ارزیابی مزیت و شکاف تکنولوژیکی مدیریت پایدار جنگل

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری دانشگاه لرستان

2 2استادیار گروه جنگلداری، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم آباد، ایران،

3 هیت علمی دانشگاه شهید بهشنی

چکیده

سابقه و هدف: امروزه انسان به این مهم رسیده است که بقای آینده گان تابع مدیریت نسل حاضر است بنابراین برای حفظ امکان بقای نسلهای امروز و فردا، تفکر توسعه پایدار و مدیریت پایدار را پذیرفته و راهی بجز آن متصور نیست. به منظور دستیابی به این مفهوم اقدام به سیاستگذاری و برنامه ریزی در سطوح بین المللی، ملی و محلی نموده و راههای اجرای بهینه آن را بررسی می نماید. تفکر مدیریت پایدار منابع طبیعی و همچنین جنگلها در این راستا مورد توجه قرار گرفته، ولی متاسفانه به کندی پیش می رود و نیاز به محرکی دارد که متناسب با شرایط امروزه و نیازهای فردا عمل نماید. بنابراین در این پژوهش تکنولوژی به عنوان یکی از اصل های توسعه پایدار و محرکی برای رسیدن به مدیریت پایدار جنگل مورد بررسی قرار گرفته است. هدف این تحقیق ارزیابی ظرفیت ها و نیازهای تکنولوژیکی جهت دستیابی به مدیریت پایدار جنگل می باشد.
مواد و روش ها: مزیت و شکاف تکنولوژیکی برای دستیابی به مدیریت پایدار جنگل در استان همدان با ابزار کپ تک بررسی شده است. برای این منظور از معیارها و شاخصهای تکنولوژی و اصول مدیریت پایدار جنگل استفاده شده است. این تحقیق از نوع پیمایشی توصیفی با جامعه هدف کارشناسان بخش جنگل اداره کل منابع طبیعی و با نمونه برداری غیر احتمالی هدفمند بوده است.
یافته ها: نتایج این بررسی نشان داد که اصل های مدیریت پایدار جنگل بر اساس معیارها و شاخص های تکنولوژی ابزار کپ تک دارای مزیت کلی 40 درصد و شکاف 60 درصد می باشند. کمترین مزیت موزون در پارامتر سیستم ها و رویه ها با مقدار 33 درصد و بیشترین میزان مزیت موزون در پارامتر سطح پشتیبانی و بهینه سازی با مقدار 49 درصد می باشد. بیشترین مزیت معیار رویکرد مدیریتی مربوط به شاخص فرهنگ سازمانی به مقدار 49 درصد و کمترین مزیت مربوط به شاخص حل مساله با مقدار 35 درصد می باشد. بر اساس شاخص های رویکرد مدیریتی، اصل اول مدیریت پایدار جنگل، یعنی سیاست، برنامه ریزی و چارچوب های سازمانی، بیشترین مزیت را که مقداری برابر 50 درصد می باشد را کسب کرده است و کمترین مزیت مربوط به اصل پنجم، یعنی توافق ذی نفعان برای حفظ سلامت اکوسیستم جنگل و رفاه انسان های وابسته به جنگل به مقدار 38 درصد به دست آمد.
نتیجه گیری: با توجه به اهمیت مدیریت پایدار جنگل و اهمیت تکنولوژی و مدیریت آن در عصر حاضر که در دستور کار 21 هم مورد تاکید قرار گرفته، ضروری است تا از تکنولوژی و ظرفیت های آن جهت دستیابی به اهداف استفاده نموده و برای این منظور می بایست نقاط قوت و ضعف تکنولوژیکی برای سیاستگذاری و برنامه ریزی بهینه را شناخت.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Assessment of technological Gap and advantage of the sustainable forest management

نویسنده [English]

  • Rahim Malekniya 2
چکیده [English]

Background and objectives: Today, mankind has reached at this important point, which next generations survival depends on management function of present generation, therefore to protect probability of survival of next and present generations, has accepted sustainable development and management, and it'll has no way. In order to achieve this concept to policy making and planning at the international, national and local, and searching optimal way to implement it. To do this, the concept of sustainable management of natural resources and forests has been considered, but unfortunately it is a slow process and requires a motive, that fits with the needs of today and tomorrow. Therefore in this study, technology has investigated as a sustainable development principle and a motivation factor to achieve sustainable management. The aim of this study is to evaluate the capacity and technological requirements in order to achieve sustainable forest management.
Materials and methods: Technological gaps and advantages for getting sustainable forest management in The Hamadan province studied using "CAPTECH" method. For this purpose, technological criteria and indicators and sustainable forest management principles have used. This research was descriptive survey with target population including forestry sector experts of Natural Resources and watershed management administration and the non-probability purposive sampling.
Results: The result of this study showed that sustainable forest management principles based on CAPTECH parameters has 40% advantage and 60% gap. The lowest weighted advantage of technological parameters which is related to systems and practices parameter is 33 percent and the highest weighted advantage of technological parameters which is related to logistics and optimization level is 49%. The greatest advantage of managerial approach criterion is related to organizational culture indicator by 49% and the lowest advantage of this criterion is related to problem-solving index by 35%. Based on the managerial approach indicators, the first principle of sustainable forest management, the policy, planning and institutional framework, has got the greatest advantage that it has won an amount equal to 50% and The advantage of the fifth principle, the agreement of stakeholders to maintain forest ecosystem health and human well-being, has obtained the lowest amount of 38%.
Conclusions: Due to the importance of sustainable forest management and the importance of technology and technology management at present era that has been emphasized in Agenda 21, it is important to use technology and its capacities to reach our target, therefore technological gaps and advantages should be determine for optimal planning and policy making.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Technology
  • CAPTECH
  • Sustainable forest management
1. A'arabi, S.M., and Izadi, D. 2014. Management of Technology: The key to competitiveness
and wealth creation, Cultural Research Bureau press, 758p. (Translated in Persian)
2. Agenda 2020 and AF&PA. 2006. Forest products industry technology roadmap. Agenda 2020
technology alliance. A special project of the American forest and paper association, 54p.
3. Aryaeimanesh, M. 2012. Technology assessment using CAPTECH approach. The Executive
Management Conference, 24 and 25 October, 2012. 1-10. (In Persian)
4. Bahmani, A.A. Rafighi, A., Vali, M., and Salari, M. 2012. Identification and Evaluation of
Oncoming Changes of Wood and Paper Industries of the Country. Wood and Paper
Industries. 2: 2. 27-38. (In Persian)
5. Danaifard, H., alvani, S.M., and Azar, A. 2013. Quantitative research methodology in
management: comprehensive approach. Saffar press. 496p. (In Persian)
6. Gilanipoor, N., Najafi, A., and Heshmatolvaezin, S.M. 2012. Productivity model and cost of
steel tracked skidder LTT-100A in downward skidding (Case study: Research and
educational forest of University of Tarbiat Modares). Iranian Journal of Forest. 4: 3. 243-
252. (In Persian)
7. Goleij, A., Hasanzad Navroodi, I., and Mohammadi Limaei, S. 2016. Determining the
criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management, (Case study: Nav-e Asalem,
Guilan province). Iranian Journal of Forest and Poplar Research. 24: 1. 176-187. (In Persian)
8. Hejazi, R., Talebi, K., and Mohammadi Daniali, E. 2011. Identify factors affecting quality
technology for the introduction of technological entrepreneurship opportunities. Case study:
Dairy industry, Economy and New Bussiness, 24: 135-156. (In Persian)
9. Hemati, M.R., Ghobadi, A., and Baselizade, Gh. 2009. Development document of natural
resources and watershed management of Hamedan province in 1404 Horizon. Sorush Alvand
press, 64p. (In Persian)
10. Hetemaki, L., and Mery, G. 2010. Global socio-economic changes: implications of
technological development to forestry. IUFRO. 25: 157-181p.
11. Heydari, A.S., and Teymurian, M. 2015. Study of strategic management of technology
models and providing a suitable model for ABFAR companies. Water and Sustainable
Development. 2: 1. 1-8. (In Persian)
12. Hodbay, Michael. 2002. Technology needs assessment for developing countries. United
nation industrial development organization. 75p.
13. Holvoet, B., and Muy, B. 2004. Sustainable forest management worldwide: A comparative
assessment of satandards, The International Forestry Review. 65: 12. 99-122.
14. Jafarnejad, A., and Morovati, A. 2006. Technology audits and providing sound solutions to
reduce the technological gap. Journal of Management Sciences. 1: 2. 1- 34. (In Persian)
15. Khazaeea, H., Fallah, A., and Yakhkeshi, A. 2006. Sustainable assessment and performance
using Barometer of Sustainability, natural resources and sustainable development in
southland of Caspian sea, Islamic Azad university, Noor. (In Persian)
16. Khazaeeb, H., Fallah, A., and Yakhkeshi, A. 2008. Implementation of policy, planning and
institutional framework for sustainable forest management. Forest and Poplar Research. 16:
4. 608-599. (In Persian)
17. Limbitso, C.C., and Shiholo, M.V. 2016. An indicator framework for assessing the
technology aspect of Integrated Lake Basin Management for Lake Malawi Basin. Ecological
Indicators. 60: 789–801.
18. Makuie, A., Payedar, M.M., Abdolahzade, S., and Rafiei, A. 2011. Clustering Technology
Assessment and determine strategies to CAPTECH method. Improving management. 5: 3.
66-79. (In Persian)
19. Maleknia, R., Feghhi, J., Makhdoum, M.F., Zobeiri, M., and Marvi Mohajer, M.R. 2014.
Developing Criteria and Indicators Framework for Monitoring the Sustainability of
Ecological Functions of Northern Forests in Forest Management Unit level (Case study:
Kheyrud Forest of Nowshahr). Environmental Researches. 5: 9. 137-146. (In Persian)
20. Myllyviita, T., and Leskinen, P. 2013. Sustainability assessment of forest resources– tools
for a problem- orientated approach, School of forest Sciences, Faculty of Science and
forestry, University of Eastern Finland, 1-38.
21. Narayan P.D. 2000. Measures of success for sustainable forestry: pursuing progress towards
sustainability, Indian Institute of forest management Bhopal India. 1-117p.
22. Prabhu, R., Carol, C.J.P., and Dudley, G.R. 1999. Guidelines for Developing, Testing, and
Selecting, C&I for SFM. Toolbox 1. 186p.
23. Presscot-Allen, R. 1996. Barometer of Sustainability: What it's for and how to use it, IUCN,
1-16.
24. Puettmann, K.J., Coates, K.D., and Messier, C. 2009. A critique of Silviculture: Managing
for Complexity. Island Press, London.
25. Rajabbeigi, M., Darvish, H., Saeed Asr, M., and Fathi, F. 2008. A survey of organizational
culture in the forest, rangelands and watershed organization. Pajouhesh and sazandegi. 81:
152-161. (In Persian)
26. Rist, L., and Moen, J. 2013. Sustainability in forest management and a new role For
resilience thinking. Forest Ecology and Management. 310: 416–427.
27. Ronasi, F., Hejazi, S.R., and Binesh, M. 2010. Technology Assessment in SMEs. Industrial
management organization press. 188p. (In Persian)
28. Sayer, J.A., Vancley, J.K., and Byron, N. 1997. Technology for sustainable forest
management: challenges for the 21th century. Commonwealth forestry congress. Victoria
Falls. Zimbabve. CIFOR. Occasional paper. 12. 14p.
29. Sayyadi, F., Ghasemi, E., and Saberi-Ansari, A. 2016. Ranking the Technology Changing
Plans Based On the Effective Technology Changing Priorities on Improving the Competition
Quality by Using Fuzzy TOPSIS, International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies
(IJHCS). 2: 4. 1-13.
30. United Nations. 1992. Aganda 21. United Nations conference on environment and
development, Rio de Janerio, Brazil. 351p.
31. Van De Kerk, G., and Arthur, R.M. 2008. A comprehensive index for a sustainable society:
the SSI – the Sustainable Society Index, Ecological Economics. 66: 2-3. 228-242.
32. Wiersum, K.F. 1995. 200 years of sustainability in forestry: lessons from history.
Environmental Management. 19: 3.321-329.