Comparison of Expert- based and Exposure-based Analysis in Historical Districts. Case study: Haft-Chenar, Iran

Abstract

City managers need to make the best decisions possible in order to achieve optimal patterns for developing cities, and for making such decisions managers require different groups of experts and consultants to help in choosing the best options in the specific field in question. In general, the views of policymakers are based on the comprehension and definition of the quality of urban space which in turn is based on two different approaches of experts-based and exposure-based. The questions that follow are the basis for this study: Are there any similarities or differences between what experts mean by ’space’ and how users define it? How trustworthy are the results of the team of experts and their decisions? How can we improve experts ‘analysis of urban areas? The research method is qualitative. This is an applied research and the research strategy is abductive. The purpose of this study was to determine the differences between the points of view of experts and the laymen on the quality of urban space in the Haft-Chenar area. The data gathering method is structured observation and interviews. 450 questionnaires were completed through interviews. After analyzing the differences between the responses of the expert team and users of the urban space, as well as the initial response of the expert team and their final responses, it has been concluded by the authors that the evaluation of the quality of space should be based on a combination of expert opinions and those of the people. The combination of ideas will generally compensate for each other's shortcomings and provide a more accurate analysis of the qualities of urban space. As a result, utilizing participatory approaches in urban planning and design will improve the quality of location and more appropriate decisions can be made.