Special Article

Study of social psychological characteristics and extension factors in range land management plans in Iran

Hossein shirzad,Agricultural Extension Specialist
College of Agriculture , Unit of Science and Research,Islamic Azad university of Iran

(Nov,2002)



- Introduction
Rangeland is an important natural and economic resource(Altieri & Merrick, 1988). As far as the nature is concerned , range lands contribute to the conservation of soil , water and vegetative cover, development of wild life habitat , prevention of floods , and enhancement of tourism and sightliness(0ilfield & Alcorn, 1987). Economically speaking, range lands are vital for many reasons, eg. For the role that they play in the supply of feed for livestock. As a result of the changes in the political, social and demographic of the country, vital changes also occurred in the range land utilisation system over the last half of twentieth century(Jordan & Farnworth, 1982). A historical review shows that the government did not have , until very recent years , an effective intervention in the range land conservation(Waterford & partou,1990). The history of the forestry Authority, which was also responsible for range lands , goes back to 1910 , when the ministry of trade and agricultural was established. In practice, however , the authority failed to take effective measures to protect or improve the range land conditions. This situation continued until 1962, when the responsibility of range land planning and management affairs from the government ministry to the forest and range organization (F.R.O). At the outset, the objectives of the organization confided to the conservation of soil and vegetative cover, contribution to meeting the national demands to meat and dairy products, and finally to realization of a balance between livestock and range lands. To achieve these objectives, the Grazing permits program was initiated and, besides it , the organization started to prepare and implement long term range land management plans(Azkia,1994). The later policy was enhanced by Article 3, the natural resources conservation and utilization Act , that recognized range land management plans (R.M.P) as a suitable setting for the use of this resource. At the earlier decades, the F.R.O preferred large scale plans, which were prepared and implemented by the organization itself. At this policy proved unsuccessful , the organization shifted to the implementation of smaller range land management plans , 407 cases of the kind of which were prepared , and 87 cases implemented , until 1978, (Mojahed & Esfahany,1990). The assertion that the long term/large scale plans failed as a means for managing the range lands. However it cannot to renounce the fact that they had a significant degree of success as far as the technology transfer and local expertise built up are concerned. The implementation of range land management plan by the Islamic Revolution in 1978, though the government studied, for a short period in 1981 , to resume the policy. In general , two significant events occurred in the area of range land management in the early Post – revolution years: Firstly , the tenure right to the traditional range lands was extended to shepherds and small livestock operators ; in some cases , this resulted in evasion of the rights of other people. The second event was the implementation of a program to identify the qualified livestock operators in each province and to issues temporary grazing permits to them. The program , which was implemented by the technical bureau of range land , provided the only mechanism to monitor range land use in a systematic way. Since 1986 , the revised concepts and definitions of the basic elements such as livestock operators , and range land managers shed new lights on the way of preparing range land management plans. Which were entitled with rights to the traditional range land(Azkia,1990). Research objectives is studying social psychological aspects of range land management plans including extension group participation of range land operators as well as their attitudes and view point.


- The research method
In order to achieve the study objective, we have taken advantage from the following methods:
1- Direct observation, participation observation and group interview , in this method, we have tried to take advantage of the authorities and experts who have lived beside range lands and husbandmen for many years and have had face to face relation with them (Lategan, F.S., & Duvel,G. H, 1992).
2- Case study, in order to being informed characteristics of social – psychology of the societies under investigation considerable numbers of the plan members have been studied by in depth method This method has been used , specially for range land utilization cooperatives.
3- The method of using documents, as responding to some minor goals necessities of this research such as specifications of range land management plans, historical precedents of subject at national level , studying principles and rules of turning over the plan , technical specifications of range lands, social and economical specialties of range land utilization before starting the plans , has been possible only by interviewing with experts and using the existing document. So all the present documents in this respect such as administrative reports , essays presenting in seminars and books and scattered essays presenting in seminars and books and scattered essays which are some how related to the topic of research , are tried to be studied.


- Theoretical framework
To study the socio – psychological aspects and extension factors of range lands management plans , particularly to examine some socio – psychological variables of related communities , such as: partnership and group participation , tendency to group working , incentive to progress, tendency to use of extension services and innovation , job consenting and satisfaction and so forth , which are considered part of peasant petti – culture or tribe petti – culture elements(Toha & Bavoo,1997) ; and to investigate mechanisms and methods of active participation of range managers (R.M,S) in affairs related to (R.M,S) plans by specially using group promotion method and relying on group dynamic application in R.M.P organization and in running meeting attended by members of rural small group of range managers (R.M,S)(Mohseni Tabrizi,1984).The theoretical discussion roated around three main subjects i.e. extension and rural participation , elements of peasant or tribe petti – culture , and rural group dynamic Those three issues are of great significance because ; firstly , for rims as users of this development in (R.M.P) to achiene a self – relied ,self increasing and more important mass – aided development ; thus the participation of range manager in range land management plans to allow the plans to become successful (Bochet,1983); secondly in every extension program no matter it is locally regional , or national , it is essential to recognize users of the plans (or target group) and also those whom are somehow affected by the implementation of plans. This recognition especially consists of their psycho – social characteristics, customs and habits, attitiuds and their opinions(Acharya et al,1982). Many of the extension programmers consider the motivation, values , belief and opinion of peasants and tribesmen as being the main elements of peasant petti – culture and as a key to understand the behaviour of these group of people(Adams,1982). The point in which frequent emphasis is put all through the debates of these expert is that, to carry out any kind of peasant and and tribal extension & rural development program we should initially attempt to know the belief, temperament, and morale of the public under study. For example the extension agent should know to what extent they believed in destiny or how they prefer team working .He also should know whether there is any incentive for agrotechnical innovation and progress in peasants and and to what degree they believe in participation. Such information help the extension specialist organize their plans in a realistic and broad – minded manner, furthermore investigation of mechanisms of methods to encourage stockmen to participate in (R.M) plans necessitate taking into account of group dynamics and group promotion methods(Hufschmidt,1985).Investigation of rural group dynamics is important because dynamism of rural group acts as a psychiatrist who tries to create changes in a patient to enhance his abilities in conforming himself to new conditions and environment(Mohseni Tabrizi,1985). Due to its intrust characteristics aiming at crating a change in individuals strengthens and rural social bodies , group dynamics as a participation appears to be like an optimizing method for raising the efficiency levels(Huizer,1983). In group and interpersonal relationship framework, the personality type of individuals strengths and the behavioral abnormalities as welas impediments with regard to mutual relations with others could be distinguished and defined. Participation method can provide a promotion coverage and as a result can be cost effective and more efficient(FAO,1992). Furthermore participation method can provide a fruitful learning ambience in wich the(R.M.S) can listen, argue and make decision on having a share in promotion programs of (R.M.S) for the sake of his own benefits; and finally group promotion method assembles those (R.M.s) having the same difficulties under the same roof, and cosequently organize a participation activity to deal with difficulties.


- Range managers opinion about different aspects of range land utilization plans
After the study consideration, it is observed that range managers well familiared with the aims of the plans, and the role of the Forest and Range Lands Organization regarding this acquaintance is more than the other communicate, channels. The determinant and important role of extension agent and expert in regard of advising rentire of range lands, should be pointed here Most of rentiers believe that transferring the range lands in small and non – economics sizes is not reasonable(Sources of household income: education 3.8 , transportation 8.9 , health & medical care 2 , furnitures 7.5 , marriage & other 6.3 , clothing 22.5 , cools 4 , nutrition 44.2, percent also household consumption expenditures composition: animal husbandry 61.8 , services 2.7 , handicrafts 1.9 , farming & horticulture 32.3 , natural resources 1.3 , percent).
However, they are totally satisfy with transferring the rights of range lands, albit they believe this fact is useful for reinforceing the traditional animal husbanddary over the country, although; they prefer transferring the rights of range lands, for certain .Interview considerations indicate ; the period of the project implementation is long and there is a necessity for reconsidering the problem. After the consideration of open interview, it was observed that (F.A.R.O) was capable a lot to meet its commentes regarding the frutiality of the project. Also, they were not successful to meet all the demands of the project. It is necessary to use range managers, opinion in different field of policy making and they will be participated in different steps of the projects performance as well as consider the local knowledge with modern knowledge of expert and extension agent. Results show that range managers are asked just for some initial consulting, or finance and job collaborating. This fact make stockmen ask arbitrators support regarding the frutiality of the project, and they loose their self – dependence. Studies indicate that, just a few numbers of range managers are consulted in compiling the project in respect of technical aspect. The communication between range managers and technical supervisiors is considered as an important fact. in this cases, the considerable majority of range land utilizers, point out they have just done some parts of the predicated acts, it seems that permanent communications of supervisors and their continuous supervising on the project could be effective in performing the predicted activities and achieving the project end. Of course, solving the difficulties of supervisors is very important , as; this fact causes them be dismobile. The majority of range managers agree that the projects affect the quality of improvement of range lands. They have declared, by controlling the number of cattles, they have deduced the cattle – pressures on the range lands. However, it should be considered that there are surplus cattles in the range lands, yet. Concerning the difference of haghe – alafchar of target group and also the difference in enjoyment of range land utilization units from bountry ( govermental aids) , since transferring the range lands is based on haghe – alafchar of stockmen , it seems forming somekinds of social – poles among the projects members will be occurred in future , especially that some new measures are being created regarding the ability of range managers to transfer the range land rights with having fewer cattles. Dividing the range lands is not avoidable according to inheritage law and this fact affects its economic aspect, therefore; preparing the necessary legal fields is able to prevent the more range lands dividing.


- The sub – culture of peasantry and range land extension programs
In social consideration of range land utilization plans, the following variables are considered, motivation of progress, trend to collective labour, fatalism, participation and job satisfaction. The research results show that most cultural objection in respect of modernization the tribal and rural societies which are expressed by the development authorities, are not practicable in Iran. The animal husbandmen and stockmen in the interviewed societies are very familiar with with the range land management plan, although the acceptance and participation of the range managers in the projects will be done little by little after benefiting the plans conclusions, by tribes and animal husbandmen. stockmen have a great tendency to adoption innovations and this fact is reflected in their welcome to the projects. But, their cooperation and participation rates are depended on the numbers of participator and the tribal and relatively relations among them. The results show, in members of those projects which their enjoy great productivity, there are a relatively relations among their members and the number of their members are limited. In respect of job satisfaction rate; stockmen are not much satisfy with husbandry, although; they prefer the style of husbandry – life to any other life – style. This fact agrees with some social results of this research; the rate of stockmen social and job mobility and tendency to other careers, even second jobs acceptance (except husbandry) express the doubts about livestock breeding career, in the studied societies. The following point are effective in succeeding the projects:
The range manager satisfaction of the extension agent and project performance as well as their participation in the different process of performance are considered as the important indexes. Educated executor and members of the project affects the performance the programs of the project. The range managers access to infraustructure facilities such as, extension office, extension and education agent, sanitary, roads and literacy services, etc… in the villages or the other centers near to the project place. Careers harmony among range managers especially whom husbandry is their main job. Existence of minor or secondary jobs for range land rentier who own small cattles and they are not able to earn a normal economics life(Distribution of household net accessible income: consumption expend 62.5 , saving 7.8 , capital formation 29.7, percent, also composition of cash earning source: animal husbandry 76.1 , natural resources 0.3 , agriculture 21.3 , services 2.3, percent)Experience is one of the most important factors in improvement of range land, quality, accordingly, tribal stockmen are more successful than rural husbandmen, for the stockmen husbandry is the major job and they are more experienced in this job, albit, livestock breeding is counted as the second or minor job for rural range managers. The less the number of members, the more success at the project. The kinds of projects which are based on relatively relationships are more powerful in comparing with the projects of joint rentiers. There are less social problems, resulting from contrast among range managers and exceeding to other range lands which are surrounded gardens, figgardens or by natural fences like, hill, mountain,.face to less social problems. The management of the project led to the more technical succeed. These executive managements are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism s are in the kind of paternalism . Leadership local men of influence are able to reduce the social difficulties and the problems which are born of the Alafchar – rights . the opposition opinion of these people can cause the project to fail . Education and extension system roles are very important in the project acceptance . Making friendships relations with range managers is as important as expert acceptance by rentiers . Holding short – time training classes and visiting the best projects by range managers affect the rate of motivation in the project acceptance. Attendance of local employees (local leadership) in the projects and the confeidence feeling of range managers in them, are considered as social factors which affect the technical success of the project. Face to face relation of local extension agent and range managers make them pay more attention to experts advises according to technical aspects of the project. The range managers home should be near to his range land, therefore he can be always present there. This fact helps mind stabilization right and ownership which are affective in solving the social difficulties of landed aggression. The range lands that were verified by the government confirmation and the governmental assets and nationalized has designated are of less social difficulties. For the purpose of faciliating the process of acceptance and performance of the projects, more attention should be paid to education and extension. Holding short time training classes. Visiting the best projects, participating the project performance (as one of desired patterns in using the range land) are considered as very effective factors. Extension and diffusion the culture of conservation the basic natural sources is considered as one of the national and religious duties and this fact should be diffusion through the tribune of Friday – prayers . In addition, holding special meetings with attendance the social science instructors of agriculture and extension expert and natural resources in Forests and Range lands Organization of each province is suggested.


- Extension system difficulties
The lack of integrated rural extension and development programs can be seen as one of the effective factors that makes country s projects and policies of tribal and rural extension less successful during the latest decates(Agunga,1990). In the policies of regional and rural development; physical and technical aspects are considered more than social aspects, accordingly, most of these plans can not achieve their expected aims(Van den Ban & Hawkins,1985). Therefore, they are often stopped in the middle of process. The extension system difficulties of the range land management plans are summarized as following:
1-lack of using of indigenous knowledge: Expert theoretic knowledge are considered more than local knowledge of villagers and tribes, therefore, these kind of projects are not able to be practical and they cant attract the participation of range managers.

2- lack of prospective sense : In most of studied projects, range managers don’t have prospective sense as they prefer the instant benefits to future interests such as, conserving, reviving and reforming the range lands. This fact cause the range managers be disable to perform the project according to the considered schedule .So that, the projects face to difficulties during the performance. Some of instant aims are; ownership motivation, stabilization of utilization right. Hence, one can say that the programs of reforming and reviving the range lands have not still found their place among the beneficiaries an this fact resulting from the poverty of education and extension system in scope of natural sources.

3- Decampment and settlement: Range lands may be transferred to stockmen in both zones of winter and summer grazing range. It means that a stockmen perhaps own two pieces of range lands in both areas and this fact may strengthen the pattern of decamping style. But little – by – little tendency to sedentary life will be reinforced among the members and executors of the projects. When the settlement occurs, some parts of domestic labor, forces will be omitted from the process of livestock breeding which are dependent on range lands. Specially that, these projects have not plural purposes and they are not able to attract the released domestic labor forces , gradual sedentary causes some parts of range lands change to agricultural lands and some changes in utilization the range lands. Ultimately, it will be terminated to the decreasing of husbandry production in the project.

4- lack of extension and social – economic studies: the researches indicate; necessary studies are not made (in the field of extension and social - economic structure, tribal disagreement, problems of ownership and the rate of social participation), before preparing the outline of range land management projects. In regard of technical aspect; finding the optimum place far the project performance, recognizing the actually and potential technical abilities, and present limitations are not basically considered for the plans performance, consequently, most of the plans are not performed on and they face to social difficulties during the performance process. Thus, extension – education and social, economic, technical studies are advised in the limitation of preliminary studies of the project preparation(Roling,1988).

5- The contrast between tribal and rural societies: villagers and tribles use the range lands on turn. Villagers sometimes use tribal range lands and this matter causes a quarrels among them. Researches show that these kind of quarrels will damage the foundation in the projects surrounding and will make the reforming and reviving operations be ineffective.

6- lack of connection systems among executors( plan managers)of the projects :The plan managers are never informed of each others actions(Rogers,1983). There is no connection system among range managers for exchanging of views and experiences. It is impossible for range managers to support each other educationally, economically, financially and socially. Executors activities are dependent on educational, economic, and financial support of Frosts and Range Lands Organization, banking and credit institution discontinuation of these financial helps, will cause the projects to stop, accordingly. Therefore, it is necessary that self – dependence and self – management of these units be seriously considered.

-The collapsibility of traditional formations in the nomadic communities in the studied areas
Nomads traditional formations in the studied areas have faced with some important and determinant transformation in the last 4 decades which actually can be defined as collapsibility of nomadic traditional formation in those areas. In the recent 39 years, that is, from the time of the implementation of modern reform policies in the country the collapsibility of hierarchical structures in nomadic communities have been increasingly exceeded. During the land reforms and the nationalization of range lands and forests in 1960 , the expropriation of khan (Lords or the chief of groups and communities in nomadic sicieties)


-conclusions
Following points are advised regarding extension – education and social aspects of renge land management projects:
1- In respect of preventing bad effects and undesired functions of scattered settlements. scattering the projects settlements are suggested to be reduced; therefore, presenting necessary services in the basic education, extension and education services, health, treatment field will be possible for the families covered by the project.
2- Those projects which are managed by young educated forces having professional homogeneity, achieve more success in economic – social and technical aspects. Regarding this fact, the following indexes are suggested to be considered as definite standards in transferring the new projects and be inserted in technical prescriptions and servicing descriptions of the projects; equalization of the first and second occupation, agree homogeneity, presence of relatively relationships, being aware of range land and husbandry knowledge.
3- Duties and organization of govermental departments should change in such a manner that make them deal solely with affairs regarding research, training, extension, and give technical consultation and financial support to those who are active in the said utilization units.
4- Finally, appropriate mechanisms are advised for developing the range managers awareness in respect of target project, by means of research , extension and evaluation studies. Increasing their participation in the project and advertising group labour feeling should be performed. For achieving this purpose, skills of extension and education activities as: providing information, changing attitudes, method demonstrations, training and visit system, extension training packages, field trips and tours, demonstration trials and results demonstrations are useful factors for developing range managers abilities and more productivity of range lands. Considering the plans results and making the conditions better will be available by evaluation research.


Refrences :
0. Altieri, M.A. and Merrick, L.C.(1998). Agroecology and conservation of native Crop diversity in the Third world. In E. O. Wilson Bioscience, 35, 279-285.
1. Waterford, J. and Z . Partou.(1990). Natural resource management in the third World: A policy and research approach. American journal, Agri. Eco, 72 (5).
2. Huizer, G. (1983). Guiding principles for peoples participation projects. Design Operation, monitoring and ongoing evaluation. FAO, Rome.
3. Toha, G.J. and A.Bavoo.(1997). The role of forest and range land policies and Institutions in achieving sustainable, forest development,Unasylva, Vol. 48, No 190-191.
4. FAO.(1992). Forest and cultures in Asia, workshop and project proposal on focus, regional unit for social and human science in Asia and Pacific,Bangkok.
5. Oilfield, M. l. and Alcorn, J. B.(1987). Conservation for traditional agroecosystems. Bioscience, 37, 199-208.
6. Jordan, C.F.and Farnworth. (1982). Natural VS. Plantation forests: A case study of land reclamation strategies for the humid tropics. Enviromental Mamagement, 6, 485-492.
7. Mohseni Tabrizi, A. (1985). The problem of participation in rural Iran. Tehran: Department of extension and popular participation, Ministry of Jihad- e- agriculture.
8. Mojahed, A. and H. Esfahany. (1989). Agricultural policy and performance in Iran: The post revolutionary experiences, World Development. 17, no. 6:836-860.
9. Azkia, M. (1990). Some considerations on the systems of land exploitation in Iran. Olum- e – Ejtemai, 1, no. 3: 168 –179.
10. Azkia, M. (1994). The system of land tenure and modes of production. Working paper,Annex 22of world bank, Services for agricultural and rural development, report no. 11956, Iran, (Tehran:World Bank), 10 –15.
11. Hufschmidt, Maynard M. (1985). A conceptual framework for analysis of watershed management activities. Agenda item No. 13. Expert meeting on strategies, approaches and systems for integrated watershed management. Kathmandu, Nepal, 25 Feb – 1 Mar.
12. Acharya, H. et al. (1982). What do people think? A case study and evaluation report. Tinau watershed project, Tansen, Palpa, Nepal.
13. Adams, M. E. (1982). Agricultural extension in developing countries. Longman Group, London. PP:112-118
14. Bochet,J. (1983). Management of upland watersheds. Participation of the mountain communities. FAO Conservation Guide 8. FAO: Rome.
15. Van den Ban and Hawkins. (1985). Agricultural extension and education. Essex: Longman.
16. Roling, N. (1988). Extension science. Cambridge university press. Cambridge.
17. Agunga, R.A. (1990). Development support communication and popular participation in rural development Gazette, International Journal on Mass Communication. Vol. 45.No, 3.
18. Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of innovation. 3rd edition. New York: The Free Press.
19. Lategan, F.S., & Duvel,G. H. (1992). The group interview as data collection technique. South African Journal of Agricultural Extension, 21: 69-72.