The Effect of Rural Guidance Plan on the Subjective Quality of Life among Rural Communities (Case Study: Fariman County)

Document Type : علمی

Authors

• Fahimeh Jafari
• Aliakbar Anabestani
• Hamdollah Sojasi Qeydari

Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

10.22067/jrrp.v5i4.48639

Abstract

Extended abstract
1. INTRODUCTION
In the literature of rural development, the main goal is to promote the quality of rural life and the welfare of the villagers, especially the socio-economic status of a particular class of people, i.e., the poor villagers. To upgrade the physical structure of the village is among the ways to achieve this goal. Therefore, rural construction has been among the measures taken by the government to tackle this issue over the last years, which include not only changes in rural communities, production methods and economic organization of rural communities, but also measures relevant to improving infrastructure, political, and social matters and the relation of the community members with each other. Therefore, one of the most fundamental issues in the aftermath of the Islamic Revolution of Iran, is how to improve the socio-economic status or the living conditions of the people living in small villages. Their share in economic and social development is too modest. Today, rural Conduct plans are the most important means of directing rural development in Iran. The final goal of such plans is to provide the conditions for welfare and improving the quality of rural life, and maintain it in rural areas. Two decades after the implementation of rural Conduct plans in Iran, and having learned valuable experiences, it is essential to know what the implications of these plans are for the rural communities, and whether they have reached their ultimate goals, i.e., improved quality of life, and providing a lively and healthy environment for rural people? Therefore, the main research question is to what extent have the rural conduct plans been effective in improving the quality of life of the villagers in Fariman County?
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Rural conduct plans are among the rural construction plans which can play a fundamental role in development of rural areas. These projects, with their potentials and - capacities can make ground for improvement of public facilities and welfare, such as modernization of rural housing, newly made sidewalks, and residential space, improving the lives of the villagers and their participation. Rural conduct plans are the revitalization of rural areas in social, economic and physical dimensions.
Quality of life is a broad concept that has many definitions. Some have defined it as the viability of a region, others have defined it as a measure for the attraction and some have defined as welfare, social well-being, happiness, satisfaction, etc. Therefore, the quality of life is a complex, multi-dimensional and qualitative term about the conditions and population in a special geographical area that relies on subjective or qualitative indicators and on objective or subjective ones, too.
3. METHODOLOGY
The research is an applied one conducted in descriptive-analytical and correlational method using survey and questionnaires. The population included 22 villages in which rural conduct plans have been implemented; eight villages with a total population of 3835 households were selected. Employing the Cochran formula, 249 rural households were selected from the villages of the study area, they were interviewed based on random sampling method. Data collected from the questionnaires, were analyzed using statistical analysis methods in SPSS, and fitness research model in EQS software.
4. DISCUSSION
Step-by-step regression was used to assess the effectiveness of rural conduct plans on subjective dimension of quality of life. According to coefficient of determination that shows the specification of a variance and variation of the dependent variable through independent variable, in the final stage, it was 0.57 which indicates the indicators of independent variable explain 57% of variation of dependent variable. According to the results, the model was implemented in four stages, and in each stage the most influential variable was introduced to the model. At the end, all the variables, land use and distribution of services, rural environment, quality of housing and street network were introduced to the model which explained 57 percent of variations in quality of life. The amount of P-Value or the significance level is 0.000, which is smaller than 0.05. Therefore, the null hypothesis test, implying the insignificance of regression model, was rejected with 99% confidence. Eventually, we may conclude that among the indicators of implementing the rural Conduct plans, ‘to maintain the land-use’ and ‘distribution of services’ had the greatest impact on the subjective dimension of villagers’ quality of life.
5. CONCLUSION
Currently, the rural Conduct plans are viewed as the most significant and the only rural development document in our country whose only aim is to improve the quality of rural life and bring more prosperity into rural areas. The results show that there is a direct and complete correlation between the variables (correlation coefficient 0.75). In other words, there is a strong and positive relationship between implementing rural Conduct plans and subjective improvement in the quality of villagers’ life in the study area. As the success rate of rural Conduct plans increases, the quality of life of the villagers increases as well. Therefore, to achieve the desired objectives, all individuals involved in this project, including shareholders who are rural residents and the Islamic Revolution Housing Foundation, should play their role in better implementation of the project. It is essential that all those involved in the project help each other to achieve all-round development of rural areas, as the development of rural areas makes way for national development.

Keywords

• quality of life
• subjective indicators
• rural guidance plan
• Path analysis
• Fariman County

---

References

1. Ahmadvand, M., Hedayati Niya, S., & Abdullahi, Kh. (1391/2012). The effect of welfare and social capital on quality of life in rural areas of Boyer Ahmad County. Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 1(2), 89-112. [In Persian]

2. Anabestani, A. (1388/2009). An assessment of the physical effects of the rural Conduct plans. Proceedings of the First National Conference on Housing and Physical Development of‌ rural areas, Sistan and Baluchistan University, Zahedan, Iran. [In Persian]

3. Anbari, M. (1389/2010). Developments in quality of life of the Iranian (1987-2009). Journal of Rural Development, 1(2), 149-181. [In Persian]

4. Asayesh, H. (1373/1994). Rural Planning Workshop. Tehran: Payam Nour University Press. [In Persian]

5. Asayesh, H. (1376/1998). Rural planning in Iran. Tehran: Payam Nour University Press. [In Persian]

6. Azimi, N., & Jamshidian, M. (1384/2005). Physical impact of rural Conduct plans (case study: West Gilan). Journal of Fine Arts, 8 (22), 25-34. [In Persian]

7. Azizpour, F., Khalili, A., Mohsenzadeh, A., & Hosseini Hasel, S. (1390/2011). Analysis of the economic impacts of rural guidance plans on rural settlements. Journal of Housing and Rural Environment, 39(136), 71-84. [In Persian]

8. Bullock, S. J. (2004). An analysis of technology uses and quality of life in a rural West Texas community (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Texas Tech University.

9. Epley, D. R., & Menon, M. (2008). A method of assembling cross-sectional indicators into a community quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 88(2), 281-296.

10. Faraji Sabokbar, H., Sadeqlou, T., & Sojasi Keidari, H. (1390/2011). An assessment of quality of life in rural areas (A case study of Agh Bolag Village, Zanjan Province). Journal of Rural & Development, 4 (14), 27-48. [In Persian]

11. Foo, T. S. (2000). Subjective assessment of urban quality of life in Singapore (1997-1998). Habitat International, 24(1):31-49.

12. Governor of Khorasan Razavi. (1394/2015). The latest administrative divisions of Fariman County. Mashhad: Governor of Khorasan Razavi. [In Persian]

13. Grgić, I., Žimbrek, T., Tratnik, M., Markovina, J., & Juračak, J. (2010). Quality of life in rural areas of Croatia: To stay or to leave? African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(8), 653-660.

14. Heydari, A. (1390/2011). An investigation of indicators of quality of life in rural areas of Koh kiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad. Journal of Housing and Rural Environment, 39(136), 51-66. [In Persian]

15. Iranian Organization of Municipalities & Dehyaris. (1385/2006). An introduction to rural guidance plans, control and supervision over rural construction. Tehran: Institute of Humanities and Social Studies. [In Persian]

16. Jamshidi, A., Azadi, Y., Taghdisi, A., & Gemini, D. (1392/2013). An assessment of quality of Life in rural areas of Ilam province (A case study of Karzan rural district). Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 2 (3), 49-71. [In Persian]

17. Kharazmi, Sh. (1384/2005). Quality of life and requirements of digital era in Iran. Journal of World Economy, 1(1),2-4. [In Persian]

18. Khorasan Razavi Housing Foundation of Islamic Revolution. (1394/2015): An investigation of rural Conduct plans implemented in Fariman County. Mashhad: Department of Rural Development. [In Persian]

19. Kokabee, A. (1386/2007). Indicators for assessment of quality of urban life in urban areas. Journal of Art and Architecture, 1, 75-87. [In Persian]

20. Lee, Y.J. (2008). Subjective Quality of Life Measurement in Taipei. Building and Environment. 43(7), 1205–1215.

21. Mohammadi Yeganeh, B., Nabati, A., & Cheraqi, M. (1391/2012). The effects of rural Conduct plans on improving the quality of life in rural areas (Case study: Karani District, Bijar County). Journal of Housing and Rural Environment, 40 (139), 99-112. [In Persian]

22. Movlaee Hashjin, N. (1386/2007). An analysis of objectives, requirements and process of preparing and implementing rural CONDUCT plans with an emphasis on Guilan Province. Journal of Geographical Landscape, 4(2), 105:123. [In Persian]

23. Nasiri, A. (1388/2009). Evaluating the effectiveness of rural Conduct plans on rural settlements. Proceedings of the First National Conference on Housing and Physical Development of‌ rural areas, Sistan and Baluchistan University, Zahedan, Iran. [In Persian]

24. Noghani, M., Asgharpour Masouleh, A., Safa, Sh., & Kermani, M. (1387/2008). Quality of life of citizens and its relationship with social capital in Mashhad. Journal of Social Sciences, 5(1), 111-140. [In Persian]

25. Omidi, R. (1386/2007). Quality of life in development plans of Iran. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian]

26. Pacione, M. (1982). The use of objective and subjective measures of life quality in human geography. Progress in Human Geography, 6(4), 495-514.

27. Pal, A. K., & Kumar, U. C. (2005). Quality of Life (QoL) concept for the evaluation of societal development of rural community in West Bangal, India. Asia-Pacific Journal of Rural Development, 15(2), 83-93.

28. Pourtaheri, M., Roukn al-Din Eftekhari, A., & Badri, S. A. (1390/2012). Strategies and policies for physical development of rural settlements (with emphasis on international experience and Iran). Tehran: Housing Foundation of Islamic Revolution. [In Persian]

29. Qayour Madah, M. (1385/2006). An assessment of effectiveness of rural Conduct plans in rural development. Unpublished master’s thesis, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. [In Persian]

30. Rezvani, M., & Mansourian, H. (1387/2008). Measuring quality of life: A review of concepts, indicators, models and proposed model for rural areas. Journal of Rural & Development, 11(3), 1-26. [In Persian]

31. Rezvani, M., Mansourian, H., & Ahmadi, F. (1388/2009). Upgrading rural areas to urban ones, and its role in improving the quality of local residents (Case study: cities of Firozabad and Sahib in Lorestan and Kurdestan provinces). Journal of Rural Studies, 1(1), 33 -65. [In Persian]

32. Roknoddin-e-Eftekhari, A. R., Fattahi, A., & Hajipour, M. (1390/2011). An assessment of spatial distribution of the quality of life in rural areas (A case study of Central District of Delfan County). Journal of Rural Studies, 2(2), 69 -94. [In Persian]

33. Rostami, Sh., & Mirza Ali, M. (1392/2013). An analysis of site location, in rural Conduct plans of Gonbad Kavoos rural areas. Journal of Space Economy & Rural Development, 2(4), 93-118. [In Persian]

34. Savari, M., Shiri, N., & Shaban-Ali Fami, H. (1391/2012). Factors effective in satisfaction of villagers with rural guidance plans (Case study: Qara Gol village, Divandarreh County). Journal of Housing and Rural Environment, 41(142), 67- 82. [In Persian]

35. Shakur, A., & Shams al-Din, A. (1393/2014). An assessment of socio-economic aspects of rural Conduct plans in rural settlements (case study: Kenareh Village- Marvdasht County. Journal of Geography and Urban-Regional Planning, 13(4), 39-52. [In Persian]

36. Shamaei, A., Ahmadabadi, F., & Ahmedabadi, H. (1393/2014). Assessment of the effects of rural guidance plans on rural settlements. Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 3(6), 75-88. [In Persian]

37. Shucksmith, M., Cameron, S., Merridew, T., & Pichler, F. (2009). Urban–rural differences in quality of life across the European Union. Regional Studies, 43(10), 1275-1289.

38. Statistical Center of Iran. (1391/2012). Profile of Iranian rural areas. Fariman County, 2011. Tehran: SCI Publication. [In Persian]

39. Vosoughi, M. (1367/1988). Report on economic and social effects of renovation plans in Hamedan Province. Tehran: Ministry of Jihad Sazandegi. [In Persian]

40. Zarafshani, K., Borzo, Gh. R., Shah Hosseini, A., Abbasiazad Ghanavati, M., Vali Zadeh, A., Baqernasab, M., ... Abdul Maliki, S. (1389/2010). A qualitative assessment of rural Conduct plans in Karnachi Village of Kermanshah County. Application of Basic Theory. Journal of Rural Studies, 1(3), 154-172. [In Persian]