• صفحه اصلی
  • تحلیل مناقشه تأمین حقابه محیط‌زیستی در سطح سازمان‌های تصمیم‌گیرنده

اشتراک گذاری

آدرس مقاله


کد مقاله : JEST-1612-3249 (R1) بازدید : 141 صفحه: 251 - 266

10.22034/jest.2021.23374.3249

نوع مقاله: پژوهشی

تحلیل مناقشه تأمین حقابه محیط‌زیستی در سطح سازمان‌های تصمیم‌گیرنده

محورهای موضوعی : مدیریت منابع آب

حسین زنجانیان 1 , محمد حسین نیک سخن 2 , مجتبی اردستانی 3 , حمید عبدل آبادی 4 , مهدی قربانی 5

1 - کارشناسی ارشد مهندسی محیط‌زیست-منابع آب، دانشکده محیط‌زیست، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
2 - دانشیار، دانشکده محیط‌زیست، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. ( مسئوول مکاتبات)
3 - دانشیار، دانشکده محیط‌زیست، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
4 - دکتری مهندسی محیط‌زیست-منابع آب، دانشکده محیط‌زیست، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
5 - استادیار، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تهران، کرج، ایران.

تاریخ دریافت : 1395/10/04 تاریخ پذیرش : 1396/03/07 تاریخ انتشار : 1399/06/01

کلید واژه: سد ایلام, تحلیل مناقشه, حقابه محیط‌زیستی, مدل GMCR+,

چکیده مقاله :

زمینه و هدف: از آن جا که برآورد نیاز محیط‌زیستی همواره با مناقشاتی میان سازمان های تصمیم گیرنده منابع آب همراه است، بررسی این مناقشات با در نظرگیری جوانب مختلف از ملزومات مهم به شمار می آید. این تحقیق با هدف تحلیل مناقشه تامین حقابه پایین دست سد ایلام، به بررسی تصمیمات و اقدامات سازمان‌های مسئوول پرداخته و با لحاظ تاثیر شرایط اقلیمی نقاط تعادل مسأله مورد نظر را تشریح می‌نماید. روش بررسی: در این تحقیق، اقدامات و رفتار سازمان‌های ذی‌ربط در مواجه با موضوع مدیریت و تامین آب مورد نیاز هر بخش با کمک مدل گراف جهت حل مناقشه (GMCR+) بررسی شده است. سازمان های تصمیم گیرنده در این مناقشه با توجه به اهداف ساخت سد ایلام تعیین شدند. به منظور تعیین اقدامات سازمان‌های مذکور، مطالعات اهداف و اقدامات صورت‌گرفته پس از بهره‌برداری از سد، از سال آبی 84-85 تا سال 94-95 انجام پذیرفت و نتایج حاصل از تحلیل مناقشه با شرایط واقعی مقایسه شد. یافته ها: نتایج حاصل نشان می دهد در نقاط تعادل 27 و 32 سازمان های جهادکشاورزی و آب و فاضلاب تمایل دارند در راستای رسیدن به اهداف خود به سمت سناریو دریافت حقابه بیش تر حرکت کنند و همین موضوع سبب می شود که سازمان محیط زیست برای دریافت حقابه محیط‌زیستی اقدام به شکایت کند و در این میان شرکت آب منطقه ای و استانداری به عنوان بازیگران کلیدی در جهت بخشیدن به آینده این مناقشه نقش بسیار تأثیرگذاری ایفا می نمایند. بحث و نتیجه گیری: در بررسی این مناقشه مشخص شد که سیاست‌گذاری و اقدامات هر سازمان نقش به سزایی در تصمیم دیگر سازمان های دخیل در مناقشه دارد.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Background and Objective: Since allocating water to satisfy environmental water share can cause a conflict among governmental organizations supplying water, withdrawing water, and protecting the ecosystem, recognizing and analyzing such situations is paramount significance and can avoid encountering serious conflicts. In this research, we analyzed the actions of involved organizations which are either using or supplying water from Ilam’s dam to find the equilibria and the possible outcomes of the conflict. Method: We used Graph Model for Conflict Resolution to study the actions and strategies of rival organizations managing water allocation and involving in water conflict. The involved organizations are determined based on uses of Ilam’s dam. To define the strategies, all the measures and decisions of these organizations have been studied since 2005. In addition, the effect of drought years on the players’ actions is taken into account. Finally, we compared the status-quo with the results of the base line strategy of the model. Findings: Equilibria results suggest that in states 27 and 32 the Jihad Agriculture Organization and the Water and Wastewater Companyare interested in withdrawing more water to achieve their goals. As a result, the Department of Environment will complain against them to protect ecosystem and provide the required environmental water share. In this case, the Regional Water Authority and the Governorship can play a dominant role in accomplishing to the stable outcomes. Furthermore, it is shown that the status-quo is not stable. Discussion and Conclusion: Analyzing this conflict indicates that all players have enough power to change the game's output. Therefore, their goals and measures can effectively change the equilibria and the future of the conflict

منابع و مأخذ:


  1. Babran, S., 2009. Legal viewpoint of environmental water right. Rahbord Journal, Vol. 49, pp. 129-146. (In Persian)
    2.
  2. Oryan, s., Sadeghiyan, M.S., Makhdoum, M., Zarankabi, M., 2014. Comparison of Environmental Flow Requirement Assessment Methodologies for Rivers and Proposing the Appropriate Approach for Iran by Using TOPSIS Technique. Environmental Researches, Vol. 4(8), pp. 3-14. (In Persian)
    3.
  3. Teymoorey, I., Pour Ahmad, A., Habibi, L., Salarvandian, F., 2011. Using the Fuzzy C-means Classification Method for the Need Water Determination of Lakes Bakhteghan & Tashk. Physical Geography Research Quarterly, Vol. 43(77), pp. 21-37. (In Persian)
    4.
  4. Taghavi Kaljahi, S., Reiazi, B., Taghavi, L., 2014. Determination of environmental water requirement of Miankaleh wetland. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 16(2), pp. 101-109. (In Persian)
    5.
  5. Zare Bidaki, R., Mahdianfard, M., Honarbakhs, A., Zeinivand, H., 2015. Base Flow Estimation in Tireh Dorood River in order to EnvironmentalFlow Assessmen. Iranian journal of Ecohydrology, Vol. 2(3), pp. 275-287. (In Persian)
    6.
  6. Noori Gheidari, M.H., Abdesharif Esfahanirif Esf, M., Ebrahimi, L., 2011. Using Developed Building Block Method in Estimating of Environmental Flow (Case study: Gumbar River). Journal of Water and Soil, Vol. 25, pp. 646-655. (In Persian)
    7.
  7. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2006. Game Theory, see information in:Http:plato.stanford. edu/ entries/game-theory/.
    8.
  8. Madani, K., 2010. Game theory and water resources. Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 381(3-4), pp. 225-238.
    9.
  9. Wang, L., Fang, L., Hipel, K.W., 2008. Basin-wide cooperative water resources allocation. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 190(3), pp. 798-817.
    10.
  10. Mahjouri, N., Ardestani, M., 2010. A game theoretic approach for interbasin water resources allocation considering the water quality issues. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, Vol. 167(1-4), pp. 527-544.
    11.
  11. Niksokhan, M.H., Kerachian, R., Karamouz, M., 2009. A game theoretic approach for trading discharge permits in rivers. Water Science and Technology, Vol. 60(3), pp. 793-804.
    12.
  12. Ke, G.Y., Li, K.W., Hipel, K.W., 2012. An integrated multiple criteria preference ranking approach to the Canadian west coast port congestion conflict. Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 39(10), pp. 9181-9190.
    13.
  13. Madani, K., Rheinheimer, D., Elimam, L., Connell-Buck, C., 2011. A game theory approach to understanding the Nile River Basin conflict. A Water Resource” Festschrift in Honor of Professor Lars Bengtsson, Division of Water Resources Engineering, pp. 97-114.
    14.
  14. Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., Kinsara, R.A., 2013. Strategic Investigations of Water Conflicts in the Middle East. Group Decision and Negotiation, Vol. 23(3), pp. 355-376.
    15.
  15. Philpot, S., Hipel, K., Johnson, P., 2016. Strategic analysis of a water rights conflict in the south western United States. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 180, pp. 247-256.
    16.
  16. Safaee, A., Malek Mohammadi, B., 2014. Game Theoretic Insights for Sustainable Common Poll Water Resources Governance (Case Study: Lake Urmia Water Conflict). Journal of Environmental Studies, Vol. 40(1), pp. 121-138. (In Persian)
    17.
  17. Mahab Ghods Consulting Engineering Company, 2011. Long term water supply plan of Ilam. Environmental studies, Vol. 1. (In Persian)
    18.
  18. Mohammadi, A., Omidipour, R., Heidarizadeh, Z., 2013. Assessment of changes in groundwater quality and quantity (Case study: Mehran basin), 5th National conference on water resources management. Iranian Water Resources Association, Tehran, Iran, Shahid Beheshti University. (In Persian)
    19.
  19. Hipel, K., Fang, L., 2005. Multiple participant decision making in societal and technological systems, Systems and Human Science. Elsevier, pp. 3-31.
    20.
  20. Fang, L., Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., 1993. Interactive decision making: the graph model for conflict resolution. Vol. 3, John Wiley & Sons.
    21.
  21. Madani, K., Hipel, K.W., 2011. Non-Cooperative Stability Definitions for Strategic Analysis of Generic Water Resources Conflicts. Water Resources Management, Vol. 25(8), pp. 1949-1977.
    22.
  22. Kinsara, R.A., Petersons, O., Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., 2015. Advanced Decision Support for the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution. Journal of Decision Systems, Vol. 24(2), pp. 117-145.
    23.



 

_||_

  1. Babran, S., 2009. Legal viewpoint of environmental water right. Rahbord Journal, Vol. 49, pp. 129-146. (In Persian)
    2.
  2. Oryan, s., Sadeghiyan, M.S., Makhdoum, M., Zarankabi, M., 2014. Comparison of Environmental Flow Requirement Assessment Methodologies for Rivers and Proposing the Appropriate Approach for Iran by Using TOPSIS Technique. Environmental Researches, Vol. 4(8), pp. 3-14. (In Persian)
    3.
  3. Teymoorey, I., Pour Ahmad, A., Habibi, L., Salarvandian, F., 2011. Using the Fuzzy C-means Classification Method for the Need Water Determination of Lakes Bakhteghan & Tashk. Physical Geography Research Quarterly, Vol. 43(77), pp. 21-37. (In Persian)
    4.
  4. Taghavi Kaljahi, S., Reiazi, B., Taghavi, L., 2014. Determination of environmental water requirement of Miankaleh wetland. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 16(2), pp. 101-109. (In Persian)
    5.
  5. Zare Bidaki, R., Mahdianfard, M., Honarbakhs, A., Zeinivand, H., 2015. Base Flow Estimation in Tireh Dorood River in order to EnvironmentalFlow Assessmen. Iranian journal of Ecohydrology, Vol. 2(3), pp. 275-287. (In Persian)
    6.
  6. Noori Gheidari, M.H., Abdesharif Esfahanirif Esf, M., Ebrahimi, L., 2011. Using Developed Building Block Method in Estimating of Environmental Flow (Case study: Gumbar River). Journal of Water and Soil, Vol. 25, pp. 646-655. (In Persian)
    7.
  7. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2006. Game Theory, see information in:Http:plato.stanford. edu/ entries/game-theory/.
    8.
  8. Madani, K., 2010. Game theory and water resources. Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 381(3-4), pp. 225-238.
    9.
  9. Wang, L., Fang, L., Hipel, K.W., 2008. Basin-wide cooperative water resources allocation. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 190(3), pp. 798-817.
    10.
  10. Mahjouri, N., Ardestani, M., 2010. A game theoretic approach for interbasin water resources allocation considering the water quality issues. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, Vol. 167(1-4), pp. 527-544.
    11.
  11. Niksokhan, M.H., Kerachian, R., Karamouz, M., 2009. A game theoretic approach for trading discharge permits in rivers. Water Science and Technology, Vol. 60(3), pp. 793-804.
    12.
  12. Ke, G.Y., Li, K.W., Hipel, K.W., 2012. An integrated multiple criteria preference ranking approach to the Canadian west coast port congestion conflict. Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 39(10), pp. 9181-9190.
    13.
  13. Madani, K., Rheinheimer, D., Elimam, L., Connell-Buck, C., 2011. A game theory approach to understanding the Nile River Basin conflict. A Water Resource” Festschrift in Honor of Professor Lars Bengtsson, Division of Water Resources Engineering, pp. 97-114.
    14.
  14. Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., Kinsara, R.A., 2013. Strategic Investigations of Water Conflicts in the Middle East. Group Decision and Negotiation, Vol. 23(3), pp. 355-376.
    15.
  15. Philpot, S., Hipel, K., Johnson, P., 2016. Strategic analysis of a water rights conflict in the south western United States. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 180, pp. 247-256.
    16.
  16. Safaee, A., Malek Mohammadi, B., 2014. Game Theoretic Insights for Sustainable Common Poll Water Resources Governance (Case Study: Lake Urmia Water Conflict). Journal of Environmental Studies, Vol. 40(1), pp. 121-138. (In Persian)
    17.
  17. Mahab Ghods Consulting Engineering Company, 2011. Long term water supply plan of Ilam. Environmental studies, Vol. 1. (In Persian)
    18.
  18. Mohammadi, A., Omidipour, R., Heidarizadeh, Z., 2013. Assessment of changes in groundwater quality and quantity (Case study: Mehran basin), 5th National conference on water resources management. Iranian Water Resources Association, Tehran, Iran, Shahid Beheshti University. (In Persian)
    19.
  19. Hipel, K., Fang, L., 2005. Multiple participant decision making in societal and technological systems, Systems and Human Science. Elsevier, pp. 3-31.
    20.
  20. Fang, L., Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., 1993. Interactive decision making: the graph model for conflict resolution. Vol. 3, John Wiley & Sons.
    21.
  21. Madani, K., Hipel, K.W., 2011. Non-Cooperative Stability Definitions for Strategic Analysis of Generic Water Resources Conflicts. Water Resources Management, Vol. 25(8), pp. 1949-1977.
    22.
  22. Kinsara, R.A., Petersons, O., Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., 2015. Advanced Decision Support for the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution. Journal of Decision Systems, Vol. 24(2), pp. 117-145.
    23.



 

مقالات مرتبط

حقوق این وب‌سایت متعلق به سامانه مدیریت نشریات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی است.
حق نشر © 1403-1400

صفحه اصلی| عضویت/ ورود| درباره سند| تماس با ما|
[English] [العربية] [en] [ar]