Structural Analysis of Modern Management (Rural areas) in Rural development Case Study ( Baraan-e South Rural)
Subject Areas : Regional Planning
1 - isfahan
Keywords: Rural Development, Structural Equations, : Evaluation, New Rural Management, South Baraan rural distric,
Abstract :
Abstract The results of the programs implemented in rural areas for development in most cases are not only not useful but also cause more chaos in the existing situation of the villages, this is due to lack of proper management in the process of programs, with new management, villagers can Participate in the implementation of programs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the new rural management as a case study in Shian rural district, west of Islamabad. The research method is applied based on purpose and based on descriptive-analytical nature. The statistical population of the study was 1736 heads of households in the southern district of Baraan. Based on the Cochran's formula, the statistical sample in question was 314 heads of households. The results show that the measured validity of all five measurement models as well as the second-order five-factor model is acceptable for rural management. Finally, the structure of production and services (0.30), ecosystem (0.18), socio-cultural (0.66), economic (0.46) and institutional-political (0.22) explain the factor loads. Extended Abstract Introduction Rural management, as one of the basic components for achieving rural development, is influenced by macro-national strategies as well as existing approaches in the field of management. Management approaches can be considered as follows: traditional approaches, human resources approaches, Quantitative approaches and systemic and contingency approaches. The contingency approach to management can be considered the culmination of management science; Because this approach broadens the field of action of managers and management leaders in organizations and increases their power of action, rural management is in fact the process of organizing and guiding the community and the rural environment through the formation of organizations and institutions. These organizations and institutions are the means of achieving the goals of rural society. Rural management is a multifaceted process that includes the three pillars of people, government and public institutions. desertification is a public non-governmental organization established to manage rural affairs and as a liaison between the government and the people plays an important role in advancing the goals and policies of the government in rural areas. Since the establishment of systematic structural processes in rural areas, the concept of rural management has a special place in order to achieve rural development. Despite the extensive services provided by the government and revolutionary institutions in the villages, the gap between the existing realities and the goals of development is still very large, and there are many problems in the rural community, which are equivalent to removing those issues and problems. Elimination of deprivations in rural communities, therefore, creating the ground for development largely depends on the realization of efficient executive management in rural areas. The problems of rural areas are due to their infancy and the major management problems of the country. With the formation of rural areas, it has eliminated a large part of the problems of rural management, including continuous structural changes. Dehyaran, as a local symbol, is the link between government and popular institutions, the executive arm of Islamic councils in the modern rural management system, provides many services and public and welfare facilities, and strengthens the process of social and cultural development, etc., therefore In this research, an attempt has been made to evaluate and analyze the new management (rural areas) in rural development. Methodology The research method is descriptive-analytical. The required information was obtained through a questionnaire by consulting rural residents. The statistical population is the total number of households in the villages with more than 20 households in the southern rural areas, which according to the statistics of 2016 includes 14 villages, 1736 households and 6633 people. The number of samples according to Cochran's formula was 314 questionnaires. The author provided the questionnaire to a number of specialists and experts for initial evaluation, and after applying the opinions of individuals and the final opinion of experts and consultants, the final questionnaire was developed. The questionnaire consists of two parts. The first part was related to the personal characteristics of the respondents including gender, age, level of education, occupation, number of households and income. The second part is related to the indicators of modern rural management, which was used in the form of a five-level Likert scale (very low = 1 to very high = 5). (Hafeznia, 1389: 74) Formal and content validity of the questionnaire with the corrective opinion of university professors and Experts of the University of Isfahan were approved in several stages after making the necessary corrections. In the present study, Cronbach's alpha method has been used to assess the validity of the measurement tool. The structural equation model (AMOS) was used to measure the collected information. There are several fitness indicators to evaluate the fit of the structural equation model. Results and Discussion The strength of the relationship between the factor (hidden variable) and the observable variable is indicated by the factor load. The factor load is a value between zero and one. If the factor load is less than 0.3, a weak relationship is considered and ignored. A factor load of between 0.3 and 0.6 is acceptable, and if greater than 0.6 it is highly desirable. It can be seen that all the observed variables had positive and significant regression effect coefficients with their scales and the magnitude of these coefficients is relatively high for all cases, of all factor loads at the level of / 001. They are meaningful. As can be seen, in this table no significant level is reported for the factor loads or the standard regression coefficients of the five observed variables. This is because these variables are considered as reference or representative variables for the structure of production and services, ecosystem, socio-cultural, economic and institutional-political, respectively, so that these hidden variables are without scale and in other words without Eliminate their roots and units of measurement. That is why the initial path diagrams are considered on the arrows related to the paths between these observed variables with the hidden variable corresponding to the values of 1, the AVE criterion represents the average variance shared between each structure with its own indicators. Simply put, AVE (average variance extracted) is used to validate convergence and shows a high correlation between the indices of one structure compared to the correlation of indices of other structures. The value of this coefficient is from zero to one variable that values higher than 0.5 are accepted. Convergent validity or derived mean variance (AVE) for production and service structure index / 766. , Ecosystem index 0.711, socio-cultural index 0.799 and economic index 0.526 and institutional-political index 0.626, also the value of structural reliability coefficient or combined reliability (CR) is from zero to one variable with higher values. It is accepted from 0.7, which is / 755 for the index of production structure and services. The ecosystem index was 0.733, the socio-cultural index was 0.802, the economic index was 0.765 and the institutional-political index was 0.526, which indicates the appropriateness of these subscales. Conclusion The aim of this study was to investigate the impact on modern management in rural development with a structural equation modeling approach. Case study: Southern rural development, the impact of rural management on rural development by defining five socio-cultural, institutional and political, economic, ecosystem resources and production structure and Services were considered as a measure of rural management. Five models of confirmatory factor analysis, a first-order factor for measuring and validation of four scales and a second-order five-factor model for rural management analysis and related indicators were developed and implemented, finally the structure of production and services (0.30), Ecosystem (0.18), socio-cultural (0.66), economic (0.46) and institutional-political (0.22) explain the factor loads.
References
_||_