تحلیل جایگاه مدیریت روستایی مبتنی بر رویکرد حکمروایی خوب در توسعه پایدار روستایی (مطالعه موردی: مقایسه بخش مرکزی کوهدشت و بخش لواسانات شمیرانات)

هدف: رویکرد حکمروایی خوب روستایی با تاکید بر سه رکن اصلی دولت، بخش خصوصی و جامعه مدنی به حضور فعّال و اثرگذار این ارکان در سایه مشارکت، شفافیّت، پاسخ گویی، قانون‌مندی، عدالت، اجماع گرایی، مسوولیت پذیری،کارآیی و توسعه انسانی تاکید دارد. هدف از این پژوهش، بررسی جایگاه مدیریت روستایی مبتنی بر رویکرد حکمروایی خوب در توسعه پایدار روستایی «مقایسه بخش مرکزی کوهدشت و بخش لواسانات شمیرانات» است. روش: پژوهش از نوع توصیفی تحلیلی بوده و روش پژوهش از نظر هدف کاربردی و از نظر نحوه گردآوری داده ها، پیمایشی است. جامعه آماری؛ شامل خانوارهای روستایی دو منطقه مورد مطالعه با 27 روستای نمونه و 280 خانوار است. ابزار گردآوری داده ها از نوع پرسش نامه بوده که به صورت تصادفی در روستاهای نمونه تکمیل شد. به منظور تحلیل داده ها و آزمون فرضیه ها نیز از مدل ویکور و آزمون های آنوا توکی و رگرسیون چند متغیّره استفاده شده است.یافته‌ها: مطابق یافته های مدل ویکور، مدیریت مبتنی بر رویکرد حکمروایی خوب و سطح پایداری سکونت گاه ها در دو منطقه مورد مطالعه از وضعیّت بسیار متفاوتی برخوردار است؛ به طوری که در هر دو منطقه، روستاهایی که از وضعیت حکمروایی خوبی برخوردارند، پایداری بهتری نیز دارند. هم‌چنین، تحلیل رگرسیون چند متغیّره، نشان دهنده تاثیر و ارتباط معنی دار بین مولفه های حکمروایی خوب و توسعه پایدار روستایی است.محدودیّت ها: محدودیّت های این پژوهش شامل وسیع‌بودن حجم نمونه و جامعه مورد مطالعه و تطابق مدل نظری پژوهش با مدل تجربی آن بود. راه‌کارهای عملی: درنظرگرفتن رویکرد حکمروایی خوب در نظام مدیریت روستایی می تواند موجب سرعت بخشی روند توسعه پایدار روستایی شده و از ناپایداری سکونت گاه ها جلوگیری کند. اصالت و ارزش: این مقاله ضمن مقایسه تطبیقی دو منطقه با نظام مدیریت، سطح حکمروایی و پایداری متفاوت، می تواند کاستی‌های موجود در ساختار مدیریت یک‌پارچه کنونی روستاهای کشور را واضح تر نشان دهد.

Good Governance Based Rural Management and its Role in Sustainable Rural Development (Case Study: A Comparison between Central District of Kuhdasht and Lavasanat District of Shemiranat)

Extended abstract1. INTRODUCTIONGood governance, as an approach in rural management, is the engagement of government, private sector and civil society, based on active and effective participation, transparency, accountability, rule of law, justice, Consensusoriented Responsiveness, efficiency, and effectiveness as well as human development. This paper aims to provide an analysis of the present condition of ‘good governance based rural management’ and its role in the sustainable rural development in two regions (central district of Kuhdasht, and Lavasanat Shemiranat). The paper also studies the relationship between good governance indicators and sustainable rural development.Rural good governance as an approach is one of the newest and most famous approaches in sustainable management of rural sustainable development. This approach is considerably powerful in explaining the realities. It is also useful in policy making in the case of sustainable rural development. It is because the rural good governance pays a special attention to institutionalizing, enabling, and empowering local people 's participatory development. The main debate in this part of the article is the relationship between the good governance and sustainable rural development and their effects on each other. Good governance is defined as transparent and responsible management with a special focus on fair and sustainable development in social and economic aspects. Then, rural good governance is a process, in which, all actors of rural management are engaging.2. METHODOLOGYIn this paper we used a descriptive–analytical approach. Survey and questionnaires were used for gathering data. The sample includes 280 households in 27 villages in the above mentioned regions. In order to achieve the purpose, we used different numerical models, such as VIKOR, multivariate regression, and correlation.3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKThe process aimed development of place and prosperity of the local people. In other words, rural good governance is implementing policies and decisions, two eleven by local people, in order to their living condition, so rural sustainable development is the process of maiming rural areas in away.While the literature on sustainable development covers many of the issues raised in the early literature on economic growth models, it seems fair to say that whatever the merits of the original formulation in the Brundtland Report of 1987, one decade later there has been great advances in both the theoretical aspects of desirable development and the ways in which that development might be indicated. Hence, there has been an ongoing debate regarding the meaning of constant capital, the relative merits of weak and strong sustainable development as a framework for analyzing these issues, the increasing attention given to the concept of critical natural assets, and more recently the role of social capital formation and maintenance in the development process.Thus, good governance expresses approval for a type of government, usually a democratic one, and its related political values. Equating governance with government focuses on technical problems of administrative and legal capacity and the improvement of public sector management, the legal framework for sustainable development, accountability through better auditing, decentralization, the policing of corruption, civil service reform, and improved information on policy issues for both decisionmakers and the public. Finally, good governance has been defined as a framework of private nongovernmental bodies that have a role to play in the formulation and implementation of public policy and the delivery of public services.4. DISCUSSIONThe results show that rural areas with higher good governance level are more sustainable. Rural areas in Lavasanat district owe good governance and sustainable position to institutional arrangement. Hence, the weakness of this institutional arrangement is an indicator for the good governance level in Kuhdasht central district.Based on the VIKOR model, which provides us with a QI result ranging from 0 to 1, rural areas with QI=0 are the most sustainable areas with a high level of governance and rural areas with QI=1 are the worst areas based on the sustainability and good governance. The result of this study showed that all rural areas in Lavasanat have a QI between 00.5. We can claim that these rural areas have a reasonable sustainability and a good level of governance. On the other side, in Kuhdasht, we can classify rural areas in two different classes; seven rural areas with a QI between 0.50.8 and thirteen rural areas with a QI between 0.81. The first group has a medium level of sustainability and governance while the second group is neither sustainable nor has good governance. The other model used in this article was the regression analysis. The result of this model showed that the model is acceptable and can forecast both governance level and sustainability.5. CONCLUSIONThe result shows that good governance in different rural areas can be recognized into two different levels. At the same time, there is a close tie between good governance and sustainable rural development as well as their indicators. Hence, as it has been shown in the article, rural areas with higher governance position have a better situation in the sustainable rural development.