0458 GMT July 17, 2019
From the early years of the 21st century, more precisely in 2005, the concept of spatial planning was again raised in the literature of European agricultural development planning, with modified and revised development hub models, and was theoretically discussed among European planners.
This may be because a large number of policymakers thought that under United States hegemony and WTO policy, they had to look for more support from exploiters, along with an increase in agricultural subsidies and an improved and efficient mix of relationships, resources and production factors.
Adopting a target-oriented and revised agricultural strategy, therefore, rose again in the European planning circles.
Fortunately, the concept of agricultural spatial development, meaning optimum integration of stakeholders, space and agricultural activity, enjoys an old historical background in Iran, albeit forgotten.
Influenced and organized by state interventions, the economic structure was designed in line with monetary policies, the specifications of applied technology, human resources, practices and production factors during the past 70 years.
The government interventionism approach toward agriculture has led to develop agricultural hubs, including agro-joint stock companies, agro-business companies, rural production cooperative societies, processing and complementary factories, displacement streams of workforce and energy, triggering harbors and many other infrastructural facilities.
From a historical point of view, such planning was influenced by the Eisenhower government, and gradually shifted to the huge projects impressed by Rostov’s development theory and Jean Monett’s fundamentalism.
Based on this pattern, originated from “pole theory” by Francois Peru and other intellectuals of the 1960s, including Friedman, Myrdal, Hans and Hirschman, believing that development does not occur totally, en masse, but rather as a gradual procedure, in the initial stage, development occurs at the growth poles and then disseminates.
By presenting the “center-perimeter” model, Friedman tried to consider a combination of factors associated with “the gradual dissemination effect” in the center, and an increasing trend of inequalities and marginalization.
Referring to the “unbalanced growth theory,” Hirschman emphasized the development of the whole through developed sections, asserting that economic activity, including agriculture, is locally concentrated in a limited area, leading to creating developed spots. Introducing the “leakage effect,” as well as the “polarization effect,” he tried to analyze the pros and cons of concentration.
Like Hirschman, Myrdal paid attention to spatial implications in the development process; however, despite him, Myrdal also believed in intensifying the polarization process in southern countries, requiring governmental interference for building an equilibrium.
Introducing a new concept, “growth poles,” Francois Peru, reaffirmed Hirschman’s and Myrdal’s beliefs, asserting that development does not occur en masse (entirely), rather, it initiates in the development poles, gradually dispreads in the different poles, and finally impresses the whole economic system.
As one of the few theories of the 1960s, this theory was welcomed by many developed and developing countries, and later was applied in the fourth Five-Year Development Plan in Iran, and followed up in the fifth Five-Year Development Plan, too.
As a result of applying this theory, six industrial hubs were developed in Iran, including Tehran, Tabriz, Isfahan, Ahvaz, Arak and Qazvin. The agriculture sector was simultaneously impressed by industrial development and many agro-hubs were developed.
*Hossein Shirzad is deputy agricultural jihad minister and CEO of the Central Organization for Rural Cooperatives (CORC).