Assessing the Rangeland Users' Attitudes Related to Vulnerability Contexts in line with the Sustainable Rangeland Management in Three Villages of Najafabad County

Vulnerability context is one of the basic concepts of sustainable livelihood framework. The vulnerability contexts, including shocks, trends, and seasonal variability affect the rangeland users’ livelihoods. This study aims to assess the vulnerability contexts of rangeland users in three villages of Jalal Abad, Haji Abad, and Nahzatabad in Najafabad city. A structured questionnaire was used to measure the vulnerability contexts. From the statistical population of 68 people, 58 people were selected using Cochran's formula. The results showed that about 80% of the respondents evaluated the changes in vulnerable areas as high and 19% as very high. The results of measuring the attitude of the rangeland users of the three studied villages showed the shocks including air pollution and drying of plants and economic shocks with an average of 3.21 and 3.17, trends consisted of inflation and price and rangeland degradation with an average of 3.92 and 3.80 and the seasonality including drought, temperature increase and rapid melting of snow and frost and heat exhaustion of plants with an average of 3.69 and 3.68 had the greatest impact on livelihood vulnerability. Since vulnerability contexts are not one or two, but several factors of vulnerability may occur at the same time, this study suggests policymakers employ a multifaceted approach and a set of adaptive strategies in dealing with vulnerability contexts. In addition, since individuals, households, and communities affected by vulnerability contexts due to the spatial distribution in the geography of the land may not experience risks and vulnerabilities in the same way, future studies can show how different individuals, groups, households, and communities are exposed. In the face of vulnerability, including environmental hazards, and natural disasters.
 
Extended Abstract
1-Introduction
Livelihood is abilities, assets, and activities that are needed for life and survival. Livelihood, as a means of better understanding the quality of life and well-being, is one a new approach in line with the goals of environmental sustainable management. Livelihood thinking introduces the basic resources through which, people can improve their lives. The main components of the sustainable livelihood framework include livelihood capital (1), vulnerability contexts (2), policies, institutions and processes (3), livelihood strategies (4), and outcomes (5), which have been the subject of various studies. Vulnerability contexts are one of the main components in the sustainable livelihood framework, which directly and indirectly affect livelihood capital. The vulnerability contexts are related to the external environment. The external environment or vulnerability contexts include shocks (i.e. livestock and human diseases and plant and animal pests, environmental hazards such as floods or earthquakes, and economic shocks), trends (i.e. population, biodiversity, migration), and seasonality (i.e. drought, flash floods, rains). One of the areas in which, the livelihoods of individuals and human groups are affected by vulnerability are rangeland resources. They have been reported to be vulnerable to the livelihoods of rangeland users depending on them; at the same time, the vulnerable contexts also affect the sustainability of livelihoods and rangeland resources. This study intends to specifically assess three main criteria and sub-criteria related to the vulnerable contexts of rangeland users in the central part of Najafabad County.
 
2-Materials and Methods
This research measures the criteria related to the vulnerability contexts of livelihoods of rangeland users in three villages of Jalalabad, Hajiabad, and Nahzatabad in the central part of Najafabad County. The statistical population was 68 rangeland users; According to Cochran's formula, 58 users were selected as a statistical sample. To measure the criteria of vulnerability contexts, three main criteria of shock, trend, and seasonality were taken into consideration. Prioritizing and extracting items for measuring the criteria of vulnerability contexts, according to the literature review, in the form of a preliminary questionnaire, was assessed and reviewed by an expert panel. Finally, by analyzing the views of the expert panel and prioritizing the examined items, 5 items in the final questionnaire and 15 items, total in the form of a five-point Likert scale (1-5) including very little (1), little (2), somewhat decreased (3), increased (4) and very increased (5) were investigated. The content validity of the questionnaires was confirmed by using the opinions of the expert panel and its reliability was confirmed by calculating Cronbach's alpha coefficient. After completing the questionnaire and recording the information in the Excel spreadsheet, data analysis was done using SPSS software, and graphs were drawn in the Excel environment. To prioritize and classify the items of vulnerability contexts in the three investigated dimensions, the difference in the standard deviation from the mean or the ISDM standard was used by using the sum of the points.
 
3- Results and Discussion
The results showed that 79.31% of the respondents with the highest frequency evaluated the vulnerability contexts (shock, trend, and seasonality) as high, 18.97% as very high, and 1.72% as moderate during the last 20 years, which affected their livelihood. According to Friedman's test, "drying of plants (rangeland and forest)" and "economic" shocks with an average rating of 3.21 and 3.17, and the shock of "natural disasters and unforeseen events (storms and fires, floods and loss of land)" with an average rating of 2.66, respectively, had the greatest and least impact on livelihoods in the last 20 years. It can be stated that the drying of rangeland plants is an objective and tangible issue due to the decrease in rainfall and extreme weather changes. Regarding dust, the pollution caused by this phenomenon is observed in most parts of Iran, and Najafabad is no exception. According to the Friedman test, the trends of "inflation" and "land degradation" with an average rank of 3.92 and 3.80, and the trend of "immigration of family members to other regions" with the lowest average rank of 1.90 have the highest and lowest impact had on livelihood, respectively. It can be said that according to the current conditions, the state economy dependent on oil, existing sanctions, global inflation, and high prices, are obvious and outstanding issues. According to Friedman's test, the items of seasonality "freezing and heat exhaustion of plants" and "increasing temperature and rapid melting of snow" with average rank values of 3.70 and 3.69 had the highest impact on the rangeland users’ livelihoods. "Occurrence of destructive and sudden floods" with the lowest average rating of 1.51 had the lowest impact on rangeland users. It can be acknowledged that the drought and the increase in temperature largely lead to people's lack of proper productivity of environmental facilities and potentials; including lack of water for various activities and low productivity of crops and many other activities that are directly related to people's livelihood.
 
4- Conclusion
Shocks, trends, and seasonality are among the factors and vulnerability contexts, each of which can have negative effects on the livelihood of rangeland users; so the cumulative and combined effects of these vulnerability criteria can permanently affect environmental resources, including rangelands. In the studied area, economic shocks, inflation and high prices, drought, and drying of plants affected the livelihood of rangeland users more than in other cases. In this regard, the study suggests adopting multifaceted approaches and adaptation strategies to deal with vulnerable contexts. Future studies can examine how individuals, groups, households, and communities face different areas of vulnerability, including environmental hazards, natural disasters, and other social and economic vulnerabilities. This helps the policymakers and planners to use a specific strategy in facing risks and crises in every situation, place, and local community and to take basic measures in line with the sustainable management of environmental resources, especially sustainable rangeland management.