تحلیل عوامل مؤثر بر شبکه همکاری دست‌اندرکاران سازمانی توسعه روستایی (موردمطالعه: استان قزوین)

Introduction

Villages, as spatial manifestations of human settlement, constitute key arenas of economic, social, and cultural life and thereby underpin the socio-economic development of many developing countries. Ineffective rural development initiatives reverberate beyond the countryside, adversely influencing urban centres and, ultimately, national development trajectories. Consequently, national progress is contingent upon rural prosperity, which has remained a central policy concern across developing nations for the past several decades. Given the multiplicity of rural development interventions, the involvement of numerous executive agencies in village contexts has become unavoidable. However, cooperation among these institutions is frequently hampered by organisational inefficiencies, managerial shortcomings, and limited professional capacity. Such governance regimes are typically marked by fragile institutions and minimal local participation, generating inefficient service delivery and chronic socio economic lag. In Iran, a highly centralised, sector-specific, top-down planning apparatus engenders poor inter-institutional coordination and redundant activities, thereby undermining cooperation and accountability. Consequently, inadequate cohesion and communication among Iranian rural development organisations have curtailed their capacity to respond to emergent challenges, weakening the stakeholder cooperation network nationwide. Reflecting national patterns, Qazvin Province likewise exhibits a fragile cooperative network among rural development stakeholders. Accordingly, this study seeks to identify the determinants shaping stakeholder cooperation networks in rural development within Qazvin Province, while the persistent disparity between rural and urban welfare indicators underscores the urgency of addressing these structural deficiencies.



Methodology

This research adopts a descriptive–analytical methodology and is applied in nature, aiming to inform practical planning and policy interventions in rural development. The target population consists of all governmental, semi-governmental, and non-governmental organisations actively involved in rural development activities across Qazvin Province. Using purposive sampling to ensure expert insight and institutional relevance, a total of 36 organisations and centres were selected for participation in the qualitative phase of the study. Data were gathered through exploratory, semi-structured interviews conducted with senior managers, subject-matter experts, and institutional heads who possess direct experience with rural development initiatives. These participants represent a broad spectrum of actors across administrative hierarchies and policy domains. The interviews were transcribed and coded systematically, and qualitative content analysis was performed using MAXQDA software to identify thematic patterns, key categories, and relational dynamics among influencing factors

.

Results and discussion

The analysis yielded twelve principal categories of factors that shape and constrain cooperation among stakeholders in the rural development domain. These include: legal and regulatory frameworks; policy formulation and strategic direction; lack of coordination and institutional collaboration; absence of participatory and long-term planning mechanisms; managerial inefficiencies; structural-institutional features; institutional–managerial interface challenges; infrastructure limitations; financing and resource mobilisation; socio-cultural impediments; human capital development; and environmental constraints. Among these, the financing dimension emerged as the most influential factor, particularly in terms of budget allocation, financial autonomy, and fiscal accountability across stakeholder institutions. Following financing, management-related challenges and weak policy frameworks were identified as the second and third most significant impediments to effective collaboration. Issues related to education, professional development, and human resource management—alongside poorly defined institutional roles and responsibilities—jointly occupied the fourth rank in terms of impact. The findings suggest that these factors are interrelated and mutually reinforcing, creating a feedback loop that stifles innovation, responsiveness, and policy coherence in rural governance. Moreover, institutional mistrust, lack of shared goals, and the absence of knowledge-sharing mechanisms further hinder the formation of durable, goal-oriented cooperation networks.



Conclusion

The findings of this study underscore the critical limitations of Iran’s rural development governance system, which remains heavily centralised, compartmentalised, and disconnected from grassroots realities. The absence of an integrated macro-level rural development policy, combined with the fragmented implementation strategies of sectoral ministries and agencies, has resulted in a proliferation of poorly coordinated initiatives. This fragmentation manifests in the duplication of mandates, a lack of designated lead institutions, and the absence of a unified theoretical and strategic framework. Additionally, circulars and policy directives are often inconsistent, outdated, or contradictory, leading to institutional confusion and parallel operations at the provincial level. In Qazvin Province, these systemic dysfunctions manifest as weak supervision, insufficient evaluation metrics, underdeveloped infrastructure for inter-institutional networking, and a general failure to adopt technological innovations and integrated systems .Cultural barriers to cooperation, such as the absence of collaborative norms and incentive structures, further diminish the effectiveness of stakeholder networks. The lack of a shared institutional vision, divergent organisational mandates, and limited technical capacity contribute to a fragmented and inefficient governance landscape. Addressing these challenges necessitates a paradigmatic shift toward decentralised, participatory governance models that prioritise network-building, institutional synergy, and evidence-based policymaking. Such a shift would enhance institutional resilience, facilitate cross-sectoral collaboration, and promote sustainable rural development pathways attuned to both local specificities and national priorities.