نقش و اهمیت معیارها و شاخص‌‌های اکولوژیکی، اقتصادی، فنی و اجتماعی جهت کاهش خسارت ناشی از سیل در ایران

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار، گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشکده مهندسی زراعی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع‌طبیعی ساری، ایران

2 دکتری جنگلداری، دانشکده منابع‌طبیعی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع‌طبیعی ساری، ایران

3 دانشجوی کارشناسی رشته اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشکده مهندسی زراعی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع‌طبیعی ساری، ایران

چکیده

پدیده‌ی طبیعی سیل یکی از چالش‌‌های جدی محیط‌‌زیستی کشور است که عوامل مختلفی در رخداد آن نقش دارند. بنابراین، هدف از این تحقیق شناسایی، وزن‌‌دهی و اولویت‌‌بندی معیارها و شاخص‌‌های موثر در کاهش خسارت‌های ناشی از سیل در ایران با استفاده از نظر خِبرگان و متخصصین این حوزه و اساتید هیات علمی متخصص در این امر است. در این راستا به منظور شناسایی معیارها و شاخص‌‌های موثر در کاهش خسارت‌های ناشی از سیل از چهار دیدگاه اکولوژیکی، اقتصادی ، فنی و اجتماعی از پرسشنامه‌‌ای محقق ساخته و به منظور محاسبه وزن و اولویت آنها به ترتیب از روش‌‌های اِنتروپی (Entropy) و ترجیحات بر اساس مشابهت به راه‌‌حل ایده‌آل (TOPSIS) استفاده شد. تجزیه و تحلیل یافته‌‌های این پژوهش با استفاده از 30 پرسشنامه دریافتی، 21 شاخص را از جنبه‌‌های اکولوژیکی، اقتصادی، اجتماعی و فنی برای کاهش خسارت‌های ناشی از سیل شناسایی نموده که شامل 7 شاخص اکولوژیکی، 6 شاخص اقتصادی، 5 شاخص فنی و 3 شاخص اجتماعی بوده است. نتایج وزن‌‌دهی شاخص‌‌ها با استفاده از روش اِنتروپی نشان داد که از دیدگاه اکولوژیکی شاخص شکل زمین (تنوع ارتفاع از سطح دریا، تنوع شیب زمین، تنوع جهت)، از دیدگاه اقتصادی شاخص مدیریت بهینه اراضی جنگلی و مرتعی، از دیدگاه فنی شاخص عملیات آبخیزداری و از دیدگاه اجتماعی شاخص تراکم مسکونی (سکونتگاه‌‌ها، شاخص‌‌های جمعیتی) به‌‌ترتیب بیشترین وزن را به‌‌خود اختصاص دادند. همچنین، نتایج روش تاپسیس نشان داد که برای کاهش خسارت ناشی از سیل معیارهای اکولوژیکی، اقتصادی، فنی و اجتماعی به ترتیب در اولویت اول تا چهارم قرار دارند. بنابراین،، پیشنهاد می‌‌شود در برنامه‌های مدیریتی برای کاهش سیلاب به نقش و اهمیت معیارها و شاخص‌‌های اکولوژیکی، اقتصادی، فنی و اجتماعی بر اساس اولویت‌‌های تعیین‌‌شده توجه شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Role and Importance of Ecological, Economic, Technical and Social Criteria and Indicators to Reduce Flood Damage in Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hamid Amirnejad 1
  • Sareh Hosseini 2
  • Mostafa Saberi 3
1 Assoc. Profe, Department of Agricultural economics, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University Sari, Iran
2 PhD. Forestry Faculty of Natural Resources, Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University Sari, Iran
3 BS Student of Agricultural economics, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University Sari, Iran
چکیده [English]

Flood is a natural phenomenon of serious environmental challenges the country that many factors are involved in the event. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify, weight and prioritize effective criteria and indicators for flood damage reduction in Iran using the opinion of experts and experts in this field and faculty members in this field. In this regard, a researcher-made questionnaire to identify effective and important criteria to reduce flood damage from four ecological, economic, technical and social perspectives and entropy technique to calculate their weight and preferences technique. Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) has been used to prioritize criteria and andicators. Analyzing the findings of the study by completing 30 questionnaires, 21 indicators from ecological, economic, social and technical aspects to reduce flood damage identified that it included 7 ecological indicators, 6 economic indicators, 5 technical indicators and 3 social indicators. The results of weighting of the indicators using entropy technique showed that from the ecological point of view the landform (the elevation above sea level, slope variation and aspect) indicator with weight (0.04779), from the economic point of view, the forest and rengeland optimal management indicator with weight (0.04780), from of the technical point of view, watershed management indicator with weight (0.04774) and socially from residential density indicator (settlements, population indices) with weight (0.04768) respectively, the highest weight among the other indicators are dedicated to themselves. Also the results of the prioritization of the criteria using TOPSIS technique showed that the ecological, economic, technical and social criteria had the highest priority in the reduction of flood damage respectively. Therefore, it is suggested to pay more attention to the role and importance of ecological, economic, technical and social criteria and indicators based on thire priorities in management programin of reduction flood.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Multiple Criteria Decision Making
  • weighting
  • Prioritizing
  • flood
  • Damage
Afri Takhti, A.; Kohpayeh, N.; Babaei, A.; Ameri, F.; & firefighters, M. 2019. Investigation of watershed management activities in flood prevention and control of Maragheh watershed and Dehgin couple in Hormozgan province. 7th National Conference on Rainwater catchment systems. 1033-1026. (In Persian).
Asghari Moghadam, M. 1999. Natural geography of the city, hydrology and flooding of the city. First Edition, Masi Publications, Tehran. 202 p. (In Persian).
Asgharpour, M. 2003. Multi-criteria decision making and operations research theory. University of Tehran Press, 225 p. (In Persian).
Azar, A. & Rajabzadeh, A. 2010. Applied decision making MADM approach. Tehran, Negah Danesh Publications, 230 p. (In Persian).
Bagherian Kalat, A.; Bagherian, R.; Vahedi, A.; Falahati, H.; Rouhani, H.; Sdigh R.; & Sheibani, Z. 2016. Investigation of the effect of aquifer project on flood control (Case study in Kashmar aquifer project). Fourth National Conference on Rainwater Catchment Systems. 7 p. (In Persian).
Brooks, K.N.; Folliott, P.F.; Gregersen, H.M.; & Thames, J.L. 1991. Hydrology and the Management of Watershed. vol. 1. Iowa State University, 220 p.
Bruijnzeel, L.A. 1990. Hydrology of Moist Tropical Forests and Effects of Conversion: A State of Knowledge Review. Humid Tropics Program of the International Hydrological Program of UNESCO, Paris and Vrije Universities Amsterdam, 224 p.
Carlos, E. & Tucci, M. 2002. Flood flow forecasting. Paper presented at 54th session of Executive Council of WMO World Meteorological Organization in Geneva.
Carssie, D. & Jolicoeur, S. 2002. Comparison of stream flow between pre and post timber harvesting in catamaran brook. Journal of Hydrology. 258: 232-248.
Doyle, M. W.; Harbor, J. M.; Rich, C. & Specie, A. 2014. Examining the effects of urbanization on streams using Indicators of geomorphic stability. Physical geography, 21: 155-181.
Du, J.; Fang, J.; Xu W. & Shi, P. 2013. Analysis of dry/wet conditions using the standardized precipitate. Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 27(2): 377–387.
Friesecke, F. 2004. Precautionary and sustainable flood protection in Germany –Strategies and instruments of spatial planning. 3rd FIG Regional Conference, Jakarta, Indonesia, 3-7, 17 p.
Fussel, H. 2005. Vulnerability in Climate Change, Research: A Comprehensive Conceptual Framework. Breslauer Symposium, No 6, University of California.
Hwang, C.L. & Yoon, K. 1981. Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications, Berlin: Springer Verla.
Ismaili, R. & Lorestani, Q. 2016.Analysis and assessment of urbanization effects on geomorphic characteristics of streams, a case study: Nour city, Mazandaran province, Researches in Earth Sciences. 6(4): 78-93. (In Persian).
James, L. D. & Lee, R. R. 1971. Economic of Water Resources Planning, McGraw- Hill.
Jongman, B. 2018. Effective adaptation to rising flood risk, Nature Communications, 9: 3 P.
Jons, J. A. A. 2000. The physical causes and characteristics of floods. In floods Vol II, 93 P.
Karamouz, M. & Heydari, A. 1998. Structure of Flood Warning Systems, Specialized Workshop on Flood Warning Systems and Flood Management. Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran. (In Persian).
Karamouz, M.; Poortoiserkani, A. & Ahmadi, A. 2006. Economic Analysis and Comparison of Flood Control Projects during the Construction of Diversion Dams: A Case Study.Iran-Water Resourc Research. 2 (2):15-30. (In Persian).
Mahroyan Gh.; Mahroyan, F.; & Taghavi, l. 2018. The effect of climate change phenomenon on the occurrence of floods. Sixth Comprehensive Conference on Flood Management and Engineering, 10 p. (In Persian).
Messne, F. & Meyer, V. 2006. Flood damage, vulnerability and risk perception-challenges for flood damage research. In: Flood Risk Management-hazards, Vulnerability and Mitigation Measures, (Eds). Jochen Schanze, Ezven zeman, Jiri Marasalek, Nato Science Series, Springer, Amsterdam;149-167.
Mikaeili, A. 2017.A Study on the Self- Rehabilitation of Natural Ecosystems in Flooded Hazard Areas for Developing Applied Methods in Ecological Rehabilitation (Case Study: Golestan Recreational Area of the Golestan National Park). Enviromental Researchs. 7(14): 145-156. (In Persian).
Mohammadzadeh Larijani, F. 2013. Deadly floods in the north of the country are a response of nature to the illegal exploitation of forests. The Second International Conference on Environmental Hazards, Tehran, Kharazmi University. (In Persian).
Mokhtari, S. 2009. Flood control strategies. Journal of Housing and Rural Environment, Accidents.2: 72-89. (In Persian).
Montgomery, M.R. 2008. The urban transformation of the developing world. Science, 319 (5864):761-764.
Nakano, H. 1972. Effects of changes of forest conditions on water yield, peak flow and direct runoff of small watersheds in Japan, In: Sopper, W.E. and Lull, H.W. (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Forest Hydrology Pergamon, New York: 551-564.
Norouzi Khatiri, K.; Omidvar, B; Malekmohammadi, B.  & Ganjehi, S. 2014. Multi-Hazards Risk Analysis of Damage in Urban Residential Areas (Case study: earthquakeandflood hazards in Tehran- Iran). Journal of Geography and Environmental Hazards. 2(3):53-68. (In Persian).
Pacione, M.1999. Applied Geography; Principles and Practice. By Routledge, 95 P.
Roghani, M. 2003. Investigation of spatial impact of areas affected by flood peak discharge in order to reduce flood risk in the country's watersheds. Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Center, Final Report of the Research Project, 116 p. (In Persian).
Sharifi, F. & Nowruz, Gh. 2002. Comprehensive watershed management is the key to biosource development. Journal of Forests and Rangelands.56:22-33. (In Persian).
Salvati, A. & Malekian, A. 2020. Prioritization of Urban Sub-Basins to Flood Control Using AHP and Fuzzy_AHP Decision-Making Techniques. Enviromental Researchs. 11(22): 3-14. (In Persian).
Tahvili, Z.; Malekian, A.; Khosravi, H.; & Khalighi Sigaroudi, Sh. 2017. Rain water harvesting potential locating in arid regions using TOPSIS; Case study Nain Plain, Journal of Irrigation and Water Engineering.7(3): 60-74. (In Persian).
Vakhshouri, A. 2012. Investigation of Floods in the Region of Flood Dams and Ways to Prevent its Dangers on Lar City. Scientific - Research Quarterly of Geographical Data (SEPEHR). 21(81): 66-75.
Wang T. C. & Chang, T.H. 2007. Application of TOPSIS in evaluating initial training aircraft under a fuzzy environment. Expert systems with applications, 33 p.
Youssef, A.M.; Pradhan, B.; & Hassan, A.M. 2016. Flash flood risk estimation along the St. Katherine road southern Sinai, Egypt using GIS based morphometry and satellite imagery. Environmental Earth Sciences, 62: 611-623. (In Persian).
Zhang, S.; Guo, Y.; & Wang, Z. 2015. Correlation between flood frequency and geomorphologic complexity of river network, a case study of Hangzhou China. Journal of Hydrology. 527: 113-118.
Zongxue, Xu. & Gang, Z. 2016. Impact of urbanization on rainfall – runoff processes: case study in the liangshui river basin in beijiing. China, Proc. IAHS, 373: 7–12.