Spatial Analysis of Environmental Hazards

Spatial Analysis of Environmental Hazards

Prioritization analysis of effective factors in non-participation of local societies in desertification projects (Case Study: Ain Khosh region, Ilam province)

Authors
Reza Barjas 1
Noredin Rostami 1
Amin Salehpourjam 2
1 Ilam University
2 Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Institute
10.52547/jsaeh.8.3.93
Abstract
Prioritization analysis of effective factors in non-participation of local societies in desertification projects (Case Study: Ain Khosh region, Ilam province)



Introduction

Participation in social affairs is a commitment and acceptance of individual and social responsibility that all human beings will have to accept. This commitment and responsibilities may take the form of definite and unlimited activities. By increasing the population and the complexity of the goals and efforts of the human community to advance economic, cultural, social and political goals, we inevitably need partnership and cooperation. Participation means using personal resources to participate in a collective action. The first step is to increase popular participation in desertification initiatives, identify and remove barriers to effective non-participation in project implementation. The main objective of this research is to prioritize the factors affecting the lack of public participation in desertification plans using the FUZZY-AHP method and the Friedman nonparametric test.



Materials and methods

The statistical population of the study consisted of households in Ein-e-Khosh village of Dehloran Ilam and experts of Ilam University and natural resources organization of Ilam province and Dehloran County with more than ten years’ experience in combating desertification issues. In this research, the indexes and sub-indicators related to library studies, questionaire from experts of the university, experts from the Natural Resources Department of Ilam province and Dehloran city, as well as referring to the region and interviews with the residents of the region were identified. Then, the questionnaire designed by the FAHP method evaluated by inconsistency rate and its validity and reliability by Likert scale, and finally tried to prioritizing them based on the following steps. First, the prioritization of the indicators was performed from the expert's point of view using Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP). Then, the prioritization of the indicators from the perspective of experts by application of Friedman test and finally, the priority of indices and sub-indicators by the local point of view with Friedman's test.



Results and discussion

The findings of the research showed that the ranking of indices using Friedman's nonparametric test is based on the average rating from the viewpoint of residents of the region, respectively, economic index, design-executive, educational-promotional, and social. Also, this prioritization from the perspective of experts using the FUZZY-AHP test is design-executive, economic, educational, promotional and social priority, respectively. Also, the results showed that in the total of 15 identified subcategories influencing the lack of public participation in combating desertification projects, from the perspective of experts, the sub-design of the design-executive entitled "Short-term, mid-term and long-term non-planning for participation" with the average rating of 11.68 was the most important and the sub-index, "Migration of youth in the countryside" with the average rating of 3.59, is the most insignificant sub-indicator. However, from the perspective of residents in the region, the underlying economic indexes "disregarding people's income as a direct incentive to implement combating desertification projects" with an average of 11.24, the most significant and sub-indicator of the design-executive "lack of full allocation of funds during the implementation of combating desertification projects" with average rating of 5.63 is the most significant sub-indicator, which indicates that economic indicators and design-executive, along with the sub-indexes, are the most important reasons for non-participation of people in combating desertification projects in the study area.

Due to the fact that the indicators and sub-indicators are identified based on the opinions of experts and locals in the study area, this has led to familiarizing the respondents with the research. In this research, the FAHP and Friedman test were used. According to the topic of the research in the field of public participation, the best tool for measuring the comprehensive statistical view of experts including experts and locals with regard to the study area is considered. In the reliability of the FAHP questionnaire, the responsiveness questionnaire has high reliability with regard to the multi-stage and multi-stage couples comparing method and the incompatibility rate test (mean 0.043 inconsistency rate). Cronbach's alpha test was used for Likert scale questionnaires. Results (Cronbach's alpha = 0.83) showed that the questionnaire had acceptable reliability. So, results is in consistence with other researchers' findings, including Saleh Pourjem et al. (2017).



Conclusion

According to the results obtained from prioritization, it has been shown that in the subject of participation, in spite of the difference between the views of experts and the people of the region, in some cases, the main priorities in the discussion of non-participation are almost similar; these results are consistent with the studies of previous researchers such as Saleh Pourjem et al. (2017).

It is suggested that the removal of obstacles to public participation in combating desertification projects be put on the agenda of trusteeship organizations and public participation in all stages of design, implementation and future protection in the combating desertification projects will be considered.



Keywords: People’s Participation, MCDM, FUZZY-AHP, Friedman Test
Keywords
People’s Participation
MCDM
FUZZY-AHP
Friedman test
1. اسلامی پریخانی، هوشنگ و عطااله کاویان. 1393. تحلیل عوامل مؤثر در مشارکت روستائیان در طرح‌های آبخیزداری (مطالعه موردی: حوزه آبخیز مشکین چای، استان اردبیل). مجله ترویج و توسعه آبخیزداری، 2(4):14-7.
2. امینی، یوسف و محمد امینی. 1395. بررسی عوامل اقتصادی- اجتماعی و زمینه‌ای مؤثر بر میزان مشارکت شهروندان در حوزه امور شهری مرتبط با شهرداری. فصلنامه توسعه اجتماعی، 11: ۱۷۹-۱۹۸.
3. بصیری، زینب؛ نورالدین رستمی و امین صالح‌پورجم. 1399. شناسایی و اولویت‌بندی شاخص‌های مؤثر در عدم مشارکت جوامع روستایی در طرح‌های بیابانزدایی (مطالعه موردی: منطقه موسیان، شهرستان دهلران، استان ایلام). تحلیل فضایی مخاطرات محیطی، 7(3): 47-60.
4. پیش‌یار، سارا؛ حسن خسروی، علی طویلی و آرش ملکیان. 1395. تعیین و اولویت‌بندی شاخص‌های مؤثر در بیابان‌زایی با استفاده از مدل تاپسیس و تحلیل سلسله مراتبی. مجله مخاطرات محیط طبیعی، 5: 83-96.
5. خلیلی، وحید؛ جلال محمودی، شعبانعلی غلامی و محمدرضا نظری. 1393. عوامل مؤثر بر میزان مشارکت بهره‌برداران در اجرای طرح‌های مرتعداری (مطالعه موردی مراتع ییلاقی حوزه واز رود). فصلنامه اکوسیستم‌های طبیعی ایران، 5: 105-113.
6. خورشیدی، شهناز؛ نورالدین رستمی و امین صالح پور جم. 1400. اولویت‌بندی پتانسیل سیل‌خیزی در حوضه‌های آبخیز فاقد آمار با کاربرد روش AHP-VIKOR (مطالعه موردی: حوضه آبخیز حاجی بختیار، استان ایلام). پژوهش‌های فرسایش محیطی، 11(2):66-92.
7. سلیمان‌پور، سید مسعود؛ امین صالح‌پور جم، علی‌اکبر نوروزی و ناصر خلیلی. 1398. بررسی دیدگاه آبخیزنشینان در اولویت‌بندی عوامل مؤثر بر مشارکت ضعیف ایشان در طرح‌های آبخیزداری (بررسی موردی: حوزه آبخیز مرادآباد میمند، استان فارس). مرتع و آبخیزداری، 72(4):994-979.
8. صالح‌پورجم، امین؛ امیر سررشته‌داری و محمودرضا طباطبایی. 1396. اولویت‌بندی عوامل مؤثر بر عدم مشارکت ذینفعان در طرح‌های آبخیزداری بر اساس دیدگاه کارشناسان، منطقه موردمطالعه: حوضه‌های آبخیز مشرف‌به شهر تهران. نشریه علمی_پژوهشی مهندسی و مدیریت آبخیز، 9: 441-450.
9. طائی‌سمیری، سیاوش؛ و مریم احمدی. 1395. نگرش بر مهم‌ترین عامل مؤثر بر مشارکت و عدم مشارکت آبخیزنشینان در طرح‌های آبخیزداری و بازخورد آن در معیشت بهره‌برداران (مطالعه موردی: شهرستان سمیرم). همایش ملی علوم مهندسی آبخیزداری ایران، 11: 47-53.
10. فتوتی، هستی؛ مسعود برادران؛ سیروس سلمانزاده و منصور غنیان. 1391. تبیین نقش مشارکت زنان روستایی در توسعه روستایی (مطالعه موردی دهستان شاوور شهرستان شوش). مجله تحقیقات اقتصاد و توسعه کشاورزی ایران، 4: 677-692.
11. قربانی، اردوان؛ امیرحسین کاویانپور و روح‌الله دبیری. 1394. تأثیر ویژگی‌های اجتماعی بهره‌برداران بر مشارکت آنها در تعاونی‌های آبخیزداری (مطالعه موردی: تعاونی آبخیزداری حوزه آبخیز سقزچی‌چای اردبیل). فصلنامه اکوسیستم‌های طبیعی ایران، 6: 59-74.
12. محبوبی، محمدرضا؛ ندا نجدعباسی و امید طوسی. 1394. عوامل انگیزشی مؤثر بر مشارکت کشاورزان در عملیات کشت پلکانی اراضی کشاورزی در حوزه آبخیز چهل‌چای استان گلستان. پژوهش‌نامه مدیریت حوزه آبخیز، 6: 88-97.
13. منصورفر، کریم. 1385. روش‌های پیشرفته آمار، برنامه‌های کامپیوتری. دانشگاه تهران‌پارس، تهران.
14. مهردوست، خدیجه؛ علی شمس و اسماعیل کرمی‌دهکردی. 1392. عوامل مؤثر بر سطوح مشارکت مردم روستایی در پروژه‌های آبخیزداری (مطالعه موردی حوزه‌های آبخیز دورود فرمان و لعل آباد کرمانشاه). تحقیقات و توسعه کشاورزی ایران، 44: 399-409.
15. یوسفی، محسن و نیلوفر بهبهانی. 1395. معرفی الگوهای توانمندسازی جوامع محلی در حفاظت از منابع طبیعی و توسعه پایدار روستایی با تأکید بر نقش و مشارکت زنان روستایی (تجارب موفق پروژه بین‌المللی RFLDL خراسان جنوبی-سرایان). همایش ملی زن و پایداری منابع طبیعی و محیط‌زیست در مناطق روستایی، 17.
16. Das, S. 2018. Gographic information system and AHP based flood hazard zonation of Vaitarna basin. Maharashtra, India. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 11(19): 576.
17. Duram, Duram; and K. G.Brown. 2010. Insights and applications assessing public participation in US watershed planning initiatives. Society and Natural Resources, 12: 455-467.
18. Garip, F. 2007. From Migrant Social Capital to Community Development: A Relational Account of Migration, Remittances and Inequality. Ph.D. Princeton University, 199.
19. Hammami, S; L. Zouhri, D. Souissi, A. Souei, A. Zghibi, A. Mazougui, and M. Dlala. 2019. Application of the GIS based multi-criteria decision analysis and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) in the flood susceptibility mapping (Tunisia). Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 12(21): 1-16.
20. Hasanloo, M; P. Pahlavani, and B. Bigdeli. 2019. Flood risk zonation using a multi-criteria spatial group fuzzy AHP decision making and fuzzy overlay analysis. The international Archives of photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 42: 455-460.
21. Johnson, N; H.M. Ravnborg, O. Westermann and K. Probst. 2002. User participation in watershed management and research. Water policy, 3: 507-520.
22. Khashtabeh, Rokhsareh; M. Akbari, M. Kolahi and A. Talebanfard. 2020. Assessing the effects of desertification control projects using socio-economic indicators in the arid regions of eastern Iran Environment, Development and Sustainability, Springar, Environ Dev Sustain https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01065-6
23. Mendoza, Carrie Castille. 2006. Factors influencing participation in environmental stewardship programs: a case stady of the agricultural and forestry sectors in Louisiana. A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College. Ph.D. dissertation, University of of Louisiana, America.
24. Mishra, K. and R. Sinha. 2020. Flood risk assessment in the Kosi megafan using multi-criteria decision analysis: A hydro-geomorphic approach. Geomorphology, 350: 1-19.
25. Mohammed, D; A.E. Akpan and H.S. Aliyu. 2013. Role of CommunityParticipation in Combating Desertification in the Arid Zone of Nigeria: An Overview. Journal of Environmental Management and Safety, 4: 49-58.
26. Mosaffaie, J; and A. Salehpour Jam. 2021. Prioritization of factors preventing participation of rural people in soil & water conservation projects (The case of Vers watershed). JAST, 23(5): 975-986.
27. Nxumalo, K.K.S; and O.I. Oladele. 2013. Factors Affecting Farmers’ Participation in Agricultural Programme in Zululand District, Kwazulu Natal Province, South Africa. Journal of Social Sciences, 34(1): 83-88.
28. Prokopy, Linda Stalker. 2005. The relationship between participation and project outcomes: audience from rural water supply projects in India. Journal of World Development, 33: 1801-1819.
29. Rahmati, O; H. Zeinivand, and M. Besharati. 2019. Flood hazard zoning in the Yasooj Region, Iran, using GIS and multi-criteria decision analysis. Geomatics, Natural Hazard and Risk, 7(3): 1000-1017.
30. Saaty, Thomas. 1980. The Analytical Hierarchy process. Planning, priority, Resource Allocation, Rws pub, USA.