Analysis and recognition of economic and social effects of rangeland management projects (Case study: semi-arid region of Bijar city)

Background and objectives: Rangelands, as an important part of natural resources, play an essential role in improving or reducing the economic and social conditions of local communities and rural residents. After the Forest and Rangeland Nationalization Act of 1962, in the laws passed in 1969, the exploitation of rangelands was considered as a rangeland management plan for the first time. In the meantime, rangeland management plans are formulated and implemented with the aim of promoting ecological, economic and social indicators of stakeholders that it is necessary to evaluate the achievement of these aims in order to policy and decision making for rangeland management. Rangeland management plans are one of the main tools for managing and exploiting rangelands in Iran, which are implemented to eliminate or reduce degradation and optimal and sustainable rangeland management. In this study, economic and social effects of rangeland management projects in Bijar city of Kurdistan province were evaluated. Methodology: In this research, according to the applied objectives of the study, a survey and documentary method was used to collect data and information. The study area included rangelands of 9 completed rangeland projects in Bijar city in the East of Kurdistan province. The statistical population in this study included two groups of stakeholders of rangeland and experts familiar with the subject and rangeland projects. 175 households were selected based on Cochran's formula and adapted to Krejcie and Morgan table as study samples and participated in completing the questionnaires randomly. Also, 24 experts participated in the research. After confirming the validity of the questionnaires using the opinion of experts, Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used in order to evaluate the reliability of the questionnaires. These values are obtained 0.81 and 0.84 for experts and stakeholders, respectively. It showed that the questionnaires were properly reliable. In addition to demographic characteristics, the research questionnaires included questions about the direct and indirect socio-economic effects of rangeland plans based on Likert scale. Prioritization of economic and social effects was done through the ranking average. The normality of the data was assessed by Kolmogorov -Smirnov test and after confirming the normality of the data, Student's t-test was used to compare the viewpoints of experts and stakeholders about economic and social effects of rangeland projects. Data analyses were performed using SPSS20 software. Results: According to the results, preventing the land use changes, improving the drinking water needs of livestock and increasing the confidence of stakeholders in the aims and programs of the executive department of natural resources by obtaining averages of 4.04, 3.96 and 3.92, were the most important economic and social effects of rangeland projects in Bijar city from the viewpoint of the experts, respectively. But from the viewpoint of the stakeholders, the sense of belonging and sense of ownership to the rangelands for stakeholders, strengthening the social spirit and participation of the local community in implementing the plan and increasing the unity and social cohesion of the with averages of 4.16, 3.92 and 3.88 were the most important economic and social effects of rangeland projects, respectively. In the majority of economic and social indicators of rangeland management projects, there was no statistically significant difference between the viewpoint of experts and stakeholders (P >0.05), but according to viewpoint of experts, the mean value of the effects of preventing land use changes (P =0.0001) and increasing the trust of stakeholders to the aims and programs of the executive department of natural resources (P = 0.012) was more significantly. Such, from the viewpoint of stakeholders, increasing the unity and social cohesion of stakeholders (P = 0.003), the sense of belonging and sense of ownership to the rangelands for stakeholders, (P = 0.019), strengthening the social spirit and participation of the local community in the implementation of the project (P = 0.012) were significantly more evaluated. Economic effects from the viewpoint of the stakeholders were evaluated significantly lower than experts (P <0.05). But there was no significant difference between the viewpoint of experts and stakeholders in social effects (P >0.05). Conclusion: According to the results of this study, the implementation of rangeland management projects in the study area has only been somewhat effective in achieving some economic and social indicators, especially social goals. These projects in some economic and social aspects such as income generation, employment and reducing migration has not been very effective. The overall satisfaction with the implementation of rangeland management plans was not high from the viewpoints of both groups due to the failure to meet the economic needs of stakeholders. Therefore it is necessary to develop and implement rangeland management projects with more accuracy, sensitivity and seriousness. Finally, recognizing and using the capacities and resources, multi-purpose use of rangelands, attracting facilities and capitals of the private and public sectors and providing appropriate facilities can provide the basis for further success and improve the effectiveness of rangeland management projects.