| Literature DB >> 36187625 |
Mohammad Shokati Amghani1, Moslem Savari2, Shahla Choobchian1.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic caused an emergency around the world, especially in rural communities, and imposed great disasters on human societies, so it's devastating effects on mental health indicators, economy, environment, and social relations are known to everyone. But the accurate assessment of its damage to human societies can help to manage this phenomenon during and post-COVID-19 pandemic. To that end, the present study was conducted for vulnerability assessment of wheat farmers to the COVID-19 pandemic in northwest Iran. The main data collection tool in this study was a questionnaire that was designed based on the Me-bar model, but for the accurate vulnerability assessment, new parameters were added based on the theoretical research literature and the COVID-19 pandemic. The sample size was selected from 420 wheat farmers living in East Azerbaijan Province, the northwest of Iran, using the Kerjcie and Morgan's table. The results showed that for economic vulnerability, the rural poverty was the most important cause of vulnerability of the studied rural households and access to information was most important cause of social vulnerability. Also, the results showed that for psychological vulnerability, the self-efficacy was the most important cause of vulnerability. In other results, irrigation parameters of agricultural lands were the most important cause of environmental vulnerability. The study results showed that the studied farmers have experienced high levels of vulnerability and were strongly affected by economic, social, psychological, and environmental damages. Moreover, the results showed that the farmers of Shabestar and Maragheh had the highest level of vulnerability. In general, the study results can provide policymakers with new insights into the field of COVID-19 pandemic management because the vulnerability of farmers has been identified using 39 parameters.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; rural society; sustainable livelihoods; vulnerability; wheat farmers
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36187625 PMCID: PMC9516311 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.994922
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Figure 1The trend of changes in the amount of annual wheat production in the past years (unit: million tons). Source: [14].
Figure 2The study area.
The main parameters and sub-parameters used in this research.
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| 1 | Rural poverty | The occurrence of crimes | Self-esteem | Agricultural production waste |
| 2 | Rural saving | Rural youth marriage | Efficacy | Cropping pattern |
| 3 | Crop selling | The stability of daily rural life | Worry and anxiety | Type of cultivation (autumn and spring) |
| 4 | Household nutrition | migration | Hope | Equipping and renovating agricultural land |
| 5 | Providing production inputs | Unity and solidarity of villagers | Risk taking | Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) |
| 6 | Crop pricing | Social dignity | Correct and decisive decision | Water channel drainage |
| 7 | Access to wage labor | access to information | Social vitality | Irrigation of agricultural lands |
| 8 | Transferring crops to the market | Dependence on others | ||
| 9 | Agricultural waste | Cooperation and social participation | ||
| 10 | The cost of crop producing | sympathy | ||
| 11 | Supply chain of agricultural products | |||
| 12 | Processing of agricultural products | |||
| 13 | Non-farm incomes of rural households | |||
| 14 | Crop insurance | |||
| 15 | Farm income | |||
| ki | 15 | 10 | 7 | 7 |
The values and weights of farmers' economic vulnerability parameters.
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 7/3 | Rural poverty | 45/3 | 12/3 | 38/4 | 88/3 | 3/3 |
| 6/56 | Rural saving | 52/3 | 85/3 | 24/3 | 49/3 | 8/4 |
| 5/45 | Crop selling | 49/3 | 19/3 | 40/3 | 52/3 | 11/4 |
| 4/63 | Household nutrition | 25/3 | 52/3 | 87/3 | 41/3 | 15/3 |
| 4/55 | Providing production inputs | 19/3 | 88/3 | 69/3 | 19/3 | 29/3 |
| 3/21 | Crop pricing | 12/3 | 48/3 | 58/3 | 44/3 | 4/4 |
| 4/45 | Access to wage labor | 2/4 | 59/3 | 11/4 | 10/4 | 22/3 |
| 4/39 | Transferring crops to the market | 85/3 | 67/3 | 88/3 | 16/3 | 74/3 |
| 2/25 | Agricultural waste | 41/3 | 59/3 | 2/3 | 49/3 | 86/3 |
| 4/55 | The cost of crop producing | 3/4 | 49/3 | 11/4 | 8/4 | 87/3 |
| 6/36 | Supply chain of agricultural products | 4/4 | 12/4 | 24/3 | 9/4 | 63/3 |
| 4/4 | Processing of agricultural products | 63/3 | 52/3 | 19/3 | 63/3 | 45/3 |
| 6/36 | Non-farm incomes of rural households | 48/3 | 62/4 | 59/4 | 45/4 | 9/4 |
| 4/2 | Crop insurance | 27/3 | 42/3 | 45/3 | 8/3 | 12/3 |
| 6/79 | Farm income | 46/3 | 45/4 | 49/3 | 8/4 | 9/4 |
|
| 34/3 | 50/3 | 48/3 | 49/3 | 26/3 | |
Pi: The amount of each parameter on a scale of 1 (least vulnerability) to 5 (most vulnerability) from the farmers' perspective.
Wj: The relative importance of each parameter on a scale of 0 (the lowest weight) to 10 (the highest weight).
The values and weights of farmers' environmental vulnerability parameters.
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 5/45 | Agricultural production waste | 3/12 | 3/54 | 3/51 | 2/89 | 3/2 |
| 5/14 | cropping pattern | 3/41 | 3/19 | 3/72 | 3/45 | 3/12 |
| 4/15 | Type of cultivation (autumn and spring) | 3/73 | 3/98 | 4/22 | 4/8 | 4/1 |
| 4/52 | Equipping and renovating agricultural land | 3/83 | 3/88 | 3/45 | 3/69 | 3/25 |
| 5/53 | Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) | 2/55 | 2/35 | 2/14 | 2/2 | 2/25 |
| 4/66 | Water channel drainage | 3/45 | 3/47 | 3/66 | 3/82 | 3/92 |
| 5/55 | Irrigation of agricultural lands | 3/71 | 3/25 | 3/47 | 3/66 | 3/51 |
|
| 3/37 | 3/34 | 3/43 | 3/32 | 3/25 | |
Pi: The amount of each parameter on a scale of 1 (least vulnerability) to 5 (most vulnerability) from the farmers' perspective.
Wj: The relative importance of each parameter on a scale of 0 (the lowest weight) to 10 (the highest weight).
The values and weights of farmers' social vulnerability parameters.
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 2/25 | The occurrence of crimes | 2/98 | 3/21 | 3/42 | 3/26 | 3/5 |
| 4/1 | Rural youth marriage | 4/43 | 4/71 | 4/8 | 4/24 | 4/48 |
| 6/23 | The stability of daily rural life | 4/1 | 3/36 | 4/58 | 4/25 | 3/95 |
| 3/25 | Migration | 3/3 | 2/43 | 2/56 | 2/25 | 2/36 |
| 5/69 | Unity and solidarity of villagers | 4/36 | 4/49 | 4/52 | 4/52 | 4/38 |
| 5/25 | Social dignity | 4/5 | 4/12 | 3/95 | 4/12 | 3/75 |
| 6/49 | Access to information | 4/55 | 4/63 | 4/27 | 4/4 | 3/89 |
| 6/13 | Dependence on others | 4/41 | 4/52 | 4/63 | 4/17 | 4/8 |
| 6/45 | Cooperation and social participation | 4/24 | 4/82 | 4/63 | 4/63 | 4/17 |
| 4/25 | Sympathy | 4/52 | 4/52 | 4/27 | 4/31 | 4/8 |
|
| 4/17 | 4/2 | 4/22 | 4/1 | 3/92 | |
Pi: The amount of each parameter on a scale of 1 (least vulnerability) to 5 (most vulnerability) from the farmers' perspective.
Wj: The relative importance of each parameter on a scale of 0 (the lowest weight) to 10 (the highest weight).
The values and weights of farmers' psychological vulnerability parameters.
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 4/11 | Self-esteem | 3/45 | 3/52 | 4/49 | 3/59 | 3/52 |
| 6/39 | Efficacy | 4/41 | 4/9 | 4/27 | 4/41 | 4/37 |
| 4/52 | Worry and anxiety | 4/25 | 4/34 | 4/49 | 4/71 | 4/8 |
| 6/2 | Hope | 4/4 | 4/74 | 4/45 | 4/37 | 4/62 |
| 4/42 | Risk taking | 4/5 | 3/85 | 3/67 | 4/1 | 3/55 |
| 3/58 | Correct and decisive decision | 3/55 | 3/24 | 3/5 | 3/4 | 2/89 |
| 6/26 | Social vitality | 4/55 | 4/25 | 4/73 | 4/67 | 4/52 |
|
| 4/15 | 4/11 | 4/26 | 4/2 | 4/6 | |
Pi: The amount of each parameter on a scale of 1 (least vulnerability) to 5 (most vulnerability) from the farmers' perspective.
Wj: The relative importance of each parameter on a scale of 0 (the lowest weight) to 10 (the highest weight).
Total vulnerability coefficients of the studied counties.
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Economical | 3/34 | 3/5 | 3/48 | 3/49 | 3/26 |
| Social | 4/17 | 4/2 | 4/22 | 4/1 | 3/92 |
| Psychological | 4/15 | 4/11 | 4/26 | 4/2 | 4/6 |
| Environmental | 3/37 | 3/34 | 3/43 | 3/32 | 3/25 |
| Total vulnerability (VL) | 3/79 | 3/85 | 3/89 | 3/83 | 3/65 |
| Relative vulnerability (VRL) | 1/3 | 1/5 | 1/6 | 1/4 | a1 |
a: Tabriz was considered the reference.