پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 161 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,532 |
| تعداد مقالات | 70,501 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 124,098,844 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 97,206,419 |
ارزیابی سطح سواد آبی در جامعه شهری (مطالعه موردی: شهر اصفهان) | ||
| محیط شناسی | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 46، شماره 4، اسفند 1399، صفحه 683-702 اصل مقاله (1.09 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jes.2021.322250.1008160 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| شروین جمشیدی* 1؛ حمید دهقانی2 | ||
| 1گروه مهندسی عمران دانشگاه اصفهان | ||
| 2گروه علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه اصفهان | ||
| چکیده | ||
| سواد آبی مفهومی جدید در پژوهش‌های مرتبط با مدیریت تقاضای آب است که براوردی از دانش، نگرش و رفتار آبی جامعه ارائه می‌دهد. پژوهش حاضر به روش پیمایشی سطح سواد آبی شهروندان اصفهان را می‌سنجد و نقش متغیرهای مختلف را با استفاده از تحلیل‌های آماری مورد ارزیابی قرار می‌دهد. جامعه آماری، افراد با سن بالای 20 سال است که 398 نفر به روش اتفاقی یا در دسترس بعنوان نمونه انتخاب شده‌اند. نتایج نشان می‌دهد سواد آبی شهروندان اصفهان برابر 43.5 از 100 (متوسط) است که 1% با سواد بالا (نمره بیشتر از 66) و 10% با سواد کم (نمره کمتر از 33) هستند. در بین مولفه‌های سه‌گانه سواد آبی، امتیاز دانش و نگرش به ترتیب کمترین (34.1) و بیشترین (47.6) است. آزمون رگرسیون نشان می‌دهد مولفه‌های سه‌گانه سواد آبی مستقل هستند و بالاترین اثرگذاری بر سواد آبی را رفتار و سپس نگرش آبی دارد. همچنین تحلیل‌های آماری نشان می‌دهد برخورداری از تحصیلات دانشگاهی، شغل ثابت، یا درامد بالا بر افزایش سواد آبی بصورت قابل ملاحظه‌ای اثرگذار است و در مقایسه، مردان و افراد بالاتر از 40 سال از سواد آبی بیشتری برخوردارند. این موارد نشان می‌دهد سواد آبی و مولفه‌های موثر بر آن در جوامع شهری قابل ارزیابی هستند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| آموزش؛ اصفهان؛ توسعه پایدار؛ محیط‌زیست؛ مصرف آب | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Water Literacy Evaluation in Urban Society (Case study: Isfahan City) | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| shervin jamshidi1؛ Hamid Dehghani2 | ||
| 1Department of Civil Engineering, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran | ||
| 2Department of Social Sciences, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Introduction In 1958, UNESCO announced the first definition of literacy. This definition evolved in 1978 and 2005, particularly when the “plurality of literacy” could expand its perspectives. Environmental literacy is an example in plural literacy. It is the main objective of environmental education based on sustainable development goals (SDGs). The objective of environmental education is to improve the awareness, incentives, commitment, and skills of citizens to rationally deal with environmental challenges. In a nutshell, environmental literacy is made of three main pillars of knowledge, attitude and behavior that should be learnt continuously and in long-term. Knowledge represents basic information learnt by education or experience. Attitude points to the sensitive or sensible perspectives about a subject. Hopes, frustrations and values can be included as attitude. Behavior is an index for rational actions carried out in specific conditions. Water literacy can similarly include these three pillars (Figure 1). Water management and saving methods in urban societies should be educated for citizens, particularly in arid areas. Isfahan is a city with dramatic water scarcity. However, there is a lack of knowledge about the level of water literacy in this society. Therefore, this research calculates the water literacy of citizens living in Isfahan, with population more than 2 millions, based on field surveys and statistical analysis. Figure 1. The three pillars of water literacy Material and methods This research used questionnaires and field surveys to collect the required data from citizens in Isfahan City. The population of the study consisted of all citizens of Isfahan having more than 20 years old. Therefore, the sample size based on Kukran formula was 384 citizens. Accordingly, the whole questionnaires were totally collected on 2020, in two forms of virtual (37%) and physical (63%). Here, a self-made questionnaire with 36 questions was used. These questions enquire about the knowledge, attitude, and behavior (each 12 questions) of citizens about water in urban areas. These questions consist of different topics in urban water management such as: water supplies, water scarcity, leakage and bursts, water cycle, water saving methods, water tariffs, virtual water, the treatment process, water quality and sanitation, personal hygiene or obsessions, actions during water switch-offs, dependability to tap water, their responses to water misuse, and etc. It should be noted that questionnaires were developed by a two-step pre-test. The validity of the instrument was controlled by 4 experts of National Water and Wastewater Company (NWWC) and 3 professors in University of Isfahan. The reliability of questionnaire was measured by Cronbach's alpha as 0.73, 0.8 and 0.87 for water knowledge, attitude, and behavior, respectively. Data analysis was carried out by the application of descriptive and inferential statistics by SPSS (version 23) and Minitab (version 19). Kolmogorov–Smirnov (KS) and Anderson-Darling (AD) were used to control the normality of results about water literacy. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare water literacy in different variables. The impacts of gender, age, education, employment, living property, and income status of respondents on water literacy were examined. In this test, the reliability of 95% confidence interval (P-value < 0.05) was set as the criterion. In addition, Pearson test was used for correlation, while path analysis used partial least squares (PLS) regression with standardized coefficient. Results and discussion The normality tests verified that water literacy follows a normal probability distribution function. The skewness and kurtosis of these data were 0.18 and 0.27, respectively and KS and AD were 0.074 (p < 0.05) and 1.5 (p < 0.05), respectively. The mean of water literacy was calculated as 43.5 (out of 100) with standard deviation of 9.5. Here, the first and third quartiles were 37.1 and 50, respectively. It verified that the majority of citizens (about 89%) in Isfahan had moderate water literacy having score between 33 and 66. Among the three pillars of water literacy, surveys revealed that water knowledge could gain the lowest score (34.1), while attitude received the highest (47.6). Here the average score of behavior calculated as 43.9. It means that the citizens have little information about the basics of water but they have better understanding about its value and risks. This conclusion contradicts the results of previous studies in which knowledge was claimed as a prerequisite for good attitude or behavior in environmental literacy. It can be due to the fact that the life of people living in arid or semi arid area, like Isfahan, is very reliant on water. Therefore, the value, risks, and water saving methods may not necessarily dependent on the basic water knowledge. Path analysis with regression modeling also revealed that water literacy is mostly dependant on water behavior (β= 0.77) and attitude (β= 0.66) than basic knowledge (β= 0.57) as illustrated in Figure 2. The comparative statistical analysis also demonstrated that variables such as gender, age, education, employment and income were effective on water literacy in the study area. Table 1 outlines the mean, standard deviation, and P-value of water literacy for each variable based on one-way T-test. It can be concluded that having a college education, a stable job, higher income, or age more than 40 may give citizens some personality or a character that presents responsibility to the citizens for water and can be reflected in attitude or behavior. In a traditional masculine society of Isfahan, being a man may also bring this kind of responsibility. Therefore, the intrinsic motivation for life and the responsibility of water saving can improve water literacy in a society. However, higher education seems to be the most influential variable according to the path analysis. In addition, it is realized that higher water literacy may reduce the satisfaction of citizens about the performance of water supply companies. It roots in higher education and consequently increases the expectations from water companies. Figure 2: path analysis of water literacy and its variables Table 1: comparative statistical analysis of water literacy in different variables Variable Group Count Mean Std. deviation P-value (T-test) Gender Man 204 44.72 8.98 0.004 Woman 194 41.91 9.45 Age < 40 286 42.82 9.52 0.042 > 40 112 45.19 8.30 Education College 222 42.56 9.89 0.000 School 176 39.99 7.16 Employment Employed 236 44.62 9.29 0.000 Unemployed 162 41.09 8.92 Income High 179 45.15 10.05 0.002 Low 219 42.13 8.57 Living property Owner 209 43.51 9.69 0.716 On rent 189 43.15 8.79 Conclusion This research accounts the water literacy of citizens in a mega city in Iran based on basic knowledge, attitude and behavior. According to the results, it can be concluded that: • Water literacy is moderate for the majority of citizens in Isfahan. • Basic knowledge, attitude and behavior can independently enhance water literacy in which behavior and attitude are mostly influential. • Having higher education, a stable job, higher income as well as being in the middle age (> 40 years old) can provide an opportunity for citizens to enhance their water literacy. • People with higher water literacy showed less satisfaction about the performance of water companies. It implies that water literacy can be introduced as 1) an index for public water education programs, and 2) a motivation for upgrading the performance of water companies. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Education, environment, Isfahan, sustainable development, water consumption | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
آزاد م.ر. (1394)، تعیین نشانگرهای سواد محیط‌زیستی برای سال‌های پیش‌دبستان تا چهارم دبستان با نظر متخصصان، کارشناسان و آموزشگران، پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد آموزش محیط‌زیست، دانشگاه پیام‌نور
بهرامی م. (1390)، بررسی و تبیین نشانگرهای سواد زیست‌محیطی در برنامه‌های درسی علوم مدارس، پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد آموزش محیط‌زیست، دانشگاه پیام‌نور
حاجی‌زاده، م. افراسیابی ح. و بهارلوئی م. (1397)، مطالعات کیفی مصرف آب در نگاه زنان شهر اصفهان، زن در توسعه و سیاست، 16 (2)، 293-271.
خلفی ع.ا.، شیری ق. و پوراشرف، ی. (1395)، بررسی الگوی مصرف آب خانگی با رویکرد بخش‌بندی مصرف‌کنندگان (مطالعه موردی: مصرف کنندگان آب خانگی شهرستان ایلام). مجله آب و فاضلاب، دوره 29، شماره 2
دهقان ح. و کریم‌سرا ن.پ. (1395)، عوامل موثر بر سرانه مصرف آب خانواده‌های تهرانی، فصلنامه راهبرد اجتماعی فرهنگی، 5 (19)، 268-245.
Ahmed M. (2011), Defining and measuring literacy: Facing the reality, International Review of Education 57(1/2), 179-195.
Attari SZ., Poinsatte-Jones K., Hinton K. (2017), Perceptions of water systems, Judgement and Decision Making 12(3), 314–327.
Banerjee S. and Das A. (2018), Environmental Education in the Context of Sustainable Development, Journal of Education & Development 8(16), 179-190.
Dean AJ., Fielding KS., Newton FJ. (2016), Community knowledge about Water: Who has better knowledge and is this associated with water-related behaviors and support for water related policies? PLoS ONE 11(7).
Fang W.T. (2020), Envisioning Environmental Literacy, Action and Outreach, Sinophone and Taiwan Studies, Springer, Volume 3, Singapore.
Febriani A. (2017), Water Literacy in developing country: A case study for Indonesia, Master Thesis, Lund University, Sweden.
Fielding K., Karnadewi F., Mitchell E., Newton F. (2015), A National Survey of Australians’ Water Literacy and Water-Related Attitudes, CRC for Water Sensitive Cities: Clayton, Australia.
Figueiredo P. and Perkins P.E. (2013), Women and water management in times of climate change: participatory and inclusive processes, Journal of Cleaner Production 60, 188-194.
Haverkos K. and Boutista N. (2011), Environmental literacy through relationships, connecting biomes and society in a sustainable city, Science Scope 35(2), 63-70.
He H.S., (2018), Construction of the index system of water literacy and application in a case study of four Chinese communities, Journal of Discrete Mathematical Sciences and Cryptography 21(2), 485–491.
Hungerford H.R. (2009), Environmental Education (EE) for the 21st Century: Where Have We Been? Where Are We Now? Where Are We Headed?, The Journal of Environmental Education 41(1), 1-6.
Huxhold R.E. (2016), Keep Your Head above Water: Management and Water Literacy in Italy. Black & Gold 2, https://openworks.wooster.edu/blackandgold/vol2/iss1/4.
Irvine K., Weigelhofer G., Popescu L. et al. (2016), Educating for action: Aligning skills with policies for sustainable development in the Danube river basin, Science of The Total Environment 543 765-777.
Jamshidi S., Niksokhan M.H., Ardestani M. and Jaberi H. (2015), Enhancement of surface water quality using trading discharge permits and artificial aeration, Environmental Earth Sciences 74(9), 6613-6623.
Jones-Jang S.M., Mortensen T. and Liu J. (2021), Does Media Literacy Help Identification of Fake News? Information Literacy Helps, but Other Literacies Don’t, American Behavioral Scientist 65(2), 371-388.
Karami S., Bidhendi M.S. and Naderi M. (2018), Assessment of Teachers' Attitude Toward Environmental Education and its Relevance to their Readiness to Educating Students (Case Study: Teachers of Primary School in Tehran City), Quarterly Journal of Environmental Education and Sustainable Development 6(4), 9-18.
Kitamura Y., Yamazaki E., Kanie N. et al. (2014), Linking education and water in the sustainable development goals, Project on Sustainability Transformation Beyond 2015 (POST2015) and the Earth System Governance Project, POST2015/UNU-IAS Policy Brief #2
Lewinsohn T.M., Attayde J.L., Fonseca C.R., et al. (2014), Ecological literacy and beyond: Problem-based learning for future professionals, Ambio DOI 10.1007/s13280-014-0539-2.
Liang S.W., Fang W.T., Yeh S.C., Liu S.Y., Tsai H.M., Chou J.Y. and Ng E. (2018), A Nationwide Survey Evaluating the Environmental Literacy of Undergraduate Students in Taiwan, Sustainability 10(6), 1730, doi:10.3390/su10061730.
Mansouri S.A. and Afghe S.M. (2018), The Dynamic Estimating Poverty line of Urban Income groups by Using Extended Linear Expenditure System (ELES) (Panel data Approach), Quarterly Journal of Quantitative Economics 15(1), 63-85.McCarroll M. and Hamann H. (2020), What We Know about Water: A Water Literacy Review, Water 12, 2803, doi:10.3390/w12102803.
Nutbeam D. and Lloyd JE. (2021), Understanding and Responding to Health Literacy as a Social Determinant of Health, Annual Review of Public Health 42, 159-173.
Poppe M., Weigelhofer G. and Winkler G. (2018), Public Participation and Environmental Education, Riverine Ecosystem Management, Aquatic Ecology Series (AQEC) book series, Volume 8, 435-458.
Qureshi S.M.Q. (2020), Learning by sustainable living to improve sustainability literacy, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 21(1), 161-178.
Roncoli C., Orlove B., Ungemach C., Dowd-Uribe B., West CT., Milch K., Sanon M. (2019), Enough is enough: How West African farmers judge water sufficiency, Regional Environmental Change 19, 573–585.
Saberi N., Zebardast L. and Montazer Ghaem M. (2019), Performance Assessment of Iran's News Media on Environmental Aspects (Case Study: The Water Scarcity Crisis), Quarterly Journal of Environmental Education and Sustainable Development 8(1), 37-48.
Sabzehei M.T., Gholipour S. and Adinevand M. (2016), A Survey of the Relationship Between Environmental Awareness, Attitude and Pro environmental Behavior of Female Students at Qom University, Journal of Environmental Education & Sustainable Development 4(4), 5-16.
Sherchan S., Pasha F., Weinman B., Nelson FL., Sharma FC., Therkelsen J., Drexler D. (2016), Seven faculties in search of a mission: A proposed interdisciplinary course on water literacy, Applied Environmental Education & Communication 15(2), 171-183.
Singh BNB., Aranha RH, Srinivasan S, Sharma P. (2017), Water Literacy: An Empirical Study with Special Reference to the Apartment Dwellers in Bengaluru, In Sustainability, Inspiration, Innovation and Inclusion; Proceedings of the 5th Annual International Conference on Sustainability, New Delhi, India; Giri, TK, Jaipuria S, Das KC, Mukhopadhyay A, Gogoi BJ, Bhattacharya M, Eds.; Emerald Group Publishing: Bingley, UK, 152–161.
Smit H. and Merwe J. (2018), Military environmental literacy in the South African army, Scientia Militaria, South African Journal of Military Studies 46(1), doi: 10.5787/46-1-1225
Szczytko R., Stevenson K., Peterson M.N., Nietfeld J. and Strnad R.L. (2018), Development and validation of the environmental literacy instrument for adolescents, Environmental Education Research doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1487035.
Teksoz G., Sahin E. and Tekkaya-Oztekin C. (2012), Modeling Environmental Literacy of University Students, Journal of Science Education and Technology 21, 157–166.
Ternes B. (2018), Groundwater citizenship and water supply awareness: Investigating water-related infrastructure and well ownership, Rural Sociology 83(2), 347–375.
The World Bank (2021), Iran's Economic Update — April 2021, retrieved https://thedocs.worldbank.org
Tian K., Wang H. and Wang Y. (2021), Investigation and evaluation of water literacy of urban residents in China based on data correction method, Water Policy 23, 77–95.
Wang YH, Chang MC, Liou JR. (2019), Effects of water-saving education in Taiwan on public water knowledge, attitude, and behavior intention change, Water Policy 21, 964–979.
Wong C.A., Afandi S.H.M., Ramachandran S., Kunasekaran P. and Chan J.K.L. (2018), Conceptualizing environmental literacy and factors affecting pro-environmental behavior, International Journal of Business and Society 19(S1), 128-139.
Wood G.V. (2014) Water literacy and citizenship: education for sustainable domestic water use in the East Midlands. PhD thesis, University of Nottingham | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,831 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 737 |
||