تحلیلی بر نظام ژئوپلیتیک غذای جهانی با تأکید بر جایگاه ایران

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشکدگان فارابی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

2 گروه مدیریت جهانگردی، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران

3 گروه جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشکده جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

چکیده

در دهههای اخیر عواملی همچون تغییرات آب و هوایی، کمبود منابع آبی، افزایش جمعیت جهان، افزایش جمعیت شهرنشین و مصرف کننده، استفاده از مواد غذایی برای تولید سوختهای زیستی، استفاده از غذا به عنوان یک اهرم فشار در رقابت های ژئوپلیتیکی و تضعیف کشور رقیب و سایر عوامل امروزه غذا را به یکی از موضوعات مهم ژئوپلیتیک بدل ساختهاند. این پژوهش به منظور تحلیل نظام ژئوپلیتیک غذای جهانی در قالب روش تحقیق آمیخته اکتشافی و مبتنی بر داده‌های فائو و با استفاده از مدلهای دلفی، PROMETHEE ،AHP Fuzzy و نرم افزارهای Excel و GIS انجام شده است. نتایج نشان می‌دهد قدرت‌های برتر در عرصه ژئوپلیتیک غذا به ترتیب ۱۰ کشور آمریکا، فرانسه، آرژانتین، آلمان، استرالیا، برزیل، هند، هلند، اسپانیا، و بلژیک هستند. ایران با رتبههای ۱۶، ۵، ۷۴ و ۱۳ در تولید، واردات، صادرات و مصرف محصولات استراتژیک غذایی، کشوری آسیب پذیر در عرصه ژئوپلیتیک غذای جهانی به شمار میرود. در دهههای اخیر عواملی همچون تغییرات آب و هوایی، کمبود منابع آبی، افزایش جمعیت جهان، افزایش جمعیت شهرنشین و مصرف کننده، استفاده از مواد غذایی برای تولید سوختهای زیستی، استفاده از غذا به عنوان یک اهرم فشار در رقابت های ژئوپلیتیکی و تضعیف کشور رقیب و سایر عوامل امروزه غذا را به یکی از موضوعات مهم ژئوپلیتیک بدل ساختهاند. این پژوهش به منظور تحلیل نظام ژئوپلیتیک غذای جهانی در قالب روش تحقیق آمیخته اکتشافی و مبتنی بر داده‌های فائو و با استفاده از مدلهای دلفی، PROMETHEE ،AHP Fuzzy و نرم افزارهای Excel و GIS انجام شده است. نتایج نشان می‌دهد قدرت‌های برتر در عرصه ژئوپلیتیک غذا به ترتیب ۱۰ کشور آمریکا، فرانسه، آرژانتین، آلمان، استرالیا، برزیل، هند، هلند، اسپانیا، و بلژیک هستند. ایران با رتبههای ۱۶، ۵، ۷۴ و ۱۳ در تولید، واردات، صادرات و مصرف محصولات استراتژیک غذایی، کشوری آسیب پذیر در عرصه ژئوپلیتیک غذای جهانی به شمار میرود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

An analysis of the geopolitical system of world food with emphasis on the position of Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyed Mohammad Hosseini 1
  • Seyed Ali Hosseini 2
  • Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf 3
  • Rasul Afzali 3
  • zahra pishgahifard 3
1 Department of Management and Accounting, Farabi School, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Tourism Management, Faculty of Management & Accounting, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran
3 Department of Political Geography, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Introduction
In recent decades, Power and its measurement methods have been one of the inexhaustible concerns of most experts in the fields of political geography and geopolitics, international relations, political science, etc. Doing plenty of research and studies to assess the status of national power represents the interest of researchers in this topic and its importance. Understanding of the nation power of country and its position relative to other countries, Political leaders helps to have a proper strategy to maximize their goals and realize the benefits. The main factors shaping of national power is Located in different areas and a range of spiritual and material are included.
Methodology
In this paper we used the exploring technique as the one of the integrated research methods. Data has been gathered using the library and documentary methods, surfing the internet for national and international scientific databases such as FAO. The Delphi method (classic) to select strategic products of food of Iran (using The expert panel consisted of 33 patients during three surveys), the promethee and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for ranking countries in the geopolitics of food and Software of Excel and GIS for data analysis and drawing maps are used.
Result and discussion
Based on the consensus of experts in research, the results show that wheat is the most Iran's strategic products of food followed by rice, barley, meat, oil, Maize and sugar. This seven-product were selected as Iran’s strategic products of food from the perspective of experts. The findings of this study indicate that the main exporting countries of strategic products of food are powers in the geopolitics of food and 15 powerful are America, France, Argentina, Germany, Australia, Brazil, India, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, Canada, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Russia, and Italy respectively. Based on the average data from 1992 to 2011 from FAO, Iran has had the ranks of fifteenth in export of strategic products of food between countries not only doesn’t have a good Sphere of influence in geopolitics of food that a vulnerable country is known.
Based on the average data from 1992 to 2011 from FAO, Iran has had the ranks of fifteenth, thirteenth, fifteenth and forty-fifth respectively in production, consumption, import and export of wheat. Also, the rank of Iran in wheat producing with 1.8 (tons/hectares) is thirty-second among the all countries. The results of the ARIMA model shows that Iran would be a small importer of wheat till 2021 at least. Based on the results, the most important exporters of wheat from 1992 to 2011 have been: USA, Canada, France, Australia, Argentina, Russia, Germany, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, and England respectively. Hence, according to the results of Analytic hierarchy process and five factors including Political stability, Transportation advantages, Stability in the production and export, Economic relations with Iran and Political relations with Iran and their variables, the best countries for importing of wheat to Iran are respectively Russia, Kazakhstan, Germany, France, Ukraine, England, Argentina, USA, Australia, and Canada.
Conclusion
According to our aims in this research (i.e. measuring and ranking national power in the international geopolitical food), findings show that Iran is a dependent country in the international geopolitical food. It is obvious that the geopolitical dependency influence on the national power of country negatively. Therefore, it is necessary to find ways to balance import and export in order to adjust or overcome the dependency.
Key word: Food, Strategic Products of Food, National Power, Geopolitics of Food
Extended Abstract
Introduction
In recent decades, Power and its measurement methods have been one of the inexhaustible concerns of most experts in the fields of political geography and geopolitics, international relations, political science, etc. Doing plenty of research and studies to assess the status of national power represents the interest of researchers in this topic and its importance. Understanding of the nation power of country and its position relative to other countries, Political leaders helps to have a proper strategy to maximize their goals and realize the benefits. The main factors shaping of national power is Located in different areas and a range of spiritual and material are included.
Methodology
In this paper we used the exploring technique as the one of the integrated research methods. Data has been gathered using the library and documentary methods, surfing the internet for national and international scientific databases such as FAO. The Delphi method (classic) to select strategic products of food of Iran (using The expert panel consisted of 33 patients during three surveys), the promethee and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for ranking countries in the geopolitics of food and Software of Excel and GIS for data analysis and drawing maps are used.
Result and discussion
Based on the consensus of experts in research, the results show that wheat is the most Iran's strategic products of food followed by rice, barley, meat, oil, Maize and sugar. This seven-product were selected as Iran’s strategic products of food from the perspective of experts. The findings of this study indicate that the main exporting countries of strategic products of food are powers in the geopolitics of food and 15 powerful are America, France, Argentina, Germany, Australia, Brazil, India, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, Canada, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Russia, and Italy respectively. Based on the average data from 1992 to 2011 from FAO, Iran has had the ranks of fifteenth in export of strategic products of food between countries not only doesn’t have a good Sphere of influence in geopolitics of food that a vulnerable country is known.
Based on the average data from 1992 to 2011 from FAO, Iran has had the ranks of fifteenth, thirteenth, fifteenth and forty-fifth respectively in production, consumption, import and export of wheat. Also, the rank of Iran in wheat producing with 1.8 (tons/hectares) is thirty-second among the all countries. The results of the ARIMA model shows that Iran would be a small importer of wheat till 2021 at least. Based on the results, the most important exporters of wheat from 1992 to 2011 have been: USA, Canada,
Key word: Food, Strategic Products of Food, National Power, Geopolitics of Food

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • "Food"
  • "Strategic Products of Food"
  • " National Power"
  • "Geopolitics of Food"
  • "Iran"

مراجع

  1. پیشگاهی فرد، زهرا؛ حسینی، سید موسی و فراهانی، مرتضی. (1393). رتبه‌بندی قدرت ملی کشورهای خاورمیانه با استفاده از تصمیم‌گیری چند شاخصه جبرانی. پژوهشنامه جغرافیای انتظامی، 2 (5)، 44-1.
  2. حافظ نیا، محمدرضا. (1379). مبانی مطالعات سیاسی و اجتماعی. قم: انتشارات سازمان مدارس و حوزه‌های علمیه خارج از کشور.
  3. حسینی، سید محمد. (1393). تبیین نقش غذا در رقابت‌های ژئوپلیتیکی با تأکید بر جایگاه ایران. پایان‌نامه دکتری تخصصی به راهنمایی دکتر محمدباقر قالیباف. رشته جغرافیای سیاسی. دانشگاه تهران.
  4. روشندل، جلیل. (1394). امنیت ملی و نظام بین‌المللی. تهران: انتشارات سمت.
  5. عطایی، محمد. (1395). تصمیم‌گیری چند معیاره فازی. چاپ دوم. شاهرود: انتشارات دانشگاه شاهرود.
  6. قالیباف، محمدباقر؛ پیشگاهی فرد، زهرا؛ افضلی، رسول و حسینی، سیدمحمد. (1395). تحلیلی ژئوپلیتیکی بر محصول‌های راهبردی کشاورزی ایران (مطالعه موردی: گندم). فصلنامه پژوهش‌های جغرافیای انسانی، 48 (1)، صص 35-67.
  7. کوره پزان دزفولی، امین. (1394). اصول تئوری مجموعه‌های فازی. تهران: انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی واحد صنعتی امیرکبیر.

 

References

  1. Ahmed, J. O. (2020). The effect of biofuel crops cultivation on food prices stability and food security-A Review. EurAsian Journal of BioSciences, 14(1), 613-621.
  2. Ataii, M. (2017). A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making. Shahrood: Shahrood University Press. [In Persian].
  3. Bakker, K. (2007). The ‘commons’ versus the ‘commodity’: alter-globalization, anti-privatization and the human right to water in the global south. Antipode 39, 430–455.
  4. Barnett, C. & Cloke, P. Clarke, N. & Malpass, A. (2010).Globalizing responsibility: the political rationalities of ethical consumption. London: John Wiley & Sons.
  5. Barns, J.P. (1982). Lingenierie de la decision.Elaboration dinstruments daide a la decision. Method Promethee. Perspectives Davenir. Presses de Universite Laval, Quebec, Canada, pp. 183–214.
  6. Bell, D., & Valentine, G. (1997). Consuming geographies: we are where we eat. London: Routledge.
  7. Bellemare, M. F. (2015). Rising food prices, food price volatility, and social unrest. American Journal of agricultural economics, 97(1), 1-21.
  8. Collins, J. (2004). Military geography, the translation group of translators. Tehran: excellent course Corps War.
  9. Cook, I. (2006). Geographies of food: following. Progress in Human Geography 30 (5), 655–666.
  10. Cook, I. & Hobson, K. & Hallett, L. & Guthman, J. & Murphy, A. & Hulme, A. & Sheller,M. & Crewe, L. Nally, D. & Roe, E. & Mather, C. & Kingsbury, P. & Slocum, R. & Imai, S. & Duruz, J. & Philo, C. & Buller, H. & Goodman, M. & Hayes-Conroy, A. & Hayes-Conroy, J. & Tucker, L. & Blake, M. & Le Heron, R. & Putnam, H. & Maye, D. & Henderson, H. (2011). Geographies of food: ‘Afters’. Progress in Human Geography, 35 (1), 104–120.
  11. Essex, J. (2014). From the global food crisis to the age of austerity: The anxious geopolitics of global food security. Geopolitics, 19(2), 290-266.
  12. Feitelson, E., & Fischendler, I. (2009). Spaces of water governance: the case of Israel and its neighbors. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99, 728–745.
  13. Ghalibaf, M. & Pishgahi Fard, Z. & Afzali, R. & Hosseini, SM. (2014). Analysis and understanding of the role of food in geopolitical competition with an emphasis on geopolitics of food. Geopolitics Quarterly, 48 (1), 160- 189. [In Persian].
  14. Goodman, D., & Watts, M. (Eds) (1997). Globalising food: agrarian questions and global restructuring. London: Psychology Press.
  15. Goodman, M. K. (2004). Reading fair trade: Political ecological imaginary and the moral economy of fair trade foods.
  16. Guthman, J. (2008). Bringing good food to others: investigating the subjects of alternative food practice. Cultural Geographies 15 (4), 431–447.
  17. Hafez Nia, M. (2000). Principles of Political and Social Studies. Qom: Publication of theological and schools abroad. [In Persian].
  18. Hopma, J. & Woods, M. (2014). Political geographies of ‘food security’and ‘food sovereignty’. Geography Compass, 8(11), 773-784.
  19. Hosseini, M. (2013). Explanation of the role of food in geopolitical competition with an emphasis on strategic position of Iran. PhD thesis Under Supervision of Dr. Mohammad
  20. Jackson, P. & Ward, N. & Russell, P. (2006). Mobilising the commodity chain concept in the politics of food and farming. Journal of Rural Studies 22 (2), 129–141.
  21. Jones, W. (1994). The Logic of International Relations. translated by Davoud Heidari, Tehran, Office of International Political Studies.
  22. Kennedy, HP. (2004). Enhancing Delphi research: methods and results. J Adv Nurs, 45(5), 504-11.
  23. Kneafsey, M. & Cox, R. & Holloway, L. & Dowler, E. & Venn, L. & Tuomainen, H. (2008). Reconnecting consumers, producers and food: exploring alternatives. Oxford: Berg.
  24. Korehpazan Dezfuli, A. (2015). Fundamentals of the theory of fuzzy sets and its applications in modeling water issues. Tehran: Amirkabir University Jihad Press. [In Persian].
  25. Le Billon, P. (2001). The political ecology of war: natural resources and armed conflicts. Political Geography, 20, 561–584.
  26. Mechiche-Alami, A. & Yagoubi, J. & Nicholas, K. A. (2021). Agricultural land acquisitions unlikely to address the food security needs of African countries. World Development, 141, 105384.
  27. Norman, E., & Bakker, K. (2009). Transgressing scales: water governance across the Canada-US borderland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99, 99–117.
  28. Perreault, T. (2005). State restructuring and the scale politics of rural water governance in Bolivia. Environment and Planning a, 37, 263–284.
  29. Pishgahi Fard, Z. & Hosseini, S. & Farahani, M. (2013). Ranking of national power in the Middle East country by using MADM. Journal of defense policy, 2(5), 249-274. [In Persian].
  30. Pomerol, J.C. (2001). Scenario Development and practical decision making under uncertainty. Decision Support Systems, 31, 197- 204.
  31. Pomerol, J.C. & Barba Romero, S. (2000). Multicriterion decision making in management. principles and practice.
  32. Roshandel, J. (1995). National security and the international system. Tehran: SAMT publications. [In Persian].
  33. Rosin, C. & Stock, P. & Campbell, H. (2013). Food systems failure: The global food crisis and the future of agriculture. Routledge.
  34. Stringer, C. & Le Heron, R. (Eds) (2008). Agri-food commodity chains and globalising networks. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  35. Tahamy, SM. (2003). National security, doctrines and Security and defense policies. Volume 1, Tehran: Supreme National Defense University. [In Persian].
  36. Taylor, P.J. & Flint, C. (2000). Political geography. World-economy, nation-state, and Locality. fourth edition, London: Prentice Hall.
  37. Whitehead, M. & Jones, R. & Jones, M. (2007). The nature of the state: excavating the political ecologies of the modern state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  38. Zhu, Z. et al. (2010). Optimization on tribological properties of aramid fibre and CaSO4 whiskerreinforced non-metallic friction material with analytic hierarchy processand preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluations. Materials and Design 31 (2010), 551–555.
پژوهشهای جغرافیای انسانی
دوره 55، شماره 1
اسفند 1401
صفحه 41-60

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 15 آذر 1399
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 31 شهریور 1400
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 27 تیر 1400

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار