پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 161 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,532 |
| تعداد مقالات | 70,500 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 124,091,151 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 97,195,101 |
دیدگاه بهرهبرداران در مورد تأثیر طرحهای مرتع‌داری بر متنوع‌‌‌‌‌‌سازی راهبردهای معیشت خانوارهای روستایی در شهرستان ماهنشان | ||
| پژوهش های روستائی | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 6، شماره 4، دی 1394، صفحه 807-829 اصل مقاله (681.94 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jrur.2015.57118 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| کبری کریمی* ؛ اسماعیل کرمی دهکردی؛ محمد بادسار | ||
| دانشگاه زنجان | ||
| چکیده | ||
| بهره‌‌‌‌‌‌برداری پایدار از منابع طبیعی نقش مهمی در تأمین رفاه و معیشت جوامع روستایی دارد. امروزه بهره‌‌‌‌‌‌برداری بی‌رویه از منابع طبیعی موجب شده است که سیاست‌گذاران تمهیداتی را در جهت مدیریت پایدار آنها اتخاذ کنند که پیامدهایی در ابعاد مختلف معیشت بهرهبرداران از جمله راهبردهای معیشت خواهد داشت. هدف پژوهش حاضر بررسی دیدگاه بهرهبرداران درخصوص تأثیر طرحهای مرتع‌داری بر راهبردهای معیشت خانوارهای روستایی در شهرستان ماهنشان با استفاده از روش‌شناسی پیمایشی است. با کمک روش نمونه‌‌‌‌‌‌گیری تصادفی، 204 خانوار از 1280 خانوار بهرهبردار انتخاب شدند. داده‌‌‌‌‌‌ها با استفاده از پرسشنامه‌‌‌‌‌‌ای که روایی آن از طریق پانلی از متخصصان دانشگاهی و اجرایی و پایایی آن از طریق مطالعة اولیه با حدود ۲۰ بهرهبردار و تحلیل آزمون کرونباخ آلفا تأیید شده بود، گردآوری شدند. نتایج نشان دادند که این طرح‌‌‌‌‌‌ها بیشتر رویکرد حفاظتی داشتند و تأثیر چندانی بر راهبردهای معیشت خانوارها و متنوع‌‌‌‌‌‌سازی آنها نداشتند. درحالی‌که نتایج این اقدامات ضمن آنکه موجب افزایش دانش و اقدامات بهرهبرداران می‌شود، از طریق متنوع‌‌‌‌‌‌سازی معیشت از فشار بر مراتع نیز کم می‌کند. براساس تحلیل رگرسیونی گام‌به‌گام، پنج متغیر دانش در زمینة متنوع‌‌‌‌‌‌سازی راهبردهای معیشت، تعداد کندوی زنبور عسل، اقدامات اصلاحی/احیایی، میزان دریافت اطلاعات از برنامه‌‌‌‌‌‌های رادیویی و مشاهدة فیلم و DVD، 5/29 درصد از تغییرات واریانس اقدامات متنوع‌‌‌‌‌‌سازی راهبردهای معیشت خانوارها را تبیین می‌‌‌‌‌‌کنند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| بهرهبردار روستایی؛ متنوع‌‌‌‌‌‌سازی؛ مرتع‌داری؛ معیشت | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Farmers’ Perspective Regarding the Impact of Rangeland Management Projects on the Diversification of Rural Farmers' Livelihood Strategies in the Mahneshan Township | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Kobra Karimi؛ Esmail Karamidehkordi؛ Mohammad Badsar | ||
| MSc of Agricultural Extension and Education, University of Zanjan, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Introduction Sustainable utilization of natural resources have a determinant rols in rural community welfar and livelihoods. But they are in a critical condition due to their excessive use of them led to policy makers to adapt the policies for sustainable management of them that had been different consequences in different dimensions of farmers livelihood such as livelihod strategis. the aim of this research is to assess rural beneficiaries' perspective regarding the impacts of rangeland management projects on rural farmers' knowledge and activities regarding the livelihood strategies diversification in Mahneshan Township of the Zanjan Province. Materials and methods This study was conducted using a quantitative paradigm and a descriptive- correlational research methodology. The study was done in rural communities in the Mahneshan Township, located in the Zanjan Province in the North West of Iran. These communities depended on sheep and goats holding and rangelands. Rangeland management projects either had been implemented or were implementing in their lands. A sample of 204 rural households (in 10 villages) out of 1280 rural livestock holders (in 24 villages) was randomly selected through a multi-stage sampling technique and structurally interviewed using a questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed according to the research objectives, previous studies, the documents related to rangeland management projects and an initial exploratory case study through semi-structured interviews with natural resources management experts of the township and the province. This initial study identified some factors, such as location and the activities of rangeland management projects, relevant rural livestock keepers, and the measures. The content and face validity of the instrument was established by a panel of experts consisting of agricultural extension, rural development and natural resources experts and academic members. A pilot test was also conducted with 30 rural households to assess the reliability of the questionnaire and testing its constructs using the Cronbach’s Alpha measure (the coefficient for different constructs between 0.75 and 0.95 showing appropriate measures consistency). Moreover, the construct validity analyses were utilized using the convergence validity (with the emphasis on the Component Loadings above 0.5, % of construct variance above 50 and the amount of Cronbach's Alpha), and through applying the Principal Components Analysis for categorical data (CATPCA). Finally, the quantitative data were analyzed using the SPSS software for Windows. Results and discussion The analysis of demographic information showed that 98.5% of the respondents were male and 91.25% were married with the household size of 4.9 people. The respondents’ age ranged from 21 to 78 years with a mean of 52.1. Almost 54% were illiterate. Moreover, 48.5% of the respondents had membership in at least one of the locally based community organizations and only 6.4% in two institutions. All of the respondents had small scale farming lands (cultivating 3.6 hectare irrigated and 3.2 hectare rain fed arable lands as well as0.48 hectare permanent crops/ orchards on average).Land farming and livestock keeping were recognized to be the main job of 84% and the second job of 16% of the respondents. Overall, only 17.2% had a second job. In addition to land farming and livestock holding as the source of their livelihoods, some households had other income generating activities, such as selling dry fruits and home-made products to tourists and bee keeping. Moreover, 75.5% of the households weaved carpet as a complementary non-agricultural activity of their livelihoods. the results showed that this project had been more conservation approaches and they had been very low impacts on farmers livelihood strategies and that diversification. while considering the results, according to this actions by the policymakers will cause to increasing the farmers knowledge and actions and can be expected that being reduced pressure on rangelands due to single livelihood strategies diversification and reduction dependency on rangelands. a step wise regression analysis revealed that 29.5% of the impacts on rural households livelihood strategies diversification actions can be determined by five variables of livelihood strategies diversification actions by households, number of beehives, revival and conservation action by external organize, information obtain from extension films and radio. Also, A step wise regression analysis showed that fore variables of the participation can be determined by six variables of revival and conservation action, information obtain from journals, number of training courses, information obtain from extension television, can be determining 23.8% of all of the impacts on rural households livelihood strategies diversification knowledge. Conclusion Rangeland management policies and programs have paid less attention to the livelihood diversification of livestock holders dependent on rangelands in their projects. It is necessary to take appropriate actions for managing the factors can escalate unsustainable use of natural resources. One of these actions can be referred to the diversification of livelihood strategies to reduce dependency and overpressure on rangeland. There may be impossible to change the full dependency on rangelands to other activities due to the geographical location of the community, the constraints for linking to urban markets and the natural capitals available in the area. However, through diversification, it is possible to utilize alternative livelihood strategies as supplementary activities to reduce livestock number and overpressure on rangelands, increase employment, improve livelihoods and conserve natural resources. This approach is considered as a method for governing natural resources to use rangelands, arable lands and permanent lands sustainably. This perspective requires the support of external actors. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Rangeland, Management, Livelihood, diversification, farmers | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
کرمی دهکردی، اسماعیل و انصاری، افشین، 1391، تأثیر طرحهای منابع طبیعی بر معیشت پایدار خانوارهای روستایی در شهرستان زنجان، مجلة علمی و پژوهشی فناوری‌های نوین کشاورزی، سال پنجم، شمارة 2، صص. 136-107. کریمی، ک. و کرمی دهکردی، ا.، 1391، تحلیل چالش‌های درونی و بیرونی خانوارهای روستایی در بهره برداری پایدار از منابع طبیعی و نقش ترویج در آن: مطالعة موردی در روستای قوزلو در شهرستان ماهنشان، 29 - 28 شهریور، کنگرة علوم ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، پردیس کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تهران. میردامادی، س.م.، علیزاده فرد، م.، و علیمرادیان، پ.، 1389، بررسیرابطة بینمشارکتمردموپیامدهایاجتماعی- اقتصادی درطرححبله‌رود (مطالعة موردی: استان تهران)، مجلة تحقیقات اقتصاد و توسعة کشاورزی ایران، سال دوم، شمارة 4، صص. 564-557. نجفی، بهاء‌الدین، شیروانیان، عبدالرسول، حق‌شناس، تیمور، 1387، عوامل مؤثر بر عدم‌تعادل دام و مرتع در استان فارس: مطالعة موردی مراتع کوه نمک شهرستان داراب، علوم و فنون کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، سال نوزدهم، شمارة 45، صص. 683-673. Alinovi, L., D’Errico, M., Mane, E., & Romano, D., 2010,Livelihoods Strategies and Household Resilience to Food Insecurity: An empirical analysis to kenya, Paper Presented at the Promoting Resilience through Social Protection in Sub-Saharan Africa, Dakar, Senegal. Anderson, C.L., Locker, L. & Nugent, R., 2002, Microcredit, Social Capital, and Common Pool Resources, World Development,Vol. 30, No. 1, PP. 95-105. Babulo, B., Muys, B., Nega, F., Tollens, E., Nyssen, J., Deckers, J. & Mathijs, E., 2008, Household Livelihood Strategies and Forest Dependence in the Highlands of Tigray, Northern Ethiopia, Agricultural Systems, Vol. 98, No. 2, PP. 147-155. Ballet, J., Sirven, N. & Requiers-Desjardins, M., 2007, Social Capital and Natural Resource Management: A critical perspective, Environment Development,Vol. 16, No. 2007, PP. 355. Barretta, C.B., Reardon, T. & Webb, P., 2001, Nonfarm Income Diversification and Household Livelihood Strategies in Rural Africa: Concepts, dynamics, and policy implications, Food Policy, Vol. 26, No. 2001, PP. 315-331. Bebbington, A., 1999, Capitals and Capabilities: A framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty, World Development, Vol. 27, No. 12, PP. 2021-2044. Bojö, J., Bromhead, M.A., Bouzaher, A., Castro, G., Falconer, J., Hamilton, K., Segnestam, L., 2000, Natural Resources Management, Washington, DC: World Bank. Brown, P.R., Nelson, R., Jacobs, B., Kokic, P., Tracey, J., Ahmed, M., & DeVoil, P., 2010, Enabling Natural Resource Managers to Self-assess their Adaptive Capacity, Agricultural Systems,Vol. 103, No. 8, PP.562-568. Carney, D. 1998, Implementing the Sustainable Rural Livelihoods Approach, in: D. Carney (ed.) sustainable rural livelihoods: What contributions can we make? London: Department for International Development, PP. 3-23. Carney, D., 2002, Sustainable Livelihoods Approaches: Progress and possibilities for change, Department for International Development, London. Chazdon, R.L., Harvey, C.A., Komar, O., Griffith, D.M., Ferguson, B.G., Martnez-Ramos, M., Morales, H., Nigh, R., Soto-Pinto, L., van Breugel, M., Philpott, S.M. 2009, Beyond Reserves: a research agenda for conserving biodiversity in humanmodified tropical landscapes, Biotropica Vol. 41, PP. 142–153. DFID, 2000, Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets: Department for International Development. Ellis, F. & Mdoe, N., 2003, Livelihoods and Rural Poverty Reduction in Tanzania, World Development, Vol. 31, No. 8, PP. 1367-1384. Erenstein, O. & Thorpe, W., 2011, Livelihoods and Agro-ecological Gradients: A meso-level analysis in the indo-gangetic plains, india, Agricultural Systems, Vol. 104, No. 2011, PP. 42–53. FAO., 2013a, What are Grasslands and Rangelands? from www.fao.org/docrep/008/y8344e/y8344e05.htm. FAO., 2013b, Management of Grasslands, Rangelands and Forage Crops, from http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/core-themes/theme/spi/scpi-home/managing-ecosystems/management-of-grasslands-and-rangelands/en/. FAO., 2013c, Agp - grasslands, Rangelands and Forage Crops, from http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/core-themes/theme/spi/grasslands-rangelands-and-forage-crops/en. Gaillard, J., Maceda, E.A., Stasiak, E., Le Berre, I. & Espaldon, M.V., 2009, Sustainable Livelihood and People’s Vulnerability in the Face of Coastal Hazards, Jornal of Coastal Conservation, Vol. 13, No. 2-3, PP. 119-129. Government of South Australia, 2012, Our Place, our Future, State Natural Resources Management Plan South Australia 2012 – 2017, Adelaide: Government of South Australia. Grau, H.R., Aide, M., 2008, Globalization and land-use transitions in Latin America. Ecology and Society 13 (online) URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art16/. Hagmann, J., Chuma, E., Murwira, K., Connolly, M., & Ficarelli, P., 2002, Success Factors in Integrated Natural Resource Management R&D: Lessons from practice, Conservation Ecology, Vol. 5, No. 2, PP. 29-41. Haji Mirrahimi, S.D. & Nabaei, S.M., 2007, A Survey on Challenges and Problems of Natural Resources Development Methods in the Central Province, New Findings in Agriculture, Vol. 1, No. 2, PP. 161-176. Haji-Rahimi, M. & Ghaderzadeh, H., 2008, The Challeng of Sustainable Management in Renewable Natural Resource in Iran: A swot strengths, American-Eurasian J. Agric. & Environ. Sci, Vol. 3, No. 2, PP. 194-199. Hill, J. & Mustafa, S., 2011, Natural Resources Management and Food Security in the Context of Sustainable Development, Sains Malaysiana, Vol. 40, No. 12, PP. 1331-1340. Karamidehkordi, E., 2012, Sustainable Natural Resource Management, a Global Challenge of This Century, In A. Kaswamila (Ed.), Sustainable Natural Resources Management, Croatia: InTech, PP. 105-114. Kepe, T., 2008, Beyond the Numbers: Understanding the value of vegetation to rural livelihoods in africa, Geoforum, Vol. 39, PP. 958–968. Kusters, K., Achdiawan, R., Belcher, B. Ruiz Pérez, M., 2006, Balancing Development and Conservation? An assessment of livelihood and environmental outcomes of nontimber forest product trade in asia, africa, and latin america, Ecology and Society, Vol. 11, No. 2, PP. 20-29. Machado Padilha, A.C. & Hoff, D.N., 2011, Livelihood Diversification Strategy in Rural Properties: Water resources exploration in rural tourism activity, Economics and Management Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 3, PP. 49-59. McCusker, B. & Carr, E.R. 2006, The Co-production of Livelihoods and Land use Change: Case studies from south africa and ghana, Geoforum, Vol. 37, PP. 790-804. McLennan, B. & Garvin, T., 2012, Intra-regional Variation in Land use and Livelihood Change during a Forest Transition in Costa Rica’s Dry North West, Land Use Policy, Vol. 29, PP. 119-130. Mertz, O., Wadley, R.L. & Christensen, A.E., 2005, Local Land use Strategies in a Globalizing World: Subsistence farming, cash crops, Agricultural Systems, Vol. 85, PP. 209-215. Ming-can, L., Jia-li, Q., Si-hui, L. & Xing-long, J., 2000, Strategies on Natural Forest Protection of Collective Forest Area in Minority Nationality Community in China, Journal of Forestry Research, Vol. 11, No. 2, PP. 132-134. Pinstrup-Andersen, P. & Pandya-Lorch, R., 1998, Food Security and Sustainable use of Natural Resources: A 2020 vision, Ecological Economics, Vol. 26, No. 1, PP. 1-10. Rammel, C., Staglb, S. & Wilfing, H., 2007, Managing Complex Adaptive Systems — a co-evolutionary perspective on natural resource management, Ecological Economics, Vol. 63, PP. 9-21. Rigg, J., 2006, Land, Farming, Livelihoods, and Poverty: Rethinking the links in the rural south, World Development, Vol. 34, No. 1, PP. 180-202. Rodrigues, G.S., Rodrigues, I.A., Buschinelli, C.C.d.A. & Barros, I.d., 2010, Integrated Farm Sustainability Assessment for the Environmental Rural Activities, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Vol. 30, PP. 229–239. Scoones, I., 2009, Livelihoods Perspectives and Rural Development, Peasant Studies, Vol. 36, No. 1, PP. 71-96. Turton, C., 2000, Sustainable Livelihoods and Project Design in India, London, UK: Overseas Development Institute. United Nations Environment Programme, 2003, State of the Environment and Policy Retrospective: 1972-2002, Land, Nairobi: UNEP, PP. 62-89. Van Den Berg, M., 2010, Household Income Strategies and Natural Disasters: Dynamic livelihoods in rural nicaragua, Ecological Economics, Vol. 59, No. 3, PP. 592-602. Woodhouse, P., Howlett, D. & Rigby, D., 2000, A Framework for Research on Sustainability Indicators for Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods Sustainability Indicators for Natural Resource Management & Policy.
References (in Persian) Karimi, K., and Karamidehkordi, E. 2014, Family Farmers' Knowledge Regarding the Importance of Rangeland Conservation and the Impact of Rangeland Management Projects: A Case Study in the Mahneshan Township. The First International Conference of the APIRAS & the Fifth Congress of Extension and Education in Agriculture and Natural Resources Management: “Facilitating Information and Innovations for Empowering Family Farmers", 2-4 Sptember 2014, Zanjan university, Zanjan, Iran. Karamidehkordi, E. and Ansari, A., 2012, Impact of Natural Resources Projects on Sustainable Rural Households' Livelihoods in the Zanjan Township, Modern Technology in Agriculture, Vol. 5, No. 2, PP. 107-136. Khalilian, S., & Shams Aldini, E. 2001, A survey on the situation of constancy of sustainable natural resources (forests and rangelands in the first and second development program. pajouhesh-va-sazandegi fall, Vol. 14, No. 3, PP. 19-21. Najafi B, Shirvanian A., & Haghshenas, T. 2008, Factors Affecting Pasture and Meat Production Imbalance in Fars Province: A Case Study of Koohnamak Pastures in Darab. JWSS - Isfahan University of Technology, Vol. 12, No. 45, PP. 673-683. Pezeshki-Raad, Gh., and KaramiDehkordi, E. 2012, Social Statistics and Data Analysis of Research on Agricultural Extension, development and Education. Tarbiat Modares University Press, Tehran. Seyed Mehdi Mirdamadi; Mona Alizadefard; Parnaz Alimoradian. 2011, A Survey of the Socio-Economic Impacts of Public Participation in Hableh Roud Project (Case Study: Tehran Province).Iranion Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research, vol. 2, No. 4, PP. 557-564.
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,171 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,211 |
||