205 [Article] [DOI]

64. Rowe G, Marsh R, Frewer LJ. Evaluation of a deliberative conference. Science, Technology, & Human Values. 2004 Jan; 29(1):88-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243903259194 [Article] [DOI]

65. Daneshpour SA, Behzadfar M, Barakpour N, Sharfi M. Participatory planning environment, presenting a conceptual model for analyzing factors affecting citizens' participation in planning. Journal of Architecture and Urbanism , 2016; 9(18), 23-41. http://aup.journal.art.ac.ir/article_510.html [Article]

66. Bonafede G, Lo Piccolo F. Participative planning processes in the absence of the (public) space of democracy. Planning Practice & Research. 2010 Jun 1;25(3):353-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2010.503430 [Article] [DOI]

67. Yazdanian A, Kashtkar V. The effect of the public domain on citizens' participation in urban affairs, with an emphasis on urban regeneration. Haft Shahr, 2015; 4 (No. 53 and 54), 157-173. [Persian] https://www.haftshahrjournal.ir/article_24609.html [Article]

68. Conrad E, Cassar LF, Christie M, Fazey I. Hearing but not listening? A participatory assessment of public participation in planning. Environment and planning C: government and policy. 2011 Oct; 29(5):761-82. https://doi.org/10.1068/c10137 [Article] [DOI]

69. Yang K, Pandey SK. Further dissecting the black box of citizen participation: When does citizen involvement lead to good outcomes?. Public administration review. 2011 Nov;71(6):880-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02417.x [Article] [DOI]

70. Cowell R, Owens S. Governing space: planning reform and the politics of sustainability. Environment and planning C: government and policy. 2006 Jun; 24(3):403-21. https://doi.org/10.1068/c0416j [Article] [DOI]

71. ZebardastE, Khalili A, Dehghani M. The use of factor analysis method in identifying worn-out urban tissues. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture and Urbanism, 2012; 18(2): 27-42. [Persian] https://jfaup.ut.ac.ir/article_50524.html [Article]

72. Hossein Abadi S, Mohammadi P, Reza M, Mousavi MS. An analysis of the relationship between walkability and social sustainability: A case study of the city of Sabzavar. The Journal of Geographical Research on Desert Areas. 2020 Aug 22;8(1):187-214. http://grd.yazd.ac.ir/article_1931_en.html [Article]