Land use changes in natural resources and rural areas: Great threats for sustainable development in Iran

Öz

Nowadays observe a huge amount in changing land use patternes in natural resources and rural areas toward establishing vacation homes (second houses), touristy resturans and hotels, recrational centers etc. in them that caused destroying these unique valuable lands and great threats for sustainable development in Iran. In most places of Iran the acreage of productive lands is limited and balancing food security and economic development are two important and critical goals for policy makers and governmental authorities. the global consensus had shifted towards the view that environmental conservation was not in conflict with development. Today, natural resources are exposed to increasingly numerous interests and demands, which sometimes generate conflicts. we must protect nature not only for us but for the whole planet. If it is questionable to say that communities are really only practical to protect the environment, there is no doubt they are the main victims of environmental degradation. Sustainable development and successful management of the natural resources and rural areas lands would not be achieved unless demands of rural communities are addressed. For doing this study utilized qualitative approach with its tools for gathering information such as participatory observation, discussions, maps, documents and pictures. Main locations of study were four provinces that changing land use patternes in natural resources and rural areas toward establishing vacation homes touristy resturans and hotels, recrational centers etc. in them are relatively more stronger and visible in Iran, namely Tehran, Golestan, Isfahan and south Khorasan provinces. In this article discussing various aspects that caused of changing land use patternes in natural resources and rural areas in Iran. In the end present final and exigency acquired model on  the ways of confronting to these land use changes for accessing to sustainable development (SD) goals and criteria in Iran.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Land use change,Natural resources,Rural areas,Vacation homes,Sustainable development,Iran

Kaynakça

1. Adhami M, Sadeghi SH, Sheikhmohammady M. 2018. Making competent land use policy using a co-management framework. Land Use Policy, 72: 171–180.
2. Anghel AG, Draghicescu LM, Cristea GC, Gorghiu G, Gorghiu LM, Petrescu AM. 2014. The Social Knowledge - a Goal of the Social Sustainable Development. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 149: 43 - 49.
3. Busoi SM. 2015. Sustainable development and the influence of social values, a case study on Romania. Proc Econ and Fin, 26: 46 - 53.
4. Gandin J. 2012. Social perceptions of environmental changes and local development within the Usumacinta River basin. APCBEE Procedia, 1: 239 – 244.
5. Iranian Bureau of Statistics. 2019. Statistical center of Iran. https://www.amar.org.ir/ (access date: 10.10.2019).
6. Kathryn JH, Williams JS. 2012. Understanding the relationship between social change and its impacts: The experience of rural land use change in south-eastern Australia. J Rural Stud, 28: 538 – 548.
7. Moein M, Asgarian A, Sakieh Y, Soffianian A. 2018. Scenario-based analysis of land-use competition in central Iran: Finding the trade-off between urban growth patterns and agricultural productivity. Sust Cit and Soc, 39: 557–567.
8. Oyku Iyigün N. 2015. What could entrepreneurship do for sustainable development? A corporate social responsibilitybased approach. Proc - Soc and Behav Sci, 195: 1226 – 1231.

9. Paulino ET. 2014. The agricultural, environmental and sociopolitical repercussions of Brazil’s land governance system. Land Use Policy, 36: 134– 144.
10. Rouillard JJ, Reeves AD, Heal KV, Ball T. 2014. The role of public participation in encouraging changes in rural land use to reduce flood risk. Land Use Policy 38: 637–645.
11. Shiel C, Leal Filho W, Paco AD, Brandli L. 2016. Evaluating the engagement of universities in capacity building for sustainable development in local communities. Eval and Prog Plan, 54: 123–134.