ارزيابي اثرات مجتمع صنايع چوب و كاغذ مازندران بر توسعه نواحي روستايي

Assessing the Impacts of Mazandaran Wood and Paper Industries on rural areas development

صنايع چوب و كاغذ مازندران كه در سال 1376 فعاليت خود را شروع كرده است، داراي اثرات مثبت و منفي مختلفي بر نواحي روستايي پيرامون بوده است. با توجه به اينكه تاكنون اثرات بر شمرده شده به صورت علمي و دقيق مورد مطالعه قرار نگرفته است، تحقيق حاضر به شناسايي و ارزيابي اثرات اين مجتمع بر نواحي روستايي پيرامون مي‌پردازد. تحقيق حاضر به لحاظ هدف كاربردي كه از طريق پيمايش پرسشنامه‌اي اجرا شده است. جامعه آماري اين تحقيق شامل 2625 نفر از سرپرستان خانوار در 18 روستاي همجوار مجتمع بود كه بر مبناي جدول كرجسي و مورگان تعداد 350 نفر به عنوان نمونه انتخاب شدند. روايي پرسشنامه بر پايه نظرات گروهي از كارشناسان و اعضاي هيات علمي تأييد شد. پايايي پرسشنامه نيز با محاسبه‌ي ضريب آلفاي كرونباخ (0.68, 0.88, 0.86, 0.92) براي چهار نوع اثر اقتصادي، اجتماعي، كالبدي و محيط‌زيستي محرز گرديد. نتايج اولويت‌بندي گويه‌هاي مربوط به اثرات فيزيكي-كالبدي مجتمع نشان داد كه، «گسترش امكانات و خدمات آموزشي در روستا» از نظر روستاييان داراي اهميت بيشتري بوده است. همچنين «افزايش تمايل روستاييان به كار در مجتمع» جزء مهمترين اثرات اجتماعي، «افزايش فرصت‌هاي اشتغال در روستا» از مهمترين اثرات اقتصادي و «كاهش مراتع و مكان‌هاي چراي دام» نيز جزء مهمترين اثرات محيط زيستي مجتمع بر روستاهاي همجوار بوده است. نتايج آزمون t تك‌نمونه‌اي نشان داد كه كليه اثرات چهارگانه كمتر از مقدار ميانگين است. يافته‌هاي تحليل عاملي نيز نشان داد كه شش عامل با نام‌هاي «منافع اجتماعي»، «منافع زيرساختي»، «هزينه‌هاي محيط زيستي»، «منافع اقتصادي»، «منافع رفاهي-خدماتي» و «هزينه‌هاي اجتماعي» توانستند 804/68 درصد واريانس تغييرات مربوط به اثرات مجتمع صنايع چوب وكاغذ بر نواحي روستايي اطراف را تبيين كنند. نتايج اين قسمت نشان داد كه «منافع اجتماعي»، «منافع زيرساختي»، «منافع اقتصادي» و «منافع رفاهي-خدماتي» مربوط به جنبه‌هاي مثبت تأثير مجتمع و «هزينه‌هاي محيط زيستي» و «هزينه‌هاي اجتماعي» نيز جنبه‌هاي منفي تأثير مجتمع بر نواحي روستايي پيرامون را نشان مي‌دهند. همچنين از مجموع كل اثرات، 72/081 درصد مربوط به اثرات مثبت و 27/919درصد مربوط به اثرات منفي بوده است، كه اين امر بيانگر اين بود كه اثرات مثبت بسيار بيشتر از اثرات منفي بوده است. به علاوه نتايج آزمون‌هاي مقايسه ميانگين نيز نشان داد كه گروه‌هاي مختلف پاسخگويان نيز ارزيابي يكساني از اثرات مثبت و منفي مجتمع نداشتند.

Extended abstract Introduction Industrial development strategies which presented in 1950s, is one of most popular strategy to increase the development level of undeveloped regions. In fact development of industrial pole which include large urban, industrial areas and large companies can become a growth center for economic activities and encourage growth in periphery areas. Accordingly, Mazandaran wood and paper industries initiate their activities in 1997 have had positive and negative impacts on periphery rural areas. Since previous study ignored the investigation such impacts, current research aimed to assess the economic, social, environmental and physical impacts of Mazandaran’s “wood and paper complex” on periphery rural areas. Research method This applied research was carried out by questionnaire survey method. The statistical population consisted of 2625 heads of household in 18 villages around the “wood and paper complex” which 350 samples randomly selected by Krejcie and Morgan table. Content validity of the research questionnaire was confirmed by a panel experts and faculty members. Calculated Coronbach Alpha coefficients as indication of questionnaire’s reliability were as equal to 0.68, 0.88, 0.86, and 0.92 respectively for economical, social, physical and environmental impacts. Using SPSS and EXCEL software, the gathered data was analyzed. Theoretical framework Theory growth pole and growth center formulated and developed by many scientists. According to the concept of growth pole and growth center, public investment programs will have maximum effects on a regional growth if concentrated in a small number of favorable locations in regional development policy. Growth pole and growth center concept has become popular because of its orientation towards ‘dynamic industry’ (i.e. dynamic propulsive firm & leading propulsive industry) ‘polarization and agglomeration’ (inter-industry linkages of external economies) and the promise of ensuring “spread effects”. One of the important characteristics of a leading propulsive industry or growth centers is different effects on periphery areas. Such effects are of two types.  Backwash effects: These include all the negative effects of growth centers. It promise capital, skills and people moved out of backward regions to the developed regions, leaving the latter poor and dry. So growth centers can’t cause of development for periphery areas.  Spread effects: These include all the positive effects of growth centers. These spread effects were those which gave expansionary momentum from the centers of economic expansion to other regions, and were centrifugal in nature. So growth centers can cause of development for periphery areas and the main cause of economic forwardness and regional development has been the strong spread effects and the weak backwash effects Current paper aimed to investigate backwash and forward effects of wood and paper industries in Mazandaran province. Results Results of prioritizing items of physical impacts showed that "development of educational services and facilities in rural areas was most important according to rural people viewpoint. Also “increasing tendency of rural people to work in wood and paper complex” was most social impacts, "increasing employment opportunities in rural areas” was most economical impacts and “reduce in rangeland" was most environmental impacts of “wood and paper complex” on periphery rural areas. The results of on-sample t-test showed that all the four impacts of Mazandaran wood and paper industries were lower than means. Findings of factor analyzing indicated that six factors namely “social benefits”, “infrastructural benefits”, “environmental costs”, “economic benefits”, “recreational-services benefits” and “social costs” explained %68.804 of the total variances for impacts of “wood and paper complex” on around rural areas. Current results revealed that “social benefits”, “infrastructural benefits”, “economic benefits”, “recreational-services benefits” indicated positive effects and “environmental costs”, and “social costs” imply negative effects of “wood and paper complex” on periphery rural areas. Moreover %72.081 of total effects was positive and %27.919 was negative effects which revealed that positive effects were more than negative effects. Moreover the results of compare mean tests showed that different groups of rural people didn’t have consensus on the positive and negative impacts. Recommendations  Establish training centers inside of complex to train local people and increase its skill and providing them as expert workers.  Management with cooperation of rural council can introduce activity of complex and attain more support from local community.  Transforming management of training, sport and health center to local people and improve its attitude and satisfaction.  Using infiltration technology or finding location explosion can decrease waste and increase of environmental protection.