Pathology of Urban Regeneration Programs in Terms of Mental Health: The Experts’ Perspective

The issue of health and mental health is one of the hidden goals in the urban regeneration approach that has been less discussed so far. Also, urban regeneration, as it is currently pursued in the country, has serious problems in terms of supporting mental health indicators. On the other hand, the effects of such projects on various aspects of mental health are not well known. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to the pathology of urban regeneration programs to support mental health indicators.

In this study, a survey method based on semi-structured interviews and completing a weighting questionnaire of experts was used. Snowball sampling was performed on 17 experts in the form of three groups of “academic researchers”, “experts in the field of urban regeneration” and “managers of Tehran urban management institutions” and the results were analyzed using open and axial coding techniques. Then, the dimensions affecting mental health in urban regeneration projects were evaluated in the form of a 39-item questionnaire using the effect spectrum method.

An urban regeneration program to support mental health components should create 8 positive features and prevent 4 negative features. These dimensions are the externalities or external effects of projects that can be measured in the form of impact assessment techniques. Barriers to achieving a mental health support rehabilitation program can also be pursued in three areas: “policy approaches”, “preparation and implementation process” and “monitoring and evaluation process”. According to other results, the negative consequences of current rehabilitation programs on mental health are greater than their positive consequences, the most important of which are “discrimination and inequality” and “stress and anxiety”.

In order to integrate the components of mental health as much as possible in the heart of regeneration programs, the mechanisms related to policy-making, preparation, approval, implementation, and monitoring of these programs should be changed and fundamentally revised.