Urban Economics and Planning

Urban Economics and Planning

The Knowledge - Practice Gap in Urban Planning: Insights from Consulting Firms in Tehran

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Mahshid Nejati 1
Sahar Nedae Tousi 2
1 Ph.D Candidate in Urban and Regional Planning, Department of Urban and Regional Planning and Design, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Urban and Regional Planning and Design, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
10.22034/uep.2025.540516.1687
Abstract
Introduction 
In recent years, a significant gap between academia and the profession in urban planning in Iran has been raised, and doubts have emerged about the effectiveness of explicit knowledge (theories, concepts, etc.) in professional practice. In this research, the term “knowledge” is classified into two types: explicit and tacit knowledge (experience, worldview, etc.). Tacit knowledge, in contrast to explicit knowledge, cannot be articulated. Explicit knowledge sources include universities, conferences, academic and professional articles and books, government white papers, and practice guidelines. Sources of tacit knowledge are considered to be the context and the planner-as-person. The term “practice” has referred to what occurs in professional practice and leads to the production of products, namely, the prepared plans. This research has addressed the relationship between urban planning knowledge and practice within consulting firms to identify the gap between urban planning knowledge and practice.
Materials and Methods
In this research, the unit of analysis consists of consulting firms that are members of the Society of Consulting Engineers. In this section, the conceptual-operational model of the research has been presented. Since the majority of consulting firms (86 percent) are located in Tehran, this city has been selected as the case study. The approach of this research has been qualitative, and its nature has been exploratory. The research strategy was thematic analysis, and the data collection method used was semi-structured interviews. The target population of this research has been consulting firms with a Grade 1 ranking in urban planning, located in Tehran, as the main body for preparing urban plans in Iran. Based on random sampling, due to the inability to establish contact and the rejection of the interview request, seven firms have constituted the sample under study. The interviews were conducted between June and September 2024, and the interviewees were the CEOs or heads of the firms’ urban planning departments. After the interviews have been conducted, the coding process has been carried out based on this research’s criteria for thematic analysis, which, in order of importance, have been: alignment with the research question and objective, conceptual significance, and theoretical support, with the software tools ATLAS.ti and Word; and ultimately, 72 codes have been obtained. These codes—emphasizing recurring and in-depth concepts—have been the basis for deriving sub-themes and themes through a combined (deductive and inductive) approach, grounded in both the theoretical foundations and the research’s conceptual-operational model (deductive), as well as the data (inductive).
Findings
This section presents the themes and sub-themes of the detailed relationship between urban planning knowledge and practice within consulting firms in Tehran. The identified themes are: the linkage of explicit knowledge and practice, the linkage of tacit knowledge and practice, and the linkage of both explicit and tacit (hybrid) knowledge and practice. Accordingly, the relationship between explicit knowledge and practice in the firms above is often manifested through preparing specialized plans based on academic knowledge and applying theory in those plans. It also appears in conjunction with tacit knowledge, in the preparation of diverse plans, their procurement through tenders, staff training, the application of both theory and experience in practice, preparing plans and resolving complexities using the expertise of company personnel and regarding specialized components, through outsourcing, recruitment with emphasis on the planner’s experience and personality in addition to academic knowledge, as well as through public advertisements and referrals, and the procurement of both routine and innovative plans. The relationship between tacit knowledge and practice is often manifested through learning from mistakes and from others, storytelling, resolving complexities through consultation with the firm’s experienced personnel, the preparation of routine plans, limited management of tacit knowledge via the use of processes applied in previous routine plans, and aforementioned actions in conjunction with explicit knowledge.
Conclusion
In response to the research question, the relationship between urban planning knowledge and practice within consulting firms is based on both types of knowledge. The relationship between explicit knowledge and practice is based on academic explicit knowledge, and the relationship between tacit knowledge and practice is grounded in individual experience, with emphasis on context—particularly the complex context of decision-making. In the relationship between urban planning knowledge and practice in Tehran, tacit knowledge is predominant. This predominance has intensified in recent years due to the weakening of the financial capacity of consulting firms and skill-orientation within them. In order to achieve the research objective, it must be stated that the relationship between urban planning knowledge and practice in the aforementioned firms indicates the gap between explicit knowledge and practice, as well as between tacit knowledge and practice. The comparison between the context of this research and the global literature reveals that the relationship between urban planning knowledge and practice in the countries that are the context of those studies is more strongly based on explicit knowledge. Regarding the differences in the gap between explicit knowledge and practice in the contexts, while this gap in consulting firms in Tehran mainly stems from structural weaknesses imposed by higher-level institutions, in the context of global studies, it primarily originates from the non-organic (yet systematic) relationship between academia and the profession. Another difference is that the systematic relationship between academia and the profession in the context of global studies is broader than in Iran and the city of Tehran. Another difference can also be considered to be the lack of proficiency of professional inputs in the plan-making process and its hardware and software tools in Tehran, which have not been mentioned in the global literature. Similarities in the gap between explicit knowledge and practice in the mentioned contexts can be stated as a mismatch between this knowledge and the decision-making context in terms of legal and procedural aspects, as well as the observation of an expectation among professionals for theories to be predictive and prescriptive in planning practice. Regarding the gap between tacit knowledge and practice in those contexts, a difference can be identified in the lower formal recognition of experience in professional practice in the city of Tehran. Among the observed similarities is the limited tacit knowledge management system in the profession and its limited connection to the body of knowledge. Among the theoretical implications of the gap between urban planning knowledge and practice in Tehran is the weakening of the credibility of academia and research, and among its professional implications is the loss of the planner’s intermediary role between urban planning knowledge and action in the city. The knowledge contribution of this research to the field of urban planning can be regarded as the substantiation of the gap between explicit knowledge and the practice of urban planning in Tehran, as well as the gap between tacit knowledge and the practice in the city. Moreover, this research has integrated and operationalized the relationship between planning theory and practice in international studies, as well as the relationship between academia and planning practice—considering experiences—in other studies by incorporating additional concepts such as the planner-as-person and the management of tacit knowledge in the context of Tehran; and in fact, it has presented a broader concept of explicit and tacit knowledge in the relationship between planning knowledge and practice in the case study.
Keywords
Consulting Firms
Explicit Knowledge
Knowledge-Practice Gap
Practice
Tacit Knowledge
Thematic Analysis
Urban Planning

Subjects

Alexander, E. R. (1997). A mile or a millimeter? Measuring the ‘planning theory-practice gap’. Environment and Planning B. Planning and Design, 24, 3-6. https://doi.org/10.1068/b240003 
Alexander, E. R. (1998). Doing the ‘impossible’: Notes for a general theory of planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 25, 667-680. https://doi.org/10.1068/b250667 
Alexander, E. R. (1999). Response to commentaries: Planning theory and practice – Mixing them or minding the gap. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 26, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1068/b260001 
Alexander, E. R. (2003). Response to why do planning theory. Planning Theory, 2 (3), 179-182. https://doi.org/10.1177/147309520323003 
Alexander, E. R. (2005). What do planners need to know? Identifying needed competencies, methods, and skills. Architectural and Planning Research, 22 (2), 91-106. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43030728 
Alexander, E. R. (2010). Introduction: Does planning theory affect practice, and if so, how? Planning Theory, 9 (2), 99-107. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095209357862 
Alexander, E. R. (2015). There is no planning – Only planning practices: Notes for spatial planning theories. Planning Theory, 15 (1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095215594617 
Alexander, E. R. (2018). How theory links research and practice: 70 Years’ planning theory. In T. W. Sanchez (Ed.), Planning Knowledge and Research. New York, & London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315308715 
Allmendinger, P., & Tewdwr-Jones, M. (1997). Mind the gap: Planning theory-practice and the translation of knowledge into action - A comment on Alexander. Environment and Planning B. Planning and Design, 24, 802-806. https://doi.org/10.1068/b240802 
Bahraini, H., & Fallah Manshadi, E. (2016). Analyzing similarities and differences of urban planning knowledge in Iran and other countries with emphasis on undergraduate level. Engineering Education in Iran, 68, 127-138. https://doi.org/10.22047/ijee.2016.12054 [In Persian]
Bahrainy, H., & Fallah Manshadi, E. (2015). Analyzing the most important skills needed for urban planners in Iran and the success of the undergraduate education in transferring those skills. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture and Urban Planning, 19 (4), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.22059/jfaup.2015.55642 [In Persian]
Barati, N., Mohaghegh Montazeri, M., & Nikpeyma, M. (2020). Rethinking the conceptual challenge between plan and design in the discourse of Iran’s urban development: From education to practice. Urban Planning Knowledge, 3 (4), 15-32. https://doi.org/10.22124/upk.2020.14423.1289 [In Persian]
Campbell, H. (2012). Planning to change the world: Between knowledge and action lies synthesis. Planning Education and Research, 32 (2), 135-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2006.07.009 
Campbell, H., Forester, J., & Sanyal, B. (2018). Can we learn from our mistakes? Planning Theory and Practice, 19 (4), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2018.1486985 
Cooke, S. J., Leanson, A. L., Bishop, I., Bryan, B. A., Chen, C., Cvitanovic, C., Fen, Y., Forester, J., Furst, C., Hu, J., Rosa, D., Meurk, C., Nguyen, V. M., Archibald, C. L., & Young, N. (2021). On the theory-practice gap in the environmental realm: Perspectives from and for diverse environmental professionals. Socio-Ecological Practice Research, 3, 243-255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-021-00089-0 
Davoudi, S. (2015). Planning as practice of knowing. Planning Theory, 14 (3), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095215575919 
Dewey, J. (1997). Experience and Education. New York: Simon & Schuster. Original work published 1938. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131728609335764 
Ejlali, P. (2015). Planning cultures. In P. Ejlali (Ed.). Planning Experience in the World: Origin and Evolution. Tehran: The Institute for Management and Planning Studies. [In Persian]
Faludi, A., & Waterhout, B. (2006). Introducing evidence-based planning. disP- The Planning Review, 42 (165), 4-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2006.10556950 
Fazli, G. S., Creatore, M. I., Matheson, F. I., Guilcher, S., Kaufman-Shriqui, V., Manson, H., Johns, A., & Booth, G. L. (2017). Identifying mechanisms for facilitating knowledge to action strategies targeting the built environment. BMC Public Health, 17 (1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3954-4 
Fischler, R. (2012). Reflective practice. In B. Sanyal., L. J. Vale, & C. D. Rosan (Eds.), Planning Ideas that Matter: Livability, Territoriality, Governance, and Reflective Practice. Cambridge, Massachusetts, & London: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2017.1342374 
Flyvbjerg, B. (1992). Aristotle, Foucault and progressive phronesis: Outline of an applied ethics for sustainable development. Planning Theory, 7-8, 65-83. 
Forester, J. (2019). Five generations of theory–practice tensions: Enriching socio‑ecological practice research. Socio-Ecological Practice Research, 2, 111-119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-019-00033-3 
Friedmann, J. (1987). Planning in the Public Domain: From Knowledge to Action. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv10crf8d 
Friedmann, J. (2000). Toward a non-euclidean mode of planning. (N. Barakpoor, Trans.). Urban Management, 2, 14-19. (Original work published 1993). 
Friedmann, J. (2003). Why do planning theory? Planning Theory, 2 (1), 7-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095203002001002 
Friedmann, J., & Hudson, B. (1974). Knowledge and action: A guide to planning theory. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 40 (1), 2-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944367408977442 
Harris, N. (1997). Orienting oneself to practice: A comment on Alexander. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 24, 799-801. https://doi.org/10.1068/b240799 
Healey, P. (2008). Knowledge flows, spatial strategy making, and the roles of academics. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 26 (5), 861-881. https://doi.org/10.1068/c0668 
Hillier, J. (1995). The unwritten law of planning theory: Common sense. Planning Education and Research, 14 (4), 292-296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X9501400406  
Hung, F., Hobbs, B. F., McGarity, A., & Chen, X. (2022). A modeling framework for assessing the value of learning in dynamic adaptive planning: Application to green infrastructure investment evaluation. Water Resources Research, 58 (8), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR031622 
Innes de Neufville, J. (1983). Planning theory and practice: Bridging the gap. Planning Education and Research, 3 (1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X8300300105 
Ison, R. L., Collins, K. B., & Iaquinto, B. L. (2021). Designing an inquiry-based learning system: Innovating in research praxis to transform science-policy-practice relations for sustainable development. Systems Research and Behavorial Science, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2811 
Joudi Gollar, P., & Sharifzadegan, M. H. (2020). Manifestation of practical judgements in tidal behaviors of Tehran metropolitan’s Urban Planners. Urban Structure and Function Studies, 23, 57-84. https://doi.org/10.22080/usfs.2020.16527.1805 [In Persian]
Mahmoudpour, A., & Moradi Chadgan, D. (2020). “Problem-finding” of Tehran’s urban planning system using the integrated, knowledge-based strategic spatial planning cycle. Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning (Nameh), 25, 43-61. https://doi.org/10.30480/aup.2020.757 [In Persian]
Munoz-Erickson, T. A. (2012). How Cities Think: Knowledge-Action Systems Analysis for Urban Sustainability in San Juan, Puerto Rico. The Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation, Arizona State University, United States of America. 
Munoz-Erickson, T. A. (2014). Co-production of knowledge-action systems in urban sustainable governance: The KASA approach. Environmental Science and Policy, 37, 182-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.09.014 
Owens, S. Petts, J., & Bulkeley, H. (2006). Boundary work: knowledge, policy, and the urban environment. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 24, 633-643. https://doi.org/10.1068/c0606j 
Ozawa, C. P., & Seltzer, E. (1999). Taking our bearings; Mapping a relationship among planning practice, theory, and education. Planning Education and Research, 18 (3), 257-266. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X9901800307 
Panahi, S., Watson, J., & Partridge, H. (2013). Towards tacit knowledge sharing over social web tools. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17 (3), 379-397. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-11-2012-0364 
Polanyi, M. (2005). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. London: Routledge. Original work published 1962. https://download.tuxfamily.org/openmathdep/epistemology/Personal_Knowledge-Polanyi.pdf 
Polanyi, M. (2009). The Tacit Dimension. Chicago, & London: The University of Chicago Press. Original work published 1966. https://monoskop.org/images/1/11/Polanyi_Michael_The_Tacit_Dimension.pdf 
Rich, R. F. (1991). Knowledge creation, diffusion, utilization: Perspectives of the founding editor of knowledge. Science Communication, 12 (3), 319-337. https://doi.org/10.1177/107554709101200308 
Roux, D. J., Novellie, P., Smit, I. P. J., Kraker, J., Culloch-Jones, S. M., Dziba, L. E., Freitag, S., & Piennar, D. J. (2022). Appraising strategic adaptive management as a process of organizational learning. Journal of Environmental Management, 301, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113920 
Sanyal, B. (2000). Planning’s three challenges. In L. Rodwin, & B. Sanyal (Eds.), The Profession of City Planning; Changes, Images and Challenges: 1950-2000. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315134253 
Sanyal, B. (2002). Globalization, ethical compromise and planning theory. Planning Theory, 1 (2), 116-123. https://doi.org/10.1177/147309520200100202 
Sanyal, B. (2014). Celebrating the ideas of planning. Planning Theory and Practice, 15 (1), 100-103.
Sanyal, B. (2020). Book review: “Why plan? Theory for practitioners.” Planning Theory, 20 (3), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095220966683 
Sarrafi, M., Tavakkolinia, J., & Chamanimoghaddam, M. (2014). Planners’ position in the Iranian urban planning process. Urban Studies, 12, 19-32. https://urbstudies.uok.ac.ir/article_10945.html [In Persian]
Schon, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books. 
Schon, D. A. (1992). The crisis of professional knowledge and the pursuit of an epistemology of practice. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 6 (1), 49-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-0785(05)80571-X 
Schon, D. A. (2000). Town planning: Limits to reflection-in-action. In L. Rodwin, & B. Sanyal (Eds.), The Profession of City Planning; Changes, Images and Challenges: 1950-2000. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315134253 
Simoni, P., & Abbasi, M. (2020). Evaluating the relationship between education and professional activity in architecture and urban planning; Detailed study: School of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Art. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture and Urban Planning, 25 (1), 43-54. https://doi.org/10.22059/jfaup.2021.307181.672505 [In Persian]
Tennoy, A., Hansson, L., Lissandrello, E., & Naess, P. (2015). How planners’ use and non-use of expert knowledge affect the goal achievement potential of plans: Experiences from strategic land-use and transport planning processes in three Scandinavian cities. Progress in Planning, 109, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2015.05.002 
Willson, R. (2018). A Guide for the Idealist: Launching and Navigating Your Planning Career. New York, & London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315111193 
Willson, R. (2021). Reflective Planning Practice: Theory, Cases, and Methods. New York, & London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429290275 
Urban Economics and Planning
Volume 6, Issue 4
Winter 2026
Pages 126-147

  • Receive Date 10 August 2025
  • Revise Date 14 September 2025
  • Accept Date 14 September 2025