水资源脆弱性评价工具分析

Kanga Idé Soumaila, Albachir Seydou Niandou, M. Naimi, Chikhaoui Mohamed, K. Schimmel
{"title":"水资源脆弱性评价工具分析","authors":"Kanga Idé Soumaila, Albachir Seydou Niandou, M. Naimi, Chikhaoui Mohamed, K. Schimmel","doi":"10.17265/2161-6264/2019.02.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Water resources face many pressures and stresses around the world. Assessing the vulnerability of water resources is, therefore, increasingly an essential practice in water resources management. Several studies of water resources vulnerability have been carried out around the world during the last three decades. Thus, the main objective of this study was to analyze water resources vulnerability assessment tools and identify the methodological trend of water resources vulnerability assessment at the local level in existing literature. To achieve this objective, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method has been applied to include or exclude articles. Articles on water vulnerability numbering 374 were preselected in the ScienceDirect and the Google Scholar databases. Only 32 out of the 374 articles met the inclusion criteria defined for the analysis. The results show that China (21.9%), U.S.A. (9.4%) and Canada (6.3%) are the most active countries publishing water resources vulnerability assessments. Some 191 vulnerability indicators from the 32 articles were classified into five categories of factors: physical factors (33.5%), socio-economic factors (28.3%), environmental or eco-environmental factors (25.1%), institutions and governance factors (7.3%) and infrastructure factors (5.8%). This study shows that almost half of the studies (47%) considered all five categories of factors, 9.4% considered four categories of factors, 6.3% considered three categories of factors, 28% used two types of factors and 9.4% considered only one category. Researchers have used several methods to assess water resources vulnerability: overlay and index methods (59.4%), process-based models (12.5%), statistical methods (9.4%), overlay and index methods plus process-based model (9.4%), overlay and index methods plus statistical methods (6.3%) and statistical methods plus process-based models (3.1%). Geographic information system (GIS) is an important tool in assessing the vulnerability of water resources with almost 60% of the studies using it at some stage of the assessment. In recent years, there is an increasing trend toward conceptualizing the vulnerability of water resources in a holistic way.","PeriodicalId":312861,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology B","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of Water Resources Vulnerability Assessment Tools\",\"authors\":\"Kanga Idé Soumaila, Albachir Seydou Niandou, M. Naimi, Chikhaoui Mohamed, K. Schimmel\",\"doi\":\"10.17265/2161-6264/2019.02.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Water resources face many pressures and stresses around the world. Assessing the vulnerability of water resources is, therefore, increasingly an essential practice in water resources management. Several studies of water resources vulnerability have been carried out around the world during the last three decades. Thus, the main objective of this study was to analyze water resources vulnerability assessment tools and identify the methodological trend of water resources vulnerability assessment at the local level in existing literature. To achieve this objective, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method has been applied to include or exclude articles. Articles on water vulnerability numbering 374 were preselected in the ScienceDirect and the Google Scholar databases. Only 32 out of the 374 articles met the inclusion criteria defined for the analysis. The results show that China (21.9%), U.S.A. (9.4%) and Canada (6.3%) are the most active countries publishing water resources vulnerability assessments. Some 191 vulnerability indicators from the 32 articles were classified into five categories of factors: physical factors (33.5%), socio-economic factors (28.3%), environmental or eco-environmental factors (25.1%), institutions and governance factors (7.3%) and infrastructure factors (5.8%). This study shows that almost half of the studies (47%) considered all five categories of factors, 9.4% considered four categories of factors, 6.3% considered three categories of factors, 28% used two types of factors and 9.4% considered only one category. Researchers have used several methods to assess water resources vulnerability: overlay and index methods (59.4%), process-based models (12.5%), statistical methods (9.4%), overlay and index methods plus process-based model (9.4%), overlay and index methods plus statistical methods (6.3%) and statistical methods plus process-based models (3.1%). Geographic information system (GIS) is an important tool in assessing the vulnerability of water resources with almost 60% of the studies using it at some stage of the assessment. In recent years, there is an increasing trend toward conceptualizing the vulnerability of water resources in a holistic way.\",\"PeriodicalId\":312861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology B\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology B\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17265/2161-6264/2019.02.001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology B","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17265/2161-6264/2019.02.001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

水资源在世界范围内面临着许多压力和压力。因此,评估水资源的脆弱性日益成为水资源管理的一项基本做法。在过去三十年中,世界各地进行了几项关于水资源脆弱性的研究。因此,本研究的主要目的是对水资源脆弱性评价工具进行分析,并识别现有文献中地方层面水资源脆弱性评价的方法学趋势。为了实现这一目标,采用了系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)方法来纳入或排除文章。在ScienceDirect和Google Scholar数据库中预选了374篇关于水脆弱性的文章。374篇文章中只有32篇符合为分析定义的纳入标准。结果表明,中国(21.9%)、美国(9.4%)和加拿大(6.3%)是发表水资源脆弱性评价最活跃的国家。32篇文章中的191个脆弱性指标被划分为5类因素:物理因素(33.5%)、社会经济因素(28.3%)、环境或生态环境因素(25.1%)、制度和治理因素(7.3%)和基础设施因素(5.8%)。这项研究表明,几乎一半的研究(47%)考虑了所有五类因素,9.4%考虑了四类因素,6.3%考虑了三类因素,28%使用了两类因素,9.4%只考虑了一类因素。水资源脆弱性评价方法主要有覆盖指数法(59.4%)、过程模型法(12.5%)、统计方法(9.4%)、覆盖指数法加过程模型法(9.4%)、覆盖指数法加统计方法(6.3%)和统计方法加过程模型法(3.1%)。地理信息系统(GIS)是评估水资源脆弱性的重要工具,近60%的研究在评估的某个阶段使用了地理信息系统。近年来,从整体上对水资源脆弱性进行概念化的趋势日益明显。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analysis of Water Resources Vulnerability Assessment Tools
Water resources face many pressures and stresses around the world. Assessing the vulnerability of water resources is, therefore, increasingly an essential practice in water resources management. Several studies of water resources vulnerability have been carried out around the world during the last three decades. Thus, the main objective of this study was to analyze water resources vulnerability assessment tools and identify the methodological trend of water resources vulnerability assessment at the local level in existing literature. To achieve this objective, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method has been applied to include or exclude articles. Articles on water vulnerability numbering 374 were preselected in the ScienceDirect and the Google Scholar databases. Only 32 out of the 374 articles met the inclusion criteria defined for the analysis. The results show that China (21.9%), U.S.A. (9.4%) and Canada (6.3%) are the most active countries publishing water resources vulnerability assessments. Some 191 vulnerability indicators from the 32 articles were classified into five categories of factors: physical factors (33.5%), socio-economic factors (28.3%), environmental or eco-environmental factors (25.1%), institutions and governance factors (7.3%) and infrastructure factors (5.8%). This study shows that almost half of the studies (47%) considered all five categories of factors, 9.4% considered four categories of factors, 6.3% considered three categories of factors, 28% used two types of factors and 9.4% considered only one category. Researchers have used several methods to assess water resources vulnerability: overlay and index methods (59.4%), process-based models (12.5%), statistical methods (9.4%), overlay and index methods plus process-based model (9.4%), overlay and index methods plus statistical methods (6.3%) and statistical methods plus process-based models (3.1%). Geographic information system (GIS) is an important tool in assessing the vulnerability of water resources with almost 60% of the studies using it at some stage of the assessment. In recent years, there is an increasing trend toward conceptualizing the vulnerability of water resources in a holistic way.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信