Conventional spatial planning in Iran has traditionally emphasized strict zoning, separating residential, industrial, and agricultural areas through new towns, industrial estates, and urban boundary lines. However, this article argues that such segregation is neither the only nor the most desirable approach. Instead, it advocates for integrated land use at the household and neighborhood scales—where residence, small-scale industry, and agriculture coexist on the same plot. While mixed-use development typically refers to adjacent but separate functions, this research promotes simultaneous activity integration, proposing a model that enhances economic resilience and cultural vitality. Using a comparative methodology and Best Practice analysis, the study examines global examples of housing-agriculture and housing-industry integration, extracting lessons for Iran while critiquing current urban and regional policies. The prevailing large-scale, centralized industrial and agricultural model—justified by economies of scale—has alienated communities from nature, restricted self-employment opportunities, and concentrated wealth. In contrast, productive housing allocates per capita space for family-run workshops and agriculture within residential units, enabling households to work independently alongside their families. This approach aligns with Islamic principles of equitable wealth distribution (Article 43 of Iran’s Constitution) by decentralizing production and reducing reliance on capital-dominated industries. The proposed model organizes productive housing units into neighborhood-scale “bio-cities,” leveraging technology for efficient, small-scale production. Families can manufacture competitive industrial goods while supplementing income with agricultural activities. A decentralized distribution system (e.g., direct producer markets) eliminates intermediaries and spatial rent burdens. Findings challenge entrenched assumptions, demonstrating that: 1. Food security is not compromised by integrated housing-agriculture systems; 2. Economies of scale are not universally superior to decentralized production; and 3. Rigid urban-rural boundaries are socially and economically counterproductive. By prioritizing family-scale production, this framework fosters social justice, curbs poverty, revitalizes small settlements, and rebalances spatial planning. It calls for policy shifts—including land redistribution, knowledge-sharing systems, and fair distribution networks—to empower households as primary economic units, ultimately disrupting capital monopolies and achieving sustainable spatial equity.
