Assessment of the acceptance potential of the "Zagros Social Forestry Document" in Iran based on the Diffusion of Innovations Theory

Background and objectives: Over the past few decades, various programs and plans have been developed and implemented for the management of Zagros forests. The inefficiency of these programs, due to various reasons including top-down, state-driven, and predominantly technical approaches, along with the escalating degradation of the forests, has led policymakers and planners to develop a new program titled the "Zagros Social Forestry" document. This document has been prepared as an effort to redefine the governance of Zagros forests and enhance the role of non-governmental stakeholders. Many innovative documents and programs face a gap between their stated objectives and on-the-ground implementation. This research aims to examine various aspects of this document, including institutional, sociocultural, and economic structures, as well as the protection and restoration of Zagros ecosystems, from the perspectives of various stakeholders.
Methodology: In this study, using the Diffusion of Innovations Theory, the potential acceptance or non-acceptance of the Zagros Social Forestry document was evaluated based on the factors of Relative Advantage (RA), Compatibility (Cb), Complexity (Cx), Trialability (T), Observability (O), and Communication Channels (CC). For this purpose, using a researcher-made questionnaire, each of the aforementioned factors was categorized into five to seven items. Responses were rated based on a five-point Likert scale from "very low" to "very high." To ensure the content validity of the questionnaire, an expert consensus-based validation method was used. The internal reliability of the questionnaire was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient, which yielded a value of 0.983. The statistical population of the study included all experts, specialists, and key stakeholders in three groups: university and research institutions, NGOs, and the executive branch. Given the specialized nature of the population and the necessity of participants' familiarity with the Zagros Social Forestry document, a purposive non-random sampling method was employed. Accordingly, the final sample size was 81 individuals, comprising 28 from university and research institutions, 24 from NGOs, and 29 from the executive branch. For data analysis using SPSS software version 26, both descriptive and inferential statistics were utilized. In the inferential statistics section, the non-parametric Friedman test was used to compare and rank the mean ranks of the six innovation acceptance factors. The Kruskal-Wallis test was applied to examine whether significant differences existed in the attitudes of the three groups toward each of the six factors and the total acceptance score.
Results: The results indicated that the experts' responses regarding the factors of RA, Cb, Cx, O, and CC were predominantly perceived as "very low," "low," and "medium" at 71.6%, 81.8%, 87.3%, 77.7%, and 87.7%, respectively. The factor of trialability had the highest proportion of responses at the "medium" level (37.8%), with nearly equal proportions between the "low" and "very low" levels combined (31.6%) and the "high" and "very high" levels combined (30.6%). Among the experts, CC received the least favorable assessment, while T was viewed most favorably. However, the mean rank and priority of each factor in the acceptance of the Zagros Social Forestry document differed. The Friedman test results revealed a statistically significant difference among the examined factors (p < 0.01). Based on mean ranks, T ranked first with a mean rank of 4.6, followed by RA (4.16), O (3.87), Cb (2.97), CC (2.76), and Cx (2.64). Furthermore, the distribution of respondents’ overall attitude toward the plan’s likelihood of success showed that 50.7% considered its success probability "low" or "very low," 33.3% considered it "medium," and only 16% considered it "high" or "very high." Finally, the results of the Kruskal-Wallis test among the three studied groups indicated no statistically significant difference in their perspectives.
Conclusion: In general, based on the results of the study, from the experts’ perspective, the Zagros Social Forestry document faces weaknesses in terms of its perceived RA compared with previously implemented programs in the region, incompatibility with the prevailing conditions on the ground and within relevant institutions, high complexity, ambiguity in observability, and deficiencies in communication channels. This perception, more than anything, indicates a lack of meaningful involvement of stakeholders in the document’s preparation. It is recommended that large-scale implementation of the document should be halted until its ambiguities are resolved, and the views of various stakeholders should be incorporated into revising the document.