تبیین الگوی فضایی حکمروایی خوب روستایی پیرامون کلان‌شهر کرج

نوع مقاله: پژوهشی - کاربردی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی روستایی، دانشگاه پیام نور

2 استادیار جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی روستایی، دانشگاه تهران

3 دانشجوی دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی روستایی دانشگاه پیام نور

چکیده

مطالعات و واکاوی‌ها درخصوص حکمروایی خوب روستایی، بیشتر نشانگر توجه به نگرش جامعه‌شناسی حکمروایی است و در این بین به بعد فضایی کمتر توجه شده است. مفهوم حکمروایی روستایی به‌ویژه با «بعد فضایی» رهیافتی جامع در توسعة پایدار روستایی به‌شمار می‌آید؛ زیرا رویکرد توسعة پایدار به توانمندسازی، ظرفیت‌سازی، افزایش مشارکت و اعتمادسازی، توسعة شبکه‌های ارتباطی روستاییان در داخل و بیرون از محیط روستا و توسعة نهادی منجر می‌شود. در این راستا تحقیق حاضر با هدف تبیین الگوی فضایی حکمروایی خوب روستایی در روستاهای کلان‌شهر کرج با ماهیتی کاربردی و استفاده از رویکرد پیمایشی و اسنادی انجام شده است. داده‌های مورد نیاز، 53 دهیار، 105 شورای اسلامی روستا و 366 سرپرست خانوار روستایی هستند که براساس نمونه‌گیری طبقه‌بندی طی فرایند چندمرحله‌ای انتخاب شده‌اند. روایی پرسشنامه نیز با استفاده از نظرات 45 نفر از صاحب‌نظران و پایایی آن با استفاده از آزمون کرونباخ آلفا برای مقیاس‌های مختلف بررسی و تأیید شده؛ همچنین آزمون کای اسکوئر به‌منظور بررسی اختلاف نسبت افراد موافق یا مخالف در زمینة مؤلفه‌های پژوهش کاربرد داشته است. در پژوهش حاضر برای توزیع و الگوی فضایی حکمروایی خوب روستایی حکومت‌های محلی از فنون PROMETHEE  ،ANP و تحلیل رگرسیون استفاده شد و نتایج نشان داد 53 درصد از روستاهای مورد نظر، سطح حکمروایی خوب، 25 درصد متوسط و 22 درصد سطح حکمروایی ضعیفی دارند. منحنی حکمروایی خوب روستایی از شمال (کوهستانی) به جنوب (دشتی و کوهپایه‌ای) وضع مطلوب و مساعدتری پیدا می‌کند و توزیع فضایی حکمروایی طبق شاخص‌های نه‌گانه به سمت الگوی متمرکز یا خوشه‌ای گرایش دارد.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Explaining the Spatial Pattern of Rural Good Governance in Karaj Metropolitan

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mostafa Taleshi 1
  • Alireza Darban Astane 2
  • Seyed Aref Mousavi 3
1 Associate professor of Geography, Faculty of social science, PNU University, Iran
2 Assistant professor of Geography and Rural Planning, Faculty of Geography, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran
3 PhD Student of Geography and Rural Planning, PNU University, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Rural good governance is a comparative approach that can be realized through behavior, regulation, institutionalization of accountability, popular participation, transparency, legality, accountability, and consensus.  Therefore, rural good governance can be defined as the interaction between authorities and planners both in macro and micro levels for local communities with people who are affected by developmental programs.
The studies on the good governance of the rural area suggest a greater attention to the sociological view of governance and that spatial dimension has been less considered. The concept of rural governance, especially its spatial dimension can be considered as a comprehensive approach to sustainable rural development, since the sustainable development approach would lead to empowerment, capacity making, increase of participation and confidence building, expansion of communication networks of villagers inside and outside the village environment, and institutional development.
 
Methodology
This study aimed to explain the spatial pattern of rural good governance in the villages of Karaj Township in Iran with a practical nature using a survey and documentary approach. Required data are 35 rural governors, 503 Islamic rural councils and 533 rural householders who have been selected based on classification sampling during a multi-stage process. Validity of the questionnaire was evaluated using the comments of 53 experts and its reliability was verified using Cronbach's alpha test for different scales. The Chi-square test was used to determine the difference in the agreement and disagreement ratios in the components of the research.
The purpose of this present study is to explain the spatial pattern of rural good governance in local government (Rural Governor & Rural Islamic council) around Karaj metropolitan and to provide practical solutions to the achievement of a sustainable local government. The analysis of their strengths and weaknesses has been implemented to answer these questions.  How spatial distribution and the level of good governance are organized in local governments? What kind of rural governance does the spatial pattern follow in the local governments?
In this research, we used PROMETHEE and ANP techniques for spatial distribution and rural governance of local governments. In order to investigate the relationship between the factors affecting rural governance and the spatial pattern of rural good governance in the study area, we have used linear regression model and coefficient of determination (R2) technique. To assess the model conditions, the suitability of the fitted model was examined using variance analysis and coefficient of determination of the model.
 
Results and discussion
The results of the research show that 53%, 25% and 22% of the studied villages enjoy good, medium and weak levels of rural governance, respectively. The results of rural good governance in local governments indicate that participation, transparency, accountability and consensus have been the most important affecting indices on local governments. The equity, efficiency and effectiveness, accountability and legitimacy have been the weakest indices.
The relationship between the variables affecting rural governance and good governance indices indicates that the related variables, whether they do exist or not, play a significant role in the rural governance level in the area of study.
As a result, there is a significant relationship between the variables including village size,  physical development of the village, the level of development and plurality of infrastructure in one hand and good governance indices on the other hand. The results of the research show that the most decent form of rural governance is distributed in the central district. The good governance has a decreasing trend. Of course, the spatial distribution of rural governance does not follow this pattern in some cases according to rural good governance indices. The factors in Karaj are including household and population, dominant economy, economic diversification, access to various opportunities, the extent and severity of land playgrounds, tourist attraction, the location of the Chalus Road ad the important factors affecting extent of desirability or inappropriateness of good governance indicators in the studied villages. In good governance, rural good governance enjoys more favorable situation from north (mountains) to the south (plains). The governance spatial distribution has inclination towards a centralized or clustered pattern based on good governance indices.
 
Conclusion
In rural good governance approach, spatial processes have a special place and influence over other economic, social and institutional processes. Given the significant spatial distribution of good rural governance indicators in the study area, attention should be paid to the impact of spatial approach to rural governance on the planners of rural development agenda .
The relationship between the variables affecting rural governance and good governance indicators indicates that having or not having spatial variables plays a significant role in the rural governance level of the study area. The city and the countryside as a geographic space have been changed by the inter conversion of the spatial and physical elements. The spatial functions of the city and the villages have significant differences, which are the result of the nature of the place and the spirit governing their space. For this reason, the nature of village and city relations is a valuable place in development programs, especially spatial planning. In rural good governance approach in the dimensions of spatial governance, vertical and horizontal coordination of strategies can provide the spatial development of rural areas. The physical and spatial changes of villages in recent decades have been affected by the rapid acceleration of urbanization versus rural migration, especially in the metropolitan areas of rural communities, with fundamental qualitative and quantitativechanges. Therefore, study about urban rural links and their effects on these links and trends on rural areas with regard to good governance is one of the important findings in this research. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Local governance
  • sustainable local governance
  • rural good governance
  • spatial pattern
  • Karaj metropolitan
-         اصغری، لغمایی، صادق و محسن محرابی (1394)، بررسی و تحلیل حکمروایی خوب روستایی در توسعة مدیریت روستایی، کنفرانس ملی مهندسی معماری، عمران و توسعة کالبدی.

-     الوانی، سید مهدی و محسن علیزاده ثانی (1386)، «تحلیلی بر کیفیت حکمروایی خوب در ایران»، فصلنامة مدیریت دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، شمارة 53، صص 1-24.

-     جاسبی، جواد و ندا نفری (1387)، «الگوی حکمروایی خوب: رهیافتی فرایندی-سیستمی» فصلنامة مدیریت و توسعه، سال دهم، شمارة 38، صص 36-49.

-     دربان آستانه، علیرضا (1389)، «تبیینحکمرواییخوب روستاییدر حکومت‌هایمحلی(مورد مطالعه: شهرستانقزوین)»، پایان‌نامة دکتری دانشکده جغرافیا دانشگاه تهران.

-     عظیمی آملی، جلال و عبدالرضا رکن‌الدین افتخاری (1393)، حکمروایی روستایی (مدیریت توسعه پایدار)، تهران، انتشارات سمت.

-     عظیمی آملی، جلال (1390)، «تحلیل حکمروایی خوب در پایداری روستاهای استان مازندران»، پایان‌نامة دکتری دانشکده علوم انسانی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.

-  Beer, A., (2014), Leadership and the governance of rural communities, Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 34, No.1: 254–262.

-  Bevir, M., (2013), Governance: A very short introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

- CFED., (2004), Eight Principles For Effective Rural Governance…And How Communities Put Them Into Practice.

- Colebatch, H. K., (2002), Policy, Open University Press, Philadelphia, USA.

- Mehta, D., (1998), Some Attributes of Good Governance and Cities, Urban Governance: Lessons from Best practices in Asia, UMP- Asia Occasional Paper, No. 40.

- Fałkowski, J., (2013),Political accountability and governance in rural areas: Some evidence from the Pilot Programmed LEADER+ in Poland, Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 32, No.2: 70–79.

- Fujita, M., et al., (2016), The Special Economy, Second edition, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

- Hobbs, R., (1997), Future landscapes and the future of landscape ecology, Landscape and urban planning, Vol. 37, No.1:1-9.

- Hufty, M., (2011), Investigating Policy Processes: The Governance Analytical Framework (GAF), In: Wiesmann, U., Hurni, H., et al. editors. Research for Sustainable Development: Foundations, Experiences, and Perspectives, Bern: Geographica Bernensia: 403–424.

- Lackey, Steven B.,  Freshwater D., and Anil R., (2002), Factors Influencing Local Government Cooperation in Rural Areas: Evidence from the Tennessee Valley, Economic Development Quarterly, vol. 16, No. 2: 138-154.

- Martin, R., (2017), The spatial order of the economy: An investigation on location, economic areas and international trade, Regional Studies, Published online, Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cres20.

- Parker, D. C. and Meretsky, V., (2004), Measuring pattern outcomes in an agent-based model of edge-effect externalities using spatial metrics,Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, Vol.101, No.2: 233-250.

- Pierre, J., (2015), Whose city is this anyway? Tensions in urban governance, good and otherwise, The Quest for Good Urban Governance, Theoretical Refl ections and International Practices, Chapter 2, Foreword by Gerry Stoker.Springer VS.

- Sato, Hi., (2006), Public Goods Provision and Rural Governance in China. China: An International Journal – Vol. 6, No. 2: 281-298.

- Sheng. K., (2010), Good Governance in Southeast Asia, Environment and Urbanization ASIA, Vol. 1, No.2:131- 147.

- Stark, N., (2010), Effective Rural Governance, Rural Policy Research Institute, U. S. A.

- Stenseke, M., (2009), Local participation in cultural landscape maintenance: lessons from Sweden, Journal of Land use policy. Vol. 26, No.2: 214-223.

- Suang, Pheng, K., (2008), The Changing Paradigm of Rural Governance for Sustainable Development. Defining The Nice and Role of GIS. Available at: http://www. Livelihoods. org/post/docs/turmedi. rtf.

-      Colin FlintP., Taylor. J., (2007), Political Geography: World-economy, Nation-state, and Locality, Pearson/ Prentice Hall.

- Umbsaar, L., (2009), Good Governance Measured: Do Post-Martial Law and Ex-Soviet Societies Differ? A Case Study of Taiwan and Estonia, Paper prepared for the MPSA 65th Annual National Conference [online]. http://www. all academic. com/meta/ p361038_index. Html.

- UNDP., (2000), characteristics of Good Governance, The Urban Governance initiative (TUGi).

- UNDP., (2017), A Users’ Guide to Measuring Local Governance, UNDP Oslo Governance Centre.

- Van den D, et al., (2015), The Quest for Good Urban Governance, Theoretical Reflections and International Practices, Foreword by Gerry Stoker.Springer VS.

- Van Assche, K., and Hornidge, Anna, K., (2015), Rural development. Knowledge and expertise in governanceWageningen Academic Publishers.

- Welch, R., (2002),  Legitimacy of rural local government in the new governance environment, Journal, Vol. 18, No. 4: 443–459.

- Ward, N., Brown, David L., (2009), Placing the Rural in Regional Development, Regional Studies, Vol. 43, No. 10: 1237–1244.

- World B., (2006),Good governance, available on: www. World Bank.org.