تحلیل تاب آوری اقتصادی بهره برداران کشاورزی در برابر اثرات خشکسالی (مطالعه موردی: سکونتگاه های روستایی شهرستان فسا)

فصلنامه علمی برنامه ریزی منطقه ای

مقاله 7، دوره 10، شماره 39 - شماره پیاپی 38، آبان 1399، صفحه 61-78   

نوع مقاله: مقاله های برگرفته از پایان نامه

نویسندگان

مرضیه جعفری^{* 1}؛ محمد رضا رضوانی²؛ حسنعلی فرجی سبکبار³؛ مجتبی قدیری معصوم²؛ علیرضا دربان آستانه⁴

¹دانشجوی دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی روستایی، دانشکده جغرافیا دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

²استاد گروه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی روستایی، دانشکده جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

³دانشیارگروه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی روستایی، دانشکده جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

⁴استادیار گروه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی روستایی، دانشکده جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

تاریخ دریافت: 01 اردیبهشت 1398،  تاریخ بازنگری: 11 خرداد 1398،  تاریخ پذیرش: 26 مهر 1398 

چکیده

    از شروع تمدن انسانی، خشکسالی، تأثیراتی شدید و گاهی فاجعه­آمیز بر فعالیـت­هـای حیـاتی انسـان در سراسر جهان داشته است. خشکسالی به خودی خود یک بلا (فاجعه) محسـوب نمـی­شـود؛ بلکـه تـأثیر آن بـر مردم و محیط­زیست است که فاجعه­آمیز بودن یا نبودن آن را مشخص می­کند. خشکسالی یکی از مخاطرات طبیعی است که پیامدهای مستقیم و غیرمستقیم بر کره زمین و به ویژه معیشت بهره­برداران کشاورزی دارد. در این راستا تاب­آوری اقتصادی روستایی از مفاهیمی است که در چند دهه اخیر مورد توجه سیاست­گذاران توسعه­ روستایی قرارگرفته ­است. هدف این مقاله، تحلیل تاب­آوری اقتصادی کشاورزان بهره­بردار در برابر اثرات خشکسالی است. با توجه به موضوع مورد مطالعه و هدف تحقیق، فرضیه پژوهش با کاربست ذیل تبیین شده است: بنظر می­رسد بین تاب­آوری اقتصادی بهره­برداران کشاورزی جوامع روستایی و اثرات خشکسالی ارتباط وجود دارد. روش­شناسی پژوهش حاضر توصیفی- تحلیلی، بر مبنای شیوه ­پیمایشی است که در این مسیر از ابزار پرسشنامه و روش نمونه­گیری طبقه­­ای در دسترس استفاده شده است. تکنیک مورد استفاده در این پژوهش، تحلیل عاملی است. سطح تحلیل در این پژوهش 75روستای منتخب واقع در چهار بخش مرکزی؛ ششده و قره­بلاغ، شیبکوه و نوبندگان شهرستان فسا می­باشد. در این تحقیق از18شاخص تاب­آوری اقتصادی استفاده شده است. جامعه آماری نواحی روستایی شهرستان فسا 63409نفر که معادل 18855خانوار روستایی می­باشد. حجم نمونه382خانوار که از طریق فرمول کوکران برآورد شده است. نتایج کلی تحقیق نشان می­دهد با توجه به شاخص­های مورد تحلیل قرار­گرفته، عامل «تنوع مهارت در نیروی کار و اشتغال» با مقدار ویژه899/3، بیشترین تأثیر را بین چهار عامل داشته، سپس عامل«عملکرد خرده­فروش­ها و کارایی زمین و دارایی»، «توسعه سطوح اشتغال» و «انعطاف­پذیری و تسهیلات مالی» قرار دارند. با توجه به تحلیل بدست آمده و آسیب­پذیری کشاورزان در برابر اثرات خشکسالی، باید نسبت به«متنوع کردن مهارت و اشتغال بهره­برداران کشاورزی»، «افزایش کارایی زمین»، «اعطای وام و تسهیلات مالی» مبادرت کرد. جهت نمایش وضعیت تحلیل فضایی سکونتگاه­های روستایی از نظر شاخص­های تاب­آوری اقتصادی در برابر­ خشکسالی، از تکنیک تحلیل عاملی و رتبه­بندی سکونتگاه­های روستایی شهرستان فسا توسط تکنیک SWARA و ARAS انجام شد. به ترتیب سکونتگاه­های روستایی بخش­های نوبندگان، ششده و قره­بلاغ، مرکزی و شیبکوه از نظر تاب­آوری اقتصادی در برابر اثرات خشکسالی رتبه­بندی شدند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

تاب آوری اقتصادی؛ خشکسالی؛ بهره برداران کشاورزی؛ سکونتگاه های روستایی؛ شهرستان فسا

عنوان مقاله [English]

Analysis of Economic Resilience of Farmers to Drought Impacts (Case Study: Rural Settlements of Fasa County)

نویسندگان [English]

marzieh jafari¹؛ Mohmmadreza Rezvani²؛ Hassanali Faraji Sabokbar³؛ Mojtaba Ghaderi Masoom²؛ Ali Darban Astaneh⁴

¹PhD in Geography and Environmental Quality Planning in Rural Areas, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

²Prof. of geography and rural planning, faculty of geography, university of Tehran

³Associate prof. of geography and rural planning, faculty of geography, university of Tehran

⁴Assistant prof. of geography and rural planning, university of Tehran

چکیده [English]

Since the beginning of the human civilization, drought has had severe and sometimes catastrophic effects on human life activities throughout the world. Drought by itself is not a catastrophe, but its impact on the people and on the environment, determines whether it is a disaster or not. Drought is a natural hazard, having direct and indirect consequences on our planet, particularly on the livelihoods of agricultural utilization. In this regard, in recent decades, policy makers of rural development, have noticed "rural economic resilience" as an important concept. Especially, the economic resilience of agricultural utilization is closely related to natural phenomena, including drought. This study analyses farmer’s economic resilience against droughts. This is a descriptive – analytic research survey. We use questionnaire to collect data and stratified sampling method. Analysis level is 75 villages chosen from Nowbandeghan, Sheshdeh and Gharabolagh, central part & Shibkouh. We use 18 economic resilience criteria. Our population consists of 63409 residents comprising 18855 families. The sample contains 382 families calculated using Kukran model. Findings indicate that diversity in labor with eigenvalue of 3.899 has the most impact out of the four factors. Ranking models used are SWARA & ARAS. Nowbandeghan, Shashdeh and Gharabolagh Central part & Shibkouh are respectably the most economically resilience parts.
Extended Abstract
Introduction:
      Since the beginning of human civilization, drought has had profound and sometimes catastrophic effects on human vital activities worldwide. Drought itself is not a disaster; it is its impact on people and the environment that determines whether or not it is catastrophic. Drought is one of the natural hazards that has direct and indirect consequences on the planet, and in particular on the livelihoods of farmers. In this regard, rural economic resilience is one of the concepts that has been of interest to rural development policymakers in recent decades; especially the economic resilience of agricultural holders is closely linked to natural phenomena such as drought. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the economic resilience of farmers to the effects of drought. With respect to the subject under study and the purpose of the study, the research hypothesis is explained by the following application: It seems that there is a relationship between the economic resilience of rural communities and the effects of drought.
Methodology:
      The methodology of the present study is descriptive-analytical based on the survey method used in this research. The statistical population of the rural areas of Fasa city is63409 people and the sample size is calculated by Cochran formula of 382 households. The level of analysis in this study is 75 selected villages, located in four central districts: Sixth and Gharablagh, Shibkoh, Fasa city, and Household Analysis Unit. In this study, the available stratified sampling method was used. The study used 18 indicators of economic resilience. Validity - Reliability of the questionnaire was confirmed by experts and rural experts with Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.850. After completing the questionnaires and collecting samples, the data were entered into SPSS software package and the technique used in this research is "cluster analysis". They were then ranked by ArcGIS, Excel, ARAS, SWARA and factor analysis techniques.
Findings:
    At first, the research variables were obtained through a questionnaire. Before performing the factor analysis, the suitability of the data set for analysis was assessed by BTS and KMO tests. The value of KMO obtained is 0.804 which indicates that the selected indices are satisfactory for using factor analysis technique. Bartlett's value was 1562.624 which was significant at 99% confidence level. The next step in the factor analysis is to determine the values ​​as follows: - Eigenvalues: (a) eigenvalues ​​of non-rotating extractive agents and b) values ​​of rotational extraction agents. As can be seen, the first four factors have values ​​greater than 1 and account for a total of 53.222% of the variance of the set of 18 indicators, which is an acceptable percentage. Therefore, although all of these factors have eigenvalues ​​larger than the unit, for example the importance and role of the first factor is more than several times the fourth factor. The most important factor in this analysis is Factor 1, which alone accounts for 22.933% of the variance. The second, third and fourth factors accounted for 15.589, 7.945 and 6.756% of the variance, respectively. Because the eigenvalues ​​of the following indices are less than 1, they were not significant and could not be used in subsequent analyzes. The results of the T-test for measuring resilience of users show that there is a significant difference (3.5 = sig) between the baseline (3) and the calculated value of 3.51. Since the calculated value is higher than the standard limit, we conclude that the impact of resilience factors on resilience of agricultural use against the effects of drought is evaluated.
Conclusion:
     Today, drought is one of the natural disasters that due to its very complex and gradual crawling and overcoming it requires extensive facilities and has greatly affected the livelihoods of the farmers in the area involved. The present study aimed to analyze the economic resilience of agricultural holders against the effects of drought investigated by factor analysis. So the first factor: The specific amount of this factor is 3.899 which alone accounts for 22.933% of the variance of the population and has the most influence among the four factors. This factor includes variables such as "government support for agricultural jobs, diversification of economic activities and employment in the countryside, creation of conversion and supplementary industries in agriculture, start-up of new businesses, diversification of job skills, and increased post-employment." Rural tourism boom "has a positive and high correlation. This can be attributed to" diversity of skills in the workforce and employment ". Factor 2: The Eigenvalue of the second factor is 2.650 which alone accounts for 15.589% of the variance in society. Variables loaded on this factor are: "Increase in service providers, brokers, land use change, deprivation of agricultural land and stabilization in the consumer market", so this factor can be a factor. Named "Retail Performance and Land and Property Performance". Factor 3: The specific amount of this factor is 1.351 which accounts for 7.945% of the variance. Variables of this factor are "the creation of non-agricultural activities among the villagers, the increase in the tendency for economic activities of the handicrafts and the increase of the skills of the workers in other non-agricultural sectors", "the development of employment levels". Factor Four: The Eigenvalue of the second factor is 1.149 which alone accounts for 6.756% of the variance in society. Variables loaded on this factor are: "The reduction of liquidity between agricultural holders and financial credit in drought conditions does not require borrowing from others; hence this factor can be a factor of" flexibility ". Acceptance and Financial Facilities ».
        The final weight of the model dimensions was obtained by following the steps of the Swara method. Factors affecting economic resilience of agricultural farmers to the effects of drought in rural areas of Fasa city, diversity and skills factor with a final weight of 0.339, retail and land efficiency with a weight of 0.269 In the second place, the factor of development of employment levels with the weight of 0.221 was in the third place and finally the flexibility and financial facilities with the final weight of 0.177 were in the fourth place. In order to spatially analyze the rural areas of Fasa city and classify it using ARAS Multi-criteria Decision Making Technique. Given that the number of villages surveyed was 75, showing the spatial analysis of the whole village on the map makes it so crowded that the researchers decided to limit the spatial representation to only four parts of the city.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

Economic Resilience, Drought, Agricultural Operators, Rural settlements, Fasa County

مراجع

1. Barghi, Hamid, Matin Architect of Imamieh, (2009), "Investigation of the Impacts of Drought on the Structure of Rural Economy, Case Study: Gulab District of Kashan", Journal of Rural Research and Planning, Vol. 5, No. 5, Mashhad, pp. 137-148..
2. Beheshtifar, Masood, (2014), "Monitoring and Forecasting of Drought in Kerman Province Using DI Index and Its Zoning by Geostatistical Methods", Regional Planning Quarterly, Fourth Year, No. 16, Marvdasht, pp. 149-158.
3. Farshadfar, Ezzatollah, (2005), Multivariate Statistical Principles and Methods, Tagh Bostan Publications, First Edition, Kermanshah.
4. Ghasemiinejad, Saeedeh, Saeed Soltani, and Alireza Safiani (2014), "Drought Risk Assessment in Isfahan Province", Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, Soil and Water Sciences, Eighteenth Year, Sixty-Eighth, Isfahan, 213-225.
5. Ghiasvand, Abolfazl, Fatemeh Abdolshah (2015), "Indicators of Economic Resilience", Journal of Trends in Economic Research, Twenty-second Year, No. 71, Tehran, pp.79-106.
6. Jaume Freire-González. , Christopher Decker. Jim W. Hall, (2017), the Economic Impacts of Droughts: A Framework for Analysis, Ecological Economics, 132, pp: 196–204.
7. John Östha. Aura Reggianib. Giacomo Galiazzo, (2015), spatial economic resilience and accessibility: A joint perspective, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 49, pp: 148–159.
8. Karin de Bruijna, Joost Buurmanb, Marjolein Mensa, Ruben Dahma, Frans Klijn,(2017), Resilience in practice: Five principles to enable societies to cope with extreme weather events, Environmental Science & Policy ,70, pp:21–30.
9. Lajevardi, Hassan, Esmaeil Abounouri, Zohreh Besharati Rad (2016), "Estimating the Index of Economic Resilience in Iran and Presenting Improvement Strategies", First International Conference on Urban Economics (Resistance Economics Approach, Action and Practice), Tehran, Pp. 333-341.
10. Maleki, Saeed, Elias Modet (2016), "Drought Crisis Zoning with Topsis, Siap, Pnpi, Case Study: Yazd Province", Journal of Crisis Prevention and Management Knowledge, Volume 6, Issue 1, Tehran, p. P59-70.
11. Mohaghegh, Mostafa, Abbas Ostad Taghizadeh, Keyvan Karimloo (2016),  Document Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2030-2015), Publisher of Tehran Crisis Prevention and Management Organization, first edition, Tehran.
12. Parmeshwar Udmale, Yutaka Ichikawa , Sujata Manandhar , Hiroshi Ishidaira , Anthony S. Kiem,(2014), Farmers' perception of drought impacts, local adaptation and administrative mitigation measures in Maharashtra State, India, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 10, pp: 250–269.
13. Pirmoradian, Nader, Mohammad Ali Shahrokhnia, Fardin Bostani, Seyed Amir Shamsnia, (2008), "Evaluation of Drought Return Period Using Standardized Precipitation Index", Journal of Plant Ecology (Modern Agricultural Knowledge), Volume 4 , No. 13, Middle, pp. 7-21.
14. Pourtahari, Mehdi, Abdolreza Rokneddin Eftekhari, Nasrin Kazemi, (2013),  "The Role of Drought Risk Management Approach in Reducing Socio-Economic Vulnerability of Rural Farmers from the Perspective of Officials and Experts Case Study: Soldoz Village, West Azerbaijan," Rural Research, Fourth Year, No. 1, Tehran, pp. 1-22.
15. Shakoor, Ali, Hojjatollah Sharafi, Khatereh Nakhaei, Mahtab Jafari, (2016), "Drought Ranking of Villages with Environmental Perception Approach for Rural Residents, Case Study: Jiroft Townships", Regional Planning Journal, Year 6, No. 23, Marvdasht, pp. 180-190.
16. Sharafi, Lida , Zarafshani, Kiomars (2011), "Measuring Vulnerability of Drought Risk Management Point in Sarpole Zahab, Islamabad, Javanrood", Regional Planning Journal, Volume 1, Number 1, Marvdasht, Pages 43-56.
17. Ximing Cai , Majid Shafiee-Jood , Tushar Apurv , Yan Ge , Sylwia Kokoszka, (2017): Key issues in drought preparedness: Reflections on experiences and strategies in the United States and selected countries, Water Security, 2, pp: 32–42.

3. Brian, F. Thomas a. b., James S. Famiglietti, FelixW. Landerer a, David N.Wiese a, Noah P. Molotch a, Donald F. Argus a, (2017), GRACE Groundwater Drought Index: Evaluation of California Central Valley groundwater drought, Remote Sensing of Environment, 198, pp: 384–392.
4. Dimitris Tigkasa, Harris Vangelisa, and and George Tsakirisa, (2016): introducing a modified Reconnaissance Drought Index (RDIe) incorporating effective precipitation, Procedia Engineering, 162, pp: 332 – 339.

6. George Tsakirisa, (2016), Proactive Planning against Droughts, International Conference on Efficient & Sustainable Water Systems Management toward Worth Living Development, 2nd EWaS, Procedia Engineering, 162, pp: 15 – 24.

9. https://www.statisticbrain.com/drought-statistics/2012.
10. Hugo Carra˜o , Gustavo Naumann, Paulo Barbosa, (2016), Mapping global patterns of drought risk: An empirical framework based on sub-national estimates of hazard, exposure and vulnerability, Global Environmental Change ,39 ,pp: 108–124.
11. Hungsoo Kim. Jongyong Park. Jiyoung Yoo. Tae-Wong Kim, (2013), Assessment of drought hazard, vulnerability, and risk: A case study for administrative districts in South Korea, Journal of Hydro-environment Research, pp: 28-35.

15. Keshavarza, Marzieh, Ezatollah Karamia, Frank Vanclayb, (2013), the social experience of drought in rural Iran, Land Use Policy, 30, pp: 120– 129.
16. Keshavarza, Marzieh. Hamideh Maleksaeidib. Ezatollah Karmic, (2017), Livelihood vulnerability to drought: A case of rural Iran, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 21 , pp: 223–230.
17. Khayyatia, Mehdi , Mousa Aazamib, (2016), Drought impact assessment on rural livelihood systems in Iran, Ecological Indicators, 69 , pp: 850–858.
18. Khayyatia, Mehdi, Mousa Aazami , (2016), Drought impact assessment on rural livelihood systems in Iran, Ecological Indicators, 69, pp: 850–858.
19. Kiumars Zarafshani . Lida Sharafi . Hossein Azadi b. Gholam hossein Hosseini Nia. Philippe De Maeyer . Frank Witlox b, (2012) ,Drought vulnerability assessment: The case of wheat farmers in Western Iran, Global and Planetary Change, 98–99 , pp: 122–130.
20. Kristie L. Ebi . , Kathryn Bowen. , (2016), Extreme events as sources of health vulnerability: Drought as an example, WeatherandClimateExtremes,11, pp:95–102.
21. Lairize Shahabfara, Abduwasit Ghulamb, Josef Eitzingera,(2012), Drought monitoring in Iran using the perpendicular drought indices, International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geo information, 18 , pp: 119–127.

23. M. Alimullah Miyan, (2015), Droughts in Asian Least Developed Countries: Vulnerability and sustainability, WeatherandClimateExtremes,7, pp:8–23.

26. Neera Shrestha Pradhana,b,c, Yao Fuc, Liyun Zhangd, Yongping Yangc,(2017) ,Farmers’ perception of effective drought policy implementation: A case study of 2009–2010 drought in Yunnan province, China, Land Use Policy, 67 , pp:48–56.

32. Solh, Mahmoud, MaartenvanGinkel, (2014): Drought preparedness and drought mitigation in the developing world's drylands, WeatherandClimateExtremes, 3, pp:62–66.
33. Surutwadee Pak-Uthai, Nicolas Faysse, (2018): the risk of second-best adaptive measures: Farmers facing drought in Thailand, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, pp:1-18.

35. Yazdanpanaha, Masoud , Fatemeh Rahimi Feyzabada, Masoumeh Forouzania,Saeed Mohammadzadeha, Rob J.F. Burtonc, ( 2015), Predicting farmers’ water conservation goals and behavior in Iran: A test of social cognitive theory, Land Use Policy, 47, pp: 401–407.
36. Yi-ping Fang., Chen Zhao a, b, Golam Rasul c, Shahriar M. Wahid, (2016): Rural household vulnerability and strategies for improvement: An empirical analysis based on time series, Habitat International, 53 , pp: 254-264.