تولید و بازتولید فضا در بسترِ کالایی‌سازی کوهستان: واکاوی نواحی منتخبِ شرق ایران

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی بنیادی

نویسنده

گروه جغرافیا، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه بیرجند، بیرجند، ایران

چکیده

کالایی‌شدن فضاهای کوهستانی یکی از جلوه‌های مهم تحول در اقتصاد سیاسی فضاست که طی دو دهه اخیر در ایران، به‌ویژه در شرق کشور، شدت یافته است. روندی که طی آن کوهستان از یک بستر اکولوژیکی و فرهنگی با ارزش مصرفی، به عرصه‌ای برای انباشت سرمایه و دارای ارزش مبادله‌ای بدل می‌شود. این پژوهش با هدف فهم سازوکارهای تولید و بازتولید فضا در بستر کالایی‌سازی کوهستان انجام شده و نواحی کوهستانی منتخب در شهرستان‌های بیرجند، مشهد و طرقبه–شاندیز را مورد بررسی قرار می‌دهد. بر خلاف بسیاری از مطالعات که بر پیامدهای زیست‌محیطی یا اجتماعی این تحولات تمرکز دارد، این پژوهش به سازوکارهای تولید و بازتولید فضای کوهستانی می‌پردازد. چارچوب نظری پژوهش بر پیوند میان نظریه تولید فضا لوفور و مباحث کالایی‌شدن طبیعت استوار است و نقش دولت، بازار و جامعه محلی را در شکل‌گیری این فرآیند بررسی می‌کند. از نظر روش‌شناسی، پژوهش در چارچوب پرسشگری طبیعت‌گرا و با رویکرد تلفیقی استقرایی–قیاسی انجام شده و از تحلیل تماتیک برای استخراج مضامین اصلی بهره گرفته است. داده‌ها از طریق مشاهدات میدانی بلندمدت، مصاحبه‌های نیمه‌ساختاریافته، تحلیل اسناد توسعه و متون گفتمانی رسمی گردآوری شده است. تحلیل یافته‌ها مبتنی بر اصول پنج‌گانه روش دپوی و گیتلین (2015) بوده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد کالایی‌سازی کوهستان فرآیندی چندلایه و شبکه‌ای است که از برهم‌کنش پنج نیروی اصلی شکل می‌گیرد: سلطه منطق بازار، زیبایی‌شناختی و نمادین‌شدن کوهستان، حکمرانی نئولیبرال، طرد جوامع محلی و فشار توسعه شهری–زیرساختی. سرمایه‌گذاری‌های زیرساختی، تغییر کاربری اراضی و مهندسی حقوقی–فضایی دولت، کوهستان را از فضایی با ارزش مصرفی به بستری برای انباشت سرمایه و ارزش مبادله‌ای تبدیل کرده‌ است. نتیجه نهایی پژوهش تأکید بر ضرورت طرح «حق به کوهستان» و بازاندیشی در روابط قدرت، مالکیت و گفتمان‌های مسلط توسعه به‌منظور تحقق عدالت فضایی است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Production and Reproduction of Space within the Context of Mountain Commodification: An Analysis of Selected Areas in Eastern Iran

نویسنده [English]

  • Mohammad Hajipour
Department of Geography, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Birjand, Birjand, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The commodification of mountain spaces represents a significant manifestation of transformation in the political economy of space, a process that has intensified over the past two decades in Iran, particularly in the eastern regions of the country. Through this process, mountains are transformed from ecological and cultural landscapes with use value into arenas for capital accumulation endowed with exchange value. This study seeks to understand the mechanisms of the production and reproduction of space under conditions of mountain commodification by examining selected mountainous areas in the counties of Birjand, Mashhad, and Torghabeh–Shandiz. In contrast to much of the existing literature, which primarily focuses on the environmental or social consequences of these transformations, this research centers on the processes and mechanisms through which mountain space is produced and reproduced. The theoretical framework integrates Lefebvre’s theory of the production of space with debates on the commodification of nature, emphasizing the roles of the state, the market, and local communities in shaping these dynamics. Methodologically, the study is grounded in naturalistic inquiry and adopts a mixed inductive–deductive approach, employing thematic analysis to identify core patterns and meanings. Data were collected through long-term in-depth field observations, semi-structured interviews, and the analysis of development documents and official discursive texts. Data analysis followed the five-stage analytical framework proposed by DePoy and Gitlin (2015). The findings indicate that mountain commodification is a multilayered and relational process arising from the interaction of five key forces: the dominance of market logics, the aestheticization and symbolic reconfiguration of mountain landscapes, neoliberal governance, the exclusion of local communities, and urban–infrastructural development pressures. Infrastructure investment, land-use change, and state-led legal–spatial engineering have collectively transformed mountains from use-value-oriented spaces into sites of capital accumulation and exchange value. The study ultimately underscores the necessity of articulating a “right to the mountains” and calls for a critical rethinking of power relations, property regimes, and hegemonic development discourses to advance spatial justice.
 
Extended Abstract
 
Introduction
The commodification of mountain spaces has emerged as a key arena of spatial appropriation and transformation, incorporating natural landscapes into market circuits and endowing them with exchange value. Driven primarily by tourism, real estate investment, and market-oriented environmental uses, this process reshapes mountains into economic assets, often privileging commercial interests over ecological sustainability and social justice, while eroding local cultures and use value. Since the early 2000s, Iran’s mountain regions particularly in eastern Iran have entered a new phase of transformation. Once regarded as marginal spaces, these areas have become targets of intensive investment, facilitated by infrastructural development, tourism zoning, second-home expansion, and speculative land transactions. The interaction of these forces has turned the region into a laboratory of spatial transformation, where competing land uses continuously redefine mountain landscapes. While existing studies largely emphasize the outcomes of these changes, less attention has been paid to the mechanisms that produce and reproduce commodified mountain spaces. Addressing this gap, the present study integrates Lefebvre’s theory of the production of space with debates on the commodification of nature to examine how state interventions, market logics, and local practices interact to reproduce mountain spaces along capital-oriented trajectories in eastern Iran.
 
Methodology
Methodologically, this study is based on a naturalistic inquiry framework and employs a mixed inductive–deductive approach. Data analysis was conducted through thematic analysis, which DePoy and Gitlin (2015) conceptualize as an interpretive and context-sensitive approach for identifying patterns of meaning within qualitative data. The empirical data were generated through long-term in-depth observations, semi-structured interviews with local residents and managers, and document and discourse analyses of development plans, tourism policy documents, official reports, media interviews, and investment-oriented promotional materials related to mountain areas in the two provinces examined. In line with the study’s critical–interpretive and spatial perspectives, data analysis followed the five-stage analytical process proposed by DePoy and Gitlin (2015). Initial statements, informed partly by Lefebvre and Harvey’s theoretical perspectives on the production and transformation of social space and partly emerging from the empirical data beyond these frameworks, were identified and coded. These codes were subsequently organized into primary and secondary themes and analytically integrated into higher levels of abstraction, leading to the identification of key spatial themes that explain the processes underlying the production and reproduction of commodified mountain spaces. Spatial analysis and mapping were conducted using ArcGIS Pro based on shapefiles obtained from the Provincial Management and Planning Organization.
 
Results and Discussion
Spatial analysis of selected mountainous areas in eastern Iran, including the administrative jurisdictions of Birjand, Mashhad, and Torqabeh–Shandiz counties, reveals that commodification, as a fundamental mechanism in the expansion and reproduction of capitalism, has acquired a complex and multidimensional form within mountain landscapes. This process has been increasingly reinforced through the cyclical production and reproduction of space. The findings demonstrate that the interaction among five interconnected forces, including the dominance of market-oriented logic, the aestheticization and symbolic representation of mountain spaces, neoliberal governance, the marginalization of local communities, and urban–infrastructural development pressures, has collectively contributed to the formation and stabilization of commodified mountain landscapes. The penetration of market logic into mountain areas has been primarily manifested through investments in accessibility infrastructure, such as road networks, tourism corridors, and communication systems. As emphasized by Harvey (2006) and Lefebvre (1991), these infrastructures operate as spatial mechanisms that facilitate capital circulation and integrate landscapes into accumulation processes. In the studied regions, infrastructural expansion has encouraged capital inflows, villa development, and speculative tourism activities, subsequently accelerating land-use transformations toward residential and profit-oriented functions and reinforcing the conversion of land into a tradable commodity, as previously discussed by Smith (1984) and Messerli and Ives (1989). Furthermore, the commodification of mountain spaces has been closely associated with transformations in state practices, particularly through the reconfiguration of property relations and the institutional legitimization of capital expansion into mountainous territories. This process corresponds to the concept of legal–spatial engineering discussed by Blomley (1994), Scott (1998), Elden (2007), Delaney (2010), and Peluso and Lund (2011), whereby regulatory and spatial interventions become embedded within developmental discourses. Consequently, mountains are increasingly constructed as new investment frontiers within geographical space, extending the territorial reach of capital accumulation into previously marginal landscapes.
 
Conclusion
The commodification of mountain landscapes extends beyond an environmental issue and represents a broader manifestation of structural transformations within the political economy of space. Driven by the combined influence of commodification processes and neoliberal development policies, capital has increasingly appropriated mountain spaces and subjected them to market-oriented logics that transform these landscapes into consumable commodities for tourism, recreation, and real estate development. In response to these dynamics, this study emphasizes the necessity of reclaiming a “right to the mountains,” conceptualized as a pursuit of spatial justice in highland regions against processes that commodify, privatize, and enclose mountain spaces. Realizing such a right requires a fundamental transformation in the dominant power relations, property arrangements, and development narratives that shape the production of mountain spaces. Without addressing these underlying structural conditions, attempts to mitigate the environmental and social consequences of mountain commodification will remain fragmented and inadequate.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Commodification
  • Mountain Regions
  • Production of Space
  • Reproduction of Space
ازکیا، مسعود و غفاری، غلامرضا (۱۳۹۳). جامعه‌شناسی توسعه. نشر نی.
افراخته، حسن و حجی‌پور، محمد. (1393). انباشت سرمایه و اقتصاد فضا در ایران. اقتصاد فضا و توسعه روستایی 3(10)، 43-63. http://serd.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2168-fa.html
افراخته، حسن و حجی‌پور، محمد. (1394). اقتصاد سیاسی فضا و تعادل منطقه‌ای ایران. اقتصاد فضا و توسعه روستایی 4(14)، 87-110. http://serd.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2582-fa.html
بیرانوند، محمد، و تقوی‌زیروانی، اسماعیل. (1402). بررسی نقش گردشگری خانه‌های دوم در کالایی شدن فضاهای روستا-شهری (مطالعه موردی: روستاشهر گلدشت شهرستان بروجرد). اقتصاد فضا و توسعه روستایی، 12(3)، 109-126. https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.23222131.1402.0.50.7.3
ترکمه، آیدین. (1393). درآمدی بر تولید فضای هانری لوفور. انتشارات تیسا.
جواهرفر، ندا. (1403)، ارتفاعات جنوبی مشهد زیر تیغ ساخت و سازها، خبرگزاری جمهوری اسلامی، کد خبر: 85765670. https://www.irna.ir/news/85765670
حجی‌پور، محمد و قهستانی بجد، محمد الیاس. (1403). گردشگری و پایداری اقتصادی فضا؛ ارائه تحلیلی از مقاصد گردشگری پیراشهر بیرجند. توسعه فضاهای پیراشهری، 6(2)، 41-54. https://doi.org/10.22034/jpusd.2023.399435.1272
حجی‌پور، محمد. (1396). نفت، روستا و دگرش‌های اقتصاد فضا: مورد مطالعه شهرستان‌های بیرجند وفومن، رساله دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی روستایی، گروه جغرافیای انسانی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران.
رحمانی فضلی، عبدالرضا، سجادی، ژیلا، و یوسفی دستجرد، حبیبه. (1396). کشاورزی معیشتی و تحول ساختار اقتصادی روستاهای کوهستانی: دهستان چالدران جنوبی- شهرستان چالدران (حوضه آبریز ارس). پژوهش‌های دانش زمین، 8(32)، 147-160. https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.20088299.1396.8.4.10.4
عنابستانی، علی اکبر، جوانشیری، مهدی و کاویانی، سمیرا . (1396). بررسی تأثیر رواج گردشگری خانه‌های دوم بر توسعة کالبدی سکونتگاه‌های روستایی مطالعة موردی: شهرستان کلاردشت. برنامه ریزی فضایی، 7(3)، 1-24. https://doi.org/10.22108/sppl.2017.81534.0
فال سلیمان، محمود، حجی‌پور، محمد و آهنی، مریم. (1403). آسیب شناسی گسترش خانه های دوم در سکونتگاههای روستایی پیراشهر بیرجند. برنامه ریزی توسعه کالبدی، 3(11)، 91-108. https://doi.org/10.30473/psp.2025.72354.2736
فال‌سلیمان، محمود، حجی‌پور، محمد و کریمی پور، جواد. (1402). بازتاب کالبدی و فضایی سیاست‌های نولیبرالیسم در سکونتگاه‌های پیراشهر بیرجند. برنامه ریزی توسعه کالبدی، 10(1)، 73-88. https://doi.org/10.30473/psp.2023.66139.2639
مارکس، کارل. (1386)، سرمایه: نقد اقتصاد سیاسی (جلد اول؛ ح. مرتضوی، مترجم؛ چاپ 1). انتشارات لاهیتا.
هاروی، دیوید. (1399). فضاهای نولیبرال‌سازی (م. داودی، مترجم؛ چاپ 1). نشر ثالث.
Aguirre, M. A., & Buitrago Bermúdez, Ó. (2025). Land ownership and unequal geographic development in rural-metropolitan contexts [Propiedad de la tierra y desarrollos geográficos desiguales en contextos rurales metropolitanos]. Revista de Geografía Norte Grande, 92, 1.
Bacigalupo, A. M. (2024). Cannibalistic exchanges with mountain-ancestors: Moral economies of gold mining in northern Peru. Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology, 29(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/jlca.12784
Beck, C. G., & Cunha, L. H. (2017). As múltiplas faces da comodificação e a constituição da crítica acerca das práticas de consumo contemporâneas. Ciências Sociais Unisinos, 53(1), 136–147. https://doi.org/10.4013/CSU.2017.53.1.14
Blomley, N. (1994). Law, space, and the geographies of power. Guilford Press.
Bosma, U., & Vanhaute, E. (2024). Commodity frontiers as drivers of global capitalism. In The Oxford handbook of the commodity frontiers (pp. 211–225). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190924164.013.11
Botezat, D. (2010). Space and local culture provision vs. tourist consumption. Analele Științifice ale Universității „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iași, 3(1).
Brenner, N. (2019). New urban spaces: Urban theory and the scale question. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190627188.001.0001
Brenner, N., & Theodore, N. (2002). Spaces of neoliberalism: Urban restructuring in North America and Western Europe. Political Geography, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6298(03)00121-5
Bury, J., Mark, B. G., Carey, M., Young, K. R., McKenzie, J. M., Baraer, M., French, A., & Polk, M. H. (2013). New geographies of tourism in the Peruvian Andes: Climate change, glacier retreat and water resources. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103(2), 364–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2013.754665
Büscher, B., & Fletcher, R. (2020). The conservation revolution: Radical ideas for saving nature beyond the Anthropocene. Verso.
Bhattacharya, R., & Sharma, G. A. (Eds.). (2024). Capital and ecology: Developmentalism, subjectivity and the alternative life-worlds. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003424420
Castree, N. (2003). Commodifying what nature? Progress in Human Geography, 27(3), 273–297. https://doi.org/10.1191/0309132503ph428oa
Chen, K., Chen, Y., Liang, Y., & Zheng, Y. (2025). The process and logical mechanism of agricultural production space contraction in mountainous areas based on actor-network theory: A case study of Lishi Village in Longde County, Ningxia. Resources Science, 47(1), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.18402/resci.2025.01.11
Chrenka, B., & Ira, V. (2011). Transformation of tourist landscapes in mountain areas: Case studies from Slovakia. Human Geographies, 5(2), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.5719/HGEO.2011.52.13
Church, J. M. (2016). The mountain: A political history from the Enlightenment to the present. Mountain Research and Development, 36(3), 387. https://doi.org/10.1659/mrd.mm183
Christophers, B. (2020). Rentier capitalism: Who owns the economy, and who pays for it? Verso.
De Matheus e Silva, L. F., Zunino, H. M., & Huiliñir Curío, V. (2018). El negocio de la conservación ambiental: Cómo la naturaleza se ha convertido en una nueva estrategia de acumulación capitalista en la zona andino-lacustre de Los Ríos, sur de Chile. Scripta Nova: Revista Electrónica de Geografía y Ciencias Sociales, 22, 3. https://doi.org/10.1344/SN2018.22.19021
Delaney, D. (2010). The spatial, the legal and the pragmatics of world-making: Nomospheric investigations. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203849101
DePoy, E., & Gitlin, L. N. (2015). Introduction to research: Understanding and applying multiple strategies (5th ed.). Mosby.
Dinar, H. (2020). Women-led businesses: An ethnographic study of gendered entrepreneurship in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. Journal of South Asian Development, 15(2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973174120931645
Dunaway, W. A. (1996). The incorporation of mountain ecosystems into the capitalist world-system. Review (Fernand Braudel Center), 19(4), 355–381. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40241373
Elden, S. (2007). Governmentality, calculation, territory. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 25(3), 562–580. https://doi.org/10.1068/d428t
Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the Third World. Princeton University Press.
Fletcher, R., & Büscher, B. (2020). The conservation revolution: Radical ideas for saving nature beyond the Anthropocene. Verso.
Frame, M. L. (2022). Ecological imperialism: A world-systems approach. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 81(3), 503–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajes.12472
Fujioka, Y., Yatsuka, H., & Iida, Y. (2015). The commodification of Tochi nuts and rural landscape transformation in Japan [in Japanese]. Japanese Journal of Human Geography, 67(4), 40–55. https://doi.org/10.4200/jjhg.67.4_322
Godde, P. M., Price, M. F., & Zimmermann, F. M. (Eds.). (2000). Tourism and development in mountain regions. CABI Publishing.
Hajkowicz, S. (2012). Public policy decision making: Systems, tools and techniques. CSIRO Publishing.
Harvey, D. (2006). Spaces of global capitalism: Towards a theory of uneven geographical development. Verso.
Harvey, D. (2008). The right to the city. New Left Review, 53, 23–40.
Harvey, D. (2010). The enigma of capital and the crises of capitalism. Oxford University Press.
Harvey, D. (2017). Frontier accumulation and the expansion of capitalist space. In New critical writings in political sociology: Volume one: Power, state and inequality (pp. 519–535). Taylor & Francis.
Harvey, D. (2018). Marx, capital, and the madness of economic reason. Oxford University Press.
Hernández, R. E. (2020). Henri Lefebvre’s spatiology project [O projeto de espaçologia de Henri Lefebvre; El proyecto de espaciología de Henri Lefebvre]. Cuadernos de Geografía: Revista Colombiana de Geografía, 29(2), 235–252. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcdg.v29n2.80702
Hornborg, A. (1998). Ecosystems and world-systems: Accumulation as an ecological process. Journal of World-Systems Research, 4(2), 169–177. https://doi.org/10.5195/JWSR.1998.156
Hornborg, A. (2006). Ecosystems and world-systems: Accumulation as an ecological process. In [Book/chapter information not provided] (pp. 161–175). https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/536502
Hu, X., Li, H., Zhang, X., & Yang, J. (2021). The production of rural space in China: Multifunctional transformation and actor dynamics [in Chinese]. Progress in Geography, 40(1), 171–182. https://doi.org/10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.01.016
Ives, J. D., & Messerli, B. (1989). The Himalayan dilemma: Reconciling development and conservation. Routledge.
Jiang, Z.-J. (2025). Inherent logic and practice path for the transformation of rural green mountains into golden and silver mountains under space commodification theory. Journal of Natural Resources. https://doi.org/10.31497/zrzyxb.20250209
Jodha, N. S. (2005). Economic globalisation and its repercussions for fragile mountains and communities in the Himalayas. In [Book information not provided] (pp. 583–591). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3508-X_58
Karametou, P., & Apostolopoulos, C. D. (2007). Social capital as an explanatory variable: Explaining the differential socio-economic performance in two mountainous rural areas in Greece. [Journal title not provided], 102, 633–640. https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP070612
Kelly, C. (2009). Heritage. In International encyclopedia of human geography (pp. 91–97). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008044910-4.00955-X
Kostakis, V., Tsoukarelis, S., & Kouvara, M. (2025). Mountains of change: Open cooperativism and commons-based economic transformation in rural Greece. Journal of Rural Studies, 112, 103382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2025.103382
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Blackwell.
Lefebvre, H. (2009). State, space, world: Selected essays (N. Brenner & S. Elden, Eds.). University of Minnesota Press.