| تعداد نشریات | 284 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 82 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 3,051 |
| تعداد مقالات | 34,085 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 46,565,079 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 77,613,905 |
ارزیابی کارکرد کنش‌های زیستی در آبخیز بوشکان استان بوشهر | ||
| پژوهش های آبخیزداری | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 35، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 137، دی 1401، صفحه 63-76 اصل مقاله (2 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/wmrj.2022.358221.1462 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| محمد شعبانی* 1؛ شایسته احمدزاده ریشهری2 | ||
| 1استادیار گروه مهندسی آب، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، مرودشت، ایران | ||
| 2دانش آموخته ی کارشناسی ارشد آبخیزداری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، ارسنجان، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| مدیران و دستگاه های اجرایی همواره بر ارزیابی کنش‌های سازه‌یی و زیستی در آبخیزها تاکید کرده‌اند. برای دست‌یابی به آن نیاز به روی‌کردی یک‌پارچه در ارزیابی و مدیریت است، که در آن فرآیندها و همه‌ی اثرهای فیزیکی، اقتصادی، و اجتماعی در نظر گرفته شود. هدف از انجام این پژوهش ارزیابی اثر کنش‌های زیستی انجام‌شده بر پایه‌ی معیارهای فیزیکی، اقتصادی، و اجتماعی در آبخیز بوشکان در شرق استان بوشهر است. چهار گزینه ی اجراشده‌ی کنش‌های زیستی در منطقه شامل نهال‌کاری، نهال کاری همراه با ساخت هلالی های آبگیر (چاله‌ی فلسی)، شیارزنی، و شیارزنی همراه با نهال کاری مشخص شد. برای ارزیابی گزینه ها، شاخص های معیاری فیزیکی، اقتصادی و اجتماعی هر گزینه محاسبه شد. پس از بمعیارکردن شاخص‌ها و وزن دهی به آن ها به روش دلفی، گزینه ها اولویت بندی شد. نتیجه‌ی تحقیق نشان داد که گزینه ی شیارزنی همراه با نهال‌کاری، نهال کاری همراه با ساخت هلالی‌های آبگیر، نهال‌کاری، و شیارزنی به‌ترتیب با مساحت های 16554، 2155، 9655 و 428 هکتار و وزن های 0/878، 0/741، 0/701 و 0/649 در اولویت‌های اول تا چهارم است. ازین‌رو نتیجه گرفته می شود که گزینه‌ی شیارزنی همراه با نهال کاری در آبخیز بوشکان بهترین گزینه است. بنابراین با کمک روی‌کرد گزینه سازی و ارزیابی گزینه های مدیریت زیستی، برنامه‌ریزان و بهره‌برداران آبخیزها می‌توانند پس از آگاهی از نتیجه‌ی کنش‌های گوناگون برترین گزینه های ممکن را انتخاب کنند. پیشنهاد می شود شاخص ها، معیارها، و دیگر روش های اولویت بندی نیز برای بررسی اثرهای اجرای گزینه های کنش‌های زیستی با در نظرگرفتن همه‌ی محدودیت ها در آبخیزها به‌کار برده‌شود. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| آبخیز بوشکان؛ ارزیابی؛ اولویت بندی؛ روش دلفی؛ کنش‌های زیستی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Evaluation of Biological Operations Performance in Bushkan Watershed of Bushehr Province | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Mohammad Shabani1؛ Shayesteh Ahmadzadeh Rishehri2 | ||
| 1Department of Water Engineering, Marvdasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Marvdasht, Iran | ||
| 2Graduated M.Sc. of Watershed Management, Islamic Azad University, Arsanjan Branch, Arsanjan, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Evaluation of mechanical and biological operations in watersheds is always emphasized by managers and executive organs. To achieve this, there is a need for an integrated evaluation and management approach in which processes and all physical, economic, and social effects are considered. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of biological operations performed based on physical, economic, and social criteria in Bushkan watershed in the east of Bushehr province. Four scenarios of biological operations in the area were identified, including planting, planting with creating curved pits, contour furrow, and contour furrow with planting. To evaluate different scenarios, the indicators related to each scenario in terms of physical, economic, and social criteria were calculated. After standardizing the indicators and weighting them, the scenarios were prioritized by Delphi technique. The results showed that the scenario of contour furrows with planting, planting with creating curved pits, planting, and contour furrows are the first to fourth priorities in the region, With areas of 16554, 2155, 9655, and 428 ha and weights of 0.878, 0.741, 0.701 and 0.649, respectively. It is concluded, Scenario 4 (contour furrow with planting) was the best scenario in Bushkan watershed. Therefore, with the help of the scenario management approach and evaluation of biological management scenarios, planners and operators of watersheds are able to select the best possible scenarios after being aware of the results of various measures. It is suggested that considering all the limitations, indicators, criteria and other types of prioritization methods be used to examine the effects of biological operations scenarios in the study watershed. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Biological operations, Bushkan Watershed, Delphi method, evaluation, prioritization | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Ahn SR, Kim SJ. 2017. Assessment of integrated watershed health based on the natural environment, hydrology, water quality, and aquatic ecology. Hydrology and Earth System Science, 21(11): 5583–5602. Ayana NP, Balemi T. 2015. Assessment of watershed management practices for sustainable rural livelihood improvement in Meja, Jeldu District, Ethiopia. Journal of Science and Sustainable Development, 3 (1): 115–126. Bahmani O, Ahmadi H, Jafari M, Zehtabian G. 2021. Evaluating the impact of watershed management activities on upstream urban. areas. Watershed Management Research, 11(22): 58–75. (In Persian). Basuki TM. 2014. Indikator dan parameter kriteria lahan untuk monitoring dan evaluasi kinerja sub-das. Penelitian Hutan dan Konservasi Alam, 11(3): 281–297. Dastorani MT, Sharifi Darani VH. 2009. Criteria for evaluating biological watershed management plans. Proceedings of Fifth National Conference on Watershed Management Science and Engineering of Iran, Gorgan, 10 p. (In Persian). Etienne M, DuToit D, Pollard S. 2008. ARDI: A co-construction method for participatory modelling in natural resources management. Ecology and Society, 16(1): 44–57. Government Office of Natural Resources and Watershed Management of Bushehr Province. 2014. Comprehensive detailed-executive studies of a part of the PALANG Plain watershed, 150 p. (In Persian). Guo Y, Chen G, Mo R, Wang M, Bao Y. 2020. Benefit evaluation of water and soil conservation measures in shendong based on particle swarm optimization and the analytic hierarchy process. Water, 12(1955): 12–18. Hajibigloo M, Rashidi M, Abtin M. 2017. Hydrological assessment of watershed management on flood characteristics (Case study: Watershed upstream of the dam Vushmgir). Natural Ecosistems of Iran, 8(2): 67–82. (In Persian). Hajkowicz S, Higgins A .2008. A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management. Operational Research, 184(1): 255–265. Jariah NA, Pramono IB. 2013. Kerentanan sosial ekonomi dan biofisik di DAS Serayu: Collaborative management. Penelitian Hutan dan Konservasi Alam, 10(3): 141–156. Javidi Sabbaghian R, Zarghami M, Pouyan Nejadhashemi A, Sharifi MB, Herman MR, Daneshvar F. 2016. Application of risk-based multiple criteria decision analysis for selection of the best agricultural scenario for effective watershed management. Environmental Management, 168(2016): 260–272. Karimi Sangchini E, Ownegh M, Sadoddin A, Tahmasebipuor N, Rezaee H. 2018. An investigation on affecting factors on community participation and predicting the community acceptance of the vegetation-based management scenarios for the Hable-rud River Basin. Watershed Engineering and Management, 10(3): 280–293. (In Persian). Keshtkar AR, Mohammadkhan Sh, Houshmandi R, Dalfardi S. 2017. Prioritizing determination of watershed biological management options using multi-criteria decision making techniques (Case study: Delichay Catchment). Water and Soil Science, 21(3): 133–146. (In Persian). Madadi M, Maleki M. 2018. Socio-economic impact assessment of the implemented natural resource projects from the Stakeholders perspectives (Case study: Watershed Andabil- Khalkhal City). Rangeland, 12(3): 267–280. (In Persian). Moradipour Sh, Behboudi S, Ghazeri R. 2012. Biological management scenarios analysis using multi criteria decision making (Case study: Vatan catchment, Golestan province). 8th Conference of Science and Engineering of Watershed Management, KhorramAbad, Lorestan. pp. 1–7. (In Persian). Narendra BH, Siregar CA, Dharmawan IW, Sukmana A, Yuwati T. 2021. A Review on Sustainability ofWatershed Management in Indonesia. Sustainability, 13(11125): 1–29. Nasir J, shfaq M, Ahmadbaig I, Punthakey J, Culas R, Ali A, Ulhassan F. 2021. Socioeconomic impact assessment of water resources conservation and management to protect groundwater in Punjab, Pakistan. Water, 13(19): 1–16. Panahi K, Dashti S. 2020. Application of multi-criteria decision-making methods in environmental risk assessment studies of Yasuj Tang-E-Sorkh Dam during construction phase. Irrigation Sciences and Engineering, 43(3):101–115. (In Persian). Rahmani M, Davary K, Abolhasani L, Teimori MS, Shafie M. 2021. Investigating and selecting of assessment indexes for sustainable water management at watershed scale. Irrigation Sciences and Engineering, 44(1):141–154. (In Persian). Raj Kafle M, Man Shakya N. 2018. Multi-criteria decision making approach for flood risk and sediment management in Koshi Alluvial Fan, Nepal. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 10(6): 596–619. Rigi M, Pakzad A, Masoodipur AR. 2014. Investigation on effects of crescent like–micro cachment on vegetation cover properties in kamarek range, Taftan. Watershed Management Research, 27(2): 147–153. (In Persian). Sadoddin A, Sheikh V, Mostafazadeh R, Halili M Gh. 2010. Analysis of vegetation-based management scenarios using MCDM in the Ramian watershed, Golestan, Iran. International Journal of Plant Production, 4(1): 51–62. Shabani M, Ahmadi H, Nikkami D, Azarnhvand H, Mohseni Saravi M. 2008. Land use optimization for soil erosion decrease and income increase of watershed (Case study: Kharestan Watershed). Journal of the Iranian Natural Resources, 60(4): 117–1185. (In Persian). Sharama RA, Skerratt S. 1995. An expert systems approach to the socio-economic evaluation of rural lan-use policy. Indian Forester, 121(9): 775–785. Soleimanpour SM, Hosseini Marandi H, Salehpour Jam AM, Tabatabaei MR, Rousta M, Keshavarzi H. 2020. Prioritizing the affecting factors on nonparticipation of rural communities in watershed management projects from a stake-holders viewpoint (Case study: Gheshlagh Watershed, Fars Province). Extension and Development of Watershed Management, 7(27): 64–74. (In Persian). Subramanya K. 2020. Engineering hydrology. 5th Edition, Mc Graw-Hill, India, 452 p. Waskitho NT, Pratama AA, Muttaqin T. 2021. Sectoral integration in watershed management in Indonesia: Challenges and Recomendation. Earth and Environmental Science, 752 (2021): 1–7. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 488 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 698 |
||