شناسایی و اولویت‌بندی راه‌حل‌های جامع و سیستمی مدیریت تخریب اراضی با رویکرد DPSIR در حوزه حاجی‌آباد، استان سمنان

Introduction and Goal
Land degradation, as one of the most significant environmental challenges in arid and semi-arid regions, has extensive adverse impacts on ecosystems and human societies. In Iran, this problem has become particularly widespread in the central watersheds of the country, which face severe limitations in water and soil resources. The present study was conducted with the aim of identifying and analyzing the causal structure of land degradation and providing effective management solutions in the Hajiabad region (Semnan Province) using the DPSIR framework. The systemic approach of this framework enables a comprehensive understanding of the driving forces, pressures, current state, and impacts resulting from land degradation. Furthermore, the current research seeks to prioritize the drivers, pressures, and management responses from the perspective of experts in order to lay the groundwork for developing effective operational plans to improve the condition of the region and reduce the adverse consequences of land degradation.
Materials and Methods
The present study is applied research with an analytical-exploratory approach, conducted in the Hajiabad region, covering an area of 25,709.5 hectares in the north of Semnan and Sorkheh counties. Initially, through literature review, field surveys, and interviews with 32 expert specialists (including representatives from the Departments of Natural Resources and Watershed Management, Environment, Regional Water, Agricultural Jihad, the Agricultural and Natural Resources Engineering Organization, faculty members of Semnan University, and the Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Institute) as well as local communities, the components of driving forces, pressures, state, impacts, and management responses were identified. The validity of the results was confirmed by the expert panel, and the causal relationships among the components were illustrated in tables and figures. Subsequently, to prioritize the identified variables, a questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale was designed and distributed to the 32 members of the expert panel. The reliability of the measurement instrument was confirmed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient (with values of 0.863, 0.786, and 0.708 for the driving force, pressure, and response components, respectively). The ranking of variables was performed using the non-parametric Friedman test in SPSS software. The results showed that the significance level of the test for all three components was zero, indicating a significant difference among the ranks of the variables at a 99% confidence level. Furthermore, through the interaction matrix, the role of each response in eliminating or mitigating the driving forces and pressures, improving the state, and reducing adverse impacts was elucidated.
Results and Discussion
Based on the findings, 11 driving forces, 11 corresponding pressures, five state indicators representing land degradation in the region, six adverse impacts, and 36 management responses were identified and structured in the Hajiabad region. The results of the Friedman test showed that the drivers D1 with a mean rank of 9.19, D5 with a mean rank of 9.00, D9 with a mean rank of 8.63, and D2 with a mean rank of 7.88, ranked as the top four priorities among the driving forces. The pressures P1 with a mean rank of 9.22, P8 (implementation of limited, incomplete, uncoordinated, and scattered water and soil conservation practices) with a mean rank of 8.73, P7 (drought) with a mean rank of 8.09, P10 (high groundwater consumption in the agricultural sector) with a mean rank of 7.53, and P4 with a mean rank of 6.86, constituted the top five priorities among the pressures. The management responses R15 with a mean rank of 32.13, R3 with a mean rank of 30.71, R22 with a mean rank of 28.80, R13 with a mean rank of 27.83, and R9 with a mean rank of 25.70, ranked as the top five priorities among the responses. The distribution of responses showed that 16 responses were allocated to the driving force component, 20 responses to the pressure component, 2 responses to the state component, and 8 responses to the impact component. This distribution indicates a greater emphasis on preventive responses compared to reactive responses. The findings reveal that the most important driving forces of degradation in the region are mainly rooted in managerial, institutional, and awareness-based weaknesses, which, by creating a wide range of pressures (from overgrazing and excessive livestock grazing to land use change and overexploitation of groundwater), provide multiple grounds for land degradation.
Conclusion and Suggestions
The DPSIR framework, by providing a comprehensive picture of the causal chain of land degradation in the region and creating a platform for expert participation, has considerable strengths. The main recommendations of this study include: (1) implementation of all 36 identified solutions with an emphasis on the specified priorities, (2) fundamental revision of natural resource laws and regulations and strengthening supervision over their implementation, (3) transition from sectoral to integrated and participatory management through the approval of a comprehensive watershed management law and the establishment of a stakeholder organization, (4) implementation of rangeland inventory and issuance of grazing permits based on actual rangeland capacity, (5) promotion and development of alternative livelihoods, (6) modification of cropping and irrigation patterns and installation of smart meters, (7) development of databases and decision support systems, (8) formulation of operational plans with specified timelines and budgets, and (9) integration of the DPSIR framework with quantitative methods and system dynamics modeling in future research.