ارزیابی مطالعات آمایش سرزمین ایران در ارتباط با آموزش عالی

By identifying factors of achievement and failure of "Satiran" and "Regional Design" studies in this article, Ms Paridokht Vahidi- an expert of Plan and Budget Organization-offers a particular insight into the notion of regional planning. Having described similarities and differences of the above studies, the author carries the analogy a stage further and points out the consequences of the studies. In "Satiran" studies the emphasis is on sectoral development rather than regional development. Furthermore, the studies do not adequately take into account the interactions between regions and higher education institutions. In "Regional Design" studies issues, such as feasible division of labor and proper specialization of regions are not adequately handled. Moreover, the studies do not take into account Various dimensions of higher education and complementarity of higher educational investment. None of the studies offers a sense of direction. The above studies do not specify how to direct educational investment into proper regions. Therefore, the higher education sector is left with three overriding questions. The first is how to allocate higher educational investment so as to assure the most rapid development; the second is how to assure balanced development between regions and institutions of highereducation; the third is how to assure the efficiency of the use of higher educational resources. Unless these are fully spelled out in the future studies many of the reasons for delay will not be apparent. The editorial board has been fortunate in having the article published in the Journal.