نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استادیار گروه علوم اجتماعی جامعه‌شناسی، دانشکده ادبیات، علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
2 دانشیار جامعه شناسی ، گروه علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران
3 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد جامعه‌شناسی دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
Water governance is a controversial concept, and rather than being based on knowledge of the governance method, it is considered an ideal model with specific and predefined indicators. Meanwhile, governance will result in the sustainability of water resources when it is defined and regulated according to the conditions. Because governance regulates the way of managing resources, it can vary according to the dominant discourse of each era. For this purpose, the present research tried to achieve a historical understanding of water governance patterns in different periods after the Islamic Revolution of Iran by using the methodology of discourse analysis and examining its effect on water resources management.
2. Research Methodology
The method used in this research was discourse analysis. Based on this, the present study, with a historical approach, tried to discover the dominant discourse in every era and its effect on the way of managing water resources. The target period was from the 1978 revolution to the end of the twelfth government. In order to discover the dominant discourse, the text of the President's speech, the description of the deliberations of the Islamic Council, the text of water laws and development plans, and the approvals of the Supreme Water Council were examined. Therefore, in the results obtained, five decades after the revolution, the water governance period was divided into five periods, and political documents and texts and the description of the deliberations of the Islamic Council were used to evaluate it.
3. Research Findings
The results of the evaluation showed that what has determined the governance of water in Iran was not the governance that is proportional to the country's hydrological power but rather the governance that emerged from the political and international discourse. As in the periods when the ruling discourse was based on justice and the support of the government in economic matters (more emphasis on left-wing policies), the facilitation of water resource extraction, especially underground water, has intensified. During the periods when the ruling discourse was based on structural adjustment and privatization policies (with more emphasis on the right-wing economic liberalization policies), the development of surface water resources was the dominant model of water governance. Also, in many cases, there has been alignment between the government and the parliament in setting policies and laws against the sustainability of water resources. In cases where inequality has been evident, the government has sought to protect water resources in contrast to patterns that facilitate the extraction of resources.
4. Conclusion
The study of the history of water governance in Iran showed that in the dominant discourses on water governance after the revolution, the approach of protecting water resources along with the approach of self-sufficiency and development, which is still prominent in policymaking despite the worsening of the crisis, has not been able to lead the way. As far as we can say, the water protection policy has remained only as a slogan in many programs. It is based on this that the issues in water resources management policy have become chronic and are always repeated. This situation implies that water governance in Iran was not based on proportional governance, and as a result, the main goal of protecting water resources should be abandoned, and the improvement of the governance structure in accordance with the capacity of each region should be considered.
Funding
This article is an excerpt from the Water Governance Project sponsored by the Academy of Sciences.
Authors’ Contribution
The authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved the content of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declared no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to all the persons for scientific consulting in this paper.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)