شناسایی و اولویتبندی شاخص های مدیریت زیست بوم با استفاده از رویکردهای دلفی فازی و دیمتل فازی (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
بررسی شرایط امروزی محیط زیست، نشان می دهد در دهه های اخیر، کره زمین به علت اقدامات مختلف بشر دچار زیان های جبرانی ناشدنی شده است. برای بیان اهداف مدیریت زیست بوم، لازم است شاخص های آن تعریف شود. هدف مدیریت زیست بوم، به عنوان یک پدیده چندبعدی، ادغام خرده سیستم های اقتصادی، محیط زیستی، اجتماعی و نهادی در یک کل، با مراقبت از تأثیر و تعامل متقابل آنهاست. بر این اساس، در این پژوهش، ابتدا با بررسی پیشینه تحقیق به منظور شناسایی شاخص های مؤثر بر هریک از ارکان مدیریت زیست بوم، فهرستی از شاخص های تأثیرگذار و پراهمیت در هریک از ارکان اقتصادی- اجتماعی، زیست محیطی و نهادی مدیریت زیست بوم تعیین می شود. پس از دسته بندی اولیه، دو پرسش نامه طراحی شده است: یک پرسش نامه طیفی برای ارزیابی شاخص های مؤثر بر مدیریت زیست بوم با روش دلفی فازی و یک پرسش نامه با استفاده از مقایسات زوجی میان چهار رکن اصلی مدیریت زیست بوم، با استفاده از تکنیک دیمتل فازی برای دستیابی به تحلیل دقیق تر در بررسی روابط علت و معلولی بین هریک از ارکان که خبرگان و متخصصان، آنها را تکمیل کرده اند. درنهایت، تحلیل ها نشان داد ارکان نهادی و اقتصادی به عنوان متغیرهای عامل و ارکان بسیار تأثیرگذار در نظر گرفته می شوند. همچنین، معلوم شد که ارکان محیطی و اجتماعی، یک اثر در نظر گرفته می شوند؛ درنتیجه، خبرگان شاخص علم و فناوری را در رکن اقتصادی، کیفیت هوا را در رکن زیست محیطی، فقر را در رکن اجتماعی و به اشتراک گذاری شفاف اطلاعات را در رکن نهادی، به عنوان تأثیرگذارترین شاخص های مدیریت زیست بوم رتبه بندی کردند.Identifying and prioritizing ecosystem indicatorsusing Fuzzy Delphi and Fuzzy DEMATEL approaches
Purpose: This paper aims to propose an approach for identifying and prioritizing ecosystem indicators for effective ecosystem management. Specifically, fuzzy Delphi and fuzzy DEMATEL approaches are used to define ecosystem management goals and indicators, rank the importance of quality attributes in ecosystem management, and rank the effectiveness of each indicator in each pillar of ecosystem management. The ultimate goal is to provide a tool to decision-makers that can help in allocating resources more effectively and efficiently toward achieving sustainability.Design/methodology/approach: The proposed approach involves a three-phase framework. Phase 1 involves identifying and determining the indicators affecting ecosystem management. This has been performed by studying theoretical articles, reviewing systematic literature, and searching previous studies to identify different indicators for each pillar of ecosystem management. A list of indicators and factors affecting each of the pillars of ecosystem management has been determined accordingly, and an initial categorization has been created using library studies. Phase 2 involves using a fuzzy Delphi method to rank the most important indicators in each pillar of ecosystem management. Experts have been asked to indicate their proposed indicators in a questionnaire based on fuzzy variables, and the degree of proportionality of the proposed factors. Phase 3 involves using a fuzzy DEMATEL approach to rank the effectiveness of each indicator in each pillar of ecosystem management. This approach handles imprecise or subjective data and can be replicated for different cities. Overall, this methodology aims to provide a comprehensive approach for identifying and prioritizing ecosystem indicators that can be used by decision-makers in environmental management and policy-making.Findings: Findings imply that the integrated approach of the Fuzzy Delphi Method and the Fuzzy DEMATEL can be used to identify and rank the importance of quality attributes in ecosystem management, and to rank the effectiveness of each indicator in each pillar of the ecosystem management. A total of 36 indicators were identified across four pillars of ecosystem management, i.e., economic, social, environmental and institutional. The results indicated that the most important indicators for each pillar were science and technology and innovation for the economic pillar; air quality, waste treatment and energy efficiency for the environmental pillar; poverty, health, and safety and security for the social pillar; and transparent sharing of information and political stability for institutional pillar. It was also found that there was a strong interrelationship between different pillars of ecosystem management. For example, the institutional pillar had serious effects on most of the other identified EM pillars. In addition, the economic pillar was the second most influential factor. Moreover, the institutional pillar profoundly influenced the environmental pillar. Finally, the economic pillar highly affected the environmental pillar, which doubled the complexity of ecosystem management.Research limitations/implications: Several limitations and implications have been addressed for future research. The number of participating experts was limited, which could affect the results and limit the possibility of their summarization. Expert bias may have influenced the results of the study. Such limitations imply that further research with a larger and more diverse group of experts is necessary to validate and expand upon such findings. This study was limited in scope to a particular ecosystem or region and the identified indicators as a result may not apply and be generalizable to other ecosystems or regions. Based on the cause-and-effect relationships between the studied elements, a hypothesis can be expanded and validated using a larger sample. Future studies could replicate this methodology in different contexts to test its applicability and effectiveness.Practical implications: Decision-makers in environmental management and policy-making can use the methodology presented in this study to identify and prioritize ecosystem indicators. By using an integration of the Fuzzy Delphi Method and the Fuzzy DEMATEL, decision-makers can identify the most important indicators for each pillar of ecosystem management and evaluate their effectiveness. This information can be used to allocate resources more effectively and efficiently toward achieving sustainability. Decision-makers could use this methodology to evaluate different ecosystem management practices and policies, and develop new policies or modify existing ones to better address the needs of different stakeholders. Overall, this study provides a useful tool for decision-makers in environmental management and policy-making by providing a comprehensive approach to identifying and prioritising ecosystem indicators.Social implications: This study highlights the importance of considering social factors in ecosystem management. The study identifies several social indicators, such as poverty and material deprivation, education level, public awareness and training, gender equality, and social participation. By prioritizing such indicators in ecosystem management, decision-makers can ensure that the needs and perspectives of different stakeholders are taken into account. This can help to promote social equity and cohesion, which are important for achieving sustainable development. Furthermore, by involving a wide range of stakeholders in the decision-making process, including local communities and marginalized groups, decision-makers can ensure that ecosystem management policies are more inclusive and responsive to the needs of all members of society. Overall, this study highlighted the importance of considering social factors in ecosystem management and provides a useful framework for identifying and prioritizing social indicators.Originality/value: The main contribution of this study is the application of the integrated approaches of the Fuzzy Delphi Method and the Fuzzy DEMATEL to identify and rank the importance of quality attributes in ecosystem management. This methodology is innovative because it allows decision-makers to handle imprecise or subjective data, which is often encountered in ecosystem management. The study provides a three-phase framework for identifying and prioritizing ecosystem indicators, which can be replicated for different cities. Findings indicated that science and technology, air quality, poverty, and transparent sharing of information were identified as the most important quality indicators in their respective pillars of ecosystem management alternatives. This implies that decision-makers and policymakers should consider allocating more resources toward improving such areas. Overall, this study provided a useful tool for decision-makers in environmental management and policy-making by providing a comprehensive approach to identifying and prioritizing ecosystem indicators.
تبلیغات
