رویکرد سیاست اجباری دولت های ایران در قوانین محیط زیستی با کمک شبکه ی نهاد واژه های اجبار و غیر اجبار (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
نظام حقوق محیط زیستی ایران دارای رویکردهای بالا به پایین است. به عبارتی، ابزارهای نهادهای قانون گذار برای حفاظت از محیط زیست مبتنی بر اِعمال سیاست اجباری است. در این پژوهش تلاش می شود با استخراج نهاد واژه های اجبار و غیراجباری و سازمان ها و نهادهای تحت این ادبیات، نشان داده شود که در حقوق محیط زیستی ایران کدام سازمان ها و نهادها تحت سیاست های اجبار و غیر اجبار قرار دارند. در این راستا از رویکرد تحلیل شبکه ای و نرم افزارهای Ucinet و Netdraw استفاده می شود. نتایج نشان داد که از بین تمامی واژه هایی که ادبیات اجبار و غیر اجبار را نشان می دهند، نهادهای قانون گذار بر واژه ی «مکلف اند» و در نظر گرفتن «مجازات» و «می تواند» تمرکز دارند که بیش ترین مرکزیت درجه و بینابینی را دارند. بیش ترین ادبیات اجباری به کار برده شده برای «دولت» در مقاطع زمانی اجرای اصلاحات ارضی تا انقلاب اسلامی و ریاست جمهوری روحانی است که نهادهای قانون گذار «دولت» را 6 بار تحت ادبیات اجباری قرار داده اند. نهادهای قانون گذار ادبیات غیر اجبار را بیش تر برای سازمان ها و نهادهای دولتی و ادبیات اجبار و مجازات را بیشتر برای مردم و نهادهای غیردولتی استفاده می کنند. درحالی که، حکومت باید وجه دوم چارچوب های اِعمال فشار را اعمال کند که رویکردی است که در آن دولت تلاش می کند در فضایی همکارانه، نوعی اطاعت پذیری شبه داوطلبانه را تشویق کند. همچنین، حکومت به دنبال اجرای نوعی توازن بین نهادهای دولتی و بازیگران غیردولتی در اعمال ادبیات اجبار و غیر اجبار باشد. این تلاش های حکومت در برقراری توازن و تعادل باعث افزایش حس اعتماد به حکومت و ایجاد نوعی اطاعت پذیری شبه داوطلبانه می شودCoercive Policy of Iran’s Governments Environmental Legislation: A Network Analysis of Coercive/Non-Coercive Word–Institution Relationships
Introduction
In recent decades, the implementation of environmental regulations has shifted from traditional command-and-control approaches to newer strategies emphasizing participation and reduced penalties. The limitations of coercive instruments in environmental protection became increasingly evident, prompting legislative institutions to adopt less punitive policy frameworks and instruments. Non-coercive instruments move away from the command-and-control strategy and instead encourage voluntary compliance through participatory management and the involvement of resource users in management and policy development. Research on the adoption of these new political instruments for solving environmental problems can generally be grouped into several categories. The first category comprises studies that examine the instruments used by legislative bodies in developing environmental laws and regulations. The second category includes research comparing the effectiveness of coercive versus non-coercive instruments in mitigating environmental problems. Despite the valuable contributions of existing studies on regulatory instruments and the use of coercive and non-coercive approaches in policymaking, a fundamental issue remains underexplored: identifying which organizations and institutions are subject to coercive and non-coercive policy instruments. This gap in the literature highlights the need for more specialized research in this area. Accordingly, the present study aimed to address this shortcoming by examining which organizations and institutions in Iran are subject to coercive and non-coercive policies in the country’s environmental laws.
Materials and Methods
The study used the network analysis approach to examine the topic. Network analysis is an emerging method in multi-criteria decision-making that can be used to prioritize factors and criteria. In the current study, all words indicating coercive and non-coercive policies—as well as the names of organizations and institutions subject to these policies—were first extracted from the text of relevant laws and regulations. It helped analyze the network of environmental laws and regulations and generate the primary data for this research. Then, a two-dimensional word–institution matrix was constructed, with the rows representing coercive and non-coercive policy words and the columns representing the corresponding organizations and institutions identified in the legal literature. In the next step, UCINET software was used to calculate the degree centrality and betweenness centrality indices for the coercive and non-coercive literature for each law. NetDraw software was then employed to visualize the results through graphs illustrating the degree centrality and betweenness centrality.
Results and Discussion
An analysis of the coercive network graphs revealed that the greatest diversity of coercive words was produced during the period from the implementation of land reforms to the Islamic Revolution (1963–1979). In addition, the highest number of institutions influenced by coercive literature was observed during both Rouhani’s presidency (the twelfth administration, 2013–2020) and the period of land reforms leading up to the Islamic Revolution. Similarly, an analysis of the non-coercive network graphs indicated that the most diverse use of non-coercive words was found in two periods: from the implementation of land reforms to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and from Reza Khan’s coup to the onset of land reforms (1921–1963). The highest number of institutions targeted by non-coercive literature appeared during the period of land reforms up to the Islamic Revolution, and from the Islamic Revolution to the end of the Iran–Iraq War.
Conclusion
The legal and administrative structure governing the environment and natural resources in Iran adopts a top-down approach. However, this coercive literature is primarily directed at non-governmental actors—namely, the general public—while the concept of punishment is rarely applied to government institutions. As a result, the government’s primary focus is on the first dimension of environmental issues: the belief that it is the actions of people that disrupt environmental processes. Consequently, the mainstream political science tends to emphasize exerting greater coercion and pressure on the public. In other words, legislative bodies use non-coercive literature when addressing government agencies and institutions, while coercive and punitive language is reserved mainly for citizens and non-governmental organizations. However, the government should also apply the second dimension of the pressure framework—acknowledging its own role and obligations. Ideally, coercive measures should be accompanied by accountability on the part of government institutions. This would help foster a perception that the law applies equally to both those who follow and those who violate the rules when environmental issues and problems arise. A more effective approach would involve the government promoting a quasi-voluntary, cooperative atmosphere. The government should balance how coercive and non-coercive discourse is applied to both governmental and non-governmental actors. In this way, the government can help build public trust and foster a kind of quasi-voluntary compliance.
تبلیغات
