روستا و توسعه

روستا و توسعه

تحلیل اثرات حکمروایی خوب بر زیست پذیری روستاها: مورد مطالعه شهرستان درمیان

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده
جواد میکانیکی
دانشیار جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی روستایی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه بیرجند، بیرجند، ایران.
10.30490/rvt.2024.366481.1607
چکیده
حکمروایی خوب لازمه توسعه پایدار روستایی از طریق مدیریت مبتنی بر مشارکت حداکثری مردم و سازگار با ارزش­ های اجتماعی و زیست ­پذیری در ابعاد مختلف زندگی روستایی است. تحقیق حاضر با هدف تحلیل اثرات حکمروایی خوب بر زیست­ پذیری سکونت گاه های روستایی شهرستان درمیان در استان خراسان جنوبی انجام شده است. این پژوهش ازنظر ماهیت در زمره تحقیقات توصیفی – تحلیلی و از لحاظ هدف در زمره تحقیات کاربردی به حساب می­ آید. جامعه آماری پژوهش شامل 23 روستا با 1801 خانوار است که برحسب معیار طبقه­ های جمعیتی، موقعیت قرارگیری و پراکنش فضایی به­ عنوان نمونه انتخاب شدند. حجم نمونه مورد مطالعه در سطح خانوار با استفاده از فرمول کوکران 317 خانوار به دست آمد. مؤلفه حکمروایی خوب با 8 شاخص در قالب 31 گویه و مؤلفه زیست­ پذیری با 11 شاخص در قالب 53 گویه از طریق پرسش‏نامه محقق­ ساخته مورد سنجش قرار گرفت. یافته­ های تحقیق نشان داد که مؤلفه­ های حکمروایی و زیست­ پذیری از منظر جامعه محلی در سطح مطلوبی قرار ندارند؛ اما تحلیل همبستگی میان شاخص­ ها بیانگر همبستگی مثبت و نسبتاً قوی بین آن­ها است. نتایج رگرسیون چندمتغیره نیز بیانگر این است که متغیرهای پاسخگویی، مسئولیت پذیری و قانون­ محوری دارای بیشترین تأثیر و متغیرهای مشارکت، عدالت ­محوری و شفافیت دارای کمترین تأثیر بر زیست­ پذیری روستایی هستند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
حکمروایی خوب
زیست پذیری
توسعه پایدار روستایی
سکونتگاه های روستایی مرزی

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Analysis of the Effects of Good Governance on Rural Livability: Case Study of Darmian County

نویسنده English

J. Mikaniki
Associate Professor of Geography and Rural Planning, Geography Department, Faculty of Humanities, University of Birjand, Birjand, Iran.
چکیده English

Introduction
Introduction: Good governance is essential for sustainable rural development, promoting management based on maximum community participation and social values to enhance livability in various aspects of rural life. As governance theory evolves, competent governance has emerged as a key focus due to its effectiveness in fostering collaboration between government and citizens in public affairs management. Effective governance is achieved when all local stakeholders are involved in policy-making, planning, organization, implementation, and monitoring processes. Rural areas in the country face challenges such as population decline, particularly in dry and border regions, impacting the economic and social fabric of rural communities. This study aims to assess the impact of competent governance on rural livability in border regions of South Khorasan province, providing insights into the role of governance in enhancing the livability of rural villages and ensuring their sustainability.
Materials and Methods
This research adopts a descriptive-analytical approach and is classified as applied research. Data collection methods include literature review and surveys. A researcher-designed questionnaire, validated and tested for reliability, was used to collect data on good governance (comprising eight indicators with 31 questions) and livability (comprising ten indicators with 51 questions). Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and multivariate regression were employed to analyze the data gathered through surveys. The study population consisted of 93 villages with approximately 10,000 households, with a sample of 23 villages (6,525 people and 1,801 households) selected based on population size, location, and distribution criteria. The sample size was determined using Cochran's formula, resulting in 317 households.
Results and Discussion
Analysis of the research sample's responses revealed that the participation index had the highest average score (3.11) among the good governance indicators, while the justice-centered index had the lowest average (2.59). In terms of rural livability, the sense of belonging to a place scored the highest (3.08), while the landscape index had the lowest average (2.3). The overall averages for good governance and livability were below optimal levels, as confirmed by one-sample t-tests. The research findings indicated a positive impact of all governance indicators on livability, with the accountability index having the most significant effect (coefficient of 0.719), explaining the majority of variance in livability. The participation index had the least impact (0.536) on rural livability in the study area.
Conclusions
The study revealed that governance and livability in the study area were perceived as suboptimal by the local community, possibly influenced by challenging environmental conditions near Afghanistan. However, there was a positive and significant correlation between governance indicators and rural livability, with the responsibility index showing the strongest correlation and the participation index the weakest. The regression model demonstrated that all governance indicators positively influenced livability, with the accountability index having the most substantial impact and the participation index the least impact on rural livability in the study area.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Good Governance
Livability
Sustainable Development
Darmian County
  1. Alijani, S., Pourahmad, A., Hatami Nejad, H., Ziari, K. & Sodoudi, S. (2020). A new approach of urban livability in Tehran: Thermal comfort as a primitive indicator. Case study, District 22. Urban Climate, 33, 100656. https://doi.org/1016/j.uclim.2020.100656.
  2. Bednarek-Szczepańska, M. (2019). The Role of local communities in the process of siting of the unwanted facilities within the rural areas in Poland. Eastern European Countryside, 25(1), 63-94. https://doi.org/10.12775/EEC.2019.003.
  3. Radin, B,A., Agranoff, R., Bowman, A.O'M., Buntz, C.G, Ott, J.S., Romzek, B.S. & Wilson, R. (1996). New governance for rural America: Creating intergovernmental partnerships. Kansas Open Books. 52. University Press of Kansas. https://doi.org/10.17161/1808.32697.
  4. Chen, Y., Lü, B. & Chen, R. (2016). Evaluating the life satisfaction of peasants in concentrated residential areas of Nanjing, China: A fuzzy approach. Habitat International, 53, 556-568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2016.01.002.
  5. Chen, Z., Li, Y., Liu, Y. & Liu, X. (2021). Does rural residential land expansion pattern lead to different impacts on eco-environment? A case study of loess hilly and gully region, China. Habitat International, 117, 102436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2021.102436.
  6. Chen, B. (2023). Rural Gangs and village governance. In: The Underworld of Rural China. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8710-6_8.
  7. Crumpton, C.D., Cifuentes, M. & Roche, J. (2023). Rural grassroots governance-building in Myanmar. In: Ockey, J., Talib, N.S. (eds) Democratic recession, autocratization, and democratic backlash in Southeast Asia. Contestations in Contemporary Southeast Asia. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9811-9_7.
  8. Dadvarkhani, F, Salmani, M, Farhadi, S. & Zare, Z. (2011). Good governance for rural poverty reduction strategy. Journal of Human Geography, 3(4), 103-120. [In Persian]
  9. Davids, G., Prince, T., Makiva, M. & Fagbadebo, O. (2021). A rural perspective on the practice and challenges of community participation in post-apartheid South Africa insights from rural beaufort-west municipality. Public Policy and Administration Research, 11(3). https://doi.org/7176/PPAR/11-3-06.
  10. Detotto, C., Giannoni, S. & Goavec, C. (2021). Does good governance attract tourists? Tourism Management, 82, 104155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104155.
  11. Evans, P. B. (Ed.). (2002). Livable cities: Urban struggles for livelihood and sustainability. Univ of California Press.
  12. Faiz, A., Wang, W. & Bennett, C. (2012). Sustainable rural roads for livelihoods and livability. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 53, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.854.
  13. Fateminia, S. (2007). Citizenship culture: Incarnate good governance, efficiency organization and active citizen. Social Welfare, 7(26), 35-58. [In Persian]
  14. , D., & Lu, Y. (2021). A strategy of the rural governance for territorial spatial planning in China. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 31, 1349-1364. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/S11442-021-1900-6.
  15. Goodwin, M. (1998). The Governance of Rural Areas: Some Emerging Research Issues and Agendas. Journal of Rural Studies, 14(1), 5-12. Avaiable at: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:153459050.
  16. Hajarian, A. (2022). Responsibility for good governance on the social sustainability of rural households (Case study: Rural areas of Kashan). Geography and Environmental Sustainability, 12(42), 41-55. [In Persian]
  17. Hu, G., Wang, J., Fahad, S. & Li, J. (2023). Influencing factors of farmers’ land transfer, subjective well-being, and participation in agri-environment schemes in environmentally fragile areas of China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(2), 4448-4461. https://doi.org/1007/s11356-022-22537-4.
  18. Huang, X., Yang, F. & Fahad, S. (2022). The impact of digital technology use on farmers’ low-carbon production behavior under the background of carbon emission peak and carbon neutrality goals. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 1002181. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1002181.
  19. Ichplani, P., Kumar, A. & Mayberry, J. (2018). Engaging rural communities in communication processes. The Journal of Development Communication, 29(2), 62-75. Retrieved from https://jdc.journals.unisel.edu.my/index.php/jdc/article/view/133.
  20. Khodapanah, Q. (2021). Assessing the governance effects worthwhile on the resilience of villages case study: Central part of Ardabil city. Journal of Regional Planning, 11(41), 83-100. [In Persian]
  21. McGill, R. (1998). Urban management in developing countries. Cities, 15, 463-471.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-2751(98)00041-9.
  22. Momeni, A., Jahanshiri, M. & Azmi, A. (2020). The effects of good governance on the viability of urban peripheral settlements in Adran rural district. Preipheral Urban Spaces Development, 2(1), 193-205. 1001.1.26764164.1399.2.1.12.9. [In Persian]
  23. Mouratidis, K., & Yiannakou, A. (2022). What makes cities livable? Determinants of neighborhood satisfaction and neighborhood happiness in different contexts. Land Use Policy, 112, 105855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105855.
  24. Newman, P.W. (1999). Sustainability and cities: Extending the metabolism model. Landscape and Urban Planning, 44(4), 219-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00009-2.
  25. Pang, Y., Zhang, W. & Jiang, H. (2024). A socio-spatial exploration of rural livability satisfaction in megacity Beijing, China. Ecological Indicators, 158, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111368.
  26. Paul, A., & Sen, J. (2018). Livability assessment within a metropolis based on the impact of integrated urban geographic factors (IUGFs) on clustering urban centers of Kolkata. Cities, 74, 142-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.11.015.
  27. Ruth, M., & Franklin, R.S. (2014). Livability for all? Conceptual limits and practical implications. Applied Geography, 49, 18-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.09.018.
  28. Sadeghloo, T., & Sojasi Qidari, H. (2015). Survey relationship between rural settlement livability and rural resilience in front of natural disaster in rural areas of Mravehtapeh and Palizan County. Journal of Emergency Management, 3(2), 37-44. https://doi.org/1001.1.23453915.1393.3.2.4.7. [In Persian]
  29. Savari, M., & Moradi, M. (2022). The effectiveness of drought adaptation strategies in explaining the livability of Iranian rural households. Habitat International, 124, 102560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2022.102560.
  30. Sojasi Qeydari, H., Esfaram, Y. & Rahbari, M. (2017). Analysis Local management role in reducing the physical vulnerability approach to good governance (Case study: Bahmaei Sarahdi Garbi rural district). Rural Development Strategies, 4(3), 405-426. https://doi.org/10.22048/rdsj.2018.70269.1616. [In Persian]
  31. Statistical yearbook of Iran. (2016). Statistical Center of Iran.
  32. South Khorasan Management and Planning Organization (2022). Statistical Yearbook of South Khorasan Province. [In Persian].
  33. Taleshi, M., Darban astane, A. & Mousavi, S. (2019). Evaluation of rural governance for achievement of a sustainable local government (Case study: Rural area surrounding Karaj metropolis). Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 8(2), 131-144. [In Persian]
  34. (2000). Report deepening democracy in a fragmented world. Oxford University Press.
  35. Welch, R. (2002). Legitimacy of rural local government in the new governance environment. Journal of Rural Studies, 18(4), 443-459. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(02)00050-5.
  36. Yuen, B., & Ooi, G.L. (2009). Introduction: World cities - challenges of liveability, sustainability and vibrancy. World cities: Achieving liveability and vibrancy, Forthcoming, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1469435.
  37. Yurui, L., Luyin, Q., Qianyi, W. & Karácsonyi, D. (2020). Towards the evaluation of rural livability in China: Theoretical framework and empirical case study. Habitat International, 105, 10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102241
  38. Zaitul, Z., Ilona, D. & Novianti, N. (2023). Good governance in rural local administration. Administrative Sciences, 13, 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13010019.
  39. Zhu, B., Yang, M. & Chu, X. (2024). Good governance and innovation: Economic freedom matters. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 205, 123527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123527.