پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,223 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,680 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 114,872,847 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,546,004 |
تحلیل عاملی عوامل پیش برنده و بازدارنده توسعه اجتماعی (مطالعه موردی: شهرستان کرج، 1389) | ||
| پژوهشهای روستائی | ||
| مقاله 4، دوره 4، شماره 2، تیر 1392، صفحه 327-346 اصل مقاله (445.43 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jrur.2013.35648 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| شیدرخ سادات حبیب زاده* 1؛ هوشنگ ایروانی2؛ خلیل کلانتری2 | ||
| 1کارشناس‌ارشد توسعة روستایی، دانشگاه تهران | ||
| 2استاد دانشکدة اقتصاد و توسعة کشاورزی دانشگاه تهران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| موضوع توسعة اجتماعی گفتمانی است که اندیشمندان علوم اجتماعی از اواخر قرن بیستم تاکنون به آن توجه کرده‌اند. هر جامعه‌‌ای که در جهت توسعة اجتماعی تلاش می‌کند، باید به گونه‌ای برنامه‌ریزی کند که با شناخت درستْ،عوامل پیش‌برنده تقویت و عوامل بازدارنده تضعیف شوند. تحقیق حاضر، با هدف دستیابی به درکی عمیق از توسعة اجتماعی در روستاهای شهرستان کرج، به روش پیمایشی، توصیفی، تحلیلی انجام شد. حجم نمونه با استفاده از فرمول کوکران 124 نفر تعیین شدکه برای اطمینان بیشتر 150 نفر انتخاب شد. این تعداد(6354نفر) از بین جامعة آماری مردان و زنان عضو خانوار کشاورزان ساکن روستاهای شهرستان کرج، انتخاب شدند. برای انتخاب روستاها از روش نمونه‌گیری چندمرحله‌ای و برای انتخاب افراد از روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی استفاده شد. اطلاعات لازم از طریق پرسشنامه‌ای که روایی آن بر اساس نظرخواهی از کارشناسان و پایایی آن با استفاده از آلفای کرونباخ (بالای 7/0) به تأیید رسید، جمع‌آوری و با استفاده از نرم‌افزار spss و تکنیک تحلیل عاملی تحلیل شد. بر اساس نتایج تحلیل عاملی، عوامل پیش‌برندة توسعة اجتماعی محیط زیست (17/16%)، حمل‌ونقل (37/10%)، اشتغال زنان (66/9%)، ارتباطات (53/9%)، همبستگی اجتماعی (6/8%)، روابط خانوادگی (69/7%)، درخواست کمک از دیگران (24/6%)، و علاقه به کار (69/5%) شناخته شد و در مجموع 97/73 درصد از واریانس کل را تبیین کرد. عوامل بهداشت سنّتی (36/14%)، عدم احساس نیاز به آموزش (92/11%)، عدم احساس امنیت (25/11%)، بی‌اعتمادی به دیگران (10%)، خوداتکایی منفی (84/9%)، و درون‌گرایی (11/8%) جزء عوامل بازدارندة توسعة اجتماعی شناخته شد و 51/65 درصد از واریانس کل را تبیین کرد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| تحلیل عاملی؛ توسعة اجتماعی؛ شاخص‌های اجتماعی؛ شهرستان کرج؛ عوامل پیش‌برنده و بازدارنده | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Factor Analysis of Social Development’s Upgrading and Downgrading Factors, Karaj County, 2010 | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Shidrokh Sadat Habibzadeh1؛ Hooshang Iravani2؛ Khalil Kalantari2 | ||
| 1M.Sc. Rural Development, University of Tehran | ||
| 2Prof., Faculty of Agricultural economics and Development, University of Tehran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Introduction Social development is a phenomenon having close relationship with ways and how the people live in a society. The main goal of social development is to upgrade the levels of general livings’ status by creating preferred conditions based on accepted values.Focuses must be on: Reducing poverty and improving the qualities of Nutrition, Hygiene, Housing, Occupation, Education and fruitful spare time. Also it is a path for continuing to upgrade the effective values in the selected society and improving the social system for using nature’s potentials and developing the quality of social relations for providing conditions for Individual growth in different dimensions of human life and redistributing human roles for justice and social security indexes. It is important to know the upgrading and downgrading factors of social development in order to empower the positive and weakening negative factors.The objectives of the research has been to determine these factors in Karaj county and formulate some suggestions. Methodology An applied, descriptive and analytical research using surveying method has been in concern. Based on Cochran’s formula the sample size has been 150 persons. Statistical population was 6354 male and female of rural households of Karaj County. Proportional stratified sampling method has been used to select the villages and simple random sampling was used for selecting the individuals. A researcher’s made questionnaire was constructed and the reliability was determined by using Cronbach’s Alpha.(over 0.7). Expert opinions have been used for validating the questionnaire. For data processing SPSS computer software has been used. Statistical design included determining central tendencies and factor analysis. Results Based on the results 52% (78 persons) were male and 48% (72 persons) were female. Their mean of the age was 46 years, minimum age 23 years, and the maximum age 76 years. 44% of respondents were farmers, 32.7% horticulturists, 23.3% livestock breeders, and 14% of them in addition to agriculture had a job outside the farm. 20% were illiterate, 10% of them were only able to read and write, 37.3% had primary school’s education and, 12.7% having middle school’s certificates, 13.3% having high school’s diploma and 2% didn’t complete their high school’s study, 1.4% were junior college’s graduates, and 3.3% of them having a bachelor degree. In the study of social development’s upgrading factors using factorial analysis technique, 8 factors pinpointed having specific value of higher than 1 naming:‘Environment’ with the value of 3.56 ( explaining 16.17% of the varience). ‘Transportation’ with the value of 2.28 (10.37%), ‘Women employment’ with the value of 2.12 (9.66%), ‘Communication’ with the value of 2.09, (9.53%), ‘Social solidarity’ with the value of 1.89 (8.6%), ‘Family relationships’ with the value of 1.69 (7.69%), ‘Asking others for help’ with the value of 1.37, (6.24%), and finally ‘Interest in work’with the value of 1.25 (5.69%) which the sum of them explained the total varience equal to 73.97% . Downgrading factors of social development were 6 factors naming : ‘Traditional hygiene’ with the value of 2.29 explaining 14.36%, ‘Lack of feeling need for education’ with the value of 1.9 (11.92%), ‘Not feeling secure’ with the value of 1.8 (11.25%), ‘distrust regarding others’ with the value of 1.6 (10%), ‘Negative self-reliance’ with the value of 1.57 (9.84%) and finally, ‘Self-introversion’ with the value of 1.29 (8.11%) which sum of them explained a total varience of 65.51%. Conclusion Based on factor analysis, the most important upgrading factor was ‘to keep clean the environment’ (more than 80%) confirmed by studies of Anderson & Keoleian(2008), Matsui(2004) and Ghai, Hopkins & McGranahan(1988), but in practice, they do not keep the environment clean. One suggestion is to conduct related workshops. The second factor was ‘Transportation’ confirmed by Lashkari (2008). A suggestion for improving transportation, is to improve the qualities of services and the quanteties of public transportation by private sector in oriented contracts. The third factor was ‘Women employment’ which (more than 70 %) agree with women’s occupation, in the research by Karimi (2005) is specifically referred to, and in the researches by Lashkari (2008), Kosari (2008), Ahmadi (2007), Moeeni (2003), UN (2009), Anderson & Keoleian (2008), Todaro (2006), and Jackson (2002), the employment is generally referred to as one of the social development components, therefore it would be wise to facilitate women’s occupations through cooperatives and self-employments. The fourth factor is ‘Communication’ confirmed by Anabestani & Vaziri (2011), Hajinejad, Noori & Fazlali (2011), Kosari (2008), and Ghai, Hopkins & McGranahan (1988). One suggestion would be to use mass media and provide investment to improve ICT services. Social solidarity, family relationships, asking others for help, and interest in work were the other social development’s promoting factors, respectively. The most downgrading factor was ‘Traditional hygiene’. In general hygiene is important for social development and in the studies by Rezaee Eskandari (2010), Lashkari (2008), Kosari (2008), Rezaee (2007), Ahmadi (2007), Karimi (2005), HajiEbrahimzadeh (2004), Moeeni (2003), UN (2009), Anderson & Keoleian (2008), Jackson (2002), Estes (2000), and Ghai, Hopkins & McGranahan (1988), has been confirmed as essential.The suggestion is to increase the number of quality services offered by the specialists and improve the health facilities. ‘Lack of feeling need for education’ was the second downgrading factor. More education has been confirmed by the studies of Rezaee Eskandari (2010), Kosari (2008), Lashkari (2008), Ahmadi (2007), Rezaee (2007), Karimi (2005), HajiEbrahimzadeh (2004), UN (2009), Anderson & Keoleian (2008), Matsui (2004), Estes (2000), Jackson (2002) and Ghai, Hopkins & McGranahan (1988), therefore more investment for better education and extension activities can be recommended. ‘Not feeling secure’ is the third downgrading factor in social development. Research findings by Pourtaheri, Sojasi Qidari, & Sadeghloo (2010), Lashkari (2008), Rezaee (2007), Ahmadi (2007), Hajiebrahimzadeh (2004), Moeeni (2003), and Todaro (2006), indicats that security has been known as a necessary element for social development. So it is important to keep the level of feeling secure for doing regular activities. Other downgrading factors were distrust regarding others, negative self-reliance and self-introversion, respectively. References Ahmadi, M. (2007). Social Development and National Security, Social Development Research Journal, No. 14, pp. 69 -90. Anabestani, A.; Vaziri, S. (2011). Analysis of social, economical and physical Impacts of ICT in development of rural areas (case study : Gorgan County), Journal of Rural Resarch, Year 2, No. 1, pp. 187 -213. Anderson, A.; Keoleian, G. (2008). Social Development Indicators, University of Michigan. Azkia, M.; Ghafari, Gh. (2002). Development Sociology, Fourth Edition, Kalameh Publication Institute, Tehran. Azmi, A. (2008). Position of Iran’s Social Development in direction of the Outlook Document, Journal of Rahbord Yas, No. 15, pp. 97 -115. Estes, R. (2000). World Social development trend: Challenges for the new century, Journal of Planning and Budget, No. 56 & 57, pp. 91 -132. Estes, R. (2001). Social Welfare and Social Development : Partners or Competitors. University of Pennsylvania. Firoozabadi, A.; Hosseini, R.; Ghasemi, R. (2010). Study of Indexes and Rank of Social Development in Iran’s Provinces and their Relationship with Social capital, Journal of Social Welfare, No. 37, pp. 57 -93. Ghai, D.; Hopkins, M.; McGranahan, D. (1988). some Reflections on Human & social Indicators for Development, Discussion parper No 6, united Nations Research Institute for social Development (UNRISD). HajiEbrahimzadeh, T. (2004). Measuring Performance of Exemplary Islamic Councils by Social Development Indicators, Master Thesis in Management of Development, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tehran. Hajinejad, A.; Noori, M.; Fazlali, Z. (2011). Assessment of using the Information and Communication Technology in Rural Management by Rural Managers (Dehyars) (Case Study: Galoogah and Behshahr; Mazandaran Province), Journal of Rural Resarch, Year 2, No. 2, pp. 137 -160. Karimi, Gh. (2005). A review of the Most Important Social Development Indexes with Emphasis on Gender Indicators. Kosari, M. (2008). Relative Effect of New Information and communication technologies in Social Development, Cultural Research Journal, No. 1, pp. 139 -170. Ladburry, S.; Kinear, R. (1995). Social Policy Research for Development, London. Lashkari, M. 2008, Quantitative and Qualitative Social Development Indexes, Journal of Economy and Society, No. 18, pp. 49 -62. Matsui, N. (2004). Social Development Index as Capability Proxy: An Illustration of South and East Asia, The Graduate School of East Asian Studies Yamaguchi University, Japan. Moeeni, M.R. (2003). Social Policy, Social Development and Informal Institutions, Journal of Social Welfare, Social Policy Special Edition, Year 3, No. 10, pp. 103 -118. Mohammadian, M. (2005). The study of the mode of Tabriz citizen’s view to social development, Journal of Social Sciences, No. 5, pp. 171 -191. Nancy, R. (2000). World Summiton Social Development, Economic Development and Social Responsibility, Geneva, Switzerland. Piran, P. (2003). Social development and future challenges, lecture National projects office, the ministry of islamic culture and guidance. Pourtaheri, M; Sojasi Qidari, H; Sadeghloo, T. (2010). Measurment and Priority Social Sustainability in Rural Regions with Using TOPSIS-FUZZY Technique Based on Order Preference by Similarity to an FUZZY Ideal Solution (Case Study: Khodabandeh Country Rurals in Central Part), Journal of Rural Resarch, Year 1, No. 1, pp. 1 -32. Rezaee Eskandari, D. (2010). Social Development of Central Asian Countries, Central Eurasia Biquarterly, No. 6, pp. 19 -40. Rezaee, Z. (2007). Social Development in Iran : Indicators and Obstacles, Social Development Research Journal, No. 14, pp. 15 -48. Todaro, M. (2006). Economics development in third world, Fourteenth Edition, Koohsar Publication, Tehran. UN. (2009). Social indicators, Demographic and Social Statistics, United nations statistics Division. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| factor analysis, Karaj County, social development, social indexes, upgrading and downgrading factors | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,590 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,323 |
||