واکاوی رفتارهای محیط زیستی و سازوکارهای مدیریت نهادی خشکسالی و تأثیر آن ها بر توسعه معیشت پایدار کشاورزان شهرستان برخوار: کاربرد نظریه انگیزه حفاظتی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری گروه اقتصاد، ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران.

2 دانشیار گروه اقتصاد، ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

خشکسالی‌های چند سال اخیر شهرستان برخوار، زیستگاه‌های طبیعی و معیشت روستاییان را بیش­ ازپیش آسیب‌پذیر نموده است. در این راستا، به نظر می‌رسد درک عوامل مؤثر بر رفتارهای محیط زیستی کشاورزان به ­عنوان اولین گام توسعه معیشت پایدار با رویکرد مدیریت نهادی خشکسالی ضروری است. لذا هدف پژوهش حاضر، واکاوی سازوکارهای مدیریت نهادی خشکسالی و تأثیر آن­ها بر توسعه معیشت پایدار کشاورزان شهرستان برخوار استان اصفهان، با تکیه بر نظریه انگیزه حفاظتی است. داده ­ها به­صورت پیمایشی از نمونه‌ای شامل 293 کشاورزان خرده‌پا در فاصله سال­های 1399-1397 در شهرستان برخوار به دست آمد و با استفاده از مدل معادلات ساختاری تجزیه و تحلیل شدند. یافته­ ها حاکی از آن است که سازه­ های خودکارایی، آسیب­ پذیری درک ­شده و اثربخشی پاسخ، تأثیر مثبت و معنی ­داری بر رفتارهای محیط زیستی کشاورزان داشته، درحالی­ که، سازه‌های شدت مخاطرات درک ­شده و هزینه‌های پاسخ، تأثیر منفی و معنی‌داری بر رفتارهای محیط زیستی نشان داده است. همچنین بر اساس یافته­ ها، سازه‌های رفتارهای محیط‌ زیستی و مدیریت تلفیقی مخاطرات، پیش ­بینی کننده اصلی توسعه معیشت پایدار کشاورزان بودند. به ­علاوه، حفاظت از زیستگاه­ های طبیعی و تنوع زیستی، و ارائه آموزش‌های لازم جهت توسعه آگاهی و مهارت­های کشاورزان در این مناطق روستایی از شاخص‌های بسیار مهمی هستند که بهبود و توسعه معیشت پایدار را در شرایط خشکسالی، افزایش داده و منجر به توسعه روستاهای شهرستان می ­شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating Pro-Environmental Behaviors and Institutional Drought Management Mechanisms and their Impact on Sustainable Livelihood in Borkhar-Isfahan Region: Application of Protection Motivation Theory (PMT)

نویسندگان [English]

  • M. Aghdasi 1
  • M. Omidi Najafabadi 2
  • S.M. Mirdamadi 2
  • S.J. Farajollah Hosseini 2
1 PhD Student, Department of Agricultural Economics, Extension and Education, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, Extension and Education, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Drought is a complex natural catastrophe with no universally accepted definition. Each definition reflects the differences in regions, needs, and disciplinary approaches. Some consider the definition of drought as an agricultural drought that has become a serious threat to food security while deeply affecting production and farmers’ livelihood. Farmers in some regions have greater exposure to drought than others, and farmers in each region face their own unique set of challenges. As a result, coping behaviors and strategies used by different farmers are very different than their risk management. Recent efforts have recognized the importance of applying risk reduction behaviors, both during and after the drought, to prevent environmental problems. It would be necessary to focus on the promotion of appropriate drought management practices among farmers to achieve a more sustainable and environmentally alternative livelihood where pro-environmental behavior is set as a core factor. Thus, when investigating a sustainable alternative livelihood where pro-environmental behavior is set as a core factor, it is necessary to focus on the promotion of drought management practices among smallholder farmers. Further, using institutional drought management mechanisms as effective factors to improve sustainable livelihood under drought is very appropriate.
Materials and Methods
From a holistic sustainable livelihood perspective, these mechanisms might be divided into three categories: integrated drought risk management, comprehensive reduction of damages, and control the consequences based on indigenous knowledge, that reduce vulnerability and attempt to change the surroundings under drought. Thus, in this study, we aim to use the Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) to explain farmers’ pro-environmental behavior, and we subsequently apply our conceptualization of the PTM to explain the effects of pro-environmental behavior as well as some institutional management mechanisms to achieve a sustainable livelihood in the Borkhar-Isfahan region of Iran. The PMT, a general theory of persuasive communication that incorporates individual and social factors, provides a set of predictors for human behavior, which balances two main processes, threat appraisal and coping appraisal. The threat appraisal process involves individual assessment of threat levels and includes two constructs: a) perceived severity and b) perceived vulnerability. In this study, perceived severity is conceptualized as the degree to which smallholder farmers perceive the effects of drought. The coping appraisal process also involves individual assessment of internal and external factors and includes three constructs: a) self-efficacy, b) response efficacy, and c) response costs. Farmers perceived self-efficacy have a positive and direct effect on their actual farming and non-farming practices in a drought. Response efficacy refers to an individual's belief; in this case, farmers evaluate the types of adaptive behaviors and various measures to deal with the threat. However, in this study, based on the research framework, farmers’ pro-environmental behaviors are influenced by two threat appraisal factors, and three coping appraisal factors. Furthermore, sustainable alternative livelihood is directly determined by pro-environmental behavior and institutional management mechanisms.
This paper specifically focuses on a semi-arid region of Borkhar-Isfahan region of Iran, and smallholder farmers living in Borkhar region are generally some of the most ecologically, socially, and politically marginalized people. The population of this study was comprised of rural smallholder farmers who produce agricultural and horticultural crops under drought between 2018-2020. According to the Isfahan Agriculture-Jahad Organization, there are about 3666 smallholder farmers in the two districts of Borkhar, which consists of 12 villages (N=3666). The study sample consisted of 293 farmers, based on Cochran’s formula, and was selected through stratified random sampling (n=293). Data were collected with a questionnaire consisting of four sections: 1) demographic characteristics, 2) pro-environmental behavior, 3) institutional management mechanisms, and 4) sustainable alternative livelihoods. The sub-scales were developed based on a 5-point Likert scale. The questions of these sections were derived from the research framework, confirmed by the previous studies and then modified to fit the objectives of this study. The questionnaire validity and reliability were measured through a pre-test. Then, descriptive analysis was done using SPSS and to testing the research model, this study also used the partial least squares (PLS) technique of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) using Smart-PLS.
Results and Discussion
Results show that self-efficacy, perceived vulnerability, and response efficacy have significant positive effects on the farmers’ pro-environmental behavior under drought. Moreover, self-efficacy has the greatest direct role in explaining farmers’ pro-environmental behavior. Also, based on confirmatory factor analysis, “ability to implement best practices to improve farm management” accrued the highest loadings and is the main indicator for explaining self-efficacy. Furthermore, the results revealed that perceived vulnerability significantly influenced farmers' pro-environmental behavior. Based on confirmatory factor analysis, “possible threat to food security” is the main indicator for explaining perceived vulnerability. Thus, understanding vulnerability to environmental issues raises farmers’ awareness and attitudes toward prevention effects; therefore, when farmers’ perceptions of vulnerability are very high, it increases the likelihood of an adaptive response. Our results also show that perceived severity and response costs have a significant negative influence on the farmers’ pro-environmental behavior. Threat appraisal is based on weighing the benefits of not engaging in pro-environmental behavior under drought. Thus, the greater the severity of the risk perceived by individuals, the more it reduces the likelihood of drought coping behaviors. Also, the study showed that response costs have a negative effect on pro-environmental behavior. So, whenever response costs decreased, the higher perceived costs of pro-environmental practices reduce the probability of protective behavior. Therefore, when a farmer evaluates the implementation of an environmental behavior as laborious, expensive, unpleasant, time-consuming, he will be reluctant to implement it. The findings further show that farmers' pro-environmental behavior and integrated drought risk management are the main predictors of achieving a sustainable alternative livelihood. Moreover, conservation of natural habitats and biodiversity, and providing the necessary training to increase farmers’ knowledge and skills, were found to be highly important indicators that enhance sustainable livelihood under drought. Therefore, concentrating on efforts and shifting the focus to these indicators lead to increased farmer’s livelihood resilience in the long run.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Drought
  • Rural Development
  • Perceived Vulnerability
  • Sustainable Livelihood Development
  • Protection Motivation Theory (PMT)

مراجع

  1. Adeli, B., Moradi, H.R., Keshavarz, M. & Amirnejad, H. (2014). Draught and its economic consequences in rural area case: Dodangeh district Behbahan. Space Economics and Rural Development, 3, 131-148. [In Persian]

  2. Alam, G.M., Alam, K. & Mushtaq, S. (2016). Influence of institutional access and social capital on adaptation decision: Empirical evidence from hazard-prone rural households in Bangladesh. Ecological Economics, (130), 243-251.

  3. Alston, M. (2010). Gender and climate change in Australia. Journal of Sociology, 47(1), 53-70.

  4. Aniah, P., Kaunza-Nu-Dem, M.K. & Ayembilla, J.A. (2019). Smallholder farmers' livelihood adaptation to climate variability and ecological changes in the savanna agro ecological zone of Ghana. Heliyon, 5(4), e01492.

  5. Arayesh, M.B. (2017). Pro-environmental analysis of the water and drought scenario based on the theory of planned behavior of Ajzen from the viewpoint of farmers in Ilam county. Interdisciplinary studies in the humanitie, 9(4), 135-170.

  6. Becker, C.D., Agreda, A., Astudillo, E., Costantino, M. & Torres, P. (2005). Community-based monitoring of fog capture and biodiversity at Loma Alta, Ecuador enhance social capital and institutional cooperation. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14(11), 2695-2707. DOI:1007/s10531-005-8402-1

  7. Bockarjova, M. & Steg, L. (2014). Can protection motivation theory predict pro-environmental behavior? Explaining the adoption of electric vehicles in the Netherlands. Global Environmental Change, 28, 276-288.

  8. Brocklesby, M.A. & Fisher, E. (2003). Community development in sustainable livelihoods approaches — an introduction. Community Development Journal, 38(3), 185-198.

  9. Darijani, A., Shahhosseini Dastjesdi, S. & Shahnoushi, N. (2011). Determination of drought risk management priorities in agricultural sector of Gonbad-E-Kavous district using Ahp technique. Agricultural Economics: Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics (Economics and Agriculture Journal), 5(1), 37-59. [In Persian]

  10. Dolfian, F., Yazdanpanah, M., Forouzani, M. & Yaghoubi, J. (2018). Investigating farmers’ behaviour management in drought period as prevention responses: The case of Dehloran district. Journal of Spatial Analysis Environmental Hazarts, 4(4), 79-92. [In Persian]

  11. Ghasemi, M., Sahebi, S. & Mehrgan Majd, J. (2020). Identify livelihood resilience strategies against drought risk from the point of view of rural households (Case study: Dehestan Golmakan, Chenaran county). Journal of Environemntal Sciences, 18(1), 117-136. [In Persian]

  12. Ghobadi Ali Abadi, S., Chizari, M. & Sedighi, H. (2016). The analysis of farmer’s behaviour and strategies in dealing with drought (The case study: Kermanshah township). Journal of Regional Planning, 6(21), 143-154. [In Persian]

  13. Karpisheh, L. (2020). Indigenous methods of drought risk reduction and the challenges of integrating it with modern knowledge. Geography and Human Relations, 3(11), 307-322.

  14. Keshavarz, M., Karami, E. & Zamani, G. (2011). Drought vulnerability of farm households: A case study. Iranian Agricultural Extension and Education Journal, 6(2), 15-33. [In Persian]

  15. Keshavarz, M. (2015). Social effects of durable drought on rural residents: A case study of Dodangeh rural district in Behbahan. Journal of Rural and Development, 18(4), 133-151.

  16. Keshavarz, M. & Karami, E. (2016). Farmers' pro-environmental behavior under drought: Application of protection motivation theory. Journal of Arid Environments, 127, 128-136.

  17. Keshavarz, M. & Karami, E. (2008). Structures affecting drought management of farming villagers and its consequences: Application of structural equation model. Journal of Water and Soil Sciences, 12(43), 267-283.

  18. Khosravipour, B. & Soleymani Harooni, K. (2019). Commercialization of agriculture in contrast with sustainable development. Geography and Human Relationships, 3(7), 243-434. [In Persian]

  19. Kim, T.W. & Jehanzaib, M. (2020). Drought risk analysis, forecasting and assessment under climate change. Water, 12(7).

  20. Krantz, L. (2001). The sustainable livelihood approach to poverty reduction. Proposal draft. Stockhom, Sweden: Division of Policy and Socio-Economic Analysis Swedish International Development Agency (Sida).

  21. Mollasadeghi, V., Aghahasanbeyglo, A.A., Masoumzadeh, B.M. & Asghari, A.R. (2013). Evaluation of drought tolerance of bread wheat genotypes by use of stress tolerance indices. International Journal of Farming and Allied Sciences, 2, 1233-1236.

  22. Neisi, M., Bijani, M., Abbasi, E., Mahmoudi, H. & Azadi, H. (2020). Analyzing farmers' drought risk management behavior: Evidence from Iran. Journal of Hydrology, 590, 125243.

  23. (2021). Coping with drought: Narratives from smallholder farmers in eemi-arid Keny. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 57, 102168.

  24. Rainear, A.M. & Christensen, J.L. (2017). Protection motivation theory as an explanatory framework for proenvironmental behavioral intentions. Communication Research Reports, 34(3), 239-248.

  25. Rogers, R.W. (1983). Cognitive and psychological process in fear appeals and attitude change: A revised theory of protection motivation. In Social Psychology: A Sourcebook, 153-176.

  26. Savari, M. & Eskandari, H. (2019). The role of participatory management in empowering local communities in coping with droughts in southern Kerman Province. Spatial Planning (Modares Human Sciences), 23(2), 123-171.

  27. Serrat, O. (2017). The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach. In: Knowledge Solutions. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0983-9_5

  28. Shafiei, A. & Maleksaeidi, H. (2020). Pro-environmental behavior of university students: Application of protection motivation theory. Global Ecology and Conservation. 22, e00908.

  29. Sharafi, L. & Zarafshani, K. (2014). Drought management strategies among wheat producers in Kermanshah Province. Water management in Agriculture, 1, 1-12. [In Persian]

  30. Simelton, E. (2012) Coping with drought risk in agriculture and water supply systems. Drought management and policy development in the mediterranean. Advances in natural and technological hazards research (Vol. 26), Iglesias A, Garrote L, Cancelliere A, Cubillo F, Wilhite D (eds). Land Degradation and Development23(2). DOI:1002/ldr.1059

  31. Tate, E.L. & Gustard, A. (2000). Drought definition: A hydrological perspective. In Drought and Drought Mitigation in Europe. Eds.: Vogt, J.V. and Somma, F., Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research Series 14. San Francisco, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 23–48.

  32. Udmale, P., Ichikawa, Y., Manandhar, S., Ishidaira, H. & Kiem, A.S. (2014). Farmers' perception of drought impacts, local adaptation and administrative mitigation measures in Maharashtra state. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 10, 250-269.

  33. Wang, T., Tu, X., Singh, V.P., Chen, X. & Lin, K. (2021). Global data assessment and analysis of drought characteristics based on CMIP6. Journal of Hydrology, 596, 126091.

  34. Wong, K. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) techniques using Smart-PLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24, Technical Note 1. Available at: http://marketing-bulletin.massey.ac.nz.

  35. Wright, J.H., Hill, N.A.O., Roe, D., Rowcliffe, J.M., Kumpel, N.F., Day, M., Booker, F. & Milner-Gulland, E.J. (2016). Reframing the concept of alternative livelihoods. Conserv Biol, 30(1), 7-13.

  36. Xu, Y., Zhang, X., Hao, Z., Singh, V.P. & Hao, F. (2021). Characterization of agricultural drought propagation over China based on bivariate probabilistic quantification. Journal of Hydrology, 598, 1261.

  37. Yeganegi Dastgerdi, V., Sharifzadegan, M.H. & Mobarghei Dinan, N. (2020). Assessing the effectiveness of organizational performance for drought adaptation case study: Agricultural Jahad Organization of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province. Iranian Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 13(5), 1352-1362. [In Persian]

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار