Understanding the Causes of Agreement or Disagreement of Farmers to participate in Land Consolidation Projects, Case Study: Some Villages of Bukan City

Document Type : Research Paper


1 Assistant professor of rural development, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor of rural development, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran


Land consolidation in agricultural sector is one of the most fundamental policies. It is not expected to solve many problems without taking the agricultural mechanization and efficiency in production into account. Therefore, the land consolidation projects  are one way to achieve agricultural development and sustainable agricultural development which plays an important role in achieving this. The main problem that this research is seeking to achieve is to answer this question that whether the farmers didn’t have tendency for participation or Jihad experts didn’t perform projects with appropriate planning. If farmers disagree with performance project, what was the cause of their disagreement?
The purpose of this research is to find the reasons and factors that serve as barriers to participate in land consolidation projects. Finding the reasons make us able to  discover the causes of this issue and present the solutions to reduce the factors that negatively affect their tendency to participate in the projects. The sample villages of the city of Boukan as the representatives for the statistical population of the city are Abdullah Tapasy, Gale Rasoul and Mallalar Villages. To explore and to explain the problems the qualitative methods (focus groups, interviews or focus) were used in this study.
Focus group interview is the kind of interview with  an interaction approach based on interview with individuals on special subjects- provided by researcher- in one free and one controlled space by the researcher. This method is also used as reaching to common mind of individuals.  Main sampling on qualitative research is based on criterion sampling. In this study, we also have selected three sample villages (in every village we have one opposite and opponent group with these projects), six groups of total delegation of the villages with criterion-based sampling that can be generalized to all people of the village (in terms of socio- economic situation, age, and etc.).Each of them was separately in one session group interview.  The number of these groups was changeable from seven to ten. On this basis, during these interviews after introduction, the researchers carried interviews to provide three total questions of essence and the rate of awareness of the project. Why you are opponent and opposite with these projects? And what methods and strategies are presented to promote the participation in land consolidation projects specially and other developmental projects generally?
Results and discussion
The main reason for the disagreement between the opposite groups of the villages were unimportant implementation, quality of program implementation and enforcement without end, the similar quality, the sense of belonging, a high level of distrust, and initiation of an interest in personal property family, lack of awareness due to lack of information, the sense of powerlessness and dissatisfaction.
The main reason for the participants in the interviews were awareness of the benefits of cost reduction and increase in the revenue, soil and water management, giving incentives, increased land values​​, better control on the monitoring of the ground and etc.
It can be said that the most important effect of land consolidation is increase in the performance, due to reasonable cultivation system. It can also designate farms to other crops by using consolidation planning in the region according to expertise due to implementation of consolidation cultivation method after primary cultivation and harvesting. Hence, it is hopeful to production in agriculture and finally to rural development and self- sufficiency in production. Therefore, more attention of the politicians can be very effective to encourage farmers in traditional land consolidation and intervene among them in the projects.
Given the mentioned results we provide strategies that solved these problems in both micro and macro levels. Some of the strategies are:
1-       Awareness of the farmers : in order to increase information and awareness of the farmers, it is required to give more attention to public relation section of relevant organization, promotion and capable promotion by educational and promotional classes, exposing successful methods in other countries even in the region and local media in micro and macro framework planning. Besides, two of these items, variable education of farmers and attraction of the adolescent educated generation in this field can play an effective role.
2-       In view of farmers, People distrust to governmental agents and organizations is due to weak performance of government in field of project performance and other duties pertaining to the villager affairs. Thus, it is necessary for trust-building to government for  performance of project for more than one time. It has correct evaluation to study farmer life condition in relevant to unemployment situation, employment opportunities and correct planning of lands with farmer participant, having systematic vision, and attention to all aspects of distribution and consolidation of land.
3-      Integrative and systematic planning is one of the most important factors to increase people satisfaction and their participation in land consolidation projects. Land consolidation should be putted in total policies of rural development and agriculture as participation action and from context of society. It requires creation of capable environment to provide active participants of all stakeholders. This is conducted in such an integrative and process attitude and the environmental situation that the rural and agricultural development becomes visible.
4-      In view of the opponents of land consolidation projects, one of the most important factors in attracting villagers participation in development plants- such as land consolidation- is using of rural trustee in the village. The trustees, for example, are sheriff, the council of village, mosque trustee, educated persons and etc., because the people have authority among villagers and the rural community as well as they can have important and good role in solving family problems and also the problems pertaining to lands among people and organization. Thus, relevant organizations can start these projects primarily from the lands of these people.


Main Subjects

احمدی، عبدالحسین و امیرمظفر امینی، 1386، عوامل مؤثر بر تقاضای اجرای طرح‌های یکپارچه‌سازی اراضی از نظر کارشناسان کرمانشاه و منطقۀ لنجانات اصفهان، مجلة علوم و فنون کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، سال یازدهم، شمارة 42.
افتخاری، رکن‌الدین، 1382، توسعة کشاورزی: مفاهیم، اصول، روش تحقیق، برنامه‌ریزی در یکپارچه‌سازی کشاورزی، سمت، تهران.
افتخاری، رکن‌الدین، 1377، ارزیابی طرح‌های یکپارچه‌سازی اراضی کشاورزی، مجلة مدرس علوم انسانی، شمارة 8.
آشکار آهنگرکلایی، محمدعلی و دیگران، 1385، بررسی نگرش کشاورزان به طرح یکپارچه‌سازی اراضی در شالیزارهای مازندران (مطالعة موردی: روستای گلیرد شهرستان جویبار)، اقتصاد کشاورزی و توسعه، سال چهاردهم، شمارة 55.
بلیکی، نورمن، 1390، طراحی پژوهش‌های اجتماعی، ترجمة حسن چاوشیان، نشر نی، تهران.
امیرنژاد، حمید و حامد رفیعی، 1388، بررسی عوامل اقتصادی- اجتماعی بر مشارکت بهره‌برداران در اجرای طرح‌های مرتع‌داری، مجلة علمی- پژوهشی مراتع، سال سوم، شمارة 3.
پاپلی یزدی، محمدحسین و محمدامیر ابراهیمی، 1387، نظریه‌های توسعة روستایی، سمت، تهران.
پاپلی یزدی، محمدحسین و زهره حسین­پور چالاکی، 1371، پراکندگی زمین‌های کشاورزی، مجلة تحقیقات جغرافیایی، شمارة 27.
جمشیدی، علیرضا، تیموری، مصطفی، حاضری، محمد و کوروش روستا، 1388، عوامل مؤثر بر مشارکت کشاورزان در اجرای طرح‌های یکپارچه‌سازی اراضی استان ایلام (مطالعة موردی: شیروان و چرداول)، فصلنامة توسعه و روستا، سال دوازدهم، شمارة 1.
توسلی، غلامعباس، 1382، مشارکت اجتماعی در شرایط جامعة آنومیک، رابطة آسیب‌ها و انحرافات اجتماعی با مشارکت اجتماعی، انتشارات دانشگاه تهران، تهران.
حیاتی، زهیر و فرشته دیدگاه، 1389، مطالعة تطبیقی میزان گرایش پژوهشگران ایرانی در حوزه‌های موضوعی مختلف به مشارکت و همکاری در سال‌های 1998 تا 2007، فصلنامة علمی- پژوهشی پژوهشگاه علوم و فناوری اطلاعات ایران، دورۀ 25، شمارة 3.
ذوقی، محمد، 1374، استراتژی یکپارچه‌سازی اراضی تحت کشت­وکار خانوار روستایی، مجلة جهاد، سال شانزدهم، شماره­های 186- 187.
طالب، مهدی و موسی عنبری، 1387، جامعه‌شناسی روستایی با تأکید بر ابعاد تغییر و توسعه در جامعة روستایی ایران، انتشارات دانشگاه تهران، تهران.
عبداللهی، محمد، 1377، نظام بهره‌برداری کشاورزی در ایران، انتشارات وزارت کشاورزی، تهران.
غفاری، غلامرضا و محسن نیازی، 1386، جامعه­شناسی مشارکت، نشر نزدیک، تهران.
فعلی، سعید و پزشکی راد، غلامرضا، چیذری، محمد و مسیب بقایی، 1387، عوامل مؤثر بر مشارکت کشاورزان گندمکار در طرح گندم (مطالعة موردی: تهران)، فصلنامة توسعه و روستا، سال یازدهم، شمارة 3.
موسوی، میرطاهر، 1391، درآمدی بر مشارکت اجتماعی، انتشارات جامعه‌شناسان، تهران.
محمدپور، احمد، 1390، روش تحقیق کیفی: ضد روش، جلد دوم، انتشارات جامعه‌شناسان، تهران.
محسنی، رضاعلی، 1382، نوسازی و یکپارچه‌سازی اراضی کشاورزی در فرایند توسعه، مجلة تعاون، دورة جدید، شماره­های 146 و 147.
گونیلی، ابوالحسن، 1363، فرهنگ کشاورزی ایران، چاپ سوم، امیرکبیر، تهران.
کلانتری، خلیل، حسینی، سیدمحمد و عبدالله­زاده، غلامحسین، 1384، ساماندهی و یکپارچه‌سازی اراضی روستایی با استفاده از تجارب کشورهای اروپای شرقی، فصلنامة توسعه و روستا، سال هشتم، شمارة 3.
فلیک، اووه، 1388، درآمدی بر تحقیق کیفی، ترجمة هادی جلیلی، نشر نی، تهران.
سینگ، جاسبر و اس. اس. برتون، 1374، جغرافیای کشاورزی، ترجمة سیاوش دهقانیان و دیگران، انتشارات دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد.
رضوانی، محمدرضا، 1383، مقدمه‌ای بر برنامه‌ریزی توسعة روستایی در ایران، قومس، تهران.
احمدرش، رشید، 1391، تحلیل جامعه‌شناختی پیامدهای ورود عناصر مدرن به کردستان (مورد مطالعه: جامعة روستایی مکریان)، رسالة دکتری مطالعات توسعه، دانشکدة علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران.
1. Ahmadi, A. and Amini, A. M., 2007, Effective Factors on Demand for Land Consolidation Projects from the View of the Experts KermanshahandLajanat Region of Isfahan, Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Vol. 11, No. 42. (In Persian)
2. Ahmadrash, R., 2012, SociologicalAnalysis ofthe Consequences ofModernElements inKurdistan(Case Study: RuralCommunityMokrian), PhD Thesis, Department of Development Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Tehran University, Tehran.(In Persian)
3. Ashkar Ahangar Kalaei، M. A., et al, 2006, A Survey of Farmers' Attitudes for Land ConsolidationProjectinMazandaranPaddies(Case Study:GlyrdVillage ofJouibar City), Agricultural Economics and Development, Vol. 14, No. 55.(In Persian)
4. Eftekhari، R., 1998, Evaluation of Land Consolidation Projects, Modarres Journal of Humanities, No. 8. (In Persian)
5. Eftekhari, R., 2003, Agricultural Development: Concepts, Principles, Research Methods, Planning in Integration of Agriculture, Samt, Tehran. (In Persian)
6. Amirnejad, H. and Rafiee, H., 2009, Evaluation ofSocio–economic FactorsonFarmers' Participation in RanchProjectsManagement, Journal of Scientific Research Pastures, Vol. 3, No. 3. (In Persian)
7. Blake, N., 2011, DesigningSocialResearches, Translated by: Chavoshyan, H., Ney Press, Tehran.
8. Papoly Yazdi, M. H. and Hossainpour Chalaki, Z., 1992, Distribution ofAgricultural Land, Journal of Geographical Research, No. 27. (In Persian)
9. Papoly Yazdi, M. H. and Ebrahimi, M. A., 2008, Theories ofRural Development, Samt, Tehran. (In Persian)
10. Tavassoli, Gh., 2003, Social Participationin Position ofAnomic Society, The Relationship BetweenInjuriesandSocial Deviationswith Participation, Tehran University Press, Tehran. (In Persian)
11. Jamshidi, A., Teimuri, M., Hazeri, M. and Roosta, K., 2009, Effective Factors on Farmers' Participation in Land Consolidation Projects in Ilam province (Case Study: Shiravan and Chardavol), Journal of Rural Development, Vol. 12, No. 1. (In Persian)
12. Hayati, Z. and Didegah, F., 2010, A Comparative Study of Iranian Researcher’s Tendency in Different Thematic Fields in Participation and Cooperation in the Years 1998 to 2007, Quarterly Journal of Institute of Science and Information Technology of Iran, Vol. 25, No. 3. (In Persian)
13. Zowghi, M., 1995, Strategies of Integration Land Under Rural Household’s Cultivation, Journal of Jihad, Vol. 16, No. 186-187. (In Persian)
14. Rezvani, M. R., 2004, Introduction to Rural Development Planning in Iran, Ghomes, Tehran. (In Persian)
15. Singh, J. and Burton, S. S., 1995, AgriculturalGeography, Translated by: Dehghanian, S., et al, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad. (In Persian)
16. Taleb, M. and Anbari, M., 2008, Rural Sociology with Emphasis on Change and Development Dimensions in the Rural Community of Iran, Tehran University Press, Tehran. (In Persian)
17. Abdullahi, M., 1998, System of Agriculture Exploitation in Iran, Publishing Department of Agriculture, Tehran. (In Persian)
18. Ghaffari, Gh. and Niazi, M., 2007, Sociology of Participation, Nazdik press, Tehran. (In Persian)
19. Feli, S., Pezeshkirad, Gh., Chizari, M. and Baghaei, M., 2008, Effective Factors on Farmers Participation in the Wheat Project (Case Study: Tehran), Quarterly Journal of Rural And Development, Vol. 11, No. 3. (In Persian)
20. Phyllic, U., 2009, An Introduction to Qualitative Research, Translated by: Jalili, H., Ney Press, Tehran. (In Persian)
21. Kalantari, Kh. Hosseini, S. M. and Abdullahzadeh, Gh., 2005, Organizing and Integration Rural Lands According to Eastern Europe Countries Experiences, Quarterly Journal of Rural and Development, Vol. 8, No. 3. (In Persian)
22. Gounili, A., 1984, Culture of Agriculture of Iran, 3rd Ed, Amir Kabir, Tehran. (In Persian)
23. Mohseni, R. A., 2003, Revival and Integration of Agricultural Land in the Development Process, Journal of Ta’avon, New Issue, No. 146-147. (In Persian)
24. Mohammadpour, A., 2011, Qualitative Research Methods: Anti-method, Vol. 2, Sociologists Press, Tehran. (In Persian)
25. Moussavi, M., 2012, Introduction to Social Participation, Sociologists Press, Tehran. (In Persian)
26. Burkely, S., 1996, People Frist: A guide to Self-Reliant Participatory Rural Development, Zedbooks, London.
27. Cohen, J. M. and Upholf Norman, T., 1980, Participations Place in Rural Development, Seeking Clanty Though Specifieity, World Development, Vol. 8, pp. 213-235.
28. Gaotri, H., 1986, Popular Participation in Development, Unesco, Paris.
29. Midgely, J., et al, 1986, Community Participation, Social Development and the State, Methuend, London.
30. Oakley, P., et al, 1999, Protects with People: The Practice of Participation in Rural Development, ILO, Geneva.
31. Santosh Kumar, A., 1996, Economic of Consolidation of Holdings in Uttar Pradesh: A Case Study of Jucknow District, Indian Journal of Agricultural Economic, Vol. 21, No. 3.
32. Mann, W. S., 1959, Scope for Consolidation of Holkings Soil Conservation and its Effect in Agricultural Production, Indian Agricultural Economic, Vol. 14, No. 3.