11 Int. J. Architect. Eng. Urban Plan, 30(1): 11-19, June 2020 DOI: 10.22068/ijaup.30.1.11 Research Paper Main Intergovernmental Conflicts among Urban Management Actors of Small Cities Case Study: City of Natanz, Iran E. Shieh 1* , D. Martouzet 2 , R. Piroozi 3,4 1 Professor, Department of Urban Planning, School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran 2 Professor, Département Aménagement, Léquipe DATE, UMR CITERES, École Polytechnique de L’université de Tours, Tours, France 3 PhD Candidate, Department of Urban Planning, School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran 4 Invited Researcher, Département Aménagement, Léquipe DATE, UMR CITERES, École Polytechnique de L’université de Tours, Tours, France Received: November 2019, Revised: June 2020, Accepted: June 2020 Abstract There are studies about interlocal relations of local governance, but it would be unique to explain these in urban management mechanisms of unitary country in Middle East, like Iran. One of the important issues for the city's urban management system is its state actors’ interrelations and probable challenges of this process, which mentioned by terms like inter -local, intergovernmental, or inter-organizational relations and is the main issue of this article. Present study aims to find the main challenges in the iranian multi-level intergovernmental relations, especially in local-level urban management of small cities. After a review of conflicts among local actors in iranian town’s administration, the contradictory components are summarized in the propositions. In order to better explain findings and utilize the opinions of local decision makers of Natanz city (the study case in Iran), the importance of existing conflicts and challenges was measured via questionnaire and interview. Through factor analysis method, such propositions as lack of updated plans and programs (prepared at national level but for local level), and the unbalanced proportion between scope of duties and authority at local level, are among the most important concerns of them. Keywords: Local governance, Urban management, Interlocal relations, Small cities. 1. INTRODUCTION 1 The accumulation of humans around the world for the survival of life, the emergence of multiple settlements and the distribution of population in the rapidly expanding area of the territory have created new conditions for its particular needs. The increasing urban population in these years, coupled with increased socio-political conflicts and the demand for services and facilities, highlights the early signs of a sense of need for the formation of small-scale local governments. This kind of government, as a local power, in the urban management system of different countries can play a facilitating role in or, at the same time, be an obstacle to development. In fact, one of the * Corresponding author: es_shieh@iust.ac.ir important issues for the city's urban management system is its state actors’ interrelations and probable challenges of this process, which mentioned in researches [1-8] by terms like interlocal, intergovernmental, or interorganisational relations. Over the past years, numerous scholars [9-14] have used concepts, such as decentralization, local autonomy, local discretion and accountability to examine such relations. And some of them [10, 12, 15-19] tried to measure its dimensions by different top-down or bottom- up methods. In fact, most of them sought to find out conflicts and challenges among different types of local state actors, officials or non-profit organizations at different scales [5, 20-22]. In studies on local government, various definition have been presented for the concept “decentralization” [23-28]. In the example of Iran, with the experience of decentralization, a type of “delegation” has