1/14/2016 Decentralization and Ambiguities of Local Politics in Tehran | Middle East Institute http://www.mei.edu/content/map/decentralization-and-ambiguities-local-politics-tehran?print= 1/10 Decentralization and Ambiguities of Local Politics in Tehran By Azam Khatam and Arang Keshavarzian | Jan 14, 2016 This essay series examines the roles that community-based organizations (CBOs) have played as active participants in the process of "governing" megacities— whether in service delivery, risk mitigation, or the creation of livelihood and other opportunities. More ... The prospect of establishing direct popular elections for mayors has precipitated a heated debate in Iran, resulting in divisions within the conservative and reformist factions and even a reversal of their roles.[1] Nevertheless, in 2013 the Tehran Municipality, under the conservative mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf[2] submitted a proposal to the Ministry of Interior that would change the current system, in which mayors are chosen by popularly elected city councils. The proposal, which is in the process of being introduced as a bill to the Majlis (Parliament) under the title “Integrated Urban Management” (IUM) (or modeiriat-e yekparche-h shahri), has two main components: 1) it rescales the state by transferring several social, cultural and environmental functions from the central government to the municipal level; and 2) it calls for direct elections of mayors for cities with a population of over a million.[3] The IUM has gained traction among Iranian policy experts, academics, and citizens because it is viewed as a “successful” model of urban “good governance” advocated by the World Bank. This approach is consistent with the consensus among prominent Iranian scholars of urban studies who, over the past decade, have repeatedly have called for decentralization.[4] At the time of writing this article, the fate of the bill has not been decided. Yet, the debate surrounding the bill, and the forces that render urban