بررسی تاثیر اصلاحات ارضی 1341تا1357ش/1962تا1978م بر جمعیت شهری؛ نمونه‌‌پژوهی ایلام

از سال 1341تا1357ش با برنامه‌های اقتصادی و اجتماعی متنوعی، سیاست‌های اصلاحی دولت در روستاها به طور مستمر افزایش یافت. اجرای اصلاحات ارضی در سال 1341ش، ازجمله این برنامه‌ها بود که تغییراتی در ساختار مالکیت اراضی و به تبع آن، دگرگونی‌هایی در ساخت طبقات اجتماعی‌اقتصادی روستایی ایجاد کرد. مقاﻟﮥ حاضر با رویکرد توصیفی‌تحلیلی درصدد پاسخ به این پرسش است: تحولات جمعیتیِ پس از اصلاحات ارضی در ایلام، چه پیامدهای اجتماعی و اقتصادی داشت؟ نتایج پژوهش از آن حکایت دارد که هدف اصلاحات ارضی ایجاد تعادل در مالکیت ارضی و بهره‌مندی منطقی روستاییان از مالکیت بود؛ اما نتیجه متفاوت بود و بیشترِ دهقانان به علت کمبود اعتبار و سرمایه و نبود زمین مناسب، استقلال خود را از دست دادند و نفوذ مالکان کاهش نیافت و وضع اقتصادی دهقانان به‌تدریج ضعیف‌تر نیز شد. این وضعیت آرزوهای روستاییان را خواه دربارﮤ اصلاحات ارضی و خواه در زﻣﻴﻨﮥ دیگر سیاست‌های کشاورزی دولت تا حد بسیاری نابود کرد. همین مسئله در استان ایلام نیز رخ داد و مهاجرت روستاییان به شهر و افزایش جمعیت و حاشیه‌نشینی در شهر ایلام را به دنبال داشت. حاشیه‌نشینی در این شهر باعث این مشکلات شد: گسترش آسیب‌های اجتماعی، تخریب زمین‌های کشاورزی، توﺳﻌﮥ فیزیکی شهر در زمین‌های نامناسب و ایجاد محله‌های فقیرنشین.

Investigating the Impact of Land Reforms of 1962-1978 on Urban Population: A Case Study of Ilam

Abstract Government reform policies in rural areas have steadily increased through a variety of economic and social programs from 1962 to 1978. One of them was the implementation of land reforms in 1962 that changed the structure of land ownership and consequently transformed the construction of socioeconomic classes. The present article seeks to answer the following question with a descriptiveanalytical approach: what are the social and economic consequences of demographic changes after land reforms in Ilam? The results showed that while the goal of land reform was to balance ownership and the rational use of lands by the villagers, the outcome was different and most peasants lost their independence due to the lack of credit, capital, and suitable land, and not only the influence of the owners didn’t diminish, but their economic conditions also gradually weakened. This situation largely destroyed the aspirations of villagers regarding land forms and other agricultural policies of the government. This happened in Ilam province and caused the migration of villagers to the city, increasing the population and suburbanization in Ilam city. Suburbanization in this city caused the spread of social harm, the destruction of agricultural lands, the physical development of the city in unsuitable lands, and the creation of slums.   Introduction One of the actions of the Iranian government in the 1960s was the approval of six bills including land reforms to address the lower classes of the society. The land reform that was passed to divide the land among the farmers and for the welfare of the farmers was practically the transfer of land ownership to the landless peasants and farmers, which led to changes in the relations of production and the structure of the society through the promotion of national power. These reforms were generally welcomed by the peasants and farmers, but in practice, and after the implementation, their shortcomings and problems became apparent that had a profound effect on the political, social, and economic structure of the society. Despite the abolition of the landlordpeasant system and the abolition of traditional management of farmers’ agriculture production, these reforms led to a decline in agricultural production, migration, and the growth of suburbanization in cities. The increasing population of cities was actually due to the migration of villagers and the liberated manpower of the agriculture sector in the village and their turning to the cities. Large landowners and capitalists also diverted their capitals to the cities and built financial, service, and industrial institutions due to the transfer of land to the peasants. In the process of agricultural modernization in the second Pahlavi period, the community of tribes and nomads who had the traditional method of production was integrated with the rural community in order to develop modern agriculture. This changed agriculture and the land ownership system. Land reforms caused the transformations in the social and economic situations of Ilam city including more nomadic settlement in the villages, the growth of rural migration to the city of Ilam, and the expansion of suburbanization in the city. Land reforms were approved on January 10, 1961, and their annexes were added until the end of these reforms in 1972. Land reforms have gone through three stages. The beginning of the first stage was in 1961, which lasted one year. The second stage began with the approval of 7 February 1962 and was implemented with the approval of 22 February 1964. Finally, the third stage began in 1968 and officially ended in 1972. These land reforms also took place in Ilam.   Material Methods The present study, based on library information and data, documents, and interviews, examined the impact of land reforms of 19621978 on the Ilam population. The main question of the research was: what were the effects of land reforms on the population of Ilam city? In answer to the question, this hypothesis was considered: land reforms caused the migration of villagers and increased the population of Ilam city.   Discussion of Results Conclusions Land reforms in Iran were proposed by the government in 1963 and were approved by two parliaments and were implemented in three stages. The first stage began in 1963, according to which anyone who owned more than one land had to sell the surplus to the government. Arsanjani presented at this stage, and 700,000 people became landowners. The second stage began in 1965. At this stage, the land was leased to the farmers who cultivated it. This guaranteed the ownership right of landowners. Finally, the government decided to start the third stage in the 1970s, according to which the lands that were leased for 30 years were sold to the tenants. The aim of land reforms was to carry out a series of complementary and continuous measures to bring about fundamental changes in agriculture including the ownership of arable lands, the system of exploitation and the method of production, and the increase of income and the welfare of farmers. Land reform also sought to divide the lands and eliminate the influence of major landowners. With the implementation of the land reform law, Ilam province was included in these reforms, and parts of the government properties in Mehran, Dehloran, and Darrehshahr counties, as well as parts of the properties in Ilam, Ivan, Sirvan, and Chardavol counties were purchased by the government. In the central part of Ilam, 32 plots of land were subject to land reform regulations. Thirtyone plots of land were purchased during the implementation of the third stage of the land reform law, and one plot was purchased by the government (cooperative and Rural Affairs organization), which was owned by the Agriculture Bank. In most of Iran’s major cities, land reforms have led to the migration of a large number of poor and small peasants to the cities, especially large cities, and the expansion of suburbanization in these cities. Land reforms in Ilam province and consequently in Ilam city caused the influx of immigrants in this period and the rapid growth of the city and the expansion of suburbanization to the city. This issue eliminated the opportunity to plan for the future expansion of the city and the establishment of the necessary elements and applications in a balanced way in the city and neighborhoods. Land reforms in Iran have created many inequalities in various economic, political, and social fields. While the purpose of land reforms was to create an independent and selfreliant class of peasants, but the result was inverse, and most peasants lost their independence due to the lack of credit, capital, and adequate land, and landowners’ influence didn’t decrease, as expected. At the same time, political power was transferred to the government. The government also strengthened the remnants of wealthy landowners and peasants. All these factors caused more poverty and inequality in the villages, the gap between the poor and the rich increased day by day, and the level of development in the villages not only didn’t increase but also decreased.