IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v302y2024ics0378377424003287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technical and financial interactions between Iran groundwater institutions: A stakeholder analysis approach

Author

Listed:
  • Rahimi-Feyzabad, Fatemeh
  • Yazdanpanah, Masoud
  • Gholamrezai, Saeed
  • Ahmadvand, Mostafa

Abstract

The over-exploitation of groundwater resources (GWR) by the agricultural sector in Lorestan province in the west of Iran has been blamed for the severe depletion of groundwater and irreparable damages to them in this province. This problem partially originates from poor institutional interactions between groundwater institutions especially, their technical and financial interactive links. In this regard, a prerequisite is to study the interactions of the institutions, identify stakeholder institutions, categorize them, and then, study their interactive links. The process of identifying, categorizing, and studying the links of these institutions can be performed by the stakeholder analysis (SA) method. Therefore, based on this method the groundwater institutions related to agricultural sector of Lorestan province were identified, they were categorized according to the interest-power matrix, and their (technical and financial) interactive links were investigated by the social network analysis (SNA) method. Based on the results, 25 institutions were identified as groundwater institutions related to agricultural sector of Lorestan province. According to the interest- power matrix, the institutions located in the two upper categories, i.e, Key Players and Subjects, are the most important groundwater institutions related to agricultural sector of this province. The SNA shows that the institutions have, in general, poor technical and financial interactions and most technical and financial interaction links are the disposal of some limited institutions, which are mostly from the public sector. Policymaking experts have so far identified institutions related to groundwater resources management (GWRM) by relying on their limited information and subjective experience. In this regard, SA method is a comprehensive method to identify relevant institutions, categorize them, and study their interaction links. This study might have significant policy implications for groundwater management concerns in western Iran and the arid and semi-arid regions of the Middle East. The results of this study not only helps policy makers in decisions related to GWRM but also in the analysis and policy-making related to it.

Suggested Citation

  • Rahimi-Feyzabad, Fatemeh & Yazdanpanah, Masoud & Gholamrezai, Saeed & Ahmadvand, Mostafa, 2024. "Technical and financial interactions between Iran groundwater institutions: A stakeholder analysis approach," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 302(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:302:y:2024:i:c:s0378377424003287
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2024.108993
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377424003287
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agwat.2024.108993?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jie Chen & Hao Wu & Hui Qian & Xinyan Li, 2018. "Challenges and prospects of sustainable groundwater management in an agricultural plain along the Silk Road Economic Belt, north-west China," International Journal of Water Resources Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 354-368, May.
    2. Larry Mays, 2013. "Groundwater Resources Sustainability: Past, Present, and Future," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(13), pages 4409-4424, October.
    3. Grimble, Robin & Wellard, Kate, 1997. "Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 173-193, October.
    4. Raum, Susanne, 2018. "A framework for integrating systematic stakeholder analysis in ecosystem services research: Stakeholder mapping for forest ecosystem services in the UK," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 170-184.
    5. Ferretti, Valentina, 2016. "From stakeholders analysis to cognitive mapping and Multi-Attribute Value Theory: An integrated approach for policy support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(2), pages 524-541.
    6. Madani, Kaveh & Dinar, Ariel, 2012. "Non-cooperative institutions for sustainable common pool resource management: Application to groundwater," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 34-45.
    7. Liang Emlyn Yang & Faith Ka Shun Chan & Jürgen Scheffran, 2018. "Climate change, water management and stakeholder analysis in the Dongjiang River basin in South China," International Journal of Water Resources Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(2), pages 166-191, March.
    8. Kaveh Madani, 2014. "Water management in Iran: what is causing the looming crisis?," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 4(4), pages 315-328, December.
    9. Naser Valizadeh & Samira Esfandiyari Bayat & Masoud Bijani & Dariush Hayati & Ants-Hannes Viira & Vjekoslav Tanaskovik & Alishir Kurban & Hossein Azadi, 2021. "Understanding Farmers’ Intention towards the Management and Conservation of Wetlands," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, August.
    10. Rob De Loë & Danielle Lukovich, 2004. "Groundwater protection on Long Island, New York: a study in management capacity," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(4), pages 517-539.
    11. Robin Grimble & Man‐Kwun Chan, 1995. "Stakeholder analysis for natural resource management in developing countries," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 19(2), pages 113-124, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marques, Marlene & Juerges, Nataly & Borges, José G., 2020. "Appraisal framework for actor interest and power analysis in forest management - Insights from Northern Portugal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    2. Mehdi Ketabchy, 2021. "Investigating the Impacts of the Political System Components in Iran on the Existing Water Bankruptcy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-22, December.
    3. Karalliyadda, S.M.C.B. & Kazunari, Tsuji & Fujimura, Miho, 2023. "Managing rain-fed uplands of cascaded tank village systems: What stakeholders really suggest?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    4. Ali Akhavan & Paulo Gonçalves, 2021. "Managing the trade‐off between groundwater resources and large‐scale agriculture: the case of pistachio production in Iran," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 37(2-3), pages 155-196, April.
    5. Binglu Wu & Wenzhuo Liang & Jiening Wang & Dongxu Cui, 2022. "Rural Residents’ Perceptions of Ecosystem Services: A Study from Three Topographic Areas in Shandong Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-21, July.
    6. Kathleen C. Stosch & Richard S. Quilliam & Nils Bunnefeld & David M. Oliver, 2022. "Rapid Characterisation of Stakeholder Networks in Three Catchments Reveals Contrasting Land-Water Management Issues," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, December.
    7. Pelyukh, Oksana & Lavnyy, Vasyl & Paletto, Alessandro & Troxler, David, 2021. "Stakeholder analysis in sustainable forest management: An application in the Yavoriv region (Ukraine)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    8. Samuel Sandoval-Solis & Jose Pablo Ortiz Partida & Lindsay Floyd, 2022. "Multi-Objective Water Planning in a Poor Water Data Region: Aragvi River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-16, March.
    9. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    10. Nazemi, Neda & Foley, Rider W. & Louis, Garrick & Keeler, Lauren Withycombe, 2020. "Divergent agricultural water governance scenarios: The case of Zayanderud basin, Iran," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    11. Forough Jafary & Chris Bradley, 2018. "Groundwater Irrigation Management and the Existing Challenges from the Farmers’ Perspective in Central Iran," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-21, January.
    12. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    13. Momeni, Marzieh & Zakeri, Zahra & Esfandiari, Mojtaba & Behzadian, Kourosh & Zahedi, Sina & Razavi, Vahid, 2019. "Comparative analysis of agricultural water pricing between Azarbaijan Provinces in Iran and the state of California in the US: A hydro-economic approach," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 223(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Anne Hardy & Leonie J. Pearson, 2016. "Determining Sustainable Tourism in Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.
    15. Muhammad Kamangar & Ozgur Kisi & Masoud Minaei, 2023. "Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Carbon Sequestration in Different Ecosystems of Iran and Its Relationship with Agricultural Droughts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-16, April.
    16. Schouten, Greetje & Leroy, Pieter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2012. "On the deliberative capacity of private multi-stakeholder governance: The Roundtables on Responsible Soy and Sustainable Palm Oil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 42-50.
    17. Oskar Jonsson & Joakim Frögren & Maria Haak & Björn Slaug & Susanne Iwarsson, 2021. "Understanding the Wicked Problem of Providing Accessible Housing for the Ageing Population in Sweden," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-21, January.
    18. Pereira, Miguel Alves & Figueira, José Rui & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2020. "Using a Choquet integral-based approach for incorporating decision-maker’s preference judgments in a Data Envelopment Analysis model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 1016-1030.
    19. Bottero, M. & Ferretti, V. & Figueira, J.R. & Greco, S. & Roy, B., 2018. "On the Choquet multiple criteria preference aggregation model: Theoretical and practical insights from a real-world application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 120-140.
    20. Raphael Hoerler & Fabian Haerri & Merja Hoppe, 2019. "New Solutions in Sustainable Commuting—The Attitudes and Experience of European Stakeholders and Experts in Switzerland," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-19, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:302:y:2024:i:c:s0378377424003287. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.