Explore the Effects of Decentralization Policies in Developing Rural Settlement (Case Study: Qazvin Province)

Introduction
Population growth and immigration are major causes of the most social changes in rural areas. Accordingly, political change in a country is inevitable. So, this issue of Iran’s rural settlements adopted and evolves. The rural habitations with population changes, the intensity of the positive effects of decentralization are receiving. Your changes have been noted as being the basis for the development of rural settlements. The villages and rural settlements are always in transition. Rural settlements have always been the mainstream of economic and social developments and during historical areas have experienced different geographical ups and downs in the country which is a result of local and metropolitan planning. The discussion on the development of rural settlements is directly dependant to severability of programs and strategies, hence we should specify which one of the possible consequences of the development policies are positive; And because the of rural planning pattern is based on national and macro policies, therefore it should be pointed out that the patterns of service delivery as well as the strategies of the countries planning are divided into two categories of centralized and decentralized. Centralized category is focused on top-down policies and policies in a diverse decentralized fashion of the patterns.
 
Methodology
On the basis of this strategic, planning model is more operational and applicable in Iran that their position in checking a program includes countless flaws. Such flaws, are more obvious in the system of service to the villages. Flaws of type in planning cause damages to social and economical fields of countryside. As well as genesis and formation of new provinces in Iran, due to population growth and its concentration in specific cities, also due to lack of services, there will be deprivation. Discussed long-term deprivation provides, the most severe negative consequences on the body of society and causes deterioration of the rural settlement. Their national and regional imbalances and the lack of justice in the provinces lead to physical and service damages.
 
Results
On this basis, Qazvin province, in 1997, was born in Iran's political map with focus policies applied in the form of tools to formation of the new province. On one hand, it  shows assignment of authorities of local powers, and on the other hand provides the creation of opportunities and also evokes the openings of small parts for the following new provincial divisions to be able to use these opportunities in order to strengthen the foundations of rural productivity increase. With these premises and the theory, library also field studies, this article is willing to focus on explaining the policies of rural settlements aids Qazvin province and has tried to answer this fundamental question that the basic policies of the decentralization of country's center in the form of a new province (Qazvin) provides what positive effects in the rural settlements in a way that the positive consequences of raising the quality of rural people’s life in the province have been positive effects and lead to a major qualitative and quantitative changes. Therefore, the order of present study utilizes a triple conversation (political, administrative and financial) in the form of a variety of Likert scope and utilizes a retrospective panel-based measurement method for two periods before and after becoming a province and with the use of random sampling with Cochran formula class. Desired information has been collected and been analyzed. The information obtained from three levels of administrators, and village councils and Islamic communities of 45 village is done by questionnaire techniques in Qazvin province and has been reviewed by with T-tests and time series. It has been expressing various aspects of major developments in the trilogy after the province creation so raised positive effects and progress to villages and people to the extent of the benefit of services provided. It is worth noting that the political focus promotion is not fully executable but has been able to provide groundwork to increased development.
 
Conclusion
While trying to protect and sustain this kind of political changes in the province atmosphere, the main obstacles of social and political phenomenon is studied. In the future, efficiency and equity objectives may spread in all geographical areas. Such programs are an approach to develop villages and increase people satisfaction in out of reach areas.
References
Andrew, N. Parker (2005). Decentralization the way forward for rural development.
Asayesh, Hossein (1995). Principlesand Methods ofRural Planning, Tehran, Payam Noor University
Awal, Hossain (1977). Administrative decentralization, a framework for Discussion University of Rag Shah, Bangladesh.
Badri, Ali; Karimi, B.; Barber, M.; Ghadiri, M. Masoom (2012). Impactassessmentofruraldevelopmentinlocalrural developmentperspective, Journal of Rural Studies Geography Faculty of Tehran University.
Cohen, M. John; Stephen; B. Peterson (1990). Administrative decentralization.
Dennis, A. Rondinelli (2000). Analysing Decentralization Policies in Developing Countries: a Political-Economy Framework.
Dennis, A Rondinelli; Park, Triangle (2009). Over view of developing country sid, Office for International Proqra as Research Triangle Institute.
Georgi, Azndryany, A.A. (1998). Inthe contextof Councildeconcentrationperspective, Journal of Research, the second number.
Jacob, Massuanganhe (2005). Decentralization and District Development.
John, Ashcroft (2001). The role of government in community safety, Prepared by the International Centre for the Prevention of Crime U.S. Department of Justice.E.
Johannes Jütting, Céline Kauffmann, Ida Mc Donnell Holger Osterrieder, Nicolas Pinaud and Lucia Wegner (2005). Decentralization and poverty in developing countries exploring the impact.
Jutting, J. Corsi (2005). Decentralization and Poverty Reduction, OECD Development Centre Policy.
Henry, P. Minis, (2009). Decentralization and Democratic Local Governance Programming. Research Triangle Institute, Systems Management in- American and European Space.
Hafez, M.; Ahmad Pour, Z.; Toilet, M. (2010). Politics andspace,printing, Tehran, Amir Kabir Institute.
Phyllis, M. Kodi (2006). The role of decentralization and integrated rural development in Ghanas development.
Rezvani, Mohammad Reza; Mansourian, Hossein; Ahmadi, F. (2010). Improvingthequality of lifeofruraland urbanresidents, FiruzAbadcitiesandthecase study, Journal of Rural Studies Geography Faculty of Tehran University
Shatryan, M.; Ganji, M. Mahmoud (2010). The impact ofinvestmentsin empoweringruraldevelopment, case study AbuzeydabadKashan, Journal of Rural Studies Geography Faculty of Tehran University.
Shakoei, Hossein (1995). Newperspectivesinurbangeography, Tehran, the publisher, Second Editi17.
Suzanne, Piriou-sall; Lidija R. Basta (2004). Decentralization key Issues Major Trends and Future developments.
World Bank (2001). Decentralization and governance, Doe’s decentralization improve public service.