Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
Associate Professor, Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Introduction
The country's watersheds are dynamic ecosystems whose health has been affected by civil, economic, and social developments. This is while, in the current situation, in addition to human and management factors, climate change has also had undesirable consequences in these areas. The decline in the health of the country's watersheds, on the one hand, has made it difficult to provide ecosystem services in these areas, and on the other hand, has led to the emergence of various environmental hazards such as desertification and land degradation, land subsidence, floods, landslides, and dust phenomena. In this regard, the country's Natural Resources and Watershed Management Organization implements a variety of biological, mechanical, biomechanical, and management measures to conserve water and soil and control floods in its watersheds. This is despite the fact that these measures are mostly reactive (therapeutic) and less attention has been paid to their preventive aspects. Accordingly, this study aims to identify and prioritize reactive and proactive solutions to improve the health state of the Kal-Aji watershed based on the DPSIR framework and non-parametric statistical tests.
Materials and methods
In the first stage, the drivers and pressures resulting in the health status of the Kal-Aji watershed and the related impacts were identified through a literature review, a visit to the watershed, interviews with experts from the departments of natural resources, environment, regional water, the Agricultural Jihad, the Agricultural and Natural Resources Engineering Organization of Golestan, faculty members of academic and research centers, and interviews with local communities. Then, a working group consisting of 26 stakeholders, local knowledgeable individuals, and experts knowledgeable about the issues and problems of the watershed began to determine solutions to improve the health of the Kal-Aji watershed and eliminate or modify the related adverse impacts. In the last stage, after forming the DPSIR table and identifying the various components, the importance of each of the variables categorized under the five DPSIR components was prioritized and determined. For this purpose, a Likert-scale questionnaire was used as a measurement tool. In this study, each variable was considered as an item, and the validity of the questionnaire was finally confirmed based on the opinions of experts. Also, Cronbach's alpha method was used to calculate the reliability of the measurement tool.
Results and discussion
In this study, eight drivers and 16 subsequent pressures were identified in creating six variables related to the health state component of the Kal-Aji watershed. In addition, seven variables related to the adverse impacts of the current watershed health state and 28 responses to improve the watershed health state were identified and introduced. The results show that D1 and D8 have the minimum and maximum links in creating subsequent pressures, respectively. Also, D5 with 8 links is the second driver with the maximum connections with the pressure component. In this study, the responses identified as resolving the problems listed under the four components of driver-pressure-state-impact are one of the following three: (1) a specific response to a specific problem, (2) a multi-objective response that resolves more than one problem, and (3) the existence of different responses for a specific problem. Accordingly, of the total responses, 35.7 percent (10), 46.4 percent (13), 14.3 percent (4), and 25.0 percent (7) are related to the components of driver, pressure, state, and impact, respectively. Considering the calculated values above 0.7 of Cronbach's alpha, all questionnaires have acceptable reliability (P and R) and goodness (D, S, and I) in this study. There is also a significant difference between the types of variables identified under the components of the DPSIR framework. The results showed that D5, D8, and D3, in order of importance, have been assigned the first three priorities from the experts' perspective. The results also showed that P1, P11, P6, and P3, respectively, have been assigned the top five priorities of pressures. These pressures are among the common pressures in the country's watersheds. In this study, S2 was prioritized as the most important indicator of the health status of the watershed. Consistent with the results of other studies, in addition to applying reactive water and soil conservation responses in watershed management to improve directly the state, it is necessary to pay attention to proactive responses that eliminate the various drivers and pressures identified as a result of the current state of the watershed's erosion and sediment production potential. Also, S3 and S1 were prioritized in the next order of importance. The ranking of the consequences resulting from the current state of watershed health showed that I3, I1, and I2 were assigned the first to third priority, respectively. Also, prioritizing the importance of various reactive and preventive responses showed that R20, R4, R6, R17, and R9, respectively, have been assigned the top five priorities in eliminating or modifying drivers and pressures, improving the health state of the Kal-Aji watershed, and eliminating or modifying the adverse impacts of its health state. In this regard, R4, R6, R17, and R9 are among the common responses considered in other studies conducted in other watersheds of the country.
Conclusions
In this study, the importance of various drivers and pressures resulting in the current state of watershed health and its subsequent impacts were identified and prioritized. Also, types of reactive and proactive responses to improve the watershed health and eliminate or reduce the associated adverse impacts were identified and prioritized. The results of the Friedman test indicated the presence of a significant difference between the importance of the types of variables identified under the DPSIR framework components. Accordingly, D5, P1, S2, and I3 were prioritized as the most important drivers, pressures, states, and impacts, respectively. Also, R20, R4, and R6 were assigned the first three priorities of responses, respectively. In this regard, it is strongly recommended to pay attention to (1) all solutions to address the problems identified under the components of the DPSIR framework, (2) the role of various stakeholders in the basin in the planning process to improve watershed health and reduce related risks, (3) the development of action plans related to the responses, and (4) the development of decision support systems and related databases.
Keywords
)