Towards Reflexive Land and Water Management in Iran Linking Technology, Governance and Culture
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Wageningen University & Research Publications Towards Reflexive Land and Water Management in Iran Linking Technology, Governance and Culture Mohammad Reza Balali I Thesis committee Thesis Supervisors Prof. dr. M.J.J.A.A. Korthals Professor of Applied philosophy Wageningen University Prof. dr. F.W.J. Keulartz Associate professor, Applied Philosophy Group Wageningen University Other members Prof. dr. Paul Richards, Wageningen University Prof. dr. Josee van Eijndhoven, Erasmus University Rotterdam Prof. dr. ir. Wouter. T. de Groot, Leiden University Dr. Maurits Ertsen, Delft University of Technology This research was conducted under the auspices of the Graduate School of Social Sciences II Towards Reflexive Land and Water Management in Iran Linking Technology, Governance and Culture Mohammad Reza Balali Thesis Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of doctor at Wageningen University by the authority of Rector Magnificus Prof.dr.M.J.Kropff, in the presence of the Thesis Committee appointed by the Doctorate Board to be defended in public on Tuesday 8 September 2009 at 4 PM in the Aula III Mohammad Reza Balali Towards reflexive land and water management in Iran. Linking technology, governance and culture, 255 pages Thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, NL (2009) With references, with summaries in Dutch and English ISBN 978-90-8585-427-2 IV Contents Preface 1 Chapter1. Introduction 7 1.1. General picture of Iran 8 1.2. Land and water problems 15 1.3. Linking land and water issues 19 1.4. Research questions and methodology 21 1.5. Overview and structure of dissertation 22 Part I: Theoretical and conceptual 29 Chapter2. Theoretical and conceptual framework 31 2.1. The technology-governance-people nexus 31 2.1.1. Refining the technology –governance- people nexus 32 2.2. Land and water paradigm: appreciation of the social and natural 36 environment cognitively as well as normatively 2.2.1. Pre-modern (traditional) land and water management paradigm 38 2.2.2. Industrial modernity land and water management paradigm 41 2.2.3. Reflexive land and water modernity paradigm 43 2.3. Refinement of the six research questions 45 2.4. Refinement of the research methodology 46 2.5. Concluding remarks 48 Part II: Historical background 51 Past, present and future of land and water resource management Chapter3. The pre-modern (traditional) land and water management 53 paradigm in Iran 3.1. The main technical system: Qanat 53 3.2. The main social institution: Buneh-the Qanat system as a socio-technical 55 system 3.3. The ethico-religious frameworks: Zoroastrianism & Islam 59 3.3.1. Zoroastrianism: the dominant Iranian religion in the pre- Islamic era 59 3.3.2. Islamic doctrine 63 3.4. Concluding remarks 72 V Chapter 4. The impact of modern land and water management in 75 Iran 4.1. Modernity as idea and developmental model 75 4.2. Iran’s march to modernity 77 4.3. Industrial modernity and the end of the Age of Qanats 79 4.3.1. The hydraulic mission- the replacement of Qanats by deep wells and large 79 dams 4.3.2. The substitution of the Buneh by a system of smallholding 82 4.3.3. The emergence of a mechanistic worldview 87 4.4. Concluding remarks 89 Chapter5. The shift from industrial modernity to reflexive modernity 91 5.1. Anti-modernism and reflexive modernity 91 5.2. Reflexive land and water resource management 93 5.3. Signs and indicators of reflexive turn in Iran 96 5.4. Prospects of reflexive land and water management in Iran 101 5.5. Concluding remarks 107 Part III. Empirical questions 109 Stakeholders’ opinions on the possibilities and constraints of a transition to reflexive land and water management Chapter6. Farmers and village informants 113 6.1 Methodology 113 6. 2. Results and discussion 118 6.2.1. Current perspective on land and water resources management 118 6.2.2. Traditional and modern land and water resource management and their 123 possible integration 6.2.3. Attitudes towards sustainability 126 6.2.4. Attitudes towards technology 129 6.2.5. Attitudes towards science and research 129 6.2.6. Attitudes towards rural institutions and farmers participation 131 6.2.7. Attitudes towards nature and environmental and agricultural ethics 135 6. 3. Concluding remarks 140 Chapter7. Soil and water experts 145 VI 7.1. Methodology 145 7.2. Results and discussion 147 7.2.1. The main land and water policy priorities in Iran from the experts’ point of 147 view 7.2.2. General perception of experts about research questions 147 7.2.2.1. Experts’ attitudes towards sustainability, possibility of integrating 148 traditional and modern land and water management, and technology 7.2.2.2. Assessment of organizations in relation to sustainability issues and the 152 possibility of sustainability under current conditions of the country 7.2.2.3. Attitudes towards ethics in land and water science and the relation 156 between science and society from experts’ point of view 7.3. Concluding remarks 160 Chapter8. Key persons in politics and policy-making 163 8.1. Methodology 163 8.2. Results and discussion 165 8.2.1. Causes of land degradation and water scarcity in Iran 165 8.2.2. Land reform of 1962 and industrial modernization in Iran: advantages and 167 disadvantages 8.2.3. Land and water management paradigms in Iran and transition to reflexive 169 sustainable modernity: opportunities and constraints 8.2.4. Import of western strategy and lack of internal experiences 170 8.2.5. Science, research and technology: part of the problem and part of the 171 solution 8.2.6. Political parties, civil society and democracy as the main way to 173 communicate, promote and implement sustainability 8.2.7. Stakeholders’ participation, government role, land consolidation and rural 174 institutions: challenges and hopes for participation 8.2.8. Ethical issues and the need of ethics regarding land and water, ethics in 175 science and technology and ethics in the administration 8.3. Concluding remarks 176 Chapter9. Comparative analysis of stakeholders’ attitudes 179 9.1. Current perspective of land and water resources management regime and 179 causes of land degradation and water scarcity in Iran 9.2. Sustainability: opportunities and constraints 180 9.3. Integration possibility of traditional and modern land and water resource 181 VII management 9.4. Science, research and technology: part of the problem and part of the 182 solution 9.5. Challenges and hopes of stakeholders participation and the role of 183 government 9.6. Nature, environmental and agricultural ethics 184 9.7. Concluding remarks 186 Part IV: Towards reflexive land and water management 189 Chapter10. Transition to reflexive land and water management in 191 Iran 10.1. From traditional to modern to reflexive land and water management in 191 Iran: answering research questions 1 and 2 10.2. Four key elements of the reflexive land and water management 195 framework: answering research questions 3, 4, 5, and 6 10.2.1. Towards an integrated technical system of traditional and modern 196 technology 10.2.2. Towards new participatory arrangements: shift from government to 197 governance 10.2.3. Towards new ethico- religious framework: post-mechanistic ethics 200 10.2.4. Reflexive soil and water sciences 206 10.3. Concluding remarks 210 Bibliography 213 Summary in English 225 Summary in Dutch( Samenvatting) 233 List of some publications 241 Completed Training and Supervision Plan(TSP) 243 About the author 244 VIII To Fatemeh the beloved daughter of Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon him) IX Preface Preface “We made from water every living thing” (Quran, 21:30) “The earth has been created for me as a mosque and as a means of purification” (Prophet Mohammad Peace be upon him) As a soil scientist who received his MSc degree in 1997 and started his career as a researcher at the Soil and Water Research Institute (SWRI), I first looked at land and water issues through an engineer’s “spectacles”. At first, however, I was hardly aware that my vision was coloured by the special type of spectacles that I wore. I don’t know Why it is said that the horse is a noble creature, That the pigeon is a beautiful bird. I do not know why nobody keeps a vulture in a cage. I do not know why clover flowers are considered inferior to red tulips. Eyes should be washed to see things in a different way. Words should be washed To become the wind itself, the rain itself. “The sound of water’s footsteps”1 Sohrab Sepehri (1927-1980) In subsequent years I gradually realized that there are also other views on land and water issues. Since the start of my career, new concepts such as sustainability, integrated management, and participatory approach were introduced and raised the question whether conventional methods are still adequate to solve current problems of land degradation and water scarcity with which we are confronted. This gradually brought to my mind the question what “conventional agriculture” and what the rationale behind it is. Also why the new concepts are being introduced and what the differences are between conventional and sustainable methods. Participation in the FAO conference of 2003 entitled “Global food security and the role of sustainable fertilization” made me think more seriously about the questions raised. The conference taught me that soil fertility as the basis of sustainability should be considered from a broad perspective encompassing its environmental and socio– economic aspects. According to the ‘reductionist vision’ that still dominates the productionist paradigm, however, soil fertility management has often been reduced to just giving fertilizer for more production.