تحلیل قدرت نهادی در شبکه حکمرانی مناطق بیابانی: کاربرد رویکرد تحلیل شبکه اجتماعی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تهران، کرج، ایران.

2 گروه احیا مناطق خشک و کوهستانی، دانشکده منابع طبیعی دانشگاه تهران، کرج، ایران

3 مؤسسه کسب‌و‌کار اجتماعی دانشگاه تهران

‎10.22052/deej.2025.256769.1104

چکیده

این پژوهش با هدف تحلیل ساختار قدرت نهادی در شبکۀ حکمرانی مناطق روستایی شهرستان تفتان، به‌عنوان نمونه‌ای از مناطق بیابانی در حال توسعه در جنوب شرقی ایران انجام شده است. بدین منظور، از رویکرد تحلیل شبکۀ اجتماعی، با استفاده از پرسش‌نامه‌های تحلیل شبکۀ اجتماعی و سنجه‌های مرکزیت درجه، بینابینی و مجاورت، برای بررسی و مقایسۀ الگوهای تعامل و توزیع قدرت بین دست‌اندرکاران سازمانی در حوزۀ توسعۀ روستایی این شهرستان، قبل و بعد از اجرای طرح آبادانی و پیشرفت منظومه‌های روستایی در سال 1400 استفاده شده است. نتایج نشان می‌دهد که پیش از اجرای طرح، سازمان جهاد کشاورزی با بالاترین مرکزیت درجۀ خروجی (25) نقش محوری در انتشار اطلاعات و فرمانداری با بالاترین مرکزیت درجۀ ورودی (50) نقش هماهنگ‌کنندۀ اصلی را ایفا می‌کردند. پس از اجرای طرح، درحالی‌که این سازمان‌ها همچنان نقش‌های مرکزی خود را حفظ نمودند، سازمان‌هایی نظیر صندوق کارآفرینی امید و میراث ‌فرهنگی نقش فعال‌تر پیدا کرده‌اند. افزایش مرکزیت بینابینی (صندوق کارآفرینی امید به 793/3) و مجاورت (میراث ‌فرهنگی به 877/32) این سازمان‌ها حاکی از تقویت نقش واسطه‌ای و بهبود دسترسی آن‌ها به سایر کنشگران شبکه است. این یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که اجرای طرح مذکور منجر به تغییراتی در ساختار شبکۀ حکمرانی به‌سمت مشارکت فعال‌تر سازمان‌های مرتبط در راستای مدیریت و توسعۀ مناطق بیابانی شده است. تحلیل شبکۀ اجتماعی ابزاری ارزشمند برای درک این تغییرات و پویایی‌های قدرت در شبکه‌های حکمرانی مناطق بیابانی محسوب می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Analysis of Institutional Power in the Governance Network of Desert Regions: An Application of Social Network Analysis

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mehdi Ghorbani 1
  • Samira Mohammadian, 2
  • َAyda Heydari 2
  • Majid Rahimi 3
1 Faculty of natural resources, university of tehran, karaj, Iran.
2 Department of Environmental Planning and Management, College of Environment, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
3 Social Business Institute, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Introduction: The governance of desert and arid regions, such as southeastern Iran, faces complex challenges for sustainable development and resource management. These regions are defined by scarce water, fragile ecosystems, and intricate socio-economic dynamics, all of which underscore the need to understand stakeholder interactions. The urgency for effective governance is heightened by factors like climate change, population growth, and the need for equitable resource allocation. Analyzing the power structures and interaction patterns among organizations is crucial for successful development initiatives, as traditional hierarchical governance models are often insufficient. Social Network Analysis (SNA) provides a valuable framework for examining the relational dynamics and power distribution within these systems. This study uses an SNA approach to investigate the institutional power structure and interactions among governmental and non-governmental organizations in Taftan county, a developing desert region of southeastern Iran. The primary goal is to analyze how these interaction patterns and power distributions evolved after the implementation of the Development and Advancement Plan of Rural Constellations. The findings will provide practical insights for future development strategies in similar contexts.
Materials and Methods: This study strategically employed Social Network Analysis (SNA) to map and analyze relationships among key organizations involved in rural development in Taftan County, a desert and arid region. The research focused on the rural development governance network of Taftan County. The network's boundaries were defined to include all organizational institutions directly involved in rural development, with a specific focus on those influenced by a recent development plan. A purposive sampling strategy, supplemented by snowball sampling, was used to identify and include a comprehensive list of stakeholders. This process involved: Reviewing project-related documents, conducting interviews with experts, Examining the county's broader organizational landscape. Data were collected using specialized SNA questionnaires administered to organizational representatives. The questionnaires were designed to capture the existence, nature, and intensity of interactions both before and after the implementation of the development plan. Interactions were categorized by type, including collaboration, information exchange, participation, service provision, and resource support, and were often measured using Likert scales. Collected data were structured into adjacency matrices, which were then processed using UCINET 6 software. The software was used to calculate key network metrics, with a specific focus on micro-level centrality measures such as degree, betweenness, and closeness. These metrics were analyzed to understand shifts in power dynamics and relational patterns that resulted from the development intervention. Network structures were visually represented using NetDraw software.
Results and Discussion: The network analysis revealed distinct interaction and power distribution patterns in Taftan County both before and after the Development and Advancement Plan of Rural Constellations. Before the plan, the network displayed a hierarchical structure centered on traditional government bodies. The Agricultural Jihad Organization had a high out-degree centrality, positioning it as a primary source of information dissemination. The Governorate exhibited high in-degree centrality, reflecting its central role as a key coordinator. The Governorate and the Technical and Vocational Training Center both had relatively high betweenness centrality, indicating their important intermediary roles in connecting different parts of the network. Conversely, organizations such as the Industry, Mining, and Trade Organization and the Electricity Distribution Management had lower closeness centrality, suggesting they were more distant from the network's core. Following the plan's implementation, the network's structure showed significant changes. While the Agricultural Jihad Organization and the Governorate maintained their central positions, new actors gained prominence. The Hope Entrepreneurship Fund and the Cultural Heritage Organization saw a notable increase in both betweenness and closeness centrality. This shift suggests that these organizations strengthened their brokerage roles and gained improved access to the network's resources and information. This change likely reflects the development plan's strategic focus on economic empowerment and cultural tourism. The findings indicate a clear redistribution of institutional power within the governance network. Organizations whose objectives were aligned with the new development plan's priorities, particularly in entrepreneurship and cultural heritage, gained increased prominence. This supports existing research on the dynamic nature of power in governance networks and highlights how targeted development interventions can successfully reshape stakeholder influence and collaboration.
Conclusion: This research successfully utilized Social Network Analysis (SNA) to examine the changes in the institutional power structure within Taftan County's governance network following the implementation of the Development and Advancement Plan of Rural Constellations. The findings confirm that the plan led to a notable shift in interaction patterns and power distribution among organizational stakeholders. While traditional authorities, such as the Agricultural Jihad Organization and the Governorate, maintained their central roles, other organizations gained significant prominence. Specifically, the Hope Entrepreneurship Fund and the Cultural Heritage Organization exhibited increased betweenness and closeness centrality. This suggests they have developed stronger intermediary roles and improved their access to resources and information within the network. This redistribution of power highlights how a strategic development plan can effectively realign a governance network to support its key objectives. The study underscores the value of SNA as a robust methodology for understanding the dynamic nature of governance networks and for evaluating the impact of development interventions in arid regions. For future research, it would be beneficial to explore the qualitative aspects of these new interactions and to assess the long-term sustainability of the observed network changes.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Rural Development
  • Taftan County
  • Development and Advancement Plan
  • Dynamics and Power Assessment
  • Institutional Governance
  1. Khavar, A., Ghorbani, M., Azarnivand, H., Alambaigi, A., & Khalighi Sigaroudi, S. (2021). Measuring and Comparing the Structural Characteristics of Social Capital of Users in regard with Rangeland Governance (Case study: Sabzevar County, Khorasan Razavi Province). Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Research28(2), 369-380. https://doi.org/10.22092/ijrdr.2021.124172
  2. Afkhami, M., Ghorbani, M., & Babaei, S. (2025). Application of Social Network Analysis in Evaluating Social Capital with an Emphasis on Participatory Water Governance: A Case Study of Borujerd County. Journal of Rural Research16(1), 39-57. https://jrur.ut.ac.ir/article_100497.html?lang=fa
  3. Ali, P. S. (2023). The role of nongovernmental organizations in rural development. International Journal of Social Science and Humanities5(3), 13-16.‏ https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ali-38/publication/372940836_Role_of_non-governmental_organizations_in_rural_development
  4. Armitage, D., Berkes, F., & Doubleday, N. (2007). Adaptive co-management: Collaboration, learning, and multi-level governance. University of British Columbia Press.
  5. Armitage, D., Berkes, F., Dale, A., Kocho-Schellenberg, E., & Patton, E. (2011). Co-management and the co-production of knowledge: Learning to adapt in Canada's Arctic. Global Environmental Change, 21(3), 995-1004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.04.006
  6. Ashtari, Ghorbani, Khorasani, Mohammad Amin, & Ghaffari. (2024). Analysis of the dynamics of organizational cohesion in the implementation of the rural development and progress plan (case study: Gachsaran County). Rural Research, 15(2), 382-397. https://doi.org/10.22059/jrur.2024.377112.1950
  7. Ayoub, J., Lotfi, D., & Hammouch, A. (2022). Link prediction using betweenness centrality and graph neural networks. Social Network Analysis and Mining13(1), 5.‏ https://github.com/axe-331/LinkPrediction-using-Betweenness-centrality
  8. Bandari, & Tarvirdizadeh. (2024). Qualitative analysis of sustainable development policies in rural areas: A study based on the perspective of local stakeholders. Quarterly Journal of Geography (Regional Planning)14(55). https://www.jgeoqeshm.ir/article_215174.html?lang=fa
  9. Barzegar, M., Ghorbani, M., Hassanzadeh, A., & Hosseini, G. A. (2019). Analysis of Adapting Indigenous Knowledge and Local Initiatives in Management of Water Resources (Case Study: Gezir Plain). Iranian Anthropological Research8(2), 99-121. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijar.2019.71600
  10. Beritelli, P., & Laesser, C. (2011). Power dimensions and influence reputation in tourist destinations: Empirical evidence from a network of actors and stakeholders. Tourism Management32(6), 1299-1309.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.12.010
  11. Biggs, R., Schlüter, M., Biggs, D., Bohensky, E. L., BurnSilver, S., Cundill, G., ... & West, P. C. (2012). Toward principles for enhancing the resilience of ecosystem services. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, No. 37, 421-448. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-051211-123836
  12. Bodin, Ö. (2023). Social-Ecological Networks: What Are They, Why Are They Useful And How Can I Use Them?. The Sage Handbook of Social Network Analysis, 75.‏
  13. Comprehensive Statistical Yearbook of Iran (2016). Statistical Center of Iran, https://amar.org.ir/salnameh-amari
  14. Crona, B., Ernstson, H., Prell, C., Reed, M., & Hubacek, K. (2011). Combining social network approaches with social theories to improve understanding of natural resource governance. In Ö. Bodin & C. Prell (Eds.), Social networks and natural resource management: Uncovering the social fabric of environmental governance (pp. 44-72). Cambridge University Press.
  15. Danielsen, F., Burgess, N. D., Balmford, A., Donald, P. F., Funder, M., Jones, J. P., ... & Yonten, D. (2009). Local participation in natural resource monitoring: a characterization of approaches. Conservation biology, 23(1), 31-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01063.x
  16. Davies, J., & Holcombe, S. (2009). Desert knowledge: integrating knowledge and development in arid and semi-arid drylands. GeoJournal, 74(5), 363-375.‏ doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.05.001.
  17. Ebers, M., & Oerlemans, L. (2016). The variety of governance structures beyond market and hierarchy. Journal of Management, 42(6), 1491-1529.‏ https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313506938
  18. Einloo, F., Ekhtesasi, M. R., Ghorbani, M., Abdinejad, P., & Anjomshoaa, R. (2022). Network analysis of organizational stakeholders for participatory management of water resources (Case study: Abhar Plain). Journal of Range and Watershed Management, 75(2), 263-282. https://doi.org/10.22059/jrwm.2022.324889.1593
  19. Freeman, L. (2004). The development of social network analysis. A Study in the Sociology of Science, 1(687), 159-167.‏
  20. Furmankiewicz, M., Macken-Walsh, Á., & Stefańska, J. (2014). Territorial governance, networks and power: Cross-sectoral partnerships in rural poland. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 96(4), 345-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/geob.12056
  21. Garakani, S. A. H., Ghorbani, M., Padash Zive, H., & Rahimi, M. (2025). Evaluating the effects of the rural development and progress plan on promoting social capital. Journal of Natural Environment77(4), 653-666. https://doi.org/10.22059/jne.2024.384253.2718
  22. Ghafari, S., Ghorbani, M., Salajegheh, A., Naderi, A., Ghanian, M., & Azadi, H. (2024). Analysis of actor positions and institutional conflicts in water governance in Khuzestan. Iranian Journal of Rainwater Catchment Systems12(3), 97-116. https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.24235970.1403.12.3.8.5
  23. Ghorbani, M., Garakani, S. A., Ghafari, S., Avazpour, L. and Rahimi, M. (2025). Dynamic Analysis of Organizational Stakeholders' Cohesion and Determination of Land Governance Systems: Application of Social Network Analysis. Integrated Watershed Management, 5(1), 59-78. https://iwm.ilam.ac.ir/article_715082.html
  24. Ghorbani, M., Garakani, S. A., Hamidi, M., Amiri, S., & Rahimi, M. (2025). Evaluation of the social capital of local communities in line with the governance of the land (study area: Taftan city). Journal of Range and Watershed Managment78(1), 17-27. https://jrwm.ut.ac.ir/article_100841.html
  25. He, F., Ji, L., & Li, C. (2025). Grid disaster risk identification based on social network analysis. Reliability Engineering & System Safety256, 110756.
  26. He, W., & Yue, X. (2023). Collaborative Governance in Desertification Control in China: A Case Study of Hobq Desert. Sustainability, 15(3), 1979.‏ https://doi.org/10.3390/su15031979
  27. Hermans, K., & McLeman, R. (2021). Climate change, drought, land degradation and migration: exploring the linkages. Current opinion in environmental sustainability, No. 50, 236-244.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2021.04.013
  28. Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009177856.038
  29. Islam, W., Zeng, F., Siddiqui, J. A., Zhihao, Z., Du, Y., Zhang, Y., ... & Khan, K. A. (2025). Combating desertification: comprehensive strategies, challenges, and future directions for sustainable solutions. Biological Reviews.‏ https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.70015
  30. Janssen, M. A., Anderies, J. M., & Ostrom, E. (2007). Robustness of social-ecological systems to spatial and temporal variability. Society and Natural Resources, 20(4), 307-322. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920601161320
  31. Knoke, D., & Yang, S. (2019). Social network analysis. SAGE publications.
  32. Lienert, J., Schnetzer, F., & Ingold, K. (2013). Stakeholder analysis combined with social network analysis provides fine-grained insights into water infrastructure planning processes. Journal of Environmental Management, 125, 134-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.052
  33. Lin, H., Zhu, Y., Zhou, J., Mu, B., & Liu, C. (2023). Understanding stakeholder relationships in sustainable brownfield regeneration: A combined FAHP and SNA approach. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 25(1), 1-37.
  34. Mahdavi, T., & Hoseyni, S. A. (2019). (Groundwater Policies and Governance in Arid and Semi-arid Regions,(Reviewing Current Policies in Developed Countries. Journal of Water and Sustainable Development5(2), 129-140. https://doi.org/10.22067/jwsd.v5i2.67197
  35. Maya Jariego, I. (2024). Using stakeholder network analysis to enhance the impact of participation in water governance. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications11(1), 1-6.
  36. McIlwain, L., Baird, J., Baldwin, C., Pickering, G., & Manathunga, C. (2024). Structural Power Dynamics in Polycentric Water Governance Networks. Society & Natural Resources, 37(3), 402-427. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2023.2288668
  37. Mohammadian, S., & Rahimi, M. (2025). Business Governance System in Iran: A Network Analysis for Identifying Challenges and Opportunities in Organizational Relationships. Social Business1(2), 181-192. https://doi.org/10.22059/jsbu.2025.386671.1009
  38. Norouzi, A., & Moradi, N. (2019). Land Suitability Evaluation for Tourism Development in Desert Areas (Case Study: Eastern Regions of Isfahan Province). Journal of Research and Rural Planning8(2), 77-96. https://doi.org/10.22067/jrrp.v8i2.72807
  39. Olaopa, O. R., & Ogundare, S. (2023). Traditional leadership, indigenous knowledge, and local governance: Implications for good governance and sustainable development agenda. In Indigenous People-Traditional Practices and Modern Development. IntechOpen.‏ DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1003144
  40. Ownegh, M., Sargazi, H., & Barani, H. (2019). Investigation and ranking of Social Driver’s Factors of Desertification in the Sistan plain. Journal of Water and Soil Conservation25(6), 159-173. https://doi.org/10.22069/jwsc.2019.15048.3018
  41. Pahl-Wostl, C. (2015). Water governance in the face of global change. Switzerland: Springer.‏
  42. Perrings, C. (2006). Resilience and sustainable development. Environment and Development economics, 11(4), 417-427. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X06003020‏
  43. Prell, C., Hubacek, K., & Reed, M. (2009). Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources, 22(6), 501-518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.052
  44. Rafiei-Sardooi, E., Azareh, A., Shooshtari, S. J., & Parteli, E. J. (2022). Long-term assessment of land-use and climate change on water scarcity in an arid basin in Iran. Ecological Modelling467, 109934.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2022.109934
  45. Rahdan, A., Ghorbani, M., Ahmadaali, K., & Zarghaami, M. (2024). Investigating the Mode and Regime of Water governance in the Zayandeh Rood River Basin with an emphasis on the Role of Actors and Key Institutions. Iranian Journal of Irrigation & Drainage18(5), 715-734. https://idj.iaid.ir/article_204674.html?lang=fa
  46. Rahimi, M., Ghorbani, M., Malekian, A., & Alambaigi, A. (2022). Analysis of institution-stakeholder relations for the nested water governance in downstream of the Kor river basin. Watershed Management Research35(1), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.22092/wmrj.2021.353840.1394
  47. Rahimi, M., Malekian, A., & Alambeigi, A. (2021). Determining the mode and regime of the water governance in the face of environmental changes from the perspective of institution and local stakeholders. Journal of Range and Watershed Managment74(1), 81-102. https://doi.org/10.22059/jrwm.2019.280359.1379
  48. Salajegheh, S., Avazpour, L., & Ghorbani, M. (2025). Evaluation of Social Capital of Local Communities in Line with Integrated Watershed Management of Bakhriz Watershed. Journal of Range and Watershed Managment78(2), 145-156.
  49. Salehi, M., Mahdavi, R., Rezai, M., Nafarzadegan, A. R., & Ghorbani, M. (2024). Investigating organizational cohesion and knowledge sharing among organizational stakeholders in the direction of cooperative management of the Isin Plain Aquifer in Hormozgan. Desert Management11(4), 37-54. https://doi.org/10.22034/jdmal.2024.2018501.1448
  50. Shariatyniya, L. , Ghorbani, M. , Azarnivand, H., & Rahimi, M. (2025). Social Capital in Rangeland Governance: Network Analysis of Key Actors and Social Relations (Case Study: Tafresh County, Iran). (e723444). Integrated Watershed Management.
  51. Serrat, O. (2017). Social network analysis. Knowledge solutions: Tools, methods, and approaches to drive organizational performance, 39-43.‏
  52. Mehrabi, Sh., Yazdani, M.R., & Ghorbani, M. (2022). Analyzing the position of the concept of resilience of social-ecological systems in environmental hazards of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province. Journal of Range & Watershed Management75(1). https://doi.org/10.22059/jrwm.2021.292210.1432
  53. Stafford-Smith, M., & Metternicht, G. (2021). Governing drylands as global environmental commons. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, No. 48, 115-124.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2020.12.006
  54. Tabassum, S., Pereira, F. S., Fernandes, S., & Gama, J. (2018). Social network analysis: An overview. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 8(5), e1256.‏ https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1256
  55. Vazirian, R., Karimian, A., Ghorbani, M., & Afshani, S. A. (2021). Monitoring and analyzing social networks and identifying key actors for sustainable management of natural resources. Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Research28(1), 181-194. https://doi.org/10.22092/ijrdr.2021.123886
  56. Vitkovic, S., & SOLEIMANI, D. (2019). The Economic and social impacts of water scarcity in the IR Iran. International E-Journal of Advances in Social Sciences, 5(13), 342-359.‏ http://ijasos.ocerintjournals.org/en/download/article-file/704969
  57. Xiao, W., Tang, Y., Obuobi, B., Qu, S., Yuan, M., & Tang, D. (2023). The Influence of Rule of Law on Government’s Sustainable Economic Management: Evidence from China. Sustainability15(15), 11690.
  58. Zhang, J., & Luo, Y. (2017, March). Degree centrality, betweenness centrality, and closeness centrality in social network. In 2017 2nd international conference on modelling, simulation and applied mathematics (MSAM2017) (pp. 300-303). Atlantis press.‏ https://doi.org/10.2991/msam-17.2017.68
  59. Zhang, Y., Tariq, A., Hughes, A. C., Hong, D., Wei, F., Sun, H., ... & Ma, K. (2023). Challenges and solutions to biodiversity conservation in arid lands. Science of the Total Environment857, 159695.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.159695
  60. Zhang, J., & Li, S. (2024). Decoding rural connections: A comparative insight into social network analysis in rural communities of China and beyond. Chinese Journal of Population, Resources and Environment22(4), 501-514.