تحلیل فضایی مخاطرات محیطی

تحلیل فضایی مخاطرات محیطی

عوامل و معیارهای مدیریت اکولوژیک‌محور رود-دره‌های کلانشهر تهران-مطالعه موردی: رود-دره کن

نویسندگان
دانشگاه خوارزمی
چکیده
ایران به دلیل اقلیم غالباً خشک و نیمه‌خشک، بارندگی‌های کم و فصلی و توپوگرافی متنوع، از رود-دره‌‌ها یا رودخانه‌های فصلی فراوانی برخوردار است. این رود-دره‌ها نقش اساسی در شکل‌گیری، تکوین و پایداری سکونتگاه‌های انسانی دارند و خدمات اکولوژیک متنوعی ارائه می‌نمایند. زیبا‌یی‌ بصری، ذخیره فضای سبز، تأمین آب، کاهش و ایجاد اختلاف دما، فشار و جریان محلی هوا (باد) و تهویه طبیعی از جمله کارکردها و خدمات اصلی این واحدهای طبیعی-اکولوژیک می‌باشند. شهر تهران از 7 رود-دره دارآباد، گلابدره، دربند، ولنجک، درکه، فرحزاد و کن برخوردار است. نقش اکولوژیک این رود-دره‌ها در چنددهه اخیر به‌دلیل رویکرد و مداخله‌های عمرانی غیر اکولوژیک‌محور مدیریت شهری و شهروندان به شدت کاهش یافته است. این مداخله‌ها این رود-دره‌ها را به یکی از مهم‌ترین عرصه‌های خطر بروز سیل و حرکات دامنه‌ای تبدیل کرده است. رود-دره کن، مهم‌ترین این رود-دره‌ها به‌جهت وسعت حوضه آبریز و مدت زمان و میزان دبی آب دائمی می‌باشد. بخشی از این رود-دره توسط شهرداری به بوستان (جوانمردان) تبدیل شده است. هدف این پژوهش این بوده که عوامل و معیارهای مدیریت اکولوژیک‌محور این رود-دره را برای مداخله‌ها و ساماندهی پایدار آن تدوین و ارائه نماید. اطلاعات مورد نیاز این پژوهش به دو روش کتابخانه‌ای و پیمایشی جمع‌آوری شده است. به منظور ارائه این عوامل و معیارها، از روش ارزیابی چند معیاره مبتنی بر فرایند تحلیل شبکه‌ای استفاده شده است. نتیجه حاصل از این ارزیابی نشان می‌دهد که عامل مدیریتی، بیشترین درجه اهمیت و وزن را نسبت به عوامل دیگر در این‌خصوص دارد.
کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Ecologically-based Management Factors and criteria of River-Valleys in Tehran metropolis-Case Study: River-Valleys of Kan

نویسندگان English

Mousa Kamanroudi Kojuri
Amir Saffari
Mohammad Solimani
Maryam Nemati Sani
Kharazmi University
چکیده English

Ecologically-based Management Factors and criteria of River-Valleys in Tehran metropolis-Case Study: River-Valleys of Kan



Abstract:

Iran has seasonal rivers because of dry climate, low rainfall and different topography. These river- valleys have main role in forming, genesis, and sustainability of human settlements and provide different ecological services. The main services include beauty, store of green spaces, water supply, reduce and create temperature differences, local air flow and natural ventilation which are part of the functions. Tehran is roughly the same area as 730 square kilometers and its population is 8.7 million people. It is located in51° and 17´ to 51° and 33´ east longitude and 35° and 36´ to 35° and 44´ north latitude. The height of this city is 900 to 1800 meters. The north and north east of this city are located in peculiarity range of the southern part of the middle Alborz. This city includes 7 river valleys to the names Darabad, Golabdareh, Darband, Velenjak, Darakeh, Farahzad and Kan. The ecological role of these river valleys is reduced because of non- ecological axis developmental interventions by urban management and citizens. These interventions have changed river valleys to high risk space of skirt movements and flood. Kan is the most important river valley because of the breadth of the basin and permanent water discharge rate. The part of this river valley has changed to park (Javanmardan) by municipality. The purpose of this research is that to provide factors and criteria of ecosystem based management to organize this river valley.

ANP has been used in this research. To use this method for analyzing factors and criteria of ecosystem based management to organize this river valley, firstly, these factors have been identified by library studies and scrolling. These factors include 4 criteria (natural: 15 sub criteria, social: 3, management: 6, economic: 2). the books, journals, reports, maps, aerial photos, satellite images and internet sites have been studied in library studies. In site studies, some information from library studies have been edited. After that, the findings of these two methods in form of questionnaire called factors and criteria of ecosystem based management to organize Kan River valley, was in charge academics and professionals. They were elected among pundits of urban management science, urban planning, geography and environment in Tehran. At first the number of them was 30 people came to agreement in two process about 4 factors and 18 criteria and determined importance and priority by Delphy method. Findings in Delphy method were analyzed through ANP and SUPER DECISIONS. In this process, firstly, a conceptual model and relation inter and intra clusters and nodes determined. These relations in this process are very important because paired comparison depends on this process. Assumption of equality of effects and similar relations in these factors is illogical because there are the grading of effects and relations in this research. Second, the factors have been compared to each other to create a super matrix based on paired comparison. Generally, in this process decision makers compare two different factors to each other and paired comparisons have grading of between1to9. In double- sided valuation, each factor is used to show initial inverse comparison. Inconsistent rate in paired comparison must be less than 0.1 like AHP. Third initial super matrix is created. It is the weights created from paired comparison and identified the importance of each factor in each cluster. Forth, the weighted super matrix was created. The weights of clusters was calculated in this process to identify the weight of final super matrix. Fifth, limited super matrix was created. The weighted super matrix reached for infinity band each row convergenced to a number and that number was the weight of factor. By this way limited super matrix was reached.

Based on ANP and table 1, management: 46%, natural – ecological: 26% and economic and social factors: 14% are important respectively in ecosystem based management to organize Kan River valley. Based on reached results, inconsistent rate is 0.003 and it shows that the weight is valid and review is not necessary. Among sub criteria in management factor, organizational pattern: 32%, method of management: 23% and policies: 21% are the most important respectively in ecosystem based management to organize Kan River valley. Among sub criteria in natural- ecological factor, flood, domain movements and building and texture of soil are the most important respectively 23%, 18% and 11.5% also in social factor, participation, security and public trust have the importance respectively equal to 49% 31% 19%. In economic factor, environmental assets and stakeholder’s economic participation have the same importance.

Based on this research, management factor (organizational pattern and the method of management) is the most important in ecosystem based management. But this approach, the management pattern and intervention to organize this river valley, need comprehensiveness and integrity of the subject (nature, society, management and economic), purpose (protection, resuscitation and use), factors (government, city council, municipality, private sector and people), duties (policy making, planning, designing and perform), method (collaborative), tools (knowledge, skill, rule, program, budget, machinery and materials) and management domain. Use of these factors and criteria need some infrastructure and reforms. The most important reform is reform of management structure, production of subject matter and topical program special to organize river valleys by ecological approach to release Kan of loading and contradictory grabbing.so this management can follow protection, resuscitation, sustainable use and continuity of ecological services.



Key words: ecosystem, ecosystem based management, analytic network process, river valley of Kan


کلیدواژه‌ها English

Ecosystem
river
river valley
ecosystem based management
analytic network process
Ahmed, A. and R.D. Dinye .2012. Impact of land use activities on Subin and Aboabo Rivers in Kumasi metropolis. International Journal of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, 4(7):241-251.
Azizi, A.; B. Malekmohammadi; HR. Jafari; H. Nasiri and V. Amini Parsa .2014. Land suitability assessment for wind power plant site selection using ANP-DEMATEL in a GIS environment: case study of Ardabil province, Iran. Environ Monit Assess, 186:6695-6709.
Charles, E. and D. Fanny .2009. Marine Spatial Planning: a step-by-step approach toward ecosystem-based management. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man and the Biosphere Programme.
Erneston, H. 2013. The social production of ecosystem services: A framework for studying environmental justice and ecological complexity in urbanized landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 109(1):7-17.
Garcia-Melon, M.; J. Ferris-Onate; J. Aznar-Bellver; P. Aragnes-Beltran and R. Paveda-Bautista .2008. Farmland appraisal based on the analytic network process. Journal of Global Optimization, Vol.42:143-155.
Gerardo, A. 2018. Procedural steps for the application of the DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework. Journal of Ecosystem Services. 30:327-338.
Green, R.; J.E. Luther; R. Devillers and B. Eddy .2010. An approach to GIS-based multiple criteria decision analysis that integrates exploration and evaluation phases: Case study in a forest-dominated landscape. Forest Ecology and Management, 260(12):2102-2114.
Gerner N.V.; I. Nafo; C. Winking; K. Wencki; C. Strehl; T. Wortberg; A. Niemann,; G. Anzaldua and M. Lago .2018. Large-scale river restoration pays off: A case study of ecosystem service valuation for the Emscher restoration generation project. Ecosystem Services, Volume 30:327-338.
Jharkharia, S. and R. Shankar .2007. Selection of logistics service provider: An analytic network process, Omega, Vol.35:274-289.
Khan S. and MN. Faisal .2007. An analytical network process model for municipal solid waste disposal option. Waste management, 28(9): 6-15.
Lee, H. et al. 2009. Selection of technology acquisition mode using the analytic network process. Mathematical and Computer Modeling, Vol.49, pp.1274-1282.
Mosadeghi, R.; J. Warn ken; R. Tomlinson and H. Mirfenderesk .2015. Comparison of Fuzzy-AHP and AHP in a spatial multi-criteria decision making model for urban land-use planning. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 49:54-65.
Mostafavi, H.; R. Schiniger; A. Melcher; K. Moder; C. Mielach and S. Schmutz .2015. A new fish-based multy-metric assessment index for cyprinid streams in Iranian Caspian Sea Basin. Limnologica-Ecology and Management of Inland Waters, 51:37-52.
Nekhay, O.; M. Arriaz and L. Boer boom .2009. Evaluation of soil erosion risk using Analytic Network Process and GIS: a case study from Spanish mountain olive plantations. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(10):3091-3114.
Raciti, A. and L. Saija .2018. From ecosystem services to Ecological Devices: The CoPED Summer School experience in the Simeto River Valley. Italy, the University of Memphis, TN, USA. Journal of Urban Management, Issue 3:161-171.
Sener, S.; E. Sener and R. Karaguzel .2011. Solid waste disposal site selection with GIS and AHP methodology. Journal of Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 173(1-4):533-554.
Thrush, S.F and P.K. Dayton .2009. What Can Ecology Contribute to ecosystem based management? Annual Review of Marine Science, 2(1): 419-41.
Vollmer, D.; D. O. Pribodi; F. Remondi; E. Rustiadi and A. Gret-Regamy .2016. Prioritizing ecosystem services in rapidly urbanizing river basins: A spatial multi-criteria analytic approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 20:237-252.
Yigitcanlar, T. and D. Dizaroglu .2014. Ecological approachs in planning for sustainable cities: A review of the Literature. Global J. Environ. Sci. Manage, 1(2):159-188.
Zelenovic, V.T.; Z. Srdjevic; R. Bajcetic and M.M. Vojinovic .2012. GIS and the analytic hierarchy process for regional land fill site selection in transitional countries: a case study from Serbia. Environmental Management, 49(2):445-458.