hossein daneshmehr; kamal khaleqpanah; osman hedayat
Abstract
AbstractThe hypothesis - based on the present study, suggests that border markets and related development have not been a good policy for the development of border areas. The present research method is the Grounded theory in which it deals with the field conditions, causation and intervention, consequences ...
Read More
AbstractThe hypothesis - based on the present study, suggests that border markets and related development have not been a good policy for the development of border areas. The present research method is the Grounded theory in which it deals with the field conditions, causation and intervention, consequences as well as strategies. The data collection tool is a semi-structured interview with 45 stakeholders and stakeholders as targeted examples, including village heads, members of district and village councils, market experts, and saturation data. There were deep conversations. Based on the logic of the field theory method, the data were extracted in three levels of open, central, and selective coding. The number of concepts developed in this stage was 134 basic concepts, 15 core categories, 4 main categories, and one nuclear category. The main categories are; Lack of development infrastructure, the collapse of the agricultural and livestock sector, and socio-cultural isolation, inefficiency in restorative policies. An analysis of these categories led us to the core category of institutional and structural rejection of border communities. Based on this, it can be concluded that the logic governing border-based development, by presenting markets as the most important axis of development in these areas, has rejected border communities and destroyed their capacities and potentials.Keywords: Border Development, Border Markets, Local Development, Disappearance of Capacities and Opportunities, Border Communities.
