تحقیقات کاربردی علوم جغرافیایی

تحقیقات کاربردی علوم جغرافیایی

تبیین رویکرد تلفیقی در مدیریت و کنترل مرزها: مورد مطالعه مرزهای خشکی ایران

نویسندگان
ریحانه صالح آبادی 1
سیروس احمدی 2
افشین متقی 3
1 دکتری جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
2 استادیار جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
3 دانشیار گروه جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه خوارزمی، ایران
10.61186/jgs.23.71.199
چکیده
مرزها به عنوان نقاطی که نهادهای حکومت به روش­ها و اشکال گوناگون قانون خود را در آن پیاده سازی می­نمایند شناخته می­شوند. باتوجه به اینکه جهت کنترل و مدیریت مرزها رویکردهای گوناگونی اتخاذ شده است می­توان مشاهده نمود که همچنان این موضوع در کشورهای در حال توسعه ازجمله ایران به عنوان موضوعی امنیتی نگریسته می­شود و بیشترین رویکردهای مرتبط با این امر از دیدگاه امنیتی محض مورد توجه قرار گرفته است؛ در حالیکه نگاه به مرز باید به صورت چند بعدی و همه جانبه باشد. در این پژوهش به دنبال پاسخگویی به این پرسش­ها هستیم که مدیریت مرزهای خشکی به چه صورتی می­تواند انجام شود؟ و کدام یک از شاخص­های مدیریت مرزها از وزن و اهمیت بیشتری برخوردار است؟ بنابراین روش تحقیق به صورت تلفیقی و متشکل از آزمون کندال، دیمتل و روشAHP می­باشد. یافته­های پژوهش نشان می­دهد که ما در مدیریت مرزها با پنج مؤلفه اصلی اقتصادی، فرهنگی-اجتماعی، عمرانی، امنیتی-نظامی و مدیریت تلفیقی روبرو هستیم و هر یک از مؤلفه­ها دارای هفت شاخص اصلی هستند. با استفاده از تکنیک­های مورد نظر می­توان بیان کرد که شاخص­هایی ازجمله تعیین و مشخص نمودن فرصت­ها و شناسایی عوامل باروری آنها (0.1)، مطالعه و شناخت موقعیت جغرافیایی و شرایط فضایی مناطق مرزی (0.099)، تعیین و مشخص کردن تهدیدها و شناسایی ریشه­ها و عوامل آن (0.098) و خارج ساختن مناطق مرزی از انزوا (0.096) دارای بیشترین وزن هستند. بنابراین می­توان به عنوان نتیجه گفت که مدیریت در مناطق مرزی باید به صورت تلفیقی و ترکیبی با سایر عوامل در نظر گرفته شود.
کلیدواژه‌ها
مرز
مدیریت مرز
رویکرد تلفیقی
مرز خشکی

عنوان مقاله English

Explaining the Integrated Approach to Border Management and Control: A Case Study of Iranian Land Borders

نویسندگان English

reyhane salehabadi 1
syrus ahmadi 2
afshin motaghi 3
1 PhD in Political Geography , tarbiat modares university
2 Associate Professor of Political Geography, tarbiat modares university
3 Associate Professor of Political Geography, kharazmi university
چکیده English

Borders are known as places where government institutions implement their own law in a variety of ways and forms. Given the different approaches to border control and management, it can be seen that this issue is still viewed as a security issue in developing countries, including Iran, and most of the approaches related to this are from a purely security perspective. The boundary view must be multidimensional and comprehensive. In this study, we seek to answer the questions of how land border management can be done. And which of the indicators of border management is more weighty and important? Therefore, the research method is a combination of Kendall, Demetel and AHP methods. The findings of the study show that we have five main components of border management in economic, cultural-social, civil, security-military and integrated management, and each of the seven components. Using these techniques, it can be stated that indicators such as identifying and identifying opportunities and identifying their fertility factors (0.1), studying and understanding the geographical location and spatial conditions of border regions (0.099), can be determined and determined. Identifying threats and identifying their roots and factors (0.098) and excluding border areas of isolation (0.096) are the most important. Therefore, it can be concluded that border management should be considered in combination with other factors, ie the application of only one approach, such as economic or security, cannot solve the problems of the country's border regions.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Border
Border Management
Integrated Approach
Land Border
Adey P (2009) Facing airport security: Affect, biopolitics, and the preemptive securitisation of the mobile body. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 27(2): 274–295
Amoore L (2009) Algorithmic war: Everyday geographies of the war on terror. Antipode: A Radical, Journal of Geography 41(1): 49–69.
Anderson, Malcolm and Eberhard Bort (2001) The frontiers of the European :union: (New York: Palgrave)
Aalto, P., S. Dalby, and V. Harle, (2003). The Critical Geopolitics of Northern Europe: Identity Politics Unlimited, Geopolitics 8/1 (2003) : 1–19; W. Walters, The Frontiers of the European :union:: A Geostrategic Perspective, Geopolitics 9/3 (2004) pp. 674–698; Zaiotti (note 2); Laitinen (note 8).
Agnew, J (1994). The territorial trap: the geographical assumptions in international relations theory. Review of International Political Economy, 1 (1): 53–80.
Andreas P (2009). Border Games: Policing the U.S.–Mexico Divide, 2nd edn. Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press.
Aas KF (2011). Crimmigrant’ bodies and bona fide travelers: Surveillance, citizenship and global governance. Theoretical Criminology 15(3): 331–346
Bigo D (2007) Detention of foreigners, states of exception, and the social practices of control of the banopticon. In: Rajaram PK and Grundy-Warr C (eds) Borderscapes: Hidden Geographies and Politics at Territory’s Edge. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 3–33.
Elias, N., (1994). The established and the outsiders. London: Sage. (Originally published 1965).
26. Cowen D and Smith N (2009) After geopolitics? From geopolitical social to geoeconomics. Antipode 41( 1): 22– 48
Côté-Boucher K (2010) Risky business? Border preclearance and the securing of economic life in North America. In: Braedley S and Luxton M (eds) Neoliberalism and Everyday Life. Montreal: McGillQueen’s, pp. 37–67.
Côté-Boucher, Karine, Infantino, Federica, Mark B. Salter (2014). Border security as practice: An agenda for research, Security Dialogue 2014, Vol. 45(3): 195–208, DOI: 10.1177/0967010614533243.
Dufaux, F. (2008). Birth Announcement, Justice Spatial/Spatial justice, www.jssj.org.
Guo, Rongxing (2014). Cross-Border Management Theory, Method and Application , ISBN 978-3-662-45155-7 ISBN 978-3-662-45156-4 (eBook), DOI 10.1007/978-3-662-45156-4. Springer Berlin Heidelberg Dordrecht London.
Kolossov, Vladimir, Scott, James (2013). Selected conceptual issues in border studies, Société Royale Belge de Géographie URL: http://belgeo.revues.org/10532, DOI: 10.4000/belgeo.10532, ISSN: 2294-9135
Heinesson ,(2009). Accreditation and Border Management. Available :www. Kghborderservices .com.
Haughton, G., Counsell, D. (2004). Regions, Spatial Strategies and Sustainable Development ed, London, Routledge.
Martnez, J. (2005). monitors intra-urban nequalities with GIS-based indicators: With a case study in Rosario, Argentina. Utrecht University.
Manuel, Jennifer (2016). Social and Spatial Justice: Grassroots Community Action. CHI’2016. San Jose, CA, USA.
MWUD (2014). The Merriam-Webster unabridged dictionary. Merriam-Webster, Inc, Springfield. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/border. Accessed 2 Feb 2014.
N. Megoran, G. Raballand, and J. Bouyjou, (2005). Performance, Representation and the Economics of Border Control in Uzbekistan, Geopolitics 10/4 (2005) pp. 712–740; Bialasiewicz et al. (note 9).
Nevins J (2010). Operation Gatekeeper and Beyond: The War On ‘Illegals’ and the Remaking of the U.S.–Mexico Boundary. New York: Routledge
Nyers P (2011) No one is illegal between city and nation. Studies in Social Justice 4(2): 127–143. Parker N and Vaughan-Williams N (2012). Critical border studies: Broadening and deepening the ‘lines in the sand’ agenda. Geopolitics 17(4): 727–733.
Paasi, Anssi (2009). Bounded spaces in a ‘borderless world’: border studies, power and the anatomy of territory, Journal of Power, 2:2, 213-234, To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17540290903064275.
Prokkola, Eeva‐Kaisa (2012). Neoliberalizing Border Management in Finland and Schengen45 (2): 1318-1336, https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12003.
Pratt, Martin (2009). The Scholar-Practitioner Interface in Boundary Studies. The symposium “First Contact: Bringing Together the Worldwide Community of Border Studies” held at the Slavic Research Center at Hokkaido University on December 19.
Pratt A (2009). Between a hunch and a hard place: Making suspicion reasonable at the Canadian border. Social & Legal Studies 19(4): 461–480.
Papoli Yazdi, M., & Abrahimi, M. (1387/2008). Theories of rural development (5th Ed.). Tehran: SAMT Publication. [In Persian]
Petronela, A. (2012). Concepts of Economic Growth and Development. Challenges of Crisis and of Knowledge, Economy Transdisciplinarity Cognition, 1(15): 6-71.
Prokkola, E.-K. (2013). Technologies of Border Management: Performances and
Calculation of Finnish/Schengen Border Security. Geopolitics, 18(1): 77–94. doi:10.1080/14650045.2012.685791
OD (2014). Oxford dictionary. Oxford University Press, Oxford. http://www.oxforddictionaries. com/definition/english/border. Accessed 2 Feb 2014.
Rygiel K (2011). Bordering solidarities: Migrant activism and the politics of movement and camps at Calais. Citizenship Studies 15(1): 1–19.
Shapiro, M.J. and Alker, H.R., eds., (1996). Challenging boundaries: global flows, territorial identities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Salter MB (2008). When the exception becomes the rule: Borders, sovereignty, and citizenship. Citizenship Studies 12(4): 365–380.
Smith H (2013). Overflowing borders: Smart surveillance and the border as a market device. In: Geiger M and Pecoud A (eds) Disciplining the Transnational Mobility of People. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 83–102
Skop, E., (2006). introduction-Utban Space: The shape of Inequality, Urban Geography, 27 (5).
Soja, Edward. (2008). the city and spatial justice, justice spatial/spatial justice,." www.jssj.org WUD (2013) Webster’s unabridged dictionary. Random House, Inc., New York
Wolff, Sarah (2008). Border management in the Mediterranean: internal, external and ethical challenges, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 21 (2): 253-271, DOI: 10.1080/09557570802021030.