شناسایی و اعتبارسنجی شاخصهای ارزیابی امنیت خاک
محورهای موضوعی : مدیریت بهینه منابع آب و خاکنسرین جلیلیان 1 , کریم نادری مهدیی 2 , یاسر محمدی 3 , محسن نائل 4
1 - دانشجوی دکتری توسعه کشاورزی، دانشگاه بو علی سینا، همدان، ایران
2 - استاد ، گروه ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی، دانشگاه بو علی سینا، همدان، ایران.
3 - استادیار، گروه ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی، دانشگاه بو علی سینا، همدان، ایران
4 - استادیار، گروه خاکشناسی، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا، همدان، ایران.
کلید واژه: ارزیابی زمین, امنیت خاک, مدیریت خاک, دلفی فازی,
چکیده مقاله :
سابقه و هدف: مفهوم امنیت خاک که اخیراً معرفی‌شده است ناشی از نگرانی عمیق علمی در مورد تخریب جهانی خاک و تأثیر آن بر توسعه پایدار است. اگرچه تخریب زمین یک فرآیند فیزیکی است، اما محرک های اصلی آن ریشه در محیط اجتماعی- اقتصادی و سیاسی دارد. امنیت خاک با ادغام پنج بعد از جمله وضعیت و قابلیت خاک، جنبه های بیوفیزیکی خاک و همچنین سرمایه، ارتباط و قانون گذاری عوامل فیزیکی و فنی خاک همچنین مسائل اجتماعی- اقتصادی و سیاسی مؤثر بر خاک را پوشش می دهد. بنابراین هدف این مطالعه شناسایی و اعتبارسنجی شاخص های ارزیابی امنیت خاک با تکنیک دلفی فازی می باشد.روش پژوهش: پژوهش حاضر از لحاظ هدف آن کاربردی است و از نظر نوع تحقیق، جز تحقیقات کیفی قرار دارد. همچنین تحقیق حاضر از نوع تحقیقات توصیفی (غیر آزمایشگاهی) می‌باشد که با شیوه پیمایشی انجام‌شده است. اطلاعات مورد نیاز این تحقیق عمدتاً به شیوه پیمایش و کتابخانه به‌دست‌آمده است و در این راستا عمدتاً از داده‌های ثانویه نظیر اسناد علمی و خاکستری و چندین گزارش از اسناد دولتی که منطقه مورد مطالعه را توصیف می‌کند، استفاده شده است. اطلاعات مورد نیاز این تحقیق بنا به اهداف تعیین‌شده توسط پرسشنامه گردآوری شده است. درمجموع برای تکمیل مطالعه ازنظر سی نفر خبره در ادارات و مؤسسات ذی ربط استفاده شده است.نتایج و بحث: نتایج مطالعه نشان داد که در بعد قابلیت خاک شاخص میزان فرسایش خاک و در بعد وضعیت شاخص کربن آلی خاک بیشترین اعتبار را در سنجش امنیت خاک دارا هستند. در بعد ارتباط امنیت خاک شاخص ارزش های فرهنگی دارای اولویت بالا برای سنجش امنیت خاک مطرح شده است. همچنین در این بعد شاخص های فارغ التحصیلان رشته خاک شناسی فعال مهارت مدیریت خاک و دسترسی به آمار و اطلاعات حذف شدند. در بعد سرمایه خاک شاخص میزان تولید کل به عنوان شاخص دارای اعتبار بالا برای سنجش امنیت خاک می باشد. در این بعد سه شاخص آبی یا دیم بودن زمین زراعی، ارزش معاملاتی زمین و بهره مندی از آب آبیاری حذف شدند. در بعد قانون گذاری امنیت خاک شاخص پروژه های حفاظت از خاک به عنوان شاخصی با دارای بیشترین اعتبار برای سنجش امنیت خاک عنوان شده است.نتیجه گیری: این مطالعه اولین تلاش برای جمع‌آوری شاخص های پنج بعد امنیت خاک برای ارزیابی امنیت خاک در ایران است. شناسایی شاخصهای ارزیابی امنیت خاک منجر به دست‌یابی به لیستی از شاخصهای مهم و مورد تأیید متخصصین حوزه خاک کشور شده که می‌تواند در آینده در دسترس سایر محققان برای ارزیابی وضعیت امنیت خاک در نقاط مختلف کشور قرار گیرد. با توجه به روند مطالعه در مجموع برای هر یک از ابعاد امنیت خاک سی و هشت شاخص شناسایی و اعتبار بخشی شد. در نهایت از این مجموع هشت شاخص در روند مطالعه به طور کلی حذف شد.
Background and Objectives: The recently introduced concept of soil security stems from deep scientific concern about global soil degradation and its impact on sustainable development. Although land degradation is a physical process, its main drivers are rooted in the socio-economic and political environment. Soil security by integrating five dimensions, including soil condition and capabilities, soil biophysical aspects, as well as capital, covers the relationship and legislation of socio-economic and political factors affecting soil. Therefore, the aim of this study is to identify and validate soil security indicators with fuzzy Delphi technique.Methods: The current research is applied in terms of its purpose and it is qualitative research in terms of the type of research. Also, the current research is a descriptive (non-laboratory) type of researches that was conducted with a survey method. The information needed for this research was mainly obtained through survey and library methods, and in this regard, secondary data such as scientific and gray documents and several reports of government documents that describe the studied area were used. The information required for this research has been collected according to the objectives determined by the questionnaire. In total, 30 experts in relevant departments and institutions were used to complete the study.Results: The results of the study showed that from soil capability aspect soil erosion rate index and in terms of soil organic carbon index have the most validity in measuring soil security. In relation to soil security, the index of cultural values has a high priority to measure soil security. Also, in this dimension, indicators of active soil science graduates, soil management skills and access to statistics and information were removed. In terms of soil capital, the index of total production is a highly reliable index for measuring soil security. In this dimension, three indicators of wet or dry agricultural land, trading value of land and benefit from irrigation water were removed. In the dimension of soil security legislation, the index of soil protection projects is mentioned as the most valid indicator for measuring soil security.Conclusion: This study is the first attempt to collect indicators of five dimensions of soil security to evaluate soil security in Iran. Identification of soil security assessment indicators has led to obtaining a list of important indicators approved by the country's soil experts, which can be made available to other researchers in the future to assess the soil security situation in different parts of the country. According to the study process, a total of 38 indicators were identified and validated for each dimension of soil security. Finally, eight indicators were removed from this total in the study process.
Arrouays, D., Mulder, V. L., & Richer-de-Forges, A. C. (2021). Soil mapping, digital soil mapping and soil monitoring over large areas and the dimensions of soil security–A review. Soil Security, 100018.
Arrouays, D., Richer-de-Forges, A., McBratney, A. B., Minasny, B., Grundy, M., McKenzie, N.,& Hempel, J. (2019). Global Soil Map and the dimensions of Global Soil Security. London, ISBN 978-1-138-09305-8.
Arefnezahd, M. (2017). Identifying and prioritizing elements of principals competencies with an emphasis on Islamic management. Journal of School Administration, 5(1), 151-172.
Abdullahzadeh, G., Azderpour, A., & Sharifzadeh, M. (2016). Investigating the perceptions of villagers towards climate change and adaptation strategies in Zabul city. Geography and Environmental Planning, 28(4), 85-106. doi: 10.22108/gep.2018.103703.1041. (in Persian)
Asgharpour, M. (2003).Group decision making and game theory with an operations research perspective, University of Tehran, Publishing and Printing Institute. (in Persian)
Banwart, S. A., Nikolaidis, N. P., Zhu, Y. G., Peacock, C. L., & Sparks, D. L. (2019). Soil functions: connecting earth's critical zone. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 47, 333-359.
Bennett, J. M., McBratney, A., Field, D., Kidd, D., Stockmann, U., Liddicoat, C., & Grover, S. (2019). Soil security for Australia. Sustainability, 11(12), 3416.
Bünemann, E. K., Bongiorno, G., Bai, Z., Creamer, R. E., De Deyn, G., de Goede, R., ... & Brussaard, L. (2018). Soil quality–A critical review. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 120, 105-125.
Brevik, E. C., Hannam, J., Krzic, M., Muggler, C., & Uchida, Y. (2022). The importance of soil education to connectivity as a dimension of soil security. Soil Security, 100066.
Berthe, A.A.. (2019). Chapter 3 - drivers of soil change. Global Change and Forest Soils. Developments in Soil Science (36). Elsevier, pp. 27–42.
Bouma, J. (2015). Reaching out from the soil-box in pursuit of soil security. Soil science and plant nutrition, 61(4), 556-565.
Bouma, J., Stoorvogel, J. J., & Sonneveld, M. P. W. (2012). Land evaluation for landscape units. In Handbook of Soil Sciences: Properties and Processes, 2nd ed. (pp. Chapter-34). CRC Press/Taylor & Francis.
Bagnall, D. K., Morgan, C. L., Woodward, R. T., & McIntosh, W. A. (2018, September). Approach to valuing soil ecosystem services with linking indicators. In Global Soil Security: Towards More Science-Society Interfaces: Proceedings of the Global Soil Security 2016 Conference, December 5-6, 2016, Paris, France (p. 19). CRC Press.
Bockheim, J. G., & Gennadiyev, A. N. (2010). Soil-factorial models and earth-system science: A review. Geoderma, 159(3-4), 243-251.
Bugri, J. T. (2008). The dynamics of tenure security, agricultural production and environmental degradation in Africa: Evidence from stakeholders in north-east Ghana. Land use policy, 25(2), 271-285.
Boardman, J., Evans, R., & Ford, J. (2003). Muddy floods on the South Downs, southern England: problem and responses. Environmental Science & Policy, 6(1), 69-83.
Cui, Z., Zhang, H., Chen, X., Zhang, C., Ma, W., Huang, C., ... & Dou, Z. (2018). Pursuing sustainable productivity with millions of smallholder farmers. Nature, 555(7696), 363-366.
Costanza, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., ... & Van Den Belt, M. (1998). The value of the world# s ecosystem services and natural capital. Ecological economics, 25(1), 3-15.
Dominati, E. J., Maseyk, F. J., Mackay, A. D., & Rendel, J. M. (2019). Farming in a changing environment: Increasing biodiversity on farm for the supply of multiple ecosystem services. Science of the total environment, 662, 703-713.
Dobarco, M. R., McBratney, A., Minasny, B., & Malone, B. (2021). A framework to assess changes in soil condition and capability over large areas. Soil Security, 4, 100011.
Field, D. J., & Sanderson, T. (2017). Distinguishing between capability and condition. In Global soil security (pp. 45-52). Springer, Cham.
Fayaz, Houra, Yaghmaian, Nafiseh, Sabouri, Atefeh, & Shirin Fekar, Ahmed. (2021). Evaluation of soil fertility index using Fuzzy-AHP and parametric methods in tea gardens with different performance. Agricultural Engineering, 44(3), 275-294. doi: 10.22055/agen.2021.38284.1613. (in Persian(
Fraser, J.; McCartney, D.; Najda, H.; Mir, Z.(2004). Yield potential and forage quality of annual forage legumes in southern Alberta and northeast Saskatchewan. Can. J. Plant Sci., 84 (1): 143-155.
Goodarzi, Z., Abbasi, E., Farhadian, H (2018). Achieving consensus Deal with Methodological Issues in the Delphi technique.International Journal of Agricul
Govaerts, B., Sayre, K. D., & Deckers, J. (2006). A minimum data set for soil quality assessment of wheat and maize cropping in the highlands of Mexico. Soil and tillage research, 87(2), 163-174.
Gomiero, T. (2016). Soil degradation, land scarcity and food security: Reviewing a complex challenge. Sustainability, 8(3), 281.
Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., ... & Toulmin, C. (2010). Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. science, 327(5967), 812-818.
Hermann, L. )2006(. Soil education: a public need. Developments in Germany since the mid 1990s. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 169: 464–471
Imani Makhdoom, F., Akef, M., Yaghmaian Mahabadi, N., Shokhalabadi, M. (2013).Qualitative evaluation of land suitability for major crops in Bahar region of Hamadan province with simple and parametric constraint methods (second root). The second national congress of organic and conventional agriculture, Ardabil. (in Persian)
Kiup, E. (2017). Maximizing nutrient utilisation and soil fertility in smallholder coffee and food garden systems in Papua New Guinea by managing nutrient stocks and movement (Doctoral dissertation, James Cook University).
Krasilnikov, P., Sorokin, A., Mirzabaev, A., Makarov, O., Strokov, A., & Kiselev, S. (2017). Economics of Land Degradation to Estimate Capital Value of Soil in Eurasia. In Global Soil Security (pp. 237-246). Springer, Cham.
Karami, A., Mohamadi, Z., Rastegari, H,. & Sorkh Savadkouhi, A. (2018).[Evaluation of the sustainability of rural areas and application of the Delphi fuzzy technique and the artificial neural network: A case study of rural areas of northern Savadkouh County (Persian)]. Journal of Rural Research, 9(3),496-511, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.22059/jrur.2018.246325.1187. (in Persian)
Katz, E. G. (2000). Social capital and natural capital: a comparative analysis of land tenure and natural resource management in Guatemala. Land economics, 114-132.
Koch, A., McBratney, A., & Lal, R. (2015). Global soil week: Put soil security on the global agenda. Nature, 492(7428), 186.
Kahan, D. (2010). Fixing the communications failure. Nature, 463, 296–297.
Lal, A., Erondu, N. A., Heymann, D. L., Gitahi, G., & Yates, R. (2021). Fragmented health systems in COVID-19: rectifying the misalignment between global health security and universal health coverage. The Lancet, 397(10268), 61-6.
Lal, R. (2009). Soils and world food security.
Mugandani, R., Mwadzingeni, L., & Mafongoya, P. (2021). Contribution of conservation agriculture to soil security. Sustainability, 13(17), 9857.
McBratney, A. B., Moyce, M., Field, D. R., & Bryce, A. (2019). The concept of soil security. Global Soil Security: Towards More Science-Society Interfaces; Richer-de-Forges, AC, Carré, F., McBratney, A., Bouma, J., Arrouays, D., Eds, 11-17.
McBratney, A., & Field, D. (2015). Securing our soil. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 61(4), 587-591.
McBratney, A., Field, D. J., & Koch, A. (2014). The dimensions of soil security. Geoderma, 213, 203-213.
McBratney, A. B., Minasny, B., Wheeler, I., Malone, B. P., & Van Der Linden, D. (2012). Frameworks for digital soil assessment. Digit. Soil Assessments Beyond, 9-14.
Moscatelli, M. C., Marinari, S., & Franco, S. (2018, September). Soil awareness in Italian high schools: A survey to understand soil knowledge and perception among students. In Global Soil Security: Towards More Science-Society Interfaces: Proceedings of the Global Soil Security 2016 Conference, December 5-6, 2016, Paris, France (p. 107). CRC Press.
Montanarella, L., Pennock, D. J., McKenzie, N., Badraoui, M., Chude, V., Baptista, I., ... & Vargas, R. (2016). World's soils are under threat. Soil, 2(1), 79-82.
Murphy, B., & Fogarty, P. (2019). Application of the Soil Security Concept to Two Contrasting Soil Landscape Systems Implications for Soil Capability and Sustainable Land Management. Sustainability, 11(20), 5706.
Ma, R. J., MacEwan, A. S., & Toland, A. R. (2017). Engendering connectivity to soil through aesthetics. In Global soil security (pp. 351-363). Springer, Cham.
Pozza, L. E., & Field, D. J. (2020). The science of soil security and food security. Soil Security, 1, 100002
Pimentel, D., Berger, B., Filiberto, D., Newton, M., Wolfe, B., Karabinakis, E., ... & Nandagopal, S. (2004). Water resources: agricultural and environmental issues. BioScience, 54(10), 909-918.
Robinson, D. A., Hockley, N., Dominati, E., Lebron, I., Scow, K. M., Reynolds, B., ... & Tuller, M. (2016). Natural capital, ecosystem services, and soil change: Why soil science must embrace an ecosystems approach. Vadose Zone Journal, 11(1), vzj2011-0051.
Rezaei, Amir, Poursadeq, Nasser, & Zulfiqari Zafarani, Rashid. (2017). Investigating and prioritizing the dimensions of political-social behavior of managers using the fuzzy hierarchical analysis process (FAHP) technique. Social Sciences, 12(42), 203-232. (in Persian)
Singh, K., Sanderson, T., Field, D., Fidelis, C., & Yinil, D. (2019). Soil security for developing and sustaining cocoa production in Papua New Guinea. Geoderma Regional, 17, e00212.
Salvia, R., Simone, R., Salvati, L., & Quaranta, G. (2018). Soil conservation practices and stakeholder’s participation in research projects—empirical evidence from southern Italy. Agriculture, 8(6), 85.
Shokohi, S., Afraza, A. (2013). Designing a nano technology and knowledge transfer model in Iran using fuzzy Delphi method. Technology Growth, 11(41), 2-13. SID. (in Persian)
Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Hill, J., & Befort, B. L. (2011). Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 108(50), 20260-20264.
Widyatmanti, W., & Umarhadi, D. A. (2022). Spatial modeling of soil security in agricultural land of Central Java, Indonesia: A preliminary study on capability, condition, and capital dimensions. Soil Security, 8, 100070.
Yawson, D. O., Adu, M. O., Ason, B., Armah, F. A., & Yengoh, G. T. (2016). Putting Soil Security on the Policy Agenda: Need for a Familiar Framework. Challenges, 7(2), 15.
Yang, R. M., Minasny, B., Ma, Y. X., Field, D., McBratney, A., & Wu, C. F. (2018). A preliminary soil security assessment of agricultural land in middle‐eastern China. Soil Use and Management, 34(4), 584-596.
_||_