If it is accepted that natural resources are available to individuals, especially basic resources in agriculture (such as pastures and water resources), Especially in the era of population and the advancement and increase of information and communication, and in this global spread on the eve of the 2026th century, is it acceptable that villages and stable and stable resources exist in them, as well as the belongings surrounded by their boundaries and within their boundaries, are easily given to the villagers? That they still use these huge resources in an extreme, unprincipled and undisciplined manner, like in previous centuries, and waste little? And again, considering the concepts and interests of the larger society in the present and future, do the government organizations and service providers for managing villages, in other words, the management of this vital capital of our country's growing society, feel and do not fulfill their duty? And if I feel a duty, why is the root of rural production management and productive resources so slow and abandoned?

Do we still believe that indigenous and non-indigenous systems in their legal nature can or will play the fundamental role of local organizations such as the landowners of the Dehbans in the villages? If, despite all the current turmoil, there is even an idea in mind, a brief review of the history of the village owners' management system will show a solution and a working solution in this debate...

But before that, it is worth mentioning that all of this is happening in a situation where the people of rural Iran, in light of the changes that are taking place and are ahead of them, are implementing traditional systems into new systems of lifestyle and activity. These changes are also occurring in a situation that the officials, especially the heads and beneficiaries of agricultural and rural development organizations, are not involved in the process of livelihood and rural management in the rural community due to one-sided relationships with their clients. As well as being deprived of knowledge of indigenous rural life, they are also deprived of And this is how, over the past decades, many rural production management programs have faced successive failures in the implementation process. Because, due to the growing importance of knowledge, the implementers of rural development management programs have not been and are not in tune with the problems and demands of rural people.

Therefore, at present, the most important necessity in the process of managing rural production is that educational organizations should study and investigate in the field of villages, that is, prioritize understanding the village and apply what they have learned from the study. Compiled and compared with the scientific style at the national level, and placed in the form of research texts and educational courses in university centers, and transferred to scientific experts and learners so that 

they can be expanded and critiqued in scientific circles. Rather, this belief will increase the knowledge and capability of rural production management programs in this way. And it will be coordinated with the current conditions in the rural community. But this time, those involved will not only identify rural chocolate products, To become directly acquainted with the challenges and problems facing rural producers, and more importantly, to clearly understand why and how the failure to manage sustainable rural production based on the beliefs of rural people has not only put the basic resources of agricultural production in destructive challenges, Which has also prepared the environment and, most importantly, the groundwork for the disintegration of the human resources based in the villages.

Looking back, it can be seen that due to the supervision of the owners and the presence of their representatives in the villages before the land reforms of the 1940s, the popular management of the village has always dominated internal affairs, and in other words, this approach has its roots in the history of the villages. There is a crisis that arises from the production in the villages when the farmers can cultivate in peace and security. With this aim, the landlords, directly or through representatives in the villages, always with a profit-seeking view, seek continuous supervision to maintain order in the village affairs, But they were purely trying to produce as much produce as possible on the lands under the lords and, ultimately, to generate income for themselves. And these lords, due to their extensive management experience, knew how to show off. The goal of achieving the desired goal also requires the selection of native and local managers from among the common people. Such managers will in fact be the same leaders with prudence in the economic conditions of each place. To this end, the landlords were constantly looking for skilled native forces in the management of rural production in serious relations. Until they are given authority over village affairs in any place, and this is while they actually act, with the adequacy of local managers and loyalty and trust for the owners, the necessary condition for selection will be.

Considering the above-mentioned information, it cannot be said with certainty that this local manager was from the landlords in the villages. On the contrary, the farmer always seeks to select this village head from among those who always have a support group among the villagers.

Furthermore, according to the conclusions of the surveys conducted from the period when villages were used by lordly owners to the periods when they became the sole property of the owner, the management of villages has always been managed by one person.

Therefore, the same person, the one who is responsible for the role of village management, is always considered and performs her duty as a liaison between the people of the village and the government resistance.

It is worth noting that in the country's divisions, the village, as an independent unit with economic assets, has specific and legal positions and, through the agency of the village head, becomes a producer of the state. In these circumstances, the administration of affairs related to the basic resources of production in agriculture (water, land, and pastures) and... Likewise, the administration of village protection and protection affairs was ultimately assigned to one of the villagers, while at the same time, the management of the villages was entrusted to the village headman. Given these circumstances, the administration of the social and political affairs of the villages was integrally in the hands of the landlords and farmers. The choice of the subject of landlords had a documented history of a hundred years, even after the constitutional era in Iran, when the administration of village affairs was entrusted to the village headman and the village was placed as a circle in divisions and at the lowest level of the government organization, which was considered a national concern.

And the city and province are centers under the influence of the village, each of which has a management with the official and legal titles of prefect, province and province. It is worth noting that the first population is the population in the country's divisions and in addition to that, it also becomes a production stronghold in the economy. Therefore, this production stronghold must necessarily be a sustainable management system. Of course, in order to solve this problem, those involved must approve the village head and the village headman and sign the appointment order so that they recognize the village headman, while his title is in the power of farmers and landlords.

Therefore, the village headman is one of the indigenous people of the village, supported by the owners and farmers, has executive responsibility, and has had a relevant role. And the rights of the village headman and the village headman are under the supervision of the owners, and in carrying out the assigned task, A cash or non-cash stipend paid to her by villagers and farmers so that, with the cooperation of the village, she could be appointed as a village headman and take over the integrated management of the village.

Thus, the origin of the power to manage the village through the village headman has been between the two classes of owners and the government for years, and the limits of the owners' authority in managing the village and its production through the village headman have been comparable to the government's pole But these limits are less than the law, to the point that during the land reform process of the 1940s and the removal of landowners from rural areas, the authority to manage rural production is reduced to the minimum. So that with this opportunity, villagers will be able to manage village affairs and produce their products through indigenous and local cooperatives.

With these opportunities gained, not only have people succeeded in independently managing villages through rural cooperative companies, but governments are also creating and developing rural cooperatives in rural areas through government managers. Agricultural companies, production cooperatives, and agro-industrial companies have moved towards formalizing rural management. As a result of these trends, leaders have reduced the role of villagers in decision-making regarding production management, and official and government agents have taken the place of the owner group. Meanwhile, in this process, there is no place for people's participation in managing rural production.

Throughout the land reforms of the 1940s, villagers have migrated to continue production in their local villages and have done so without being able to take action to continue their products and develop their villages, given their potential in the field of agriculture and land ownership. They have migrated and this process continues to this day.

Thus, due to the lack of a village headman, village management faded and disappeared, and as a result, the scenes of action and implementation disappeared. As a result of these events, villages were implemented without proper management. But it is worth noting that these developments, due to the absence of a village headman and responsible manager, must have been caused by the severe damage caused by the breakdown of the indigenous management system in the production of rural products. And following these events, a rural system was established and this has been the beginning of poverty in the management of rural productions until now. The traditional management system of village management has been abandoned since its inception, and the producers, owners, and residents of the villages themselves, in the face of changes and new developments, do not continue to accept the current trends and have no choice but to continue living. This reduces the participation of rural elites in development, which is considered a serious harm. It is clear that in order to combat this harm, development research is required to identify and determine the harm. And now, more than half a decade after the collapse of the system of multiple bosses and the traditional management regime in rural production, rural residents still expect the norm in rural communities. Experts, after examining the various events that are happening in villages, they are the ones who the village heads want to manage the village and its products as the administrative managers on behalf of the recipients. Of course, according to every stakeholder, a period of time is needed to show that ultimately the existence of the village head and the authority can be a worthy manager or successor to manage the village and, consequently, manage rural products? In other words, is the village headman a replacement for the previous title of village headman? And besides, is the government willing to transfer the authority of village management to the villagers? Is it strange, as the authorities are doing and seeing, to manage the security and comfort of the city residents? The authority to manage the current situation and ensure the development and prosperity of the village, and consequently the management of rural products, which play a prominent role on the tables of the people of the cities, should be given to fill the void of rural management?

At the same time, continuous observation is needed to transform the role of the village headman, the council, and the villager. The role of the village headman replaces the previous role of the village headman in the country's new hierarchy (level, province, and district) in rural development affairs, performing the tasks of survey, evaluation, and pathology, and this is also unimportant.

The most important commitment in the 2026 century is to emphasize, recommend and follow up on this issue, which in the current era, the issue of management and its importance and necessity in the field and activity in educational environments is also addressed in education and development. Management education has even penetrated schools, universities, and administrative organizations, and addressing it has become one of the coordination processes in the organization. On this basis, when it comes to transformation, development, and progress, That has established a base and systems for this management in which the operations and evaluation of programs are placed, is it worthy of implementing this important and universal  management responsibility in society, which is the main and eternal capital of the country? And the village, which is the origin, in the basic sense, and the generator of the production cycle in this country's agricultural products, becomes scarce and weak? But in reality, such observations seem to be due to negligence, weakness, and shortcomings. And now, in the coming century, if there is a lack of attention and neglect in the issue of rural studies and its management, which is the product of the country, and management based on dynamism and sustainability, taking into account the traditional beliefs of the rural people, that is an unforgivable sin committed by planning and evaluation experts and managers in the management of the country's development.

1. Shahbazi E, Sharifi A. Pathology of Rural Management. Tehran Quarterly J Rural Development and Development. 2011; 1-14.
2. Abolfazl J, Ismail S. Investigating the role of local leaders in advancing rural extension and development programs in South Khorasan. Agricultural Education and Extension Research Organization. 1997.
3. Eftekhari R, Hamdollah AFSQ, Jamshid E. A new approach to rural production management with emphasis on effective institutions. Quarterly J Rural Development. 2007; 10: 01-30.
4. Esmaeil S. Rural Management at the Beginning of the 21st Century. Editorial Board Statements of the Quarterly J Rural Development. 2007; 13: 0-5.
5. Mehdi T. Rural Management in Iran, Second Edition. Comments and Additions, Tehran: University of Tehran. 2007.
6. Ahern J, Cilliers S, Niemela J. The concept of ecosystem services in adaptive urban planning and design: An innovation. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2014; 125: 254-259.
7. Antrop M. Changing patterns in the urbanized countryside of Western Europe. Landscape ecology. 2000; 15: 257-270.
8. Wu JJ. Making the case for landscape ecology an effective approach to urban sustainability. Landscape J. 2008; 27: 41-50.
9. Xie Y, Yu M, Bai Y, Xing X. Ecological analysis of an emerging urban landscape pattern-desakota: a case study in Suzhou, China. Landscape ecology. 2006; 21: 1297-1309.
10. Wei J, Qian J, Tao Y, Hu F, Ou W. Evaluating spatial priority of urban green infrastructure for urban sustainability in areas of rapid urbanization: A case study of Pukou in China. Sustainability. 2018; 10: 327.
11. Weng Y-C. Spatiotemporal changes of landscape pattern in response to urbanization. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2007; 81: 341-353.
12. Thomas M. Making a town: Urbanity, rurality, and the politics of place in Ebersbach (Fils), 1945-1989. J Urban History. 2018; 44: 1062-1080.
13. Wang Z. Evolving landscape-urbanization relationships in contemporary China. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2018; 171: 30-41.
14. Tang Y, Zhao W, Gu C. Urbanization and rural development in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei metropolitan region: Coupling-degree model. J Urban Planning and Development. 2017; 143: 04016028.