بررسی تطبیقی پایداری اکولوژیکی تولیدات کشاورزی در شهرستان‌های زهک و هیرمند

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

استاد گروه زراعت دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه زابل

10.22034/saps.2025.64039.3298

چکیده

مقدمه و اهداف: سیستان به عنوان یکی از مناطق خشک و حساس به تغییرات اقلیمی، نیازمند مدیریت پایدار منابع آب و خاک است. لذا ارزیابی پایداری سیستم‌های کشاورزی در این منطقه ضروری می‌باشد. هدف این پژوهش، ارزیابی کارایی و پایداری اکولوژیکی طیف وسیعی از محصولات زراعی در زهک و هیرمند به عنوان نمونه‌ای از مناطق خشک کشور می‌باشد.
 
مواد و روش‌ها: برای این پژوهش داده‌های مربوط به ورودی‌ها و خروجی‌های سیستم‌های تولید کشاورزی را از طریق مصاحبه با کشاورزان و داده‌های هواشناسی گردآوری نمود. سپس، با به‌کارگیری تحلیل امرژی، کلیه جریان‌ها به واحد امرژی تبدیل شدند. در نهایت، از طریق محاسبه شاخص‌های ردپای امرژی، پایداری اکولوژیکی نظام‌های کشاورزی مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفت.
 
یافته‌ها: نتایج نشان داد که نظام‌های گندم و یونجه به ترتیب با 108×28/7 و 107×87/4 هکتار جهانی در سال، بیشترین ظرفیت اکولوژیکی را در زهک و هیرمند دارا می‌باشند. با این حال، تحلیل ظرفیت زیستی و ردپای امرژی حاکی از آن است که زهک از نظر اکولوژیکی در وضعیت مازاد و هیرمند در وضعیت کسری قرار دارد. این یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهند که زهک توانایی بیشتری در حمایت از فعالیت‌های کشاورزی فعلی خود دارد، در حالی که هیرمند تحت فشار بیشتری از نظر منابع طبیعی بوده و در معرض خطر تخریب محیط زیست قرار دارد.
 
نتیجه‌گیری: این پژوهش نشان داد که تحلیل امرژی ابزاری کارآمد برای ارزیابی پایداری نظام‌های کشاورزی در مناطق خشک و نیمه خشک است. نتایج حاصل از این مطالعه می‌تواند به عنوان خط پایه برای مطالعات آتی و پایش تغییرات در پایداری نظام‌های کشاورزی مورد استفاده قرار گیرد.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

A Comparative Study of the Ecological Sustainability of Agricultural Production in Zahak and Hirmand Counties

نویسندگان [English]

  • Sanaz Tanakian
  • Mohammad Reza Asgharipour
  • Seyed Ahmad Ghanbari
  • Mahmoud Ramroodi
  • Zahra Marzban
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
چکیده [English]

Background & Objectives: Sistan, as one of the arid regions highly vulnerable to climate change, requires sustainable management of water and soil resources. Therefore, assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems in this region is crucial. The main objective of this research is to evaluate the efficiency and ecological sustainability of a wide range of crops in Zahak and Hirmand counties as examples of arid regions in the country.
 
Materials and Methods: For this research, data related to the inputs and outputs of agricultural production systems were collected through interviews with farmers and meteorological data. Subsequently, using emergy analysis, all system flows were converted to emergy units. Finally, by calculating emergy footprint indicators, the ecological sustainability of agricultural systems was evaluated.
 
Results: The results showed that wheat and alfalfa systems, respectively, with 7.28E+08 and 2.87E+10 global hectares per year, had the highest ecological capacity in Zahak and Hirmand counties. However, the analysis of carrying capacity and emergy footprint indicated that Zahak is in a surplus ecological state, while Hirmand is in a deficit state. These findings indicate that Zahak has a greater capacity to support its current agricultural activities, while Hirmand is under more pressure from natural resources and is at risk of environmental degradation.
 
Conclusion: This research demonstrated that emergy analysis is an effective tool for assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems in arid and semi-arid regions. The results of this study can serve as a baseline for future studies and monitoring changes in the sustainability of agricultural systems.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Agricultural Systems
  • Agricultural Inputs
  • Ecological Sustainability
  • Ecological Capacity
  • Sustainability Indicators

مراجع

Amiri Z, Asgharipour MR, Moghadam EH, Kakolvand E and Campbell DE. 2022. Investigating the need to replace the conventional method of sugar beet production in Lorestan province, Iran based on the arguments obtained from emergy calculations. Ecological Modelling, 472: 110091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2022.110091
Amiri Z, Asgharipour MR, Campbell DE, Azizi K, Kakolvand E and Moghadam EH. 2021. Conservation agriculture, a selective model based on emergy analysis for sustainable production of shallot as a medicinal-industrial plant. Journal of Cleaner Production, 292: 126000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126000
Angel D and Asudo T. 2018. Sustainable agriculture: A comprehensive review. Journal of Environmental Management, 210: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.12.038
Antwi-Agyei P, Fraser ED, Dougill AJ, Stringer LC and Simelton E. 2012. Mapping the vulnerability of crop production to drought in Ghana using rainfall, yield and socioeconomic data. Applied Geography, 32(2): 324-334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.06.010
Asgharipour MR, Amiri Z and Campbell DE. 2020. Evaluation of the sustainability of four greenhouse vegetable production ecosystems based on an analysis of emergy and social characteristics”. Ecological Modelling, 424: 109021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109021
Brown MT and Ulgiati S. 2004. Emergy analysis and environmental accounting. Encyclopedia of Energy, 2(1): 329-354.
Brown MT and Ulgiati S. 2016. Emergy assessment of global renewable sources. Ecological Modelling, 339: 148-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.03.010
Campillo C, Fortes R, Prieto MDH and Babatunde EB. 2012. Solar radiation effect on crop production. Solar Radiation, 1(494): 167-194.
Chen CZ and Lin ZS. 2008. Multiple timescale analysis and factor analysis of energy ecological footprint growth in China 1953–2006. Energy Policy, 36(5): 1666-1678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.11.033
Dorado MP, Cruz F, Palomar JM and Lopez FJ. 2006. An approach to the economics of two vegetable oil-based biofuels in Spain. Renewable Energy, 31(8): 1231-1237.
Enayat FF and Asgharipour MR. 2023. Exploring and predicting the biocapacity of various fish farming systems based on modified emergy footprint accounting in the Sistan region of Iran. Science of the Total Environment, 904: 166195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166195
Enayat FF and Asgharipour MR. 2024. Towards more efficient fish farming systems in the Sistan region of Iran: An emergy-based analysis. Aquaculture, 578: 740106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2023.740106
Enayat FF, Ghanbari SA, Asgharipour MR and Seyedabadi E. 2023. Emergy ecological footprint analysis of Yaghooti grape production in the Sistan region of Iran. Ecological Modelling, 481: 110332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110332
Fallahinejad S and Armin M. 2022. Role of mechanization on the sustainability of sugar beet production using emergy approach. Journal of Emergy, Life Cycle and System Analysis in Agriculture, 2(1): 15-24. https://doi.org/10.22034/aes.2022.327793.1019
Fang K, Heijungs R and De Snoo GR. 2014. Theoretical exploration for the combination of the ecological, energy, and carbon footprints: Overview of a footprint family. Ecological Indicators, 36: 508-518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.017
Gafsi M, Legagneux B, Nguyen G and Robin P. 2006. Towards sustainable farming systems: Effectiveness and deficiency of the French procedure of sustainable agriculture. Agricultural Systems, 90(1-3): 226-242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2006.01.002
Giljum S, Hammer M, Stocker A and Eisenmenger N. 2007. The ecological footprint as a sustainability indicator: Implications for sustainable development and resource management. Ecological Economics, 61(4): 625-637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.09.011
Hajazi S, Rezaei M and Hosseini S. 1999. Research methods in behavioral sciences. Tehran: University of Tehran Press.  (In Persian with English Abstract).
Li JX, Chen YN, Xu CC and Li Z. 2019. Evaluation and analysis of ecological security in arid areas of Central Asia based on the emergy ecological footprint (EEF) model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 235: 664-677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.07.005
Nikouei A, Asgharipour MR and Marzban Z. 2022. Modeling land allocation to produce crops under economic and environmental goals in Iran: a multi-objective programming approach. Ecological Modelling, 471: 110062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2022.110062
Odum HT and Peterson N. 1996. Simulation and evaluation with energy systems blocks. Ecological Modelling, 93(1-3): 155-173.
Peng W, Wang X, Li X and He C. 2018. Sustainability evaluation based on the emergy ecological footprint method: A case study of Qingdao, China, from 2004 to 2014. Ecological Indicators, 85: 1249-1261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.12.020
Perez J. 2007. Sustainable agriculture: Ecological, economic, and social perspectives. Springer.
Shahhoseini HR and Kazemi H. 2022. Evaluation of sustainability of rainfed rapeseed production in Gorgan County using Emergy analysis. Journal of Emergy, Life Cycle and System Analysis in Agriculture, 2(1): 61-70. https://doi.org/10.22034/aes.2022.337172.1031
Shirdeli MR, Asgharipour MR, Ramroudi M, Ghanbari SA and Sirousmehr, A. 2025. Ecological security assessment of rice production systems in arid regions: a multi-criteria assessment of Iranshahr and Saravan, Iran. Scientific Reports, 15(1): 22919. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-06858-1
Snedecor GW and Cochran WG. 1980. Statistical Methods (7th ed.). Iowa State University Press.
Statistical Center of Iran. 2016. Results of the General Population and Housing Census 2016. Retrieved from [https://amar.org.ir/english]
Stöglehner G. 2003. Ecological footprint—a tool for assessing sustainable energy supplies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 11(3): 267-277. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00046-X
Tanakian, S., Asgharipour, M.R., Ghanbari, S.A., Ramroudi, M. and Marzban, Z., 2026. Ecological sustainability assessment of agricultural production systems in the Sistan region using emergy footprint analysis. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-49480-5
Wackernagel M, Schulz NB, Deumling D, Linares AC, Jenkins M, Kapos V, Monfreda C, Loh J, Myers N, Norgaard R and Randers J. 2002. Tracking the ecological overshoot of the human economy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(14): 9266-9271. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.142033699
Yang Q, Liu G, Hao Y, Coscieme L, Zhang J, Jiang N, Casazza M and Giannetti BF. 2018. Quantitative analysis of the dynamic changes of ecological security in the provinces of China through emergy-ecological footprint hybrid indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production, 184: 678-695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.271
Yang Y and Fan M. 2019. Analysis of the spatial-temporal differences and fairness of the regional energy ecological footprint of the Silk Road Economic Belt (China Section). Journal of Cleaner Production, 215: 1246-1261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.170
Yao X, Chen W, Song Ch and Gao S. 2022. Sustainability and efficiency of water-land-energy-food nexus based on emergy-ecological footprint and data envelopment analysis: Case of an important agriculture and ecological region in Northeast China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 379: 134857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134854
Zhang X, Xu L, Chen Y and Liu T. 2020. Emergy-based ecological footprint analysis of a wind farm in China. Ecological Indicators, 111: 106018 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.106018
Zhao Sh, Song K, Gui F, Cai H, Jin W and Wu Ch. 2013. The emergy ecological footprint for small fish farm in China. Ecological Indicators, 29: 62-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.12.009
Zhao S, Li Z and Li W. 2005. A modified method of ecological footprint calculation and its application. Ecological Modelling, 185(1): 65-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2004.11.016
دانش کشاورزی وتولید پایدار
دوره 36، شماره 2
1405
صفحه 275-285

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار