Extended Abstract
Introduction
Watershed management interventions are pivotal human-induced strategies for the sustainable governance of natural resources. Evaluating their effectiveness demands a rigorous, multi-dimensional analysis that transcends purely technical metrics to encompass physical, economic, social, and ecological consequences. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) serves as a fundamental instrument within development planning, offering a structured lens through which to scrutinize the complex interplay between human activities and natural systems. By systematically uncovering the strengths and shortcomings of implemented projects, EIA provides an essential feedback mechanism for adaptive management. In the context of watershed projects specifically, impact assessment is not merely a procedural formality but a critical executive tool that underpins the long-term success, maintenance, and sustainability of these interventions. Within this framework, the Department of Natural Resources of Razavi Khorasan Province has undertaken structural watershed measures, primarily the construction of check dams, in the Firouzeh Mine watershed. A core objective of this intervention is the rehabilitation of qanats—traditional subterranean aqueducts vital to local water security. To holistically evaluate the effectiveness of these measures, the present study integrates two distinct but complementary methodologies: the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix (RIAM). This synergistic approach seeks to move beyond descriptive evaluation by first leveraging expert judgment to prioritize and weight key impact criteria through AHP, and then applying RIAM to systematically quantify the project’s diverse environmental and socio-economic effects. The integration yields a nuanced, weighted assessment that captures both the magnitude and the relative importance of the watershed project's outcomes.
Materials and Methods
This research employed a hybrid methodology combining AHP and RIAM. First, a hierarchical framework comprising four main criteria (Physical, Economic, Social, Ecological) and 22 related sub-criteria was established based on research objectives and regional characteristics. To determine the relative weight (importance) of these criteria, 15 experts in natural resources and watershed management from Razavi Khorasan Province, possessing extensive knowledge of the local climatic, social, and economic conditions, were selected. A pairwise comparison questionnaire based on the AHP method (using a 1-9 Likert scale) was distributed to these experts. Their responses were analyzed using Expert Choice software, and consistency ratios were checked to ensure data validity, resulting in finalized weights for each criterion and sub-criterion.Subsequently, the RIAM method was applied to assess the environmental scores (ES) of the watershed management actions for each sub-criterion. Following standard RIAM protocol, two component scores were calculated for each main criterion: the Importance/Magnitude score (AT, derived from multiplying relevant sub-criteria values) and the Temporal Value score (BT, derived from summing relevant sub-criteria values). The overall Environmental Score (ES) for each parameter was the product of AT and BT. A key innovation in this study was the modification of the standard RIAM by integrating the AHP-derived weights. The final adjusted score (ES) for each sub-criterion was calculated by multiplying its raw ES by its corresponding AHP weight (ES = ES W). This weighted approach refined the final impact classification bands, creating a customized RIAM matrix specifically aligned with the prioritized perspectives of the regional experts.
Results and Discussion
The AHP results revealed a clear prioritization among experts. The Physical criterion received the highest weight (0.490), indicating that project evaluation was predominantly viewed through a hydrological and physical lens, primarily focused on flood control. Within this, the sub-criteria Flood Control (weight: 0.140) and Increased Qanat Discharge (weight: 0.099) were ranked first and second most important overall. The Economic criterion followed with a weight of 0.215, while Social and Ecological criteria received lower weights of 0.189 and 0.106, respectively.The weighted RIAM (ES) assessment confirmed the project's success in its primary physical objectives. The Flood Control sub-criterion achieved an adjusted score of 3.36, placing it in the +E (Large Positive Impact) band. Similarly, Increased Qanat Discharge scored 1.584, falling into the +D (Significant Positive Impact) band. These results validate the effectiveness of the constructed check dams in mitigating flood risk and enhancing groundwater recharge, crucial in this arid region.However, the integrated assessment also exposed significant limitations. Fourteen out of the 22 sub-criteria—primarily within the economic, social, and ecological domains—were assessed as having no significant impact (N band). Consequently, the project's final aggregate score was 0.28, categorizing its overall impact as +A (Negligible Positive Impact). This indicates that while the project excelled in targeted physical/hydrological functions, it failed to generate substantial, broader socio-economic benefits or ecological improvements. The discussion interprets this outcome as a potential consequence of a project design narrowly focused on structural flood control, without complementary biological measures, livelihood programs, or community capacity-building initiatives necessary to translate hydrological success into comprehensive rural sustainable development.
Conclusion
The integrated AHP-RIAM assessment confirms that the Firouzeh Mine watershed project has successfully achieved its primary physical objective of flood control. The substantial expert-assigned weight to physical criteria, combined with high positive environmental scores for flood mitigation and qanat discharge enhancement, robustly validates the technical effectiveness of the constructed check dams in this arid region. Nevertheless, the study reveals a fundamental disconnect between physical engineering success and broader sustainable development outcomes. The concentration of positive impacts within a narrow band of physical sub-criteria—contrasted with pervasive “no significant impact” classifications across economic, social, and ecological domains—yields a negligible positive aggregate score. This signals that the intervention has failed to catalyze meaningful improvements in local livelihoods, income generation, or community resilience. The finding strongly suggests that a mono-dimensional focus on structural measures, devoid of complementary biological rehabilitation, livelihood diversification, or participatory institutional strengthening, cannot independently propel holistic rural development. Qanat rehabilitation, while hydrologically significant, proves insufficient as a standalone mechanism for transformative socio-economic change. From a methodological perspective, this research demonstrates the efficacy of fusing AHP with a weight-integrated RIAM framework. This hybrid approach balances expert-driven criterion prioritization with systematic environmental scoring, producing a nuanced picture neither method could achieve independently. Its flexibility and replicability render it a valuable tool for environmental impact assessments across diverse settings, enabling decision-makers to identify precisely where projects succeed, where they fall short, and which complementary strategies are necessary to bridge the gap between technical performance and genuine sustainable development. |
