Sources of Conflict in Pastoral Lands: A Case Study in the Milan tribe in the North-West Region of Iran

B. Hoseinpour, S. Kalaycioglu
{"title":"Sources of Conflict in Pastoral Lands: A Case Study in the Milan tribe in the North-West Region of Iran","authors":"B. Hoseinpour, S. Kalaycioglu","doi":"10.32598/jsrd.03.02.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Sociologically, conflict is a “struggle over values and claims to scarce status, power and resources”. Land, as a most valuable asset and a source of wealth and power, a basis for livelihood, a subject for geopolitical purposes, a matter of territorial importance, and a substance for cultural identity, is introduced as a subject of conflict in communal pastoral lands of the Milan nomadic tribe in North-west part of Iran. Three actors are recognized in the field that have conflict over the lands; the State, nomads, and peasants. The main objective of this article is to understand contradictory interaction among the actors and analyze the source and dynamics of social conflict among them. To pursue this objective, theories of conflict including Dahrendorf (1959) and the differentiated meaning system approach are adopted. Methods: Applying the Qualitative method, six sub-tribes from Milan (located in winter pastures) and three peasantry villages (located in summer pastures) were selected as samples, and deep semi-structured interviews were conducted. Results: According to results, it is revealed that conflicts are concentrated around economic, historical, and political incentives, but differentiated meaning systems are also the source of conflict and inconsistencies among the actors. Conclusion: Our study showed that pastures had a variety of meanings and values for actors: for the State, pastures had political, environmental, and economic importance while for peasants, they merely had economic importance and for nomadic groups, economic, cultural (identity), and territorial factors were prime impetuses. For actors, sources of conflicts, their solutions, and reconciliation strategies are also different and in most cases, they are contradictory.","PeriodicalId":416445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sustainable Rural Development","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sustainable Rural Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32598/jsrd.03.02.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Sociologically, conflict is a “struggle over values and claims to scarce status, power and resources”. Land, as a most valuable asset and a source of wealth and power, a basis for livelihood, a subject for geopolitical purposes, a matter of territorial importance, and a substance for cultural identity, is introduced as a subject of conflict in communal pastoral lands of the Milan nomadic tribe in North-west part of Iran. Three actors are recognized in the field that have conflict over the lands; the State, nomads, and peasants. The main objective of this article is to understand contradictory interaction among the actors and analyze the source and dynamics of social conflict among them. To pursue this objective, theories of conflict including Dahrendorf (1959) and the differentiated meaning system approach are adopted. Methods: Applying the Qualitative method, six sub-tribes from Milan (located in winter pastures) and three peasantry villages (located in summer pastures) were selected as samples, and deep semi-structured interviews were conducted. Results: According to results, it is revealed that conflicts are concentrated around economic, historical, and political incentives, but differentiated meaning systems are also the source of conflict and inconsistencies among the actors. Conclusion: Our study showed that pastures had a variety of meanings and values for actors: for the State, pastures had political, environmental, and economic importance while for peasants, they merely had economic importance and for nomadic groups, economic, cultural (identity), and territorial factors were prime impetuses. For actors, sources of conflicts, their solutions, and reconciliation strategies are also different and in most cases, they are contradictory.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
牧区冲突的根源:以伊朗西北地区米兰部落为例
目的:在社会学上,冲突是一种“对价值和对稀缺地位、权力和资源的要求的斗争”。土地,作为最有价值的资产和财富和权力的来源,是生计的基础,是地缘政治目的的主题,是领土重要性的问题,也是文化认同的实质,是作为伊朗西北部米兰游牧部落公共牧区冲突的主题引入的。在这一领域,有三个行为者在土地上发生冲突;国家、游牧民族和农民。本文的主要目的是了解行动者之间的矛盾互动,分析他们之间社会冲突的来源和动态。为了实现这一目标,采用了包括Dahrendorf(1959)在内的冲突理论和差异化意义系统方法。方法:采用定性方法,选取位于米兰冬季牧场的6个亚部落和位于夏季牧场的3个农村村为样本,进行深度半结构化访谈。结果:根据研究结果,冲突主要集中在经济、历史和政治动机上,但不同的意义系统也是行为者之间冲突和不一致的根源。结论:我们的研究表明,对于行为者而言,牧场具有多种意义和价值:对于国家而言,牧场具有政治、环境和经济重要性,而对于农民而言,牧场仅具有经济重要性,而对于游牧群体而言,经济、文化(身份)和领土因素是主要推动力。对于行为者来说,冲突的来源、解决方法和和解策略也各不相同,在大多数情况下,它们是相互矛盾的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Characterizing Small-scale Farmers Differential Vulnerability to Global Environmental Change: Case Studies in Anger Watershed, Southwestern Ethiopia Assessing the Relationship between the Performance of Rural Municipalities and the Realization of Good Rural Governance (Case Study of the Central Part of Zanjan City) Land Use Change in East Guilan and its Consequences State Investment and Empowerment of Local Communities, An Approach to Sustainable Rural Development (Experience of Kashan Rural Area in Central Iran) Assessment of Tourism Development Compliant with Ecotourism Principles, Case Study: Guilan, Iran
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1