Identifying Policy-making and Planning Challenges in Rural Areas of Iran by Thematic Analysis Method

Document Type : Research Paper


1 Department of Geography and Rural Planning, Faculty of Geography Sciences and Planning, University of Isfahan

2 esfahan university

3 Department of Geography and Rural Planning,Faculty of Geography Sciences and Planning, University of Isfahan


Extended abstract:
Achieving development in rural areas has always been of interest to researchers in developing countries. The most important pillar of development can be considered the way society is governed to achieve development. The decisions that are made to achieve these goals are called policies and the process of study, planning, decision making and ultimately implementation in the rural environment is called policy making. The place where these decisions are made has certain conditions and characteristics. In this research, we seek to understand the main challenges of rural policy making and management so that this knowledge can lead to more correct decisions for the rural regions management. The most important role for the implementation of decisions in the village is the management of rural communities.
It is in drawing the links between the shifts in the social mode of regulation and the form and practices of new governance that rural studies have been shown particular reluctance – especially in terms of any engagement with theory. The researchers believe that rural management should significantly reduce rural migration, eliminate the socio-economic gap between the towns and villages, promote agricultural development and develop a culture of self-belief in rural areas, and reduce rural poverty. And the term is so broad that it loses its meaning.
In this study by thematic analysis method, Policy themes and challenges for managing Iran's rural areas have been identified. The information was collected through semi-structured interviews and study of sources and documents. By coding these interviews, we proceeded to the analysis of each and to the next sample by purposeful sampling. Content analysis is actually a way of identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns in qualitative data. It is also a process for analyzing contextual data and converts scattered and varied data into rich processed and detailed data. In order to document the discovered concepts and themes, quotes from geography and rural planning experts have been used and interviews and open question design have been conducted according to the existing theoretical literature and studies in the field of rural management, good governance, policy-making and planning. Also, the experience of researchers and previous studies has been done.
Results and discussion:
The results show that 17 out of 122 open source codes were identified, which can be divided into 6 categories of organizing themes. Finally, by identifying and discovering the basic and organizing themes and finding the relationships between the main themes and challenges, a diagram describing the characteristics and factors influencing the identification of policy themes for the management of Iranian rural areas was drawn. From this model it can be assumed that the theme in which these decisions are made must be taken into consideration. These concepts fall into six categories: Rurality, the historical process, the environment as an effective factor and form of policy, the role of culture in rural policy making and management, the role of culture in rural policy making and management, impact and goals. Economic policies and the place of participation in policymaking and management of rural communities were categorized as organizing themes of the research topic. The study also found new results that could be used in rural policy making and management. Another important issue is the effect of the economy and economic policy objectives. Another theme of the research is the role of culture in rural policy making and management, which emphasizes both the cultural context of Iranian villages (customs, customs, religion, etc.) and the need to recognize and influence its culture. Policies and decisions made for the village. Understanding the characteristics of the rural context for policymaking and understanding each one's relationship to decision-making, considering the environment as an effective factor in policymaking as well as the form of decisions and policies, the need to know the historical course of management and the management of rural areas. And past successful and unsuccessful experiences. The most important contributions of the codes have been the themes of organizing Historicity and participation in the policy-making and management of rural communities, each with 24 codes, which shows the greater emphasis of experts on these topics.
The results of the analysis indicate that in policymaking we should pay attention to the culture of the rural community, the independent social, economic and environmental identity of each village and the historical process of management in Iranian villages. Also, in order to better understand the current way of managing the villages, one should know about the historical development of rural management in Iran. He recognized the positive and negative impacts of the policies and decisions that have historically been taken for the management of rural communities and the plans and programs that have been developed to develop these areas as policy themes and challenges. The importance of the environmental context has been emphasized on rural policy-making and management, and attention to the environment has been formed as an influential factor and the basis of policy-making as well as form, and the result of policy implementation is very necessary for experts. If we want rural development and good management of rural communities, we must take into account the culture of rural society in policy making, taking into account the independent social, economic and environmental identity of each village and the environment as an influential factor in the policies and contexts. It was also seen as a form of policy making. Finally, it can be said that the current state of policymaking for the management of Iran's rural areas is irresponsible considering these basic themes. It is necessary to achieve the policy goals and the proper management of the villages to help the people themselves and to participate in all the policy making and implementation processes.
Keywords: Policy making, Challenges, Rural development, Rural Areas of Iran.


Main Subjects

  1. حسینی ابری، سیدحسن، 1380، کدخدا؟، فصل‏نامة تحقیقات جغرافیایی، ش 60، صص ۵۱-64.
  2. رکن‏الدین افتخاری، عبدالرضا؛ سجاسی قیداری، حمدالله و عینالی، جمشید، 1386، نگرشی نو به مدیریت روستایی با تأکید بر نهادهای تأثیرگذار، فصل‏نامة روستا و توسعه، س 10، ش 2، صص ۱-30.
  3. رکن‏الدین افتخاری، عبدالرضا؛ عظیمی آملی، جلال؛ پورطاهری، مهدی و احمدی‏پور، زهرا، 1391، ارائة الگوی مناسب حکمروایی خوب روستایی در ایران، فصل‏نامة بین‏المللی ژئوپلیتیک، س ۸، ش ۲۶، صص ۱-۲۸.
  4. محمدپور، احمد و ایمان، محمدتقی، 1387، بازسازی معنایی پیامدهای تغییرات اقتصادی در منطقة اورامان تخت کردستان ایران: ارائة یک نظریة زمینه‏ای، مجلة رفاه اجتماعی، دورة 7، ش 27، صص ۱۹۱-213.
  5. محمدی، نریمان؛ علیزاده، توحید و حاتمی طاهر، فردوس، 1395، عودلاجان، روایت مرگ یک محله: مطالعة پیامدهای معنایی تغییرات فضایی، در محلة عودلاجان تهران، مجلة پژوهش‏های راهبردی امنیت و نظم اجتماعی، س ۵، ش ۴، شمارة پیاپی 15، صص ۹۹-121.
  6. Hossaini Abari, S.H., 2002, Kadkhoda. (persian), Geographical Researches Quarterly Journal, 60, 51-64.
  7. Rokneddin Eftekhari, A.; Sojasi Ghidari, H. and Einali, J., 2007, New Attitude towards Rural Management with an Emphasis on Effective Institutions. (persian), Village and Development, 10(2), 1-30.
  8. Roknaldin Eftekhari, A.; Azimi Amoli, J.; Pourtaheri, M. and Ahmadypour, Z., 2012, Presentation of an Appropriate Rural Good Governance Model in Iran Case study: Rural Areas of Mazandaran Provience in Iran. (Persian), Geopolitics Quarterly, 8(26), 1-28.
  9. Mohamadpor, A. and Iman, M.T., 2008, The Meaning Reconstruction of Economic Changes’ Consequences in Ouraman - e - Takht Region of Iranian Kurdistan: A Grounded Theory Approach. (persian), Social Welfare Qurterly, 7(27).
  10. Mohammadi, N.; Alizadeh, T. and Hatami Taher, F. (2017). Oudlajan: Narrates the Death of a Neighborhood The Study of Semantic Implications of Spatial Changes in Oudlajan Neighborhood of Tehran. (persian), Strategic Rssearch on Social Problems in Iran University of Isfahan, 5(4), 99-121.
  11. Acharya, A. and Rahman, Z., 2016, Place branding research: a thematic review and future research agenda. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 13(3), 289-317.
  12. Balestrieri, M., 2016, Exploring the concept of rurality among university students in Sardinia, Italy, Rural society, 25(2), 117-133.
  13. Blaikie, N., 2016, Was Cicourel’s critique in Methods and Measurement in Sociology too radical?, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(1), 121-129.
  14. Bohr, J. and Dunlap, R. E., 2018, Key Topics in environmental sociology, 1990–2014: results from a computational text analysis, Environmental Sociology, 4(2), 181-195.
  15. Braun, V. and Clarke, V., 2006, Using thematic analysis in psychology, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
  16. Braun, V. and Clarke, V., 2019, Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589-597.
  17. Bürger, T. and Volkmann, C., 2020, Mapping and thematic analysis of cultural entrepreneurship research, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 40(2), 192-229.
  18. Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), 2011, The Sage handbook of qualitative research, Sage.
  19. Dye, T. R. and Dye, T. R., 1992, Understanding public policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  20. Edwards, M. B. and Matarrita-Cascante, D., 2011, Rurality in leisure research: A review of four major journals. Journal of Leisure Research, 43(4), 447-474.
  21. Elliott, J., 2005, Using narrative in social research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches, Sage Publications.
  22. Fennell, K. M.; Jarrett, C. E.; Kettler, L. J.; Dollman, J. and Turnbull, D. A., 2016, Watching the bank balance build up then blow away and the rain clouds do the same: A thematic analysis of South Australian farmers’ sources of stress during drought, Journal of rural studies, 46, 102-110.
  23. Gennaro, B. D.; Fantini, A. and Rodrigues, C. D. O., 2002, Ecotourism, rural development and local community in developing countries: the case of the village of Conceição do Ibitipoca in Brazil. Rivista di Economia Agraria, 57(2/3), 421-444.
  24. Goodwin, M., 1998, The governance of rural areas: some emerging research issues and agendas, Journal of rural studies, 14(1), 5-12.
  25. Harrington, V. and O’Donoghue, D., 1998, Rurality in England and Wales 1991: a replication and extension of the 1981 rurality index, Sociologia Ruralis, 38(2), 178-203.
  26. King, N.; Horrocks, C. and Brooks, J., 2018, Interviews in qualitative research, SAGE Publications Limited.
  27. Korten, D. C., 1980, Community organization and rural development: A learning process approach. Public administration review, PP. 480-511.
  28. Lange, A.; Siebert, R. and Barkmann, T., 2015, Sustainability in land management: an analysis of stakeholder perceptions in rural northern Germany, Sustainability, 7(1), 683-704.
  29. Lapping, M. B., 2006, Rural policy and planning, Handbook of rural studies, PP. 104-122.
  30. Li, Y.; Long, H. and Liu, Y., 2015, Spatio-temporal pattern of China's rural development: A rurality index perspective, Journal of Rural Studies, 38, 12-26.
  31. Little, J., 2001, New rural governance? Progress in Human Geography, 25(1), 97-102.
  32. Marsden, T., 1998, New rural territories: regulating the differentiated rural spaces, Journal of Rural Studies, 14, 107-17.
  33. McLaughlin, B., 1986, Rural policy in the 1980s: the revival of the rural idyll, Journal of rural studies, 2(2), 81-90.
  34. Murdoch, J. and Abram, S., 1998, Defining the limits of community governance, Journal of rural studies, 14(1), 41-50.
  35. Neuman, L., 2007, Basics o Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Second Edition, Allyn & Bacon.
  36. Patton, M. Q., 2002, Qualitative research & evaluation methods, Thousand Oaks Sage Publications, New York, New Delhi, London.
  37. Robertson, C. and Horrocks, K., 2017, Spatial Context from Open and Online Processing (SCOOP): geographic, temporal, and thematic analysis of online information sources. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 6(7), 193.
  38. Shucksmith, M., 2010, Disintegrated rural development? Neo‐endogenous rural development, planning and place‐shaping in diffused power contexts, Sociologia ruralis, 50(1), 1-14.
  39. Stevenson, N.; Airey, D. and Miller, G., 2008, Tourism policy making: The policymakers’ perspectives. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(3), 732-750.
  40. Tikai, P. and Kama, A., 2010, A study of indigenous knowledge and its role to sustainable agriculture in Samoa, Ozean Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 65-79.
  41. Tuitjer, G. and Steinführer, A., 2019, The scientific construction of the village. Framing and practicing rural research in a trend study in Germany, 1952–2015. (In press). Journal of Rural Studies.
  42. Van Berkel, D. B. and Verburg, P. H., 2011, Sensitising rural policy: Assessing spatial variation in rural development options for Europe, Land Use Policy, 28(3), 447-459.
  43. Wenchang, W. (2008). Rural Management–The Way Out for Tibetan Rural Areas. Business and Public Administration Studies, 3(3), 75.
  44. Dictionary. .(Definition of “policy-making” from the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus © Cambridge University Press).
Volume 53, Issue 3
October 2021
Pages 1089-1101
  • Receive Date: 03 May 2020
  • Revise Date: 01 September 2020
  • Accept Date: 01 September 2020
  • First Publish Date: 23 September 2021