ارزیابی پیامدهای نظام برنامه ریزی روستایی کشور در استان خراسان شمالی

نوع مقاله : مقاله مستخرج از رساله دکتری

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی روستایی گروه جغرافیا، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران.

2 استاد گروه جغرافیا، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران.

3 دانشیار گروه جغرافیا، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی،رشت، ایران.

چکیده

این تحقیق بر اساس متغیرهای؛ نارسایی‌ها، عوامل محیطی و ناحیه‌ای، توجه و تاکید بر تصمیم‌گیری و عمل غیر متمرکز، توجه کمتر به جایگاه روستا و سیاستگذاری برنامه‌ریزی توسعه روستایی در دوره قبل و بعد از انقلاب اسلامی و نیز برنامه‌ریزی فرابخشی به جای بخشی‌نگری انجام شد و جامعه آماری نمونه آن دربرگیرنده 127 نفر به روش دلفی بوده است. ابزار پژوهش مصاحبه و پرسشنامه محقق ساخته بوده که روایی، پایایی(روش ضریب آلفای کرونباخ) و نرمال بودن داده‌ها(آزمون کلموگروف اسمیرونوف) به کمک روش‌های آماری مورد تایید قرار گرفتند. در نهایت، جهت آزمون فرضیه های تحقیق از آزمونt تک نمونه‌ای به کمک نرم‌افزار SPSS آماری استفاده گردید. نتایج تحقیق نشان داد که در پنج فرضیه بر اساس تجزیه و تحلیل آماری استخراج شده از پرسشنامه ها؛ نتایج تخمین، سطح معناداری متغیرهای نارسایی، عوامل محلی و ناحیه‌ای، توجه و تاکید بر تصمیم‌گیری و عمل غیر متمرکز، توجه کمتر به جایگاه روستا و سیاستگذاری برنامه‌ریزی توسعه روستایی در دوره قبل و بعد از انقلاب اسلامی و نیز برنامه‌ریزی فرابخشی به جای بخشی‌نگری در ارتباط با متغیر مدل نظام سیاست‌گذاری برنامه‌ریزی توسعه روستایی ایران کمتر از 0/05 می‌باشد، بنابراین در سطح اطمینان 95 درصد رابطه این متغیرها معنادار است. همچنین مقدار آماره t برای پنج فرضیه به ترتیب 649/36- ، 826/33-، 571/27-، 694/30- و 384/28- بدست آمد. طی فرآیند تحقیق ثابت شد که نظام سیاست‌گذاری برنامه‌ریزی توسعه روستایی در کشور دارای مشکلات، نارسایی‌ها و چالش‏هایی است. همچنین برنامه‌ریزی متمرکز امکان و مجال استفاده از ظرفیت‏های محلی و ناحیه‌ای را برای سیاست‌گذاران و برنامه‌ریزان توسعه نمی‌دهد و این مساله خود موجب دور ماندن روستا و مناطق روستایی از توسعه می گردد. تمرکززدایی در برنامه‌ریزی توسعه روستایی کشور باید به‌عنوان یک اصل محترم شمرده شده و به‌عنوان یک ضرورت تلقی ‌گردد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluating the consequences of the country's Rural Planning system in North Khorasan Province

نویسندگان [English]

  • Majid Pourisa chafjiri 1
  • Nasrollah Molaeihashjin 2
  • Amar Teymor 3
1 PhD candidate in Geography and Rural Planning, Department of Geography, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran.
2 Professor, Department of Geography, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Introduction
One of the dimensions of rural development is the management of sustainable rural development at the local and macro level, sustainable rural development is the process of all-round improvement of rural life through the establishment and encouragement of activities compatible with the capabilities and bottlenecks of the environment. Therefore, structural grounding in environmental-ecological, social-cultural, economic, institutional-management and physical-spatial aspects can lead to the proper functioning of this process. In turn, sustainable rural development is realized with the participation of villagers in decision-making, implementation, sharing of benefits and monitoring and evaluation. Diversity is the basis of stability and stability, and the more diverse a system becomes, the more its stability and dynamism is maintained over time and in different places against internal and external tensions. Today, diversifying the rural economy is one of the approaches to realizing sustainable rural development. In a research, they designed a model of rural development planning and policy challenges in Iran based on a data-based theory. The participants in the research consisted of experts in the field of rural planning and development, of which 28 people were selected based on the theoretical saturation criterion and using the purposeful sampling approach and the snowball sampling method.
Methodology
The current research is applied in terms of purpose and descriptive-analytical in terms of nature and method. The method of collecting information was in the form of documentation and field observation, interview and completing a questionnaire. The statistical population of this research is academic experts in the field of rural development, provincial planners in the country's rural and municipal organizations, provincial planners in the Ministry of Jihad and Agriculture, and provincial planners in the Ministry of Industries, Program and Budget Organization, and others.
 
Results and Discussion
The estimation results, the significance level of the failure variables in relation to the model variable of Iran's rural development planning policy system is less than 0.05, so the relationship between these two variables is significant at the 95% confidence level. Also, according to the value of t-statistic equal to -36.649, which is greater than 1.96, the first hypothesis of the research is confirmed. In other words, during the research process, it was proved that the policy-making system of rural development planning in the country has problems, inadequacies and challenges. According to the estimation results, the significance level of the variables of local and regional factors in relation to the model variable of the policy system of rural development planning of Iran is less than 0.05, so at the 95% confidence level, the relationship between these two variables is significant. Is. Also, according to the value of t-statistic, it is equal to -33.826, which is greater than 1.96, as a result, the second hypothesis of the research is confirmed. Basically, centralized planning does not allow policymakers and planners to use local and regional capacities, and this issue itself will keep villages and rural areas away from development. Therefore, during the research process, it was proved that according to the prevailing approach of centralized planning in Iran, local and regional factors play a lesser role in rural development planning policymaking. The results of the model estimation showed that the significance level of the variables of attention and emphasis on decentralized decision-making and action in relation to the variable of the Iranian rural development planning policy system model is less than 0.05, so at the confidence level of 95% The relationship between these two variables is significant. Also, according to the value of t-statistic, it is equal to -27.571, which is greater than 1.96, as a result, the third hypothesis of the research is confirmed. What is important in this connection is that the results prove that decentralization in the country's rural development planning should be respected as a principle and considered as a necessity. In other words, during the research process, it was proved that in the country's rural development planning policy, attention and emphasis on decentralized decision-making and action is necessary. Based on the estimation results, the significance level of the variables of less attention to the position of the village and rural development planning policy in the period before and after the revolution in relation to the variable of Iran's rural development planning policy system model variable is less than 0.05. , therefore, at the 95% confidence level, the relationship between these two variables is significant. Also, according to the value of t-statistic, it is equal to -30.694, which is greater than 1.96, as a result, the fourth hypothesis of the research is confirmed. Document review shows; In all the programs that have been implemented from the past until now, the village and rural development have been on the sidelines and their place in the planning has not been satisfactory and appropriate. In other words, during the research process, it was proven that in the development programs before and after the Islamic revolution, the role of the village and the policy making of rural development planning were less considered. According to the output of the estimation results, the significance level of trans-sectoral planning variables instead of sectoral in relation to the variable of Iran's rural development planning policy system model is less than 0.05, so at the 95% confidence level, the relationship These two variables are significant. According to the value of t-statistic equal to -28.384, which is greater than 1.96, the fifth hypothesis of the research is confirmed. In other words, during the research process, it was proved that trans sectoral planning is necessary instead of sectoral planning at different levels in rural development planning.
 
Conclusion
The policies and plans of construction and development are indicative of the fact that in the country's rural development planning, attention and emphasis has been focused on decision-making and action from top to bottom. One of the main results obtained in this research is that in our country, due to the multiplicity of executive centers in the field of rural development, we are witnessing the fragmentation and lack of coherence of the organization. Therefore, the existence of a level that can aggregate these issues is very important. In fact, it acts as an executive and effective support in decision-making and implementation of rural development policies and has a trans-sectoral role. Therefore, according to the records and experiences of rural development planning in the country during the last few decades and taking into account the possibilities, bottlenecks and challenges in the development process of rural areas, as well as taking into account the approaches and strategies of rural development, the optimal approach for development planning In rural areas of the country, the solution of creating a legislative level is proposed.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Rural Planning
  • Policy System
  • Rural Development
  • North Khorasan
  1. جبارزاده شیاده، سید مهدی؛ محبی، محمد؛ کامرانی،  احسان و صفایی، محسن (1396). نقش و جایگاه اقتصادی تعاونی‌ها در برنامه‌ریزی‌های توسعه پایدار روستایی(مطالعه موردی: تعاونی‌های صیادی جزیره قشم)، فصلنامه جغرافیا (برنامه­ریزی منطقه­ای) قشم، دوره 29، شماره 1، صص. 31-17.
  2. خلیل طهماسبی، محمدرضا و جهانبخش، اسماعیل (1395). بررسی بعد جامعه شناختی صنعت گردشگری در توسعه پایدار روستایی، اولین کنفرانس بین­المللی پژوهش­های نوین در حوزه علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی و مطالعات اجتماعی ایران، قم، ص 11.
  3. صبوری، محمدصادق (1397). برنامه­ریزی درتوسعه و عمران روستایی استان سمنان از دید کشاورزان استان، فصلنامه جغرافیا (برنامه­ریزی منطقه­ای) قشم، دوره 31، شماره 2، صص. 155-149.
  4. فیروزنیا، قدیر و قرنی آرانی، بهروز (1394). به کار­گیری تحلیل بازیگران در فرایند ساماندهی نظام مدیریت و برنامه­ریزی توسعه روستایی، پژوهش­های روستایی، دوره6، شماره4، صص. 915-895.
  5. قربانیان اناری­زاده، علیرضا؛ استعلاجی، علیرضا و تاج، شهره (1396). تحلیلی بر نقش سیاست‌گذاری‌ها در توسعه و عمران گردشگری در مناطق روستایی، مطالعه موردی، مجموعه روستایی ده بالا شهرستان تفت، فصلنامه جغرافیا (برنامه­ریزی منطقه­ای) قشم، دوره 29، شماره 1، صص. 213-193.
  6. گازا، مریم؛ صاحبی، نغمه و آشفته پور لیلا کوهی، سپیده (1395). نقش توسعه و عمران روستایی روستاهای ساحلی گردشگری، اولین کنفرانس ملی علوم جغرافیا، اردبیل، ص 9.
  7. مولایی هشجین، نصرالله (1391). مدل و الگوی پیشنهادی مدیریت روستایی در استان گیلان، اولین همایش ملی توسعه روستایی، 14 و 15 شهریور ماه، استانداری گیلان، رشت، ص 9.
  8. مولایی هشجین، نصرالله (1392). برنامه­ریزی توسعه کالبدی سکونتگاه­های روستایی در گیلان، انتشارات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد رشت.
  9. مولائی هشجین، نصرالله (1393). الگوی پیشنهادی مدیریت روستایی در سطح محلی و کلان در برنامه ششم توسعه 99-1395 ه.ش، دوازدهمین کنگره انجمن جغرافیایی ایران با محوریت آمایش سرزمین، الگوی ایرانی اسلامی پیشرفت، ص 14.
  10. مومنی، منصور و فعال قیومی، علی (1391). تحلیل­های آماری با استفاده از SPSS ، چاپ اول، تهران، ص 218.
  11. نخذری مقدم، محبوبه؛ دوستی مقدم، حسین؛ سارانی، حبیب­الله و احمدی­زاده، مریم (1395). ارزیابی نقش گردشگری در توسعه اقتصادی و اجتماعی روستایی (مطالعه موردی: روستای قلعه نو، سیستان و بلوچستان)، سومین کنفرانس علمی پژوهشی افق­های نوین در علوم جغرافیا و برنامه­ریزی معماری و شهرسازی ایران، تهران، 12ص.
  12. ورمزیاری، حجت؛ کلانتری، خلیل؛ لوایی آدریانی، رسول و صمدی، محسن (1397). طراحی الگویی از چالش‌های سیاست‏گذاری و برنامه‌ریزی توسعة روستایی در ایران: یک نظریة داده‌بنیان، دوره 21، شماره 2، صص. 123-97.
  13. Chamberlain, B.C. & Meitner, M.J. (2013). A route-based visibility analysis for landscape management. Landsc. Urban Plan. 111, PP. 13–24.
  14. Diao, P.H. & Thurlow, J. (2010). The Role of Agriculture in African Development, World Development, Vol. 38, No. 10, pp. 1375- 1383.
  15. Firouznia, Q. & Qaraniarani, B. (2014). Applying actor analysis in the process of organizing the rural development planning and management system, Rural Research, Vol. 6, No. 4, 895-915 [Persion].
  16. Green, E. (2007).Extension Service Agricultural development & Smallholder production In Malavi:1960 To 2000.Department Of Econo.
  17. Gaza, M., Sahibi, N. & Ashfetapourlailakohi, S. (2015). The role of development and rural development of coastal tourism villages, the first national conference of geographical sciences, Ardabil, p. 9 [Persion].
  18. Ghorbanian, Anarizadeh, A., Astelazhi, A. & Taj, Sh. (2016). An analysis of the role of policies in the development and development of tourism in rural areas, a case study, Deh Bala village complex of Taft city, Geography Quarterly (Regional Planning) Qeshm, Vol.29, No. 1, pp.193-213 [Persion].
  19. Jabarzadehshiadeh, S.M., Mohabi, M., Kamrani, E. & Safai, M. (2016). The role and economic status of cooperatives in sustainable rural development planning (case study: fishing cooperatives of Qeshm Island), Geography Quarterly (Regional Planning) Qeshm, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 17-31 [Persion].
  20. Khalil Tahmasabi, M.R. & Jahanbakhsh, I. (2015). Investigating the sociological dimension of the tourism industry in sustainable rural development, the first international conference on modern researches in the field of educational sciences, psychology and social studies of Iran, Qom, p. 11 [Persion].
  21. Mathieu, A. (2004). The meaning of practices: Farmers'conceptions in agricultural development strategies. Available on www. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension. Vol.10, No.3, PP. 101– 109.
  22. Molaiehashjin, N. (2011). The proposed model and pattern of rural management in Gilan province, the first national conference on rural development, 14 and 15 of Shahrivar month, Gilan Governorate, Rasht, p. 9. [Persion].
  23. Molaie Hashjin, Nasrallah (2012). Physical Development Planning of Rural Settlements in Gilan, Publications of Islamic Azad University, Rasht Branch. [Persion].
  24. Molaiehashjin, N. (2013). The proposed model of rural management at the local and macro level in the sixth development plan 2016-20 A.H., the 12th Congress of the Geographical Society of Iran focusing on land preparation, Iranian Islamic model of development, p. 14 [Persion].
  25. Momeni, M. & FaalQayyomi, A. (2011). Statistical analysis using SPSS, first edition, Tehran, p. 218. [Persion].
  26. Nakhzarimoghadam, M., Dostimoghadam, H., Sarani, H. & Ahmadizadeh, M. (2015). Evaluation of the role of tourism in rural economic and social development (case study: Qala Nou village, Sistan and Baluchistan), the third scientific research conference of new horizons in the sciences of geography and architectural planning and urban planning of Iran, Tehran, p12. [Persion].
  27. Ozkan, U.Y. (2014). Assessment of visual landscape quality using IKONOS imagery. Environmental Monitoring Assessment, No.186, 4067-4080.
  28. Rosley, M. S. H., Lamit, H. & Rahman, S.R.A. (2013). Perceiving the aesthetic value of the rural landscape through valid indicators. Procedia- Social and Behavioural Sciences, No.85, PP.318-331.
  29. Sabouri, M.S. (2017). Planning in the development and rural development of Semnan Province from the perspective of the farmers of the province, Qeshm Geography Quarterly (Regional Planning), Vol. 31, No. 2, pp.155-149. [Persion].
  30. Vermziari, H., Kalantari, Kh., Lowaiadriani, R. & Samadi, M. (2017). Designing a model of rural development planning and policymaking challenges in Iran: a data-based theory, Vol. 21, No.2, pp.97-123. [Persion].