Despite numerous studies, unauthorized urban construction in Iran has not yet been analyzed from the perspective of nomotropism, a concept that focuses on acting in light of rules—a condition in which actors move beyond the conventional legal–illegal dichotomy. Rather than simply ignoring the law or engaging in outright lawbreaking, they make calculated decisions regarding the law and orient their actions in its shadow or in relation to it. The manifestations of such nomotropic behavior can be explained through a fivefold typology: hidden construction (e.g., using plants or high walls to conceal violations), overnight construction (completing structures rapidly to complicate legal removal), unfinished construction (intentionally slowing work to avoid proportional fines), non-compliant construction (obtaining permits but deviating from approved plans), and unpermitted construction (building without permits but expecting future legalization). To these must be added speculative land subdivision and the expectation of amnesty for violations. The case study is Ahmadieh Town, located in Zone 3 of District 19 of Tehran, where construction violations became particularly prominent following a fatal incident, known as Khalazir. District 19 of Tehran covers 2,036 hectares with a population of 271,000. It contains extensive barren lands spanning more than 200 hectares, including over 30 inactive brick kilns, alongside social issues such as homelessness. Zone 3, encompassing approximately 760 hectares, was historically used for agriculture but gradually encroached upon by scrap yards and was largely converted illegally. Of this area, about 430 hectares are endowed lands under the trusteeship of Marvi School, including Ahmadieh Town and the Khalazir scrap market. In August 2023, Tehran Municipality demolished part of the unauthorized constructions in this area pursuant to a judicial order, resulting in several fatalities from collapsed buildings.
The research was conducted through thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 17 urban planning experts, academics, residents, and informed individuals, selected via purposive snowball sampling. The findings indicate that the municipality’s failure to intervene promptly is the most significant factor perpetuating construction violations. This situation precisely exemplifies nomotropic behavior: violators act not out of ignorance or poverty, but based on subjective and objective acquired rights in the shadow of a possible future halt, amnesty, or legalization. From a nomotropic perspective, the law remains effective—not through obedience, but through avoidance of punishment and playing with time. Furthermore, several interviewees pointed to the semantic and functional nature of the verb “may” in Article 100 of the Municipality Law. The optional character of this verb has created a structural fragility. In this context, prevention is not treated as a definitive duty but as an option available to the municipality. This legal ambiguity provides fertile ground for nomotropic behaviors, because the violator always considers the possibility that the municipality “might not intervene or prevent for now.” Moreover, all five manifestations of nomotropic behavior in unauthorized urban construction are present in the case of Ahmadieh Town: night construction and the use of barren lands adjacent to the kilns (indicating hidden construction), the immediate and uninterrupted erection of building skeletons without adherence to engineering principles (indicating overnight construction), the abandonment of some constructions (indicating unfinished construction), constructions exceeding four floors in contradiction to the municipality’s implicit decision (indicating non-compliant construction), and the absence of building permits (indicating unpermitted construction). These are compounded by the land’s endowment status, illegal subdivision, and amnesty expectations—explicit or implicit—fueled by official silence or discretionary enforcement.
Accordingly, unauthorized urban construction is a multi-causal phenomenon resulting from the complex interaction among laws, institutions, economic interests, and actors’ opportunistic behavior. Untimely decision-making, endowment lands with illegal lot splitting, procedural flaws in the Article 5 Commission, information leakage before plan approval, lack of enforcement guarantees under Article 100 of the Municipal Law, the municipality’s financial dependence on construction, and overly stringent standards together create fertile ground for the nomotropic behavior of rent-seekers. Besides, this study expands nomotropism to the institutional level, showing that not only individuals but also institutions such as the municipality (through omission or inaction), the Provincial Security Council (through demolition-ban resolutions), the Article 5 Commission (through incomplete and non-transparent approvals), and endowments (through illegal subdivisions and creating false tenure security) can exhibit nomotropic behavior. The following solutions are proposed based on the findings: 1. formulating laws with a nomotropic impact assessment; 2. reforming Article 5 Commission procedures and ensuring referral of approvals to the Supreme Council of Urban Planning and Architecture; 3. amending Article 100 of the Municipality Law to change “may prevent” to “is obliged to prevent immediately”; 4. managing municipal revenue dependency on construction to reduce “amnesty-with-fine” incentives; 5. reforming and expediting bureaucratic procedures; 6. revising unrealistic minimum construction area standards; 7. prohibiting utility connections to unauthorized constructions; 8. voiding any promissory note transactions on properties without permits or non-compliant with permits; 9. preventing illegal subdivisions by endowments through requiring official permits from the municipality. Future research should conduct comparative studies, analyze acquired rights and amnesty expectations, and explore nomotropism in other urban planning domains.