News

a.z
Sanjari Banestani, M., Sheikh, V., Zare Garizi, A., Avarand, A. (2021). Feasibility study of watershed monitoring with participation of watershed citizens, case study: the Chehl-Chai Watershed, Golestan Province, Iran. , 13(2), 417-430. doi: 10.22092/ijwmse.2020.342231.1776
Maryam Sanjari Banestani; Vahedberdi Sheikh; Arash Zare Garizi; Amaneh Avarand. "Feasibility study of watershed monitoring with participation of watershed citizens, case study: the Chehl-Chai Watershed, Golestan Province, Iran". , 13, 2, 2021, 417-430. doi: 10.22092/ijwmse.2020.342231.1776
Sanjari Banestani, M., Sheikh, V., Zare Garizi, A., Avarand, A. (2021). 'Feasibility study of watershed monitoring with participation of watershed citizens, case study: the Chehl-Chai Watershed, Golestan Province, Iran', , 13(2), pp. 417-430. doi: 10.22092/ijwmse.2020.342231.1776
Sanjari Banestani, M., Sheikh, V., Zare Garizi, A., Avarand, A. Feasibility study of watershed monitoring with participation of watershed citizens, case study: the Chehl-Chai Watershed, Golestan Province, Iran. , 2021; 13(2): 417-430. doi: 10.22092/ijwmse.2020.342231.1776

Feasibility study of watershed monitoring with participation of watershed citizens, case study: the Chehl-Chai Watershed, Golestan Province, Iran

مهندسی و مدیریت آبخیز
Article 14, Volume 13, Issue 2, July 2021, Pages 417-430    PDF (1.3 M)
Document Type: Research Paper
DOI: 10.22092/ijwmse.2020.342231.1776
Authors
Maryam Sanjari Banestani1; Vahedberdi Sheikh* 2; Arash Zare Garizi3; Amaneh Avarand4
1MSc Student, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
2Associate Professor, Watershed Management Dept., Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Iran
3Assistant Professor, Watershed Management and Dept., Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Iran
4PhD Student, Agricultural Economics, Payame Noor University, Tehran Branch
Abstract
The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of monitoring precipitation, temperature and river stage variables in the Chehl-Chai Watershed with the participation of citizens/stakeholders. Simple and low-cost measurement tools were designed and provided to the local volunteers (two students, three women and one man) and they monitored the variables for five months. The data were recorded on paper forms and/or communicated through cellphones (text messages and social media applications of WhatsApp and Telegram). The citizen-collected data were compared with formal gauging stations using different statistical metrics including correlation coefficient, paired-sample t-test and kappa index. Results revealed that, the difference between the recorded data by the participants and those of gauging stations were not statistically significant. A female citizen with academic education of bachelor’s degree recorded the highest frequency of data that had the highest correlation with the recorded data in the formal precipitation and temperature monitoring stations, while the technical staff man from the Natural Resources Management Office recorded the least frequent data that had the least correlation with the recorded data in the formal monitoring stations. In overall, the promising level of citizens’ performance in monitoring the watershed, suggests that it is really feasible to collect reliable, on-time, and long-term data that can be used to obviate lack of data, particularly in remote mountainous areas and facilitates the decision-making and watersheds management process.
Keywords
Citizen science; Crowdsourcing; Lack of data; Participatory monitoring; Watershed stakeholders
References
  1. Altman, D.G. 1991. Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman and Hall, London and New York, 624 pages.
  2. Bell, S., M. Marzano, J. Cent, H. Kobierska, D. Podjed, D. Vandzinskaite, H. Reinert, A. Armaitiene, M. Grodzińska-Jurczak and R. Muršič. 2008. What counts? Volunteers and their organizations in the recording and monitoring of biodiversity. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17(14): 3443-3454.
  3. Black, J.M. 2009. River otter monitoring by citizen science volunteers in northern California: social groups and litter size. Northwestern Naturalist, 90(2): 130-135.
  4. Buytaert, W., A. Dewulf, B. De Bièvre, J. Clark and D.M. Hannah. 2016. Citizen science for water resources management: toward polycentric monitoring and governance? Water Resources Planning and Management, 142(4): 25-49.
  5. Buytaert, W., Z. Zulkafli, S. Grainger, L. Acosta, T.C. Alemie, J. Bastiaensen, B. De Bièvre, J. Bhusal, J. Clark and A. 2014. Citizen science in hydrology and water resources: opportunities for knowledge generation, ecosystem service management and sustainable development. Frontiers in Earth Science, 2: 1-26.
  6. Cifelli, R., N. Doesken, P. Kennedy, L.D. Carey, S.A. Rutledge, C. Gimmestad and T. Depue. 2005. The community collaborative rain, hail, and snow network: informal education for scientists and citizens. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 86(8): 1069-1078.
  7. Conrad, C.C. and K.G. Hilchey. 2011. A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 176(1-4): 273-291.
  8. Cooper, C.B., J. Dickinson, T. Phillips and R. Bonney. 2007. Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecology and Society, 12(2): 1-11.
  9. De Vos, L., H. Leijnse, A. Overeem and R. Uijlenhoet. 2017. The potential of urban rainfall monitoring with crowdsourced automatic weather stations in Amsterdam. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 21(2): 765-789.
  10. Dickinson, J.L., B. Zuckerberg and D.N. Bonter. 2010. Citizen science as an ecological research tool: challenges and benefits. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 41: 149-172.
  11. Evans, J.D. 1996. Straightforward statistics for the behavioral sciences. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, 600 pages.
  12. Hajmohammadi, M., A. Sadoddin, V. Sheikh and H. Jazy. 2017. Participatory research and its applicability in identification of health status of the Delichai River with participation of the local volunteers. MSc Thesis, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, 86 pages.
  13. Hannah, D.M., S. Demuth, H.A. van Lanen, U. Looser, C. Prudhomme, G. Rees, K. Stahl and L.M. Tallaksen. 2011. Large scale river flow archives: importance, current status and future needs. Hydrological Processes, 25(7): 1191-1200.
  14. Hsu, C.H., T.E. Lin, W.T. Fang and C.C. Liu. 2018. Taiwan roadkill observation network: an example of a community of practice contributing to Taiwanese environmental literacy for sustainability. Sustainability, 10(10): 10-36.
  15. Kruger, L.E. and M.A. Shannon. 2000. Getting to know ourselves and our places through participation in civic social assessment. Society and Natural Resources, 13(5): 461-478.
  16. Lakshminarayanan, S. 2007. Using citizens to do science versus citizens as scientists. Ecology and Society, 12(2): 22-39.
  17. Larson, L.R., G.T. Green and H.K. Cordell. 2011. Children's time outdoors: results and implications of the national kids survey. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 29(2): 1-20.
  18. McKinley, D.C., A.J. Miller-Rushing, H.L. Ballard, R. Bonney, H. Brown, S.C. Cook-Patton, D.M. Evans, R.A. French, J.K. Parrish, T.B. Phillips and S.F. Ryan. 2017. Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource management and environmental protection. Biological Conservation, 208: 15-28.
  19. Michelsen, N., H. Dirks, S. Schulz, S. Kempe, M. Al-Saud and C. Schüth. 2016. YouTube as a crowd-generated water level archive. Science of the Total Environment, 568: 189-195.
  20. Silvertown, J. 2009. A new dawn for citizen science. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 24(9): 467-471.
  21. Stepenuck, K.F., L.G. Wolfson, B.W. Liukkonen, J.M. Iles and T.S. Grant. 2011. Volunteer monitoring of E. coli in streams of the upper Midwestern United States: a comparison of methods. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 174(1-4): 625-633.
  22. Thornhill, I., A. Chautard and S. Loiselle. 2018. Monitoring biological and chemical trends in temperate still waters using citizen science. Water, 10(7): 825-839.
  23. Thornhill, I., S. Loiselle, W. Clymans and C.G.E. van Noordwijk. 2019. How citizen scientists can enrich freshwater science as contributors, collaborators and co-creators. Freshwater Science, 38(2): 231-235.
  24. Wilson, N.J., E. Mutter, J. Inkster and T. Satterfield. 2018. Community-based monitoring as the practice of indigenous governance: a case study of indigenous-led water quality monitoring in the Yukon River Basin. Journal of Environmental Management, 210: 290-298.

 

Statistics
Article View: 760
PDF Download: 443


counter
Journal management system. designed by sinaweb