نشریه محیط زیست طبیعی

ارزیابی وضعیت شاخص‌های حکمرانی خوب در اکوسیستم‌های تالابی (مطالعة تالاب زریوار، شهرستان مریوان)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

گروه توسعه کشاورزی، دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه بوعلی سینا همدان، ایران.

10.22059/jne.2022.346262.2457

چکیده

منابع تالابی سرمایه ­های مهم ­محیط ­زیستی هستند و مدیریت و حکمرانی آن­ ها به چالشی بزرگ برای کشورهای در حال توسعه تبدیل شده است. در این راستا پژوهش حاضر با هدف ارزیابی وضعیت مؤلفه ­های حکمرانی خوب در اکوسیستم تالاب زریوار در شهرستان مریوان جهت بهبود دانش حکمرانی تالاب، پایداری و حفظ خدمات اکوسیستمی آن به‌اجرا درآمد. این تحقیق از نوع مطالعات توصیفی-تحلیلی بوده که به روش پیمایش انجام شده است. داده‌های مورد نیاز با استفاده از مطالعات کتابخانه ­ای و روش میدانی با ابزار پرسشنامه جمع‌آوری شد. جامعة آماری پژوهش شامل 120 نفر از کارشناسان و خبرگان نهادهای مرتبط با مدیریت تالاب و اعضای انجمن­ ها و تشکل­ های محیط­ زیستی محلی بودند که به روش تمام‌شماری انتخاب شدند. روایی محتوایی سؤالات ابزار تحقیق توسط متخصصان موضوعی و پایایی آن نیز با محاسبة ضریب آلفای کرونباخ تأیید گردید. به‌طور کلی شاخص حکمرانی خوب تالاب زریوار ضعیف و نامناسب گزارش شد. نتایج حاصل از آزمون تی مستقل نشان داد که در رابطه با مؤلفه‌های شفافیت، عدالت و انصاف، فراگیری (تصمیم­ گیری مشارکتی)، یکپارچگی و پاسخگویی اختلاف معنی ­داری بین میانگین دو گروه اعضای نهادهای دولتی و غیر دولتی وجود دارد. با درنظر گرفتن میانگین کسب شده و سطح معنی­ داری گزارش شده، وضعیت حکمرانی خوب تالاب زریوار از نظر شاخص­ های فراگیری و پاسخگویی در وضعیت نسبتاً مناسبی بوده اما از نظر شاخص­ های شفافیت، قابلیت و ظرفیت، و یکپارچگی وضعیت مطلوبی ندارد. حکمرانی خوب تالاب، پیاده ­سازی موفقیت‌آمیز همة گزینه ­های سیاستی، قانونی و نظارتی است که برای پایداری و توسعة خدمات اکوسیستمی آن ضروری است، بنابراین برنامه­ ها، اقدامات و چش م­انداز آیندة تالاب باید با توجه به شاخص­ های حکمرانی خوب هدف­گذای شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Assessing the status of good governance indicators in wetland ecosystems (case study: Zarivar wetland, Marivan county)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Karwan Shanazi
  • Mousa Aazami

Department of Agricultural Extension and Education, Faculty of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Wetland resources are important environmental assets and their management and governance has become a big challenge for developing countries. In this regard, the current research was carried out with the aim of evaluating the state of good governance components in the Zarivar wetland ecosystem, Marivan County, to improve the knowledge of wetland governance, sustainability and preservation of its ecosystem services. This research is a descriptive-analytical type of study that was conducted by survey method. The required data has been collected using library studies and field method with questionnaire tool. The statistical population included 120 experts from institutions related to Zarivar wetland management and members of local environmental associations and organizations, who were selected by the full count method. The content validity of the questions of the research tool was confirmed by subject experts and its reliability was also confirmed by calculating Cronbach's alpha coefficient. In general, the good governance of the wetland was reported to be weak and inappropriate. The results of the t-test showed that there is a significant difference between the average of two groups of members of governmental and non-governmental institutions in relation to the components of transparency justice and fairness, inclusiveness, integrity, and accountability. Considering the average obtained and the reported significant level, the state of good governance of Zarivar wetland is in a good state in terms of inclusiveness and accountability indicators, but it is not in a favorable state in terms of transparency, capability and capacity, and integrity indicators. Good wetland governance is the successful implementation of all policy, legal and regulatory options that are necessary for the sustainability and development of its ecosystem services. Therefore, the plans, actions and future vision of the wetland should be targeted according to the indicators of good governance.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Sustainability of ecosystem services
  • Environmental governance
  • Habitat selection
  • Natural resources management
  • Components of good governance
Amano, T., Székely, T., Sandel, B., Nagy, S., Mundkur, T., Langendoen, T., Blanco, D., Soykan, C.U., Sutherland, W.J., 2018. Successful conservation of global waterbird populations depends on effective governance. Nature 553(7687), 199-202.
Armitage, D., De Loë, R., Plummer, R., 2012. Environmental governance and its implications for conservation practice. Conservation Letters 5(4), 245-255.
Armitage, D., Mbatha, P., Muhl, E.K., Rice, W., Sowman, M., 2020. Governance principles for community‐centered conservation in the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework. Conservation Science and Practice 2(2), e160.
Assessment, Millennium Ecosystem. (MEA)., 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well‐being: Synthesis
Ayivor, J.S., Nyametso, J.K., Ayivor, S., 2020. Protected Area Governance and Its Influence on Local Perceptions, Attitudes and Collaboration. Land 9(9), 310.
Bennett, N.J., Di Franco, A., Calò, A., Nethery, E., Niccolini, F., Milazzo, M., Guidetti, P., 2019. Local support for conservation is associated with perceptions of good governance, social impacts, and ecological effectiveness. Conservation Letters 12(4), e12640.
Berkes, F., 2007. Community-based conservation in a globalized world. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104(39), 15188-15193.
Chandool, C., 2007. Households' resource use, conservation attitude and perceived socioeconomic impact of the protected areas policy in the Nariva Swamp, Trinidad and Tobago. ProQuest.
Costanza, R., De Groot, R., Sutton, P., Van der Ploeg, S., Anderson, S.J., Kubiszewski, I., Farber, S., Turner, R.K., 2014. Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change 26, 152-15
Davidson, N.C., 2018. Ramsar convention on wetlands: scope and implementation. In The Wetland Book I: Structure and function, management, and methods (pp. 451-458). Springer.
Davis, C., Williams, L., Lupberger, S., Daviet, F., 2013. Assessing forest governance: The governance of forests initiative indicator framework. Washington DC: World Resources Institute’s (WRI).
Eufemia, L., Bonatti, M., Sieber, S., Schröter, B., Lana, M.A., 2020. Mechanisms of weak governance in grasslands and wetlands of South America. Sustainability 12(17), 7214.
Fasona, M., Ogunkunle, O.J., 2018. Some aspects of natural resource exploitation and management in Nigeria. In Handbook of Research on Environmental Policies for Emergency Management and Public Safety (pp. 22-39). IGI Global.
Hoque, M., 2013. Environmental governance: Emerging challenges for Bangladesh. Dhaka: A H Development Publishing House
Iran Wetlands Protection Plan., 2018. Integrated Management Plan of Zarivar Wetland Basin, Talaei press, Tehran.102 p
Islam, G.M.N., Tai, S.Y., Kusairi, M.N., Ahmad, S., Aswani, F.M.N., Senan, M.K.A.M., Ahmad, A., 2017. Community perspectives of governance for effective management of marine protected areas in Malaysia. Ocean & Coastal Management 135, 34-42.
IWMI. Retrieved February, 6, 2014, from http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/.
Khuu, D.T., Jones, P.J., Ekins, P., 2021. A Governance analysis of Con Dao National Park, Vietnam. Marine Policy 127, 103986.
Lockwood, M., 2010. Good governance for terrestrial protected areas: A framework, principles and performance outcomes. Journal of Environmental Management 91, 754– 766.
Lockwood, M., Davidson, J., Curtis, A., Stratford, E., Griffith, R., 2010. Governance principles for natural resources management. Society & Natural Resources 23(10), 986-1001
Mauerhofer, V., Kim, R.E., Stevens, C., 2015. When implementation works: A comparison of Ramsar Convention implementation in different continents. Environmental Science & Policy 51, 95-105.
Medary, A., kheirkhahan, J., 2004. Good Governance; Development Foundation, Tehran, Parliamentary Research Center, pp.193-194. (In Persian)
Mutekwa, V., 2016. Forest governance, conservation and livelihoods: the case of forest protected areas and local communities in north-western Zimbabwe (Doctoral dissertation, RHODES UNIVERSITY).
Mutekwa, V.T., Gambiza, J., 2016. Assessment of governance principles application in forest protected areas: the case of six state forests in western Zimbabwe. International Review 18(4), 466-484.
Richardson, L., Loomis, J., Kroeger, T., Casey, F., 2015. The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation. Ecological Economics 115, 51-58.
Sarami Froushani, T., Balali, H., Movahedi, R., 2021. Evaluation of Groundwater Resources Governance Indicators in Iran's Agriculture Sector: Application of the OECD Governance Framework in the Hamadan-Bahar Plain, Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development 52(3), 591-615. (In Persian)
Turner, R.K., Van Den Bergh, J.C., Söderqvist, T., Barendregt, A., Van Der Straaten, J., Maltby, E., Van Ierland, E. C., 2000. Ecological-economic analysis of wetlands: scientific integration for management and policy. Ecological Economics 35(1), 7-23.
Zhu, H., Guan, Z., & Wei, X., 2016. Factors influencing farmers’ willingness to participate in wetland restoration: Evidence from China. Sustainability 8(12), 1325.
نشریه محیط زیست طبیعی
دوره 76، شماره 1
اردیبهشت 1402
صفحه 117-131