Mixed-Method Evaluation of Watershed Management : Practices from Kushk-Abad Basin, Iran

180 Pages·2017·5.74 MB·English

by  Bahram Mohammadi Golrang (auth.)

SPRINGER BRIEFS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
Bahram Mohammadi Golrang
Mixed-Method
Evaluation of
Watershed
Management
Practices from Kushk-
Abad Basin, Iran
123
SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8868
Bahram Mohammadi Golrang
Mixed-Method Evaluation
of Watershed Management
Practices from Kushk-Abad Basin, Iran
Bahram Mohammadi Golrang
Assistant Professor
Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Department
Khorasan Razavi Agricultural and Natural Resources Research
and Education center
AREEO
Mashhad, Iran
ISSN 2191-5547 ISSN 2191-5555 (electronic)
SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science
ISBN 978-3-319-52146-6 ISBN 978-3-319-52147-3 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-52147-3
Library of Congress Control Number: 2016963631
© The Author(s) 2017
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature
The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Dedicated to my kind wife
My dear parents
and
my lovely daughters “Tannaz & Delnaz”
Preface
Watershed degradation due to soil erosion is considered a major challenge in Iran,
despite the introduction of several projects aimed at mitigating this environmental
menace. Issues related to technical and social complexities of the watershed proj-
ects are difficult to evaluate, in spite of lessons learned from past experiences. In
order to address such challenges, it is essential to assess fundamental social and
technical issues involved. Previous attempts using quantitative and qualitative eval-
uation methods separately had their strengths and weaknesses. Addressing this issue
requires an integrated watershed management approach. This study presents an
integrated model using technical and social approaches for the evaluation of the
Kushk-Abad Basin (KAB) watershed projects in Iran. The study was conducted
within an 85 km2 zone of the KAB, which is a sub-basin of the larger Kardeh dam
catchment. The study is aimed at evaluating socio-demographic and technical fac-
tors affecting KAB Watershed Management Program (WMP), taking into consider-
ation pre-, present, and post-project scenarios, particularly on the land treatment
efforts initiated by the Watershed Management Organization of Iran.
The social evaluation study was designed to determine the factors that affect the
variation of the level of participation in WMP in Iran. In this regard, a conceptual
model was developed to (1) identify characteristics that lead to the participation in
WMP and (2) determine the factors that affect the variation of the level of participa-
tion. In each of the selected three villages within the KAB locality, 200 individuals
were randomly interviewed using a structured questionnaire for assessment of their
socioeconomic characteristics and participation in the various watershed manage-
ment programs. The sample size used was based on the Cochran formula with a
confidence level of 0.05. The respondents’ level of knowledge, attitude, expectation,
and satisfaction of previous watershed programs were examined against the level of
participation. On the other aspect, the technical evaluation study examined water-
shed management and bioengineering processes of structures through measures
implemented during operations.
vii
viii Preface
Based on a series of statistical analysis from the use of chi-square, factor analy-
sis, and regression, the results of the social evaluation study suggested significant
relationship between knowledge, expectation, and attitude on WMP with participa-
tion among the villagers in KAB. The relationship between age, household size,
number of sons after 15 years, and size of irrigated and rain-fed lands was positively
correlated with watershed participation. The results of this study showed that the
level of the respondents’ knowledge on WMP was low, while expectation, satisfac-
tion, attitude, and level of participation ranged from moderate to high.
Results from the technical evaluation study revealed that the double mass curve
demonstrated significant changes to flow distribution, suggesting the effectiveness
of check dams in mitigating basin runoff. With check dams affecting almost 35% of
the basin area, runoff in KAB also shows a significant reduction in peak discharges
from the flow duration analysis. Soil erosion and sediment loads were effectively
contained by the check dams of different types including gabion, earth-fill, brush-
wood, and loose-stone dams. From field measurements, as much as 37% of the sedi-
ment loads were stored behind these dams since their construction. Results of
qualitative evaluation showed that WMP was effective on six variables (flood occur-
rence, river sediment transport, agricultural yield, well capacity, orchard, and live-
stock). The study findings showed that all check dams (except brush-wood) were
structurally in good order. Additionally, the relative performance for both seeding
and seedling planting was good, while contour furrow was moderate, and tree and
shrub planting were weak.
The findings further showed that land treatment techniques were largely check
dams and bioengineering methods from seeding to tree planting to address the soil
and water conservation objectives of watershed management. This study provided
some theoretical and practical implications and recommendations on their partici-
pations in the Watershed Management Project. In summary, this work recommends
that social exchange and reason theory are appropriate to explain the variations of
participation level.
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I wish to express my utmost thanks and gratitude to Almighty
Allah SWT for his blessings and for giving me the ability and capacity to complete
this dissertation. I also wish to express my most sincere gratitude and deepest appre-
ciation to my supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Lai Food See, for his kindness, continu-
ous support, fruitful advice, and invaluable guidance and for encouraging and
inspiring me during the period of this study.
I am also very grateful to the members of my supervisory committee, Assoc.
Prof. Dr. Kamziah, Dr. Khamurudin, and Prof. Dr. Sadeghi for their kindness, sup-
port, constructive comments, very helpful suggestions, and insights which contrib-
uted to the many aspects of this study and improved the quality of this dissertation.
I would like to thank Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mojgan Mashayekhi who always supported
me in all stages of my study, particularly in data collection and project writing.
I would also like to thank my parents, brothers, and sister who always encouraged
and supported, helping me in the choices I have made and for their dedication. I would
also like to gratefully thank my wife’s family for their never-ending support.
Last but not least, I wish to express my deepest gratitude to my beloved wife,
Mojgan, for her endless love, priceless, perpetual, indispensable help, support, and
everything which had made all this possible and lovely daughters “Tannaz and
Delnaz” for their endless encouragement, patience, and sacrifices which had helped
me to finish this study.
ix
Contents
1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Statement of the Problem .................................................................... 2
1.2 Research Questions ............................................................................. 4
1.3 Research Objectives ............................................................................ 4
1.4 Research Hypotheses .......................................................................... 4
1.5 Significance of the Study .................................................................... 5
1.6 Limitations of the Study...................................................................... 6
1.7 Book Structure .................................................................................... 6
2 Literature Review ...................................................................................... 7
2.1 T echnical Evaluation of Watershed Management ............................... 7
2.1.1 Concept of Watershed Management ....................................... 7
2.1.2 Watershed Management in Iran .............................................. 8
2.1.3 WMP Practices Outside Iran ................................................... 10
2.1.4 History of WMP in Some Asian Countries ............................. 10
2.1.5 History of WMP in Iran .......................................................... 14
2.1.6 Literature Review of WMP in KAB ....................................... 14
2.1.7 Technical Evaluation of Watershed Management ................... 18
2.2 Social Evaluation of Watershed Management .................................... 26
2.2.1 Concept of Participation ......................................................... 26
2.2.2 Benefits of Participation .......................................................... 27
2.2.3 Participator Watershed Management (PWM) ......................... 27
2.2.4 Monitoring and Evaluation of Participation ............................ 28
2.2.5 Methods of Participation ......................................................... 29
2.2.6 Factors Affecting Participation ............................................... 29
2.3 Summary ............................................................................................. 32
3 Materials and Methods .............................................................................. 33
3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................... 33
3.2 Materials and Methods ........................................................................ 33
3.2.1 Data Sources ........................................................................... 33
3.2.2 Research Framework for Watershed Study ............................. 35
xi
xii Contents
3.3 Study Area ........................................................................................... 36
3.3.1 Location .................................................................................. 36
3.3.2 Physical Characteristics .......................................................... 36
3.3.3 Climate Characteristics ........................................................... 39
3.3.4 Geology and Soil..................................................................... 40
3.3.5 Soil .......................................................................................... 44
3.3.6 Vegetation ............................................................................... 45
3.3.7 Hydrology ............................................................................... 46
3.3.8 Land Use Activities ................................................................. 46
3.4 S tudy Period ........................................................................................ 48
3.5 T echnical Evaluation of WMP ............................................................ 49
3.5.1 Quantitative Evaluation Methods of WMP ............................. 49
3.5.2 Qualitative Evaluation of WMP .............................................. 52
3.6 Social Evaluation ................................................................................ 52
3.6.1 Research Framework for Social Evaluation ............................ 52
3.6.2 Theoretical Framework of Social Evaluation ......................... 53
3.6.3 Study Villages ......................................................................... 54
3.6.4 Sampling Method .................................................................... 55
3.6.5 Sample Size ............................................................................. 55
3.6.6 Questionnaire Design and Tests .............................................. 56
3.6.7 Factor Analysis ........................................................................ 58
3.6.8 Data Preparation...................................................................... 62
3.6.9 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) .............................................. 66
3.6.10 Assumption for ANOVA ......................................................... 68
3.7 Summary ............................................................................................. 69
4 Technical Evaluation of WMP .................................................................. 71
4.1 Introduction ......................................................................................... 71
4.1.1 Double-Mass Curve ................................................................ 71
4.1.2 Flow-Duration Curve Method ................................................. 77
4.1.3 Structural and Bio-engineering Measures ............................... 79
4.2 Technical Evaluation (Qualitative Analysis) ....................................... 95
4.2.1 Assessment of WMO’s Effect on Flood Occurrence (FO) ..... 95
4.2.2 Assessment of WMO’s Effect on River Sediment Transport
(RST)....................................................................................... 97
4.2.3 Assessment of WMO’s Effect on Agricultural Yield (AY) ..... 98
4.2.4 Assessment of WMO’s Effect on Bare Land Extent (BLE) ... 99
4.2.5 Assessment of WMO’s Effect on Increasing Well Capacity
(WC) .......................................................................................100
4.2.6 Assessment of WMO’s Effect on Orchards ............................102
4.2.7 Assessment of WMO’s Effect on Migration ...........................102
4.2.8 Assessment of WMP’s Effect on Livestock ............................104
4.3 S ummary .............................................................................................106