---

The emergence of decentralization approach and transfer some political authority to non-state actors has provided new actions for the management of geographical space under the name of spatial governance. The roots of the emergence of the concept of spatial governance return to the economic-political changing in the 1980s. The emergence of a decentralization approach and the transfer powers from government to nongovernmental institutions has provided a new concept in the name of "spatial governance". Therefore, governance is beyond the government and includes the private sector and civil society with the approach of market economy and participatory democracy. So, in this paper major question is “who spatial governance functioned in the post- positivism methodology?” In this regard, in the first step has been made to define the concept of governance and its dimensions and sub-sets in relation to geographical space. Then, by matching the spatial governance conceptual relationship with post-positivism approach, a new perspective on the causes of the greater impact of this school is presented in understanding this concept. According to the governance framework, the management and production of space is not only an objective or objective action, but also it is a constructive, unfinished, contingent, and conditional, conditional and social condition. therefore, the space policy was created in a cultural-historical territory must be consistent with the cultural and historical values of a particular of human beings group and the conditions for the development and optimization of space by these policies should fit into the pattern of their social life. in governance approach, some of the concepts such as truth, rationality, justice, goodness, and especially development, are not independent from its the social processes that shape it. On this basis, spatial governance cannot have universal dimensions.  Because social action is faced with a process that can create a single position at any given time, pro-active methodology cannot predict and predict it.
 

---

---

In the classical view, the political dimension study of space has always been considered as the political geography ontological basic. Gradually from the 1980s with the development of post-positivist perspectives on human geography; Politics affected all social spheres from government and political parties to gender and considered the smallest power relations associated with the political concept. The political issue has rejected the organization of space on the basis of formal logic and has introduced new forms of epistemological reconstruction in the study of the relationship between politics and space. In this article, has been attempted to explain the political epistemological consequences in the study of relationship between politics and space. Research findings indicate that political dimension of space study is needed epistemic relativism in context of the political. In this regard, intersubjective cognition has a special dependence on the historical evolution of space and therefore requires to power factor genealogy. This spatial genealogy is always linked to the conflict that exists in human societies and forms the possibility of space antagonistic cognition. In this regard, the social meaning of geographical space; considered as place of conflict and resistance of marginalized groups and hegemonic forces in society Which reach a kind of adaptive balance within a certain time.  This process is caused, the epistemological model adaptation of cultural geography and political geography with each other.