تحلیل دست اندرکاران جنگل در ارزیابی شاخص های مدیریت پایدار (مطالعه موردی: استان لرستان، شهرستان کوهدشت)

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری گروه جنگل دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

2 دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

3 دانشجوی دکتری دانشکده مهندسی منابع طبیعی گروه جنگل دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

چکیده

سابقه و هدف: یکی از عوامل مهم در برنامه‌ریزی و تصمیم‌گیری‌ برای مدیریت پایدار جنگل در راستای توسعه پایدار، شناسایی دست‌اندرکاران و بررسی نگرش آنها نسبت به معیارهای پایداری جنگل‌ است.پس از کنفرانس بین‌المللی ریو، توسعه پایدار در اروپا که توسط کنفرانس وزرا در حفاظت از جنگل‌ها در اروپا برگزار شد، به مدیریت پایدار جنگل تبدیل گشت و از آن پس تعریف مدیریت پایدار جنگل به کار گرفته شد و بیشتر از یک سری معیار و شاخص‌ها به عنوان ابزاری برای ارزیابی مدیریت پایدار جنگل استفاده شد (26). معیار ابزاری برای اندازه‌گیری اصل، ایسوانتورو (2001) و شاخص ابزاری برای اندازه‌گیری معیار است (22 و 33). به منظور تصمیم‌گیری برای مدیریت و برنامه‌ریزی، در راستای سیاست‌گذاری اصولی و موفق منابع طبیعی، شناخت کامل دست‌اندرکاران جنگل و معیارهای مربوط به شناسایی آنها بسیار مهم است. تصمیم‌گیری‌ها در مدیریت منابع طبیعی به دلیل چند منظوره بودن خدمات و فواید منابع طبیعی، مشکل بودن ارزش گذاری پولی خدمات بوم‌سازگانی و درگیر نمودن تعداد زیاد دست‌اندرکاران اغلب با پیچیدگی، تغییر ناپذیری و عدم اطمینان همراه است و تصمیم‌گیری‌ها را همواره با چالش‌هایی مواجه ساخته است(3). مردم، منابع و مشارکت سه رکن اساسی توسعه پایدار را تشکیل می‌دهند (42). در گذشته حامیان حفظ منابع طبیعی در راستای حفظ تنوع زیستی از بهره‌برداری سنتی جلوگیری نموده و ترجیح می‌دادند تا برای حفظ منابع طبیعی مردم از بوم‌سازگان‌های طبیعی خارج شوند و دلیل نگرش فوق این بود که استفاده از منابع طبیعی توسط مردم با حفظ آن، در تضاد است (43پژوهش حاضر با هدف مقایسه نگرش دست‌اندرکاران مختلف جنگل برای ارزیابی شاخص‌های مدیریت پایدار در روستای نامجو در غرب استان لرستان و از توابع شهرستان کوهدشت، انجام شده است. هدف از پژوهش حاضر تحلیل دست‌اندرکاران جنگل در ارزیابی شاخص‌های مدیریت پایدار در روستای نامجو واقع در دهستان اولاد قباد شهرستان کوهدشت در زاگرس میانی است.
مواد و روش‌ها: دست‌اندرکاران به صورت تحقیقات میدانی و مطالعات کتابخانه‌ای انتخاب شدند. در این رابطه تعداد 50 پرسشنامه بین دست‌اندرکاران توزیع شد. روایی صوری پرسشنامه‌ها با نظر متخصصین مرتبط تعیین و برای تعیین پایایی آنها از آزمون آلفای کرونباخ و برای امتیازدهی پاسخ‌ها از مقیاس لیکرت استفاده شد. سپس وضعیت اهمیت مهمترین شاخص هر معیار متناسب با فراوانی نسبی آن حاصل از نگرش سه گروه از دست‌اندرکاران شامل افرادی از روستای محلی، کارشناسان اجرایی و استادان دانشگاه، بدست -آمد. در نهایت به‌منظور بررسی رابطه معنی‌داری نگرش دست‌اندرکاران از آزمون خی –دو یا آزمون دو جمله‌ای استفاده شد.
یافته‌ها و نتیجه‌گیری: بررسی نتایج نگرش دست‌اندرکاران برای هر معیار و شاخص‌های مربوط به آن نشان داد که تنها برای معیار "کارکردهای حفاظتی" و شاخص"سطح دامنه‌های فرسایش یافته که سالانه توسط درختکاری و بوته‌کاری احیاء می‌شود" نظر یکسان از هر سه گروه حاصل شد. نتایج حاصل از آزمون خی –دو نیز نشان داد که تفاوت معنی‌داری بین نگرش سه گروه وجود ندارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Stakeholders' analysis to assessment indicators of sustainable management of forests (Case Study: Lorestan Province, Kuhdasht County)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nastaran Nazariani 1
  • Asghar Fallah 2
  • Majid Lotfalian 2
  • mojtaba imani rastabi 3
1 Ph.D. Student, Department of Forestry, Sari University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
2 University of Natural Resources and Agriculture Sciences of Sari
3 Ph.D. student of Natural Resources Engineering Department, Forest Group, Sari University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
چکیده [English]

Background and objectives: One of the important factors in planning and decision making for sustainable forest management in the context of sustainable development is assessment stakeholders and their attitudes towards forest sustainability criteria. The seven benchmarks of the Near East process for sustainable management of Iranian forests include: the size of forest resources, biodiversity, forest health and survival, forest resource production functions, forest resource conservation functions, socio-economic functions, and the legal, political and organizational framework. Following the Rio International Conference, sustainable development in Europe, held by the Ministerial Conference on Forest Conservation in Europe, became sustainable forest management, and since then the definition of sustainable forest management has been applied and more than a series Criteria and indicators were used as a tool for assessing sustainable forest management (26). The instrumental criterion for measuring the principle is Iswanuto (2001) and instrumental tool for measuring the criterion (22, 33). In order to make decisions for management and planning, in line with the principled and successful policy of natural resources, full understanding of forest managers and their identification criteria is very important. Decisions in natural resources management due to the multivariate nature of the services and benefits of natural resources, the difficulty of valuing the services of indigenous people and the involvement of a large number of stakeholders are often accompanied by complexity, irreversibility and uncertainty, and the decision Challenges have always been challenged (3). People, resources and partnerships form the three pillars of sustainable development (42).
Materials and methods: The purpose of this study was to compare the attitudes of different forest managers in identifying sustainable management indicators in a part of central Zagros forests located in Kuhdasht city in west of Lorestan province. The practitioners included individuals from local communities, executive experts, and university professors who were selected through field studies and bibliographic studies. In this regard, 50 questionnaires were distributed among practitioners. Cronbach's alpha and SPSS16 software were used to determine the reliability of the questionnaires. Likert scale was used to evaluate the responses. Then, the status of the importance of the most important indicator of each criterion, proportional to its relative weight, was obtained from the attitude of three groups of forestry practitioners.
Results and Conclusion: The results showed that the reliability of the questionnaire was 0.729, which is indicative of acceptable reliability. Evaluation of the results of the opinions of the groups for each criterion and its related indicators showed that the two criteria for "protective functions" and "health, happiness and integrity" are the same. Finally, in order to investigate the significant relationship between the attitude of the practitioners, the Chi-I test or binomial test were used which did not show any significant difference between the attitudes of the three groups.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Stakeholders Analysis
  • Criteria and indicators
  • sustainable management
  • the participation of local people
1. Adam, M.C., and Kneeshaw, D. 2008. Local level criteria and indicator frameworks: A tool
used to assess aboriginal forest ecosystem values. Forest Ecology and Management. 7: 2024-
2037.
2. Alibabaei Emran, E., Ghorbani, M., Marvi Mohajer, M.R., and Avatefi Hemat, M. 2016.
Social Monitoring; Network Analysis and Social Capital in Sustainable Management of
Forest Resources (Research Area: Kodir Village, Kojour District, Mazandaran Province).
Journal of Forest and Wood Products, Journal of Natural Resources of Iran. 69: 4. 657-665
(In Persian)
3. Ananda, J., and Herath, G. 2003. The use of Analytic Hierarchy Process to incorporate
stakeholder preferences into regional forest planning. Forest Policy and Economics. 5: 1. 13–
26.
4. Avatefi Hemat, M., Shamekhi, M.T., Zobeyri, M., Arab, D., and Tabatabaii, M. 2103. The
reason for forest degradation: studying the subjective models of natural resource experts and
local people using the system dynamics. Journal of Forestry and Wood Products, Journal of
Natural Resources of Iran. 66: 1. 39-54 (In Persian)
5. Bakhtiari Lak, Sh., Mohaghaghi, M., Barkhordari, J., and Jamshidi Gahroii, Z. 2013.
Compilation of sustainable forest park management criteria in arid and semiarid regions.
First National Conference on Tourism Management, Naturalization and Geography, Feb. 23,
Tehran, 8p. (In Persian)
6. Brand, D.G. 1997. Criteria and indicators for the conservation and sustainable management
of forests: progress to date and future direction, Biomass Bioenergy. 4–5: 247–253.
7. Brandt, J.S. Nolte, C., and Agrawal, A. 2016. Deforestation and timber production in Congo
after implementation of sustainable forest management policy, Land Use Policy. 52: 15-22.
8. Chattopadhyay, R.N., and Datta, D. 2010. Criteria and indicators for assessment of
functioning of forest protection committees in the dry deciduous forests of West Bengal,
India, Ecological Indicators. 3: 687–695.
9. Davis, L.S., Johnson, K.N., Bettinger, P.S., and T.E., Howard, 2001. Forest management to
sustain ecological, economic and social values. McGraw- Hill 804p.
10. Dolisca, F., McDaniel, J.M., and Teeter, L.D. 2007. Farmers’ perceptions towards forests: a
case study from Haiti, Forest Policy and Economics, 6: 704–712.
11. Fatahi, M. 1994. Investigation of Zagros oak forests and its most important factors. Tehran
Forest and Rangeland Research Institute. 63p (In Persian)
12. Fathi Ashtiani, A. 2010. Psychological Examinations. Tehran, Behesht. (In Persian)
13. FAO, (1999). Practical Guidelines for the implementation of criteria and indicators for
sustainable forest management in the Near East Region, United Nations Environmental
Programme. Regional of fice for the Near East, Cairo. Available at:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/004/AC135E/ac135e0b.ht.
14. Ford, R.M., Anderson, N.M., Nitschke, C., Bennett, L.T., and Williams, K.J.H. 2017.
Psychological values and cues as a basis for developing socially relevant criteria and
indicators for forest management. Forest Policy and Economics. 78: 141-150.
15. Gbadegesin, A., and Ayileka, O. 2000. Avoiding the mistakes of the past: towards a
community oriented management strategy for the proposed national park in Abuja, Nigeria.
Land Use Policy., 2: 89–100.
16. Ghodsi Pour, S.H. 2009. Issues in Multi-criteria Decision Making, Analytical Hierarchy
Process. Amir Kabir University Press, Seventh Edition. 220p.
17. Gliem, J.A., and Gliem, R.R. 2003. Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha
reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. 2003: Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference
in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education. Boston: McGraw Hill, ©2001, paperback:
Waveland Pr Inc, 816p.
18. Golig, A., Hasanzad Navroudi, E., Mohammadi Limiaii, S., and Jokar, M. 2016. Establishing
sustainable forest management criteria and indicators based on the views of experts and
locals (Case study: Forests in the North of Iran). Iranian Forest Journal, Iranian Forestry
Association. 8: 2.365-379 (In Persian)
19. Goushegir, S.Z., Feghhi, J., Mohajer, M.R.M., and Makhdoum, M. 2009. Criteria and
indicators of monitoring the sustainable wood production and forest conservation using AHP
(case study: Kheyrud educational and research forest). African Journal of Agricultural
Research. 10: 1041-1048. (In Persian)
20. Gulnaz, J., Chiranjeewee, K., and Harald, V. 2012. Developing criteria and indicators for
evaluating sustainable forest management: A case study in Kyrgyzstan. Forest Policy and
Economics. 12: 32–43.
21. Hosseini, Z., Maleknia, R., and Sadeghi, H. 2017. Integrative approach to evaluation criteria
and indices of sustainable forest management at the local level (Case study: Lirabi
Watershed, Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province). Iranian Journal of Forest and Poplar
Research., 25: 1. 149-159 (In Persian)
22. Hosseainpour, A. 2003: Study of socio-economic rural communities and its effects on
forests. Master’s thesis, Gorgan agriculture and natural resources university, Gorgan. 140p.
(In Persian)
23. Iswantoro, H. 2001. Developing criteria and indicators for assessing the functioning of forest
protection committees in joint forest management: case studies from West Bengal and
Indonesia. Unpublished Thesis.Rural Development Centre, IIT Kharagpur, India.
24. Jalilova, G., Khadka, C., and Vacik, H. 2012. Developing criteria and indicators for
evaluating sustainable forest management: A case study in Kyrgyzstan. Forest Policy and
Economics., 21: 32-43.
25. Kramer, R., Healy, R., and Mendelsohn, R. 1992. Forest valuation. Managing the world's
forest: looking for balance between conservation and development. Kendall/Hunt Publishing
Co., Dubuque, IA, 158p.
26. Luthra, S., Mangla, S.K., and Kharb, R.K. 2015. Sustainable assessment in energy planning
and management in Indian perspective. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews., 47:
58-73.
27. Mäkelä, A., Del Río, M., Hynynen, J., Hawkins, M.J., Reyer, C., Soares, P., and Tomé, M.
2012. Using stand-scale forest models for estimating indicators of sustainable forest
management. Forest Ecology and Management., 285: 164-178.
28. Mehregan, M.R. 2004. Advanced operations research. Ketabe Daneshgahi, Pub. Tehran: 8p
(In Persian)
29. Mendoza, G.A., and Prabhu, R. 2000. Development of a methodology for selecting criteria
and indicators of sustainable forest management: a case study on participatory assessment.
Environmental management. 6: 659-673.
30. Moayeri, M.H., Sarvestani, A., Shahraki, M.R., and Kosegharavi, Y. 2015. Analysis of the
relationship between the participation and development of forest villages (Case study:
Golestan forestry cooperatives). Iranian Forest Journal, Iranian Forestry Association. 7: 2.
137-150. (In Persian)
31. Nepal, S.K., and Weber, K.W. 1995. Managing resources and resolving conflicts: national
parks and local people. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World
Ecology. 1: 11-25.
32. Nikfar, Z., Pilehvar, B., Mirazadi, Z., and Eisvand, H. 2015. Check pests oak trees in
Lorestan province (Case study: Lorestan amount suspended forests). The third congress of
agriculture and sustainable natural resources, Tehran - Higher Education Institution of Mehr
Arvand, Promotion Group of Environmental Lovers. May 27. Tehran: 4p. (In Persian)
33. Nokandeh, S.M., Moayeri, M.H., and Mahini, A.S. 2014. Stakeholders and Their
Identification Criteria in Natural Resources Management (Case Study: Forest of Golestan
Province). Journal of Science and Technology of Wood and Forest. 21: 4. 23-40. (In Persian)
34. O’Connor, T.G., and Kuyler, P. 2009: Impact of land use on the biodiversity integrity of the
moist sub-biome of the grassland biome. South Africa. Environmental Management. 90:
384-395.
35. Pokharel, R.K., Neupane, P.R., Tiwari, K.R., and Köhl, M. 2015. Assessing the
sustainability in community based forestry: A case from Nepal, Forest Policy and
Economics. 58: 75-84.
36. Prabhu, R., Colfer, C.J.P., and Dudley, R.G. 1999. Guidelines for developing, testing and
selecting criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management: a C&I. developer's
reference. (Vol. 1) CIFOR. 183p.
37. Purnomo, H., Mendoza, G.A., and Prabhu, R. 2005. Analysis of local perspectives on
sustainable forest management: an Indonesian case study. Journal of environmental
management., 2: 111-126.
38. Rahdari, M.R., Kharazmi, R., and Khosravi, H. 2014. Assessing the Necessity and
Challenges of Conservation of Natural Resources for Sustainable Development (Case Study:
Zagros Forests), Second National Student Conference on Forest Sciences, May 17 and 18.
Karaj: 9p. (In Persian)
39. Renard, Y. 2004. Guidelines for Stakeholder Identification and Analysis: A Manual for
Caribbean Natural Resource Managers and Planners. Caribbean Natural Resources Institute.
ISBN 1-890792-07-1.
40. Ridish, K., Pokharel, A., Prem Raj Neupane, C.B., Krishna, R.T.A., and Michael Kohl, C.
2014. Assessing the sustainability in community based forestry: A case from Nepal. Journal
homepage. Forest Policy and Economics. 10p.
41. Ritchie, B., Mc Dougall, C., Haggith, M., and Oliveira, N.B. 2000. Criteria and Indicators of
Sustainability in Community Managed Forest Landscapes. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia: 113p.
42. Saaty, T.L. 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J. Mathemat
Psych, 15: 234–281.
43. Saaty, T.L. 1980. The analytical hierarchy process, planning priority. Resource Allocation,
RWS Publication, USA, 287p.
44. Stein, T.V., Anderson, D.H., and Kelly, T. 1999. Using stakeholders' values to apply
ecosystem management in an upper Midwest landscape. Environmental Management. 3:
399–413.
45. WCED, U. 1987. Our common future. World Commission on Environment and
Development Oxford University Press. Pp: 284-287.
46. Weeks, P., and Packard, J.M. 1997. Acceptance of scientific management by natural
resource dependent communities. Conservation Biology. 1: 236–245.
47. Zandeh Basiri, M., and Ghazanfari, H. 2011. Compilation of the most important
consequences and factors affecting the management of the local population of Zagros forests
(Case study: Goldegh watershed, Lorestan province), Forest Journal of Iran, Iran Forestry
Association. 2: 2. 127-138 (In Persian)
48. Zandeh Basiri, M., and Ghazanfari, H. 2011. Investigating the Importance of Near East
Process Criteria and Indicators in Sustainable Management of Zagros Forests (Case Study:
Tang-Sulak Basin, Kohgiluyeh and Boyer Ahmad Province). Journal of Forest and Poplar
Research. 20: 2. 204-216 (In Persian)
49. Zand Basiri, M., and Parvin, T. 2012. The importance of criteria and indicators
forsustainable forest management in the Near East Zagros (Case Study: Basintight Sułek
Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad). Iranian Journal of Forest and Poplar Research., 20: 2. 204-
216. (In Persian)