عنوان مقاله [English]
Many researchers and academics believe that the discussions of urban and rural development are separated from each other. Such studies can be conducted in the form of regional development strategies. Therefore, strategies and policies for regional development have an important role in boosting economic activities and the development of deprived areas to reduce differences between regions. Regional allocation of public facilities and funds can be a step forward to achieve balanced development and reduce regional inequalities; otherwise, the continuation of existing trends by focusing on economic development in developed areas will lead to divergence and dissonance in national development. In general, regional development is seeking to create conditions and framework conditions suitable for continuous improvement of living standards to reduce unemployment, diversify economic activity, increase investment in the private and public sectors, promote economic prosperity and, as a result, social and economic sustainable development. Given the importance of economic growth, the objectives of the strategy of regional development are justice, poverty elimination, and economic sustainability. Much research has been done based on the assessment of regional disparities in global and national level. However, with the increasing number of case studies from developing countries, there are a plenty of reports of failure of the sustainable development approach in achievement of environmental, economic and the ideal goals. In rural communities, have special problems, resources and facilities, needs and priorities of their own. For this reason, in the context of national development planning, it is necessary to consider the requirements as a special and specific section. In relation to Iran, although the managers and decision makers periodically have increased issues, such as rural planning, rural management, a fair distribution of resources, and poverty elimination, but there are serious problems and inequality in rural areas of Iran despite the attempts of different organizations in the affairs of villages. This is a holding back at the expense of not developing in other areas and increase the gap between regions. Thus, is seems necessary to determine weaknesses of each of the townships from the different indicators of development at the provincial level. It would be a good base to determine distribution for local managers and the needs of the regions on a comparative assessment and by taking advantage of spatial planning with the maximum optimal use of resources. In this study, to meet the situation township of the province we selected about 76 variables in the form of 8 indicators, using multiple attribute decision making compensation method and integrated collection to specify the degrees of development of the province.
This study is a functional research in goal and in terms of methodology it has a descriptive analytical method. In order to achieve the research objectives, we initially classified rural development indicators in nine indices and 76 variables. The information about the variables is collected from statistical yearbook 2012 of Khuzestan governor general. We have used some applications such as TOPSIS, Electre, Vikor, Promethee to determine the level township of the province, based on the rate indicators for rural development in the form of Excel software. .
Results and discussion
From the integration of different sectors of development indicators with shared overlap function, 27 counties of Khuzestan province were categorized into five groups. The first group contains the counties of Izeh, Dezful and Shoosh; the second group contains counties of Baghmalek, Behbehan, Shooshtar Ahvaz, Ramhormuz and Shadegan; the third group contains the counties of Andika, Andymeshk, Abadan, Dashte Azadegan, Karoon, Bandar Mahshahr and Bavi; The fourth group contains the counties of Ramshir, Khorramshahr, Lali, Omidiyeh, Hamidieh, Gotvand; The fifth group also includes the counties of Masjed Soleiman, Hendijan, Hoveize, Haftgel and Aghajari. By this, we can spatially distinguish different parts of the province. The areas of the first and the second groups are located mainly in the north and east provinces and deprived areas are the fourth and fifth groups in the south and west.
In this study, we tried to achieve balanced development of rural areas in the counties of Khuzestan province. This is to determine the distribution of rural development among the counties and their position relative to each other. The geographical distribution of rural development measures and the existence of spatial mismatch between the cities in Khuzestan province are significant at the province level in terms of indices of population issues of health, education, culture, politics, services, communications and infrastructure. Most measures of development are concentrated in northern central and western parts of Khuzestan province. A closer look at the results of the study could be detected in three separate areas in Khuzestan province; some of the counties experienced rapid growth and development, one located in the west province (Izeh) and two in northern provinces (Dezful and Shoosh). In general, the county earns high ratings and this result of having potential environmental powers as well as long term policies implemented in this field can cause development of these areas. Deprived areas cover five counties of Aghajari, Haftgel, Hoveize, Hendijan and Masjed Soleiman, with the lowest level of development in most criteria.
26. AlHanbali, A., Alsaaideh, B., and Kiondoh, A., 2011, Using GIS Based Weighted Linear Combination Analysis and Remote Sensing Techniques to Select Optimum Solid Waste Disposal Sites with in Mafraq, Jordan, Journal of Geographic Information System, Vol. 3, No. 4, PP. 267-278.
27. Alatrista, H. et al., 2015, A Knowledge Discovery Process for Spatiotemporal Data, Application to River Water Quality Monitoring, Journal of Ecological Informatics, Vol, 26, No. 2, PP. 127-139.
28. Apostolache, M., 2014, Regional Development in Romania, from Regulations to Practice, Journal of Economics and Finance, Vol. 8, No. 1, PP. 35- 41.
29. Baker, S., 2007, Sustainable Development as Symbolic Commitment, Declaratory Politics and the Seductive Appeal of Ecological Modernisation in the European Union? Journal of Environmental Politics, Vol. 16, No. 2, PP. 297-317.
30. Balaceanu, C., Apostol, D., and Penu, D., 2012, Sustainability and Social Justice, Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 62, No. 7, PP. 677-681.
31. Bercu, A., 2015, The Sustainable Local Development in Romania, Key Issues For Heritage Sector, Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 188, No. 19, PP. 144 -150.
32. Boggia, A., and Cortina, C., 2010, Measuring Sustainable Development Using A Multi Criteria Model, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 91, No. 11, PP. 2301-2306.
33. Breau, S., 2015, Rising Inequality in Canada: A Regional Perspective, Journal of Applied Geography, Vol. 61, No. 7, PP. 58-69.
34. Cai, Y. et al., 2009, Investigation of Public’s Perception Towards Rural Sustainable Development Based on a Two Level Expert System, Journal of Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, No. 5, PP. 8910-8924.
35. Cai, Y., Xu, L., and Yang, Z., 2002, Public Participation in the Study of Tvies’sEnvironmental Performance, Journal of Natural Science, Vol. 38, No. 1, PP. 138-143.
36. Cobbinah, P., Odei Erdiaw Kwasie, M., and Amoateng, P., 2015, Rethinking Sustainable Development within the Framework of Poverty and Urbanisation in Developing Countries, Journal of Environmental Development, Vol. 13, No. 2, PP. 18-32.
37. Connelly, S., 2007, Mapping Sustainable Development as a Contested Concept, Journal of Local Environment, Vol. 12, No. 3, PP. 259-278.
38. Corrente, S., Greco, S., and Słowinski, R., 2016, Multiple Criteria Hierarchy Process for Electre Tri Methods, Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 252, No. 1, PP. 191-203.
39. Daras, G. er al., 2015, Development of Business Spatial Analysis Tools, Methodology and Framework, IFAC, Papers Online, PP. 1894-1899.
40. Dodescu, A., and Chirila, L., 2014, Business Environment Development and Regional Policy in North West Region of Romania, Journal of Economics and Finance, Vol. 15, PP. 626-634.
41. Draghici, A., Matta, N., and Draghici, G., 2008, Networks of Excellence as Virtual Communities, in Putnik, G., Cunha, M., Editors,Encyclopedia of Networks and Virtual Organizations, Vol. 2, PP. 1022-1030.
42. Duran, D. et al., 2015, The Components of Sustainable Development, A Possible Approach, Journal of Economics and Finance, Vol. 26, No. 3, PP. 806-811.
43. Fotheringham, S., and Rogerson, P., 2005, Spatial Analysis and GIS, Frist Edition, Taylor and Francis Group (CRC), Bristol.
44. Jato Espino, D. et al., 2014, A Review of Application of Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods in Construction, Journal of Automation in Construction, Vol. 45, PP. 151-162.
45. Kitchen, L., and Marsden, T., 2009, Creating Sustainable Rural Development Through Stimulating the Eeconomy, Beyond the Economic Paradox, Journal of Sociologia Ruralis, Vol. 49, No. 3, PP. 273-294.
46. Kwan, M., 2000, Analysis of Human Spatial Behavior in a GIS Environment, Recent Developments and Future Prospects, Journal of Geographical Systems, Vol. 2, No. 1, PP. 85-90.
47. Latinopoulos, D., and Kechagia, K., 2015, A GIS Based Multi Criteria Evaluation for Wind Farm Site Selection, a Regional Scale Application in Greece, Renewable Energy, Vol. 78, No. 8, PP. 550-560.
48. Malczewski, J., 2006, GIS Based Multi Criteria Decision Analysis: A Survey of the Literature, Journal of Geographical Information Science, Vol. 20, No. 7, PP. 703-726.
49. Matsumoto, M., 2008, Redistribution and Regional Development Under Tax Competition, Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 64, No. 3, PP. 480-487.
50. Mayhew, S., 2005, A Dictionary of Geography, Oxford University Press, Dartmouth, Hanover.
51. Nampak, H., Pradhan, B., and Manap, M., 2014, Application of GIS Based Data Driven Evidential Belief Function Model To Predict Groundwater Potential Zonation, Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 513, No. 52, PP. 283-300.
52. Neste, J., and Karjalainen, T., 2013, A Literature Review-the Use of Multi Criteria Decision Analysis in Environmental Impact Assessment, Report on the Use of MCDA in EIA and SEA, PP. 1-22.
53. Nickolaevna Semenova, N. et al., 2016, Assessment of Sustainable Development of Rural Areas of Russia, Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 9, No. 14, PP. 1-6.
54. Ozturk, D., and Batuk, F., 2011, Implementation of GIS Based MCDM Analysis with VB in Arcgis, Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, Vol. 10, No. 6, PP. 1023-1042.
55. Prato, T., and Herath, G., 2007, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for Integrated Catchment Management, Journal of Ecological Economics, Vol. 63, No. 2-3, PP. 627- 632.
56. Purohit, B.C., 2008, Health and Human Development at Sub-State Level in India, Journal of Socio-Economics, Vol. 37, No. 6, PP. 2248-2260.
57. Rikalovic, A., Cosic, I., and Lazarevic, D., 2014, GIS Based Multi Criteria Analysis for Industrial Site Selection, Journal of Procedia Engineering, Vol. 69, PP. 1054-1063.
58. Straka, J., and Tuzova, M., 2016, Factors Affecting Development of Rural Areas in the Czech Republic: A Literature Review, Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 7, No. 2, PP. 496 -505.
59. Veleva, V. et al., Indicators of Sustainable Production,Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 9, No. 5, PP. 447- 452.
60. Vilshair, M., 2007, Sustainability Landscape in Great City, Journal of Science and Development, Vol. 12, No. 4, PP. 294-313.
61. Wang, Y. et al., 2016, The Spatio Temporal Patterns of Urbanerural Development Transformation in China 1990, Journal of Habitat International, Vol. 53, No. 6, PP.178-187.
62. Ward, N., and Brown, D., 2009, Placing the Rural in Regional Development, Journal of Regional Studies, Vol. 43, No.10, PP. 1237-1244.