پیامدهای رویکرد برنامهریزی متخصص محور در توانمندسازی و توسعه پایدار روستایی (موردمطالعه: شهرستانهای پاکدشت و ری) | ||
| پژوهشهای دانش زمین | ||
| مقاله 7، دوره 11، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 42، 1399، صفحه 110-126 اصل مقاله (1.2 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.52547/esrj.11.2.110 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| ناصر شفیعی ثابت* ؛ نگین سادات میرواحدی | ||
| گروه جغرافیای انسانی و آمایش، دانشکده علوم زمین، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| براساس واکاوی متون توسعه تا اوایل دهه 1980 میلادی، رویکرد عقلایی گرایی فن محور با اصالت متخصصین بر روش برنامهریزی در اغلب کشورها غلبه داشت. این پژوهش به بررسی جایگاه شاخصهای توانمندسازی متأثر از رویکرد حاکم بر فراگرد برنامهریزی و پیامدهای حاصل از آن در توسعه پایدار سکونتگاههای روستایی پرداخته است. در این راستا، با اینکه توانمندسازی مولد روستاییان تضمینکننده توسعه روستایی است، لیکن برنامهریزی از بالا به پایین و متخصص محور موجب توانمندسازی نامولد روستاییان در ناحیه موردمطالعه شده است و نتوانسته آنها را بهمثابه یکی از عناصر قدرت در حوزه مداخلهی برنامهریزی روستایی درآورد. برای تبیین دقیق موضوع مسئله، پژوهش حاضر با استفاده از روش توصیفی - تحلیلی بر روی 54 روستای نمونه از 124 روستای ناحیه موردمطالعه انجام شد. در واقع رویکرد برنامهریزی متخصص محور بهصورت سلطهآمیز نتوانسته احساس معنیدار بودن، شایستگی، خودباوری، اعتماد، قدرت و توانمندی را در بین روستاییان ایجاد نماید. بهگونهای که باعث نارسایی در توسعه سکونتگاههای روستایی در ابعاد محیطی - اکولوژیک، اجتماعی – فرهنگی و اقتصادی شده و تنها در ارتقاء شاخصهای کالبدی و زیرساختی روستاهای موردمطالعه اثرگذار بوده است. بنابراین، تغییر بهسوی رویکرد اجتماعمحور بهمنظور ارتقاء شاخصهای توانمندسازی و توسعه پایدار روستایی پیشنهاد میگردد. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| توانمندسازی؛ توسعه روستایی؛ شهرستانهای پاکدشت و ری؛ رویکرد برنامهریزی متخصص محور | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The consequences of instrumental-technical planning approach in empowerment and rural development, case study: Pakdasht and Rey counties | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| naser shafiei sabet؛ Negin Sadat Mirvahedi | ||
| Department of Human Geography and Logistics, Faculty of earth science, Shahid Beheshti university, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Introduction Paying attention to empowering rural stakeholders with emphasis on community approach in planning was proposed by Jürgen Habermas and then Forster (1993, 1989, and 1985). In the area, a set of plans and projects are planned for the villagers by various organizations. The dominance of the "expert- oriented" and "top-down" approach in the development planning process in Iran has had detrimental environmental, ecological, socio-economic impacts on rural settlements in the study area. It is necessary to analyze the implications of this planning for the process of sustainable rural development in the area. Materials and Methods In fact, the purpose of the present survey is to identify and explain the consequences of planning with its current approach to sustainable development in rural areas of the study area. Also the factors and indicators of empowerment influenced by the development planning system's approach in the rural areas are analyzed.The present survey was carried out using descriptive-analytical method to investigate the status of planning with an expert- oriented approach in the area and to explain the research questions and hypotheses in detail. The statistical population of the present survey is a total of 124 villages in rural settlements of Pakdasht and Rey counties around Tehran metropolis. Spearman and Tobey Kendall correlation coefficients were used to investigate the significant relationship between variables. Also, regression was used for intensity of component effects. Results and Discussion According to the results, all indicators (education and awareness, knowledge and skills and human resource development, competence, meaningfulness, self-determination, trust and confidence, participation) were significant. In fact, empowerment-enhancing indicators are below average. Indicators considered in the planning process are empowerment of local stakeholders, components of education and awareness, knowledge and skills that have an impact on sustainable rural development. Other indicators were excluded because their correlation was not significant and were at lower levels from the regression model. Between the two components of empowerment in the planning process with development, there is a correlation of 0.335. Finally, based on the standardized coefficient, the results show that education and awareness under the current conditions have the greatest impact on sustainable rural development. At present, the indicators of competence, meaningfulness, self-determination, trust and confidence, participation, institutionalism have not found their place in explaining sustainable rural development. Conclusion The implications of the current approach in environmental - ecological dimension do not improve land, quantity and quality of agricultural land, reduced erosion and soil quality, status of surface and ground water and quantity and quality of water, status of sewage system and waste collection. The social dimension doesn’t improve rural poverty alleviation, reducing vulnerability, rural efficiency, bank savings rates, and income levels in rural areas. In the economic aspect, public health, rural social security, quality of life through opportunities for education, education, services, quality of employment and income generation, rural housing renovation, rural migration, rural community status, cultural and artistic activities in the area are not improved. But in terms of physical, improvements, rural housing and rural access to infrastructure, markets for trading products, commercial and educational uses and the status of rural passages have increased. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Empowerment, Rural development, Pakdasht and Rey counties, Instrumental-technical planning approach | ||
| مراجع | ||
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 100,890 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 263,077 |
||