راهکارهای تحقیق کیفی برای علوم محیط زیستی

محورهای موضوعی : مدیریت محیط زیست

پژمان رودگرمی ¹ (استادیار، سازمان تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی * (مسوول مکاتبات))
عباس اکبرزاده ² (عضو هیات علمی موسسه تحقیقات آب)

تاریخ دریافت : 1391/12/13 تاریخ پذیرش : 1392/10/17 تاریخ انتشار : 1393/10/01

کلید واژه: علوم محیط زیستی, تحقیق, کیفی, روش شناسی, راهکار,

چکیده مقاله :

علوم محیط زیستی به عنوان علومی میان رشته ای از گرایش های مختلف علوم طبیعی، علوم اجتماعی و علوم کاربردی شکل گرفته اند. حل مسایل محیط زیستی نیاز به تخصص در چندین گرایش علمی دارد. این چالش ریشه در ماهیت رشته های محیط زیستی دارد که علومی میان رشته ای[1] هستند. اغلب رشته های علمی روش شناسی تحقیقی ویژه خود را دارا هستند، اما رشته های محیط زیستی به چند نوع روش شناسی تحقیقی نیازمند می باشند. هدف این مقاله، ارایه روش شناسی تحقیق کیفی برای حل مسایل محیط زیستی و پاسخ دهی به سوالات می باشد و راهکارهای گوناگون تحقیق کیفی معرفی شده است. با ارایه مطالعات گوناگون و ماهیت روش های کیفی، قابلیت این روش ها در تحقیقات محیط زیستی ارایه شده است. تحقیق کیفی قادر به پاسخگوئی به بسیاری از سوالات در تهیه گزارش های حرفه ای محیط زیست می باشد. تحقیق کیفی این مزیت را دارد که با حداقل برنامه ریزی و تجهیزات قابل اجرا است. در بسیاری از مطالعات محیط زیستی که دارای پیچیدگی زیادی هستند، طراحی تحقیق کمی بسیار مشکل یا غیر ممکن است. دراین وضعیت، استفاده از روش تحقیق کیفی گزینه ای مناسب است. 3- Interdisciplinary

چکیده انگلیسی:

The environmental sciences can be constituted based on some branches of natural science, social science and applied science. Solving environmental problems requires integration of expertise in some academic disciplines. This challenge stems from the essence of environmental sciences because these fields have an interdisciplinary nature. The most academic disciplines have specialized research methodology, but environmental sciences need to some research methodologies. The aim of this paper is to present qualitative research methodology for solving environmental problems and respond to expected questions through gathering and inferring from the results of various qualitative studies. In this paper, various qualitative research approaches used in the studies are discussed. Using qualitative research is inevitable under some conditions. Based on presented cases, the capability of qualitative research in environmental areas is explained. Qualitative research can respond to many questions in environmental researches and professional reports. Qualitative research approaches may be used to respond the questions arisen in preparation of environmental professional reports. This research methodology has the advantage that can be performed with minimum planning and equipment. In many complex environmental studies, design of quantitative research is very difficult or impossible. In this condition, using qualitative research design is an appropriate option. 

منابع و مأخذ:

1. Ashley P., Boyd W.E., (2006). Quantitative and qualitative approaches to research in environmental management, Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 13:70-78


2. Jackson S.L., (2007).Research methods: a modular approach, Cengage Learning.


3. Groat L. N., Wang D., (2002). Architectural research methods, John Wiley and Sons.


4. McBurney D. H., White T. L., (2009).Research Methods, Cengage Learning.


5. Denzin N. K., Lincoln Y. S., (2005). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research, Sage Publications


6. 6.McNeill P., Chapman S., (2005).Research methods, Rutledge.


7. 7.Patton M. Q., (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods, SAGE Publications.


8. 8-Fellows R., Liu A., (2008).Research methods for construction, Blackwell Science.

 

9. Goodwin W.L., Goodwin L.D., (1996).Understanding quantitative and qualitative research in early childhood education, Teachers College Press.


10. Monsen E. R., Van Horn L., (2008). Research: Successful Approaches, American Dietetic Association.


11. Pitney W.A., Parker J., (2009). Qualitative research in physical activity and the health professions, Human Kinetics.


12. Boeije H., (2010). Analysis in Qualitative Research, SAGE Publications Ltd.


13. Newman  I., Benz C. R., (1998). Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: exploring the interactive continuum, Southern Illinois University Press.


14. Schenk A., Hunzike M., Kienast  F.,(2007). Factors influencing the acceptance of nature conservation measures—A qualitative study in Switzerland, Journal of Environmental Management, 83:66-79.

15.   Broto V. C., Carter C., Elghali L.,(2009). The governance of coal ash pollution in post-socialist times: power and expectations, Environmental Politics, 18:279 – 286.

16. Marshall C., Rossman  G.B., (2010). Designing Qualitative Research, SAGE Publications.

17.   Daymon C., Holloway I.,(2010). Qualitative Research Methods in Public Relations and Marketing Communications, Taylor & Francis Group.

18. Ary D., Cheser Jacobs L., Razavieh A., Sorensen C.,(2009). Introduction to Research in Education,  Cengage Learning.


19. Creswell J.W.,(2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: choosing among five approaches, Sage Publications.


20. McNabb D.E.,(2004). Research methods for political science: quantitative and qualitative methods, M.E. Sharpe.


21. Rossman G.B., Rallis S.F.,(2003). Learning in the field: an introduction to qualitative research, SAGE Publications.


22. Wiseman A.W.,(2009). Educational leadership: global contexts and international comparisons, Emerald Group Publishing.


23. هومن، حیدر علی، (1390)، راهنمای عملی پژوهش کیفی، چاپ سوم، انتشارات سازمان مطالعه و تدوین کتب علوم انسانی دانشگاهها


24. Johnson B., Christensen L.B.,(2007). Educational research: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches, Sage Publications.


25. Fischer S. L., Koshland C. P., Young J. A.,(2005). Social, economic, and environmental impacts assessment of a village-scale modern biomass energy project in Jilin province, China: local outcomes and lessons learned. Energy for Sustainable Development, 4:50-59.


26. Toupal R. S., Zedeño M. N., Stoffle R.W., Barabe P.,(2001). Cultural landscapes and ethnographic cartographies: Scandinavian-American and American Indian knowledge of the land, Environmental Science & Policy, 4:171-184.


27. Calheiros D. F. , Seidl A. F., Ferreira C. J. A.,(2000). Participatory Research Methods in Environmental Science: Local and Scientific Knowledge of a Limnological Phenomenon in the Pantanal Wetland of Brazil, Journal of Applied Ecology, 37: 684-696.


28. Mutshewa A., (2010). The use of information by environmental planners: A qualitative study using Grounded Theory methodology, Information Processing & Management, 46:212-232.

29.   Evans D., Abrahamse W., (2009). Beyond rhetoric: the possibilities of and for 'sustainable lifestyles', Environmental Politics, 18:486 – 502.

30. علی الحسابی، مهران، غزال راهب (1388) ،  آسیب شناسی توجه روستاییان به محیط طبیعی و حفظ محیط زیست در برپایی مسکن) نمونه مورد مطالعه: سکونتگا ه های روستایی استان گیلان)، علوم محیطی، جلد ششم، شماره سوم، 192- 206.


31. Eldridge D., Tenkate T.D., (2008). The role of environmental health in disaster management: a qualitative study of Australian experiences, Journal of Environmental Health, 71:31-36.


32. Carter C. R., Dresner M., (2001). Environmental Purchasing and Supply Management: Cross-Functional Development of Grounded Theory, Journal of Supply Chain Management, 37:12-27.


33. Merriam S.B., (2009). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation, John Wiley and Sons.


34. Arvai J. L.,  Mascarenhas M. J., (2009). Print Media Framing of the Environmental Movement in a Canadian Forestry Debate, Environmental Management, 27:705-714.


35. Engström R., Nilsson M., Finnveden G., (2008). Which environmental problems get policy attention? Examining energy and agricultural sector policies in Sweden, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 28:241-255.


36. Minteer B.A., Corley E. A., (2007). Conservation or Preservation? A Qualitative Study of the Conceptual Foundations of Natural Resource Management, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics,20: 307-333.


37. Fischer T.B., Gazzola P., (2006). SEA effectiveness criteria—equally valid in all countries? The case of Italy, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 26:396-409.


38. ChevaliérD. V., Lam F., Dow R., Hamilton G., (2005). USDA Forest Service: Content analysis developments for natural resource management. Proceedings of ASIS&T, 39:516 – 517.

39.   Carmin J., (1999). Voluntary associations, professional organizations and the environmental     movement in the United States, Environmental Politics, 8:101-121.

40. اعرابی، محمد، ایزدی، داود (مترجم)، تحقیق عملی: راهنمای مجریان تغییر و تحول (1384)  استرینگر ، ارنست تی. (نویسنده)، چاپ دوم، تهران: دفتر پژوهشهای فرهنگی

41.   Inmuong U., Rithmak P., Srisookwatana S., Traithin N.,Maisuporn P.,(2011). Participatory health impact assessment for the development of local government regulation on hazard control. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 31:412–414.

42. Gutberlet J., (2008). Empowering collective recycling initiatives: Video documentation and action research with a recycling co-op in Brazil, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 52: 659-670.


43. Ferreyra C., (2006). Practicality, Positionality, and Emancipation: Reflections on Participatory Action Research with a Watershed Partnership, Systemic Practice and Action Research, 19:577-598.


44. Fahy F., Davies A., (2007).Home improvements: Household waste minimization and active research, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 52:13-27.


45. Mehta P., (1996). Local agenda 21: Practical experiences and emerging issues from the South, Environ. Impact Asses., 16:309-320.


46. Yin R., (1993). Applications of case study research, Sage Publishing.


47. Zobel T., (2008). Characterisation of environmental policy implementation in an EMS context: a multiple-case study in Sweden, Journal of Cleaner Production, 16: 37-50.


48. Lund H., Hvelplund F., (1997). Does environmental impact assessment really support technological change? Analyzing alternatives to coal-fired power stations in Denmark, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 17:357-370.


49. Lichtman M., (2009). Qualitative Research in Education: A User's Guide, Sage Publications.


50. Wimpenny P., Gass J., (2000). Interviewing in Phenomenology and grounded theory: Is there a difference?, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31:1485-1492.


51. Andriotis  K., (2009). Sacred site experience: A Phenomenological Study. Ann. Tourism Res.,36: 64-84.


52. Canter L. W., (1996). Environmental impact assessment, McGraw-Hill Book Company.