Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1 Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran
Abstract
In this study, problem structuring and identification and prioritization of solutions to improve the health of the Kal-Aji watershed were carried out based on the DPSIR framework and non-parametric statistical tests. 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 of this framework in the Kal-Aji watershed, 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. In this study, the questionnaire variables were based on the multiple-response coding method, qualitative ordinal variables and matched the Likert scale (very low (1), low (2), medium (3), high (4), and very high (5)), so that the opinion of the expert working group members and the determination of the priority of the items were based on the Friedman nonparametric test.
Keywords
)