Analysis of factors and processes affecting the formulation of spatial policy-making of physical development in Iran’s rural areas

Badri, Sayed Ali; Rezvani, Mohammadreza; Khodadadi, Parvin

doi:10.30473/psp.2020.6797

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

¹ Professor, Department of Geography, University of Tehran.

² Professor, Department of Geography, University of Tehran

³ Ph.D of Geography, University of Tehran

https://doi.org/10.30473/psp.2020.6797

Abstract

Iran’s rural sector faces many problems in terms of ecological, physical, economic and social dimensions. These problems lead to the situation in which villages become places for high-income urban groups, physical unrest, land use change, and a lack of attention to the process of developing policies and programs against their products and outcomes. As a result, the future of physical development in rural areas faces a serious challenge. The aim of the present study was to analyze the current situation in the framework of developing a spatial policy for the sustainable physical development of rural areas of the country. In this regard, both the content of rural development policies and the process of formulating these policies and the role of effective factors in it have been examined. The method of obtaining cognition in this research is qualitative, which is divided into two methods: 1- method of analysis of directional qualitative content; and 2 - Grand Theory. The results show that the existing spatial policy development framework for sustainable physical development of rural areas in Iran consists of policy factors, policy processes and policy content. Important factors such as the lack of general policies of the political system in rural development, centralism and the marginal position of rural society at the national level affect the framework of spatial policy development. Also, current policy processes, following the factors, have several challenges that include sectoral and centralized policies, as well as the lack of coherence and coordination of agencies in the development of programs. Therefore, solving these challenges requires reforming processes and institutions instead of expanding administrative organization, integrating agricultural and rural development policies, and ultimately creating and strengthening clusters, systems, and networks. Analysis of the qualitative content of the documents showed that the factors of planning, budgeting and formulation of national sustainable development strategy, the need for coordination of sectors and communication of different national and local levels as well as economic dimension, infrastructure-physical dimension have the greatest role and influence in developing spatial development policy of rural areas.

Keywords

20.1001.1.26455471.1399.7.1.2.9

References

دانایی فرد، حسن (1388)، روش شناسی تدوین خط مشی ملی کارآفرینی کشور. نشریه توسعه کارآفرینی، 2(6): 155 – 125.

دانایی فرد، حسن؛ امامی، سید مجتبی (1386). استراتژی پژوهش کیفی؛ تأملی بر نظریه داده بنیاد. اندیشه مدیریت، 1(2): 97 – 69.

فیروزنیا، قدیر؛ رکن الدین افتخاری، عبدالرضا؛ بدری، سیدعلی. (1389). چشم انداز و نظام مدیریت برنامه‌ریزی توسعه کالبدی نواحی روستایی ایران. تهران: انتشارات بنیاد مسکن انقلاب اسلامی.

مرکز پژوهشهای مجلس شورای اسلامی (1386) گزارش تحلیلی طرح تاسیس سازمان توسعه روستایی (بند الف ماده 19 برنامه چهارم توسعه اقتصادی، اجتماعی و فرهنگی ج. ا. ا.)، گزارش منتشرشده محدود، مؤسسه توسعه روستایی ایران.

معاونت توسعه روستایی و مناطق محروم ریاست جمهوری، (1395). سند توسعه روستایی. تهران:انتشارات کوشا.

منوریان، عباس، ابویی، محمد، ایروانی، محمد جواد، زندی منش، محمدرضا (1392). طراحی مدل خط مشی گذاری به منظور بهبود محیط کسب و کار جمهوری اسلامی ایران با استفاده از نظریه داده بنیاد. فصلنامه مدیریت دولت، 2(5): 142 – 125.

مؤسسه عالی آموزش پژوهش مدیریت و برنامه‌ریزی، (1381) همایش چالش‌ها و چشم‌انداز توسعه روستایی. دفتر 24، محور توسعه روستایی، تهران: سازمان مدیریت و برنامه‌ریزی.

Albrechts, L. (2004). Strategic (spatial) planning re-examined. Environment and Planning B. Planning and Design, 31,743e758.

Allmendinger, P., & Haughton, G. (2012). Post-political spatial planning in England: A crisis of consensus? Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(1), 89–103.

Boonstra, F. (2006). Dutch Rural Policies at a Turning Point. In Bas Arts, ‎Pieter Leroy: Institutional Dynamics in Environmental Governance. Springer, 183 – 201.

Castells, M. (2000).The rise of the network society (2nd Ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.

Cheshire, P. (2017). Identifying principles for spatial policy: levels of intervention. Last assessed (8/1/2017): www.apdr.pt/siteRPER/numeros/RPER13/13.4.pdf

Cockfield, Geoff. 2013. Rural and Regional Policy: A Case of Punctuated Incrementalism? Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 129–142.

Creswell, J. W. (2005), Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (2nd edition).

De Marchi, Giada, Giulia Lucertini, and Alexis Tsoukiàs. (2016). from evidence-based policy making to policy analytics. Ann Oper Res 236:15–38.

Fernández, Walter D. (2004), Using the Glaserian Approach in Grounded Studies of Emerging Business Practices. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 2(2).

Freshwater, D. (2007). Rural Development and the Declining Coherence of Rural Policy: An American and Canadian Perspective. University of Kentucky.

Gregory, Derek., Ron Johnston., Geraldine Pratt., Michael J. Watts., and Sarah Whatmore. (2009). The dictionary of human geography, 5^th edition, A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication.

Haughton, G., Allmendinger, P., Counsell, D., & Vigar, G. (2010). The new spatial planning: Territorial management with soft spaces and fuzzy boundaries. London: Routledge.

Hermans, F.L.P., Haarmann, W.M.F., Dagevos, J.F.L.M., 2008. Evaluation of Stakeholder participation in monitoring regional sustainable development. Reg. Environ. Chang. 11, 805–815.

High, C., Nemes, G., 2007. Social learning in LEADER: exogenous, endogenous and hybrid evaluation in rural development. Sociol. Rural. 47, 103e119.

Horlings, I., 2011. Strategies for vital coalitions and sustainable regional Development in the Netherlands. In: Torre, A., Traversac, J.B. (Eds.), Territorial Governance, Local development, Rural Areas and Agrofood Systems. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg & New York, pp. 67–92.

Hill, M. (1997). The public policy process. Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Hsiu F. H. & Shannon, S. E. (2005). “Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis”, Journal of Qualitative Health Research, 15(9). 75-93.

Jann, W., & Wegrich, K. (2007). Theories of the policy cycle. In F. Fischer, G. J. Miller, & M. S. Sidney (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis (pp. 43–62). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Karanikolas and Hatzipanteli, 2006. decentralization Process of Rural Development Policy in Greece. European Planning Studies. 18(3).

Lee, J. (2001), A Grounded Theory: Integration and Internalization in ERP Adoption and Use, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Nebreska, In Proquest UMI Database.

Lee, S. W., & Kim, H. J. (2011). The effects of rural settlement projects on the living environment in Korea. Harvard Asia Quarterly, 13(3), 6e13.

Lefevrve, H. (1991). The social production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.

Lovan, W.R., Murray, M., Shaffer, R., 2004. Participatory Governance: Planning, Conflict Mediation and Public Decision Making in Civil Society. Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot.

OECD (2003), the Future of Rural Policy: From Sectoral to Place-Based Policies in Rural Areas, OECD Publications: Paris.

OECD, 2006. The New Rural Paradigm: Policies and Governance. OECD Rural Policy, Reviews, Paris.

OECD (2009), Regions Matter: Economic Recovery, Innovation andSustainable Growth, OECD Publishing, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264076525-en

Pike, A., Tomaney, J., Rodriguez-Pose, A., 2006. Local and Regional Development. Routledge, London.

Prager, K., Nienaber, B., Neumann, B., Phillips, A. (2015). How should rural policy be evaluated if it aims to foster community involvement in environmental management? Journal of Rural Studies 37 (2015) 120-131.

Reimer, B. and Brett, (2013). Scientific Knowledge and Rural Policy: A Long-distant Relationship. Sociologia
Ruralis, Vol 53, Number 3.

Reimer, B. and S. Markey (2008) Place-based policy: a rural perspective. 7 November 14 pages with 49-page appendix (Ottawa, ON: Human Resources and Social Development Canada).

Scott, M. (2006). Strategic spatial planning and contested ruralities: Insights from the Republic of Ireland, European Planning Studies 14(6):811-829.

Shortall, S. (2004) Social or economic goals, civic inclusion or exclusion? An analysis of rural development theory and practice. Sociologia Ruralis 44(1): 109–123.

Van der Ploeg, J.G., Marsden, T., (2008). Unfolding Webs: Enlarging Theoretical Understanding of Rural Development. In: Van der Ploeg, J.G., Marsden, T. (Eds.).Van Gorcum, Assen.

Ventura, F., Brunori, G., Milone, P., Berti, G., (2008). The rural web: a synthesis. In:Van der Ploeg, J.D., Marsden, T. (Eds.), Unfolding Webs: The Dynamics ofRegional Rural Development. Van Gorcum, Assen, Netherlands, pp. 149–174.

Wallis, A. (2002) the new regionalism: inventing governance structures for the early twenty-first century. Available online at http://www.miregions.org/ Accessed 23 August 2011.

Williams, R. H. (1996). European Union Spatial Policy and Planning. London: Chapman publishing, 283 pages.

Witherick, Michael., Simon Ross and John Small. (2001). A modern dictionary of geography, Oxford University Press London and New York.

Physical Social Planning

Analysis of factors and processes affecting the formulation of spatial policy-making of physical development in Iran’s rural areas

References

References

Volume 7, Issue 1 - Serial Number 17
June 2020
Pages 25-43

Analysis of factors and processes affecting the formulation of spatial policy-making of physical development in Iran’s rural areas

References

References

Volume 7, Issue 1 - Serial Number 17June 2020Pages 25-43

Volume 7, Issue 1 - Serial Number 17
June 2020
Pages 25-43