Explaining the Dimensions and Components of Cultural Synergy in Multi Ethnic Iranian Metropolises: A Grounded Theory Study in Bandar Abbas

Document Type : Article extracted From phd dissertation

Authors
Moslem Maleki 1
Mohammad Ali Chitsaz 1
Saeed Aghasi 2
1 Department of Sociology, Deh.C, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
2 Social and Cultural Researches Center, Deh.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
10.22034/he.2025.566076.1180
Abstract
This study aimed to explain the dimensions and mechanisms of cultural synergy in a multi-ethnic Iranian metropolis—specifically Bandar Abbas, a city that, due to its port status, migration flows, and ethnic diversity, is both compelled to coexist and simultaneously in need of a locally grounded model to overcome latent tensions and social cleavages. This qualitative research employed the systematic version of grounded theory. Data were collected through semi structured interviews with 18 participants, including cultural elites, urban sociologists, NGO activists, and culturally informed citizens of Bandar Abbas, and were analyzed through open, axial, and selective coding. The analysis resulted in a three-dimensional model consisting of: (1) contextual dimension (historical and social conditions enabling synergy, such as ethnic diversity, lived experiences of coexistence, and the presence of culture making institutions), (2) interactional dimension (actual mechanisms of encounter and dialogue, such as shared public spaces, institutional mediation, intercultural education, and joint symbolic events), and (3) consequential dimension (translation of interactions into cultural and social development, enhanced intergroup trust, and increased urban participation). The findings indicate that in Bandar Abbas, cultural synergy is realized not through top down prescriptions but through designing equitable interactional situations and institutional support for marginalized voices, with the interactional dimension serving as the crucial link between cultural capacities and social development. This model can serve as a foundation for cultural policymaking and urban management in southern and port cities of Iran.

Keywords

Subjects

  1. باوقار زعیمی، م.، و مهدوی، ا. (1404). ارزیابی جایگاه معیارهای بازافرینی شهری فرهنگ مبنا در برنامه‌های هدف محلات بازافرینی شهری (نمونه موردی محله خواجه عطا بندرعباس). https://civilica.com/doc/2353139
  2. جهانشاهی، ه.، و وارثی، ح. (1400). تدوین برنامه‌ریزی استراتژیک فضای شهری با رویکرد توسعه پایدار شهری نمونه موردی: بندر بوشهر. https://civilica.com/doc/1410036
  3. خضری، ز. (1403). بررسی جامعه‌شناختی ابزاری شدن فرهنگ شهرنشینی حاکم بر تعامل در فضای شهری با تاکید بر نابرابری‌های اجتماعی [مقاله ارائه‌شده در دهمین کنگره سالانه بین‌المللی عمران، معماری و توسعه شهری، تهران].
  4. اسدی محل چالی، م.، و توکلی طهران، و. س. (1395). ارتقاء فرهنگ و روحیه تعامل در فضاهای شهری با محوریت رویکرد روانشناسی محیطی [مقاله ارائه‌شده در نخستین اجلاس جهانی شوراها و شهرداران 2016، تهران].
  5. میری زاده کهتکی، ف. (1404). بررسی تاثیر فرهنگ‌سازی محیط زیستی بر رفتار شهروندان در استفاده از خدمات شهری بندرعباس: مطالعه راهکارهای آموزشی و اطلاع‌رسانی و تاثیر آنها در رفتارهای زیست‌محیطی مردم.
  6. Aldrich, D. P. (2019). Black wave: How networks and governance shaped Japan’s 3/11 disasters. University of Chicago Press.
  7. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
  8. Bayat, A. (2017). Revolution without revolutionaries: Making sense of the Arab Spring. Stanford University Press.
  9. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power (J. B. Thompson, Ed.). Harvard University Press.
  10. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE.
  11. Council of Europe. (2022). Intercultural cities: Building the future together. Council of Europe Publishing.
  12. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
  13. Dervin, F. (2016). Interculturality in education: A theoretical and methodological toolbox. Palgrave Macmillan.
  14. Fainstein, S. S. (2010). The just city. Cornell University Press.
  15. Florida, R. (2019). The rise of the creative class, revisited. Basic Books.
  16. Georgiou, M. (2019). Media and the city: Cosmopolitanism and difference. Polity.
  17. Hall, P. (2020). Ports, urbanity and intercultural contact. Journal of Urban Affairs, 42(5), 745–762.
  18. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
  19. Low, S., & Smith, N. (Eds.). (2013). The politics of public space (2nd ed.). Routledge.
  20. Meer, N., & Modood, T. (2019). How does interculturalism contrast with multiculturalism? Journal of Intercultural Studies, 40(1), 1–22.
  21. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE.
  22. Portera, A. (2020). Intercultural competence in education. Intercultural Education, 31(5), 483–497.
  23. Putnam, R. D. (2007). E pluribus unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first century. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2), 137–174.
  24. Sandercock, L. (2003). Cosmopolis II: Mongrel cities in the 21st century. Continuum.
  25. Şimşek, D. (2022). Intercultural urbanism in the global South. Urban Studies, 59(12), 2473–2490.
  26. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE.
  27. Throsby, D. (2010). The economics of cultural policy. Cambridge University Press.
  28. UNESCO. (2013). Creative economy report 2013: Widening local development pathways. UNESCO & UNDP.
  29. Vertovec, S. (2017). Super-diversity and its implications. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(6), 1024–1054.
  30. Wood, P., & Landry, C. (2008). The intercultural city: Planning for diversity advantage. Earthscan.
  31. Zapata-Barrero, R. (2019). Intercultural citizenship in the Mediterranean: Between coexistence and multiculturalism. Routledge.
Human Ecology
Volume 4, Issue 13
Winter 2026
Pages 1834-1846