A Comparative Study on the Quality of Life During the Migration of Rural Communities Toward Suburban Villages (Case Study: Tabadkan Dehestan in Mashhad County)

جغرافیاوتوسعه ناحیه ای

Article 4, Volume 15, Issue 1 - Serial Number 28, September 2017, Pages 123-149   

Document Type: scientific-research article

DOI: 10.22067/geography.v15i1.45665

Authors

Maryam Ghasemi^{* 1}; Neshat Omidvar²; Elham Ashore¹; Zahra Nasimi¹

¹Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

²Tarbiat Modares University

Abstract

Extended abstract
1- Introduction
Quality of life is one of the most important issues that our world is facing today. Human future will be based on a better understanding of factors that affect the quality of human life. In discussions about life quality, living is not the only goal, but its quality is also important. Currently, inappropriate living conditions in rural settlements have considerably lowered the quality of life. Obviously, the villagers hope for better living conditions, so that they leave their villages toward more desirable habitats. During this population flow and due to the lack of sufficient financial sources, rural communities logically move to suburban areas. Suburban villages of Tabadkan district as the entrance gates of North East of Mashhad have received important parts of immigrants. Since today, most migrations are performed to achieve a better quality of life; thus, the main research question arises: whether the quality of life among rural people living in suburban villages has changed compared with those living in rural areas?
2- Theoretical Framework
According to Fenwick, Naglieri, and Brown (1996), quality of life has a social concept, and has no meaning in itself. In 2000, a model was proposed to illustrate the concept of life quality. This model has generally focused on three realms of society, environment, and economy. The advantage of this model is that the contrast between areas have clearly been defined, and there is an image expressed form different concepts of livability, life quality, and stability (permanent) interacting with each other. In the present work, according to recent studies, the quality of life has been examined in the areas of socio-cultural, environmental, and economic. In a theoretical approach, life quality can be classified into two categories: descriptive and explanatory. Descriptive studies review the association between quality of life and variables such as gender, age, and education, and their central issue is the quality of life based on background variables, but explanatory studies are trying to understand the factors affecting the quality of life, and are divided into batch-oriented and structuralist approaches. It should be noted that in this research the explanatory studies have been considered with an emphasis on the structuralist approach.
3- Methodology
A descriptive-analytical method with comparative approach was used as the research method. The "pseudo panel" research project was used, due to the fact that the quality of life of rural households cannot be followed over time (before movement toward suburban villages) and consequently due to the lack of data in this area. The unit of analysis was the "migrants' rural households" of the suburban villages of Tabadkan district. The questionnaire was conducted in order to compare the quality of life of the rural households before and after migration. The quality of life was also examined in Likert scale, with 17 components and 56 variables in view of economic, social, and physical aspects. According to Cronbach's alpha coefficients, the items designed to measure the variables had internal correlation with each other.
4- Results & Discussion
Given the normal distribution of characteristics, paired sample t-test was used to determine the presence or absence of a difference in the mean value of parameters and aspects of life quality. Due to the level of significance (sig≤0.05) in the paired sample t-test, the mean values of all components of social, economic and structural parameters were found to be significantly different. Paired sample t-test results, in view of life quality, showed that except for the social dimension of quality of life, the difference between the mean values of economic and structural dimensions and the structure of life quality were significant. On the economic side of the quality of life, the average increased from 2.10 to 2.40 after migration. Structurally, the mean value increased from 2.25 to 2.55 after migration. It can be seen that a physical and economic improvement has happened after migration toward suburban villages. In general, the quality of life of rural migrants improved with a significant increase in the mean value from 2.43 to 2.58.
5- Conclusions & Suggestions
Widespread poverty, rapid population growth, unemployment, migration, urban marginalization, etc. were found to be due to the lack of quality of life in rural areas. Predictably, in order to achieve the desired level of life quality, rural people migrate to towns and urban areas. Although suburban villages are less developed and often face several challenges such as environmental pollution, etc., the results showed that the quality of life of migrants improved after migration. This reflects the poor situation in less-developed rural areas. Perpetuation of inequalities, lack of job opportunities, and poor quality of life in rural communities have revealed the necessity of achieving different but possible ways in planning and management.

Keywords

Mashhad county; Tabadkan dehestan; Suburban villages; Migration; quality of life

References

1. احمدوند، م.؛ هدایتی، س.؛ و عبداللّهی، خ. (1391). بررسی تأثیر رفاه و سرمایه بر کیفیت زندگی در مناطق روستایی شهرستان بویراحمد. مجلّۀ پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی روستایی، 1(2)، 89ـ112.

2. احمدیان، م. ع. (1385). حاشیه‌نشینی. مجّلۀ دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد. 25(3)، 826ـ836.

3. امیدی، ا. (1387). کیفیت زندگی در برنامه‌های توسعۀ ایران (پایان‌نامة منتشرنشدة کارشناسی ارشد برنامه‏ریزی و رفاه اجتماعی)، دانشکدۀ علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه تهران.

4. بریمانی، ف.؛ جعفری، م.؛ و بلوچی، ع. (1392). سنجش و تحلیل کیفیت زندگی در نواحی روستایی (مطالعۀ موردی: دهستان مهبان، شهرستان نیک‌شهر). چشم‌انداز جغرافیایی در مطالعات انسانی، 8 (23)، 41ـ54.

5. بریمانی، ف.؛ راستی، ه. (1393). ﺑﺮرﺳﻲ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻲ ﻣﻴﺰان دﻗّﺖ روش‌ﻫﺎی AHP ﻓﺎزی و AHP ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺑﺮای رتبۀ ﺷﺎﺧﺺ‌ﺑﻨﺪی زﻧﺪﮔﻲ‌ﻫﺎی ﻣﺆﺛّﺮ ﺑﺮ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ (ﻣﻄﺎلعۀ ﻣﻮردی: دﻫﺴﺘﺎن ﻣﻬﺒﺎن ﺷﻬﺮﺳﺘﺎن ﻧﻴﻜ‌‌ﺸﻬﺮ). فصلنامۀ جغرافیا و توسعه، 12 (34)، 1ـ14.

6. پورطاهری، م.؛ رکن‌الدّین افتخاری، ع.؛ و فتّاحی، ا. (1390). ارزیابی کیفیت زندگی در نواحی روستایی‏(مطالعۀ موردی: دهستان خاوه‌شمالی استان لرستان). مجلّۀ پژوهش‌های جغرافیای انسانی(پژوهش‏های جغرافیایی)، 43(76)، 13ـ31.

7. جمعه‌پور، م.؛ عیدی تراکمه، ه. (1392). پژوهش کیفی دربارۀ کیفیت زندگی مهاجران فصلی نیروی کار جوان روستایی از شهرستان کلیبر به تهران. توسعۀ محلّی (روستایی ـ شهری)، 5 (1)، 111ـ132.

8. حاتمی‌نژاد، ح.؛ منوچهری میاندوآب، ا.؛ فرجی ملائی، ا.؛ و فرهادی، ص. (1390). تحلیل کیفیت زندگی روستاهای ادغام‌شده در شهر(مطالعۀ موردی: شهر میاندوآب). فصلنامۀ جغرافیا و توسعۀ ناحیه‌ای، 9(16)، 219ـ243.

9. خراسانی، م. ا؛ رجایی، س. ع. (1393). نگرشی بر پویش جمعیتی در روستاهای پیراشهری. مجموعه مقالات اوّلین همایش توسعۀ پایدار روستایی در افق 1404، شاهین‌شهر اصفهان، 1ـ9.

10. خواجه شاهکوهی، ع.؛ جویباری، م.؛ و صمدی، ر. (1391). بررسی نقش سرمایۀ اجتماعی در نوسازی بافت‏های فرسودۀ شهری (مطالعۀ موردی: شهر جویبار). مجلّۀ جغرافیا و آمایش شهری ـ منطقه‌ای، 8(3)، 15 ـ 26.

11. خواجه شاهکوهی، ع.؛ مینایی، ف. (1392). بررسی تطبیقی کیفیت زندگی در شهرهای گردشگری و غیرگردشگری (مطالعۀ موردی: شاندیز و چناران). مجلّۀ برنامه‌ریزی و توسعۀ گردشگری، 3(10)، 49ـ64.

12. دواس، د. (1376). روش پیمایشی در تحقیق اجتماعی. ترجمۀ مریم رفعت‌جاه و رخساره کاظم. ویراست عبدالحسین نیک‌گهر، تهران: مرکز ترجمه و نشر کتاب.

13. رضوانی، م. ر.؛ منصوریان، ح. (1387). سنجش کیفیت زندگی:‌ بررسی مفاهیم، شاخص‌ها، مدل‌ها و ارائۀ مدل پیشنهادی برای نواحی روستایی. روستا و توسعه، 11(3)، 1ـ26.

14. رضوانی، م. ر.؛ منصوریان، ح.؛ و شکیبا، ع. (1387). ارزیابی کیفیت زندگی در نواحی روستایی. فصلنامۀ علمی پژوهشی و رفاه اجتماعی، 30 و 31(8)، 35ـ60.

15. رکن‌الدّین افتخاری، ع.؛ فتّاحی، ا.؛ و پورطاهری، م. (1389). ارزیابی کیفیت زندگی در نواحی روستایی(مطالعۀ موردی: دهستان خاوۀ شمالی، استان لرستان). فصلنامۀ پژوهش‌های جغرافیای انسانی، 2(43)، 13ـ33.

16. عیسی‌لو، ع. ا؛ بیات، م.؛ و بهرامی، ع. (1393). انگارۀ زیست‌پذیری؛ رهیافتی نوین جهت ارتقای کیفیت زندگی در جوامع روستایی(مطالعۀ موردی: شهرستان قم، بخش کهک). مجلّۀ مسکن و محیط روستا، 33 (146)، 107ـ120.

17. غفّاری، غ.؛ امیدی، ر. (1387). کیفیت زندگی در برنامه‌های عمرانی و توسعۀ ایران. نشریۀ رفاه اجتماعی، 30و31(8)، 9ـ33.

18. غفّاری، غ.؛ امیدی، ر. (1388). کیفیت زندگی شاخص توسعۀ اجتماعی. چاپ اوّل. انتشارات کتاب شمس.

19. قنبری، ی.؛ رحیمی، ح.؛ و احمدیان، م. (1392). سنجش و ارزیابی کیفیت زندگی در مناطق روستایی(مطالعه موردی: دهستان میانده، شهرستان فسا). مجلّۀ پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی روستایی، 2(3)، 73ـ95.

20. کوچکی‌نژاد، ف.؛ رمضان‌زاده لسبوئی، م.؛ معصوم‌پور سماکوش، ج.؛ و فتّاحی، ا. (1390)، بررسی و سنجش کیفیت زندگی در نواحی روستایی بخش مرکزی شهرستان کرمانشاه. چشم‌انداز جغرافیایی، 6(14)، 120ـ138.

21. مرکز آمار ایران. (1390). سالنامۀ آماری استان خراسان رضوی.

22. مرکز آمار ایران، شناسنامۀ آبادی‌های استان خراسان رضوی، سال‌های 1345 تا 1390.

23. Adell, G. (1999). Theories and models of the peri-urban interface: A changing conceptual landscape (Research project). London, UK: University College London (UCL).

24. Bartram, D. (2015). Migration and quality of life in the global context. In: Glatzer W., Camfield L., Møller V., Rojas M. (Eds). Global Handbook of Quality of Life. (pp. 491-503). International Handbooks of Quality-of-Life. Springer, Dordrecht.

25. Chen, Q., Acey, C., & Lara, J. J. (2015). Sustainable futures for Linden village: A model for increasing social capital and the quality of life in an urban neighborhood. Sustainable Cities and Society, 14, 359-373.

26. Epley, D. R., & Menon, M. (2008). A method of assembling cross-sectional indicators into a community quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 88(2), 281-296.

27. Liang, Y., & Guo, M. (2015). Utilization of health services and health-related quality of life research of rural-to-urban migrants in China: A cross-sectional analysis. Social Indicators Research, 120(1), 277-295.

28. Mayres, D. (1987). Community-relevant measurement of quality of life: A focus on local trends. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 23(1), 110-130.

29. Ng, I. F., Lee, S. Y., Wong, W. K., & Chou, K. L. (2015). Effects of perceived discrimination on the quality of life among new mainland Chinese immigrants to Hong Kong: A longitudinal study. Social Indicators Research, 120(3), 817-834.

30. Ruiz, L. Z. (2015). Qualitative studies of young people's quality of life in urban and rural areas. In G. Tonon (ed.), Qualitative Studies in Quality of Life: Methodology and Practice (pp. 149-178). New York: Springer

31. Van Kamp, I., Leidelmeijer, K., Marsman, G., & De Hollander, A. (2003). Urban environmental quality and human well-being: Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts, a literature study. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65(1), 5-18.

32. Webster, D. (2002). On the edge: Shaping the future of peri-urban East Asia. Stanford, California: Asia/Pacific Research Center.

33. Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. (2009). The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better (Vol. 6). London: Allen Lane.

34. Zanabria Ruiz L. (2015) Qualitative Studies of Young People’s Quality of Life in Urban and Rural Areas. In: Tonon G. (Eds) Qualitative Studies in Quality of Life. Social Indicators Research Series, vol 55. Springer, Cham.