2.2. DPSIR framework analysis of Ethiopian Wetlands
Drivers
These are hydrological and socioeconomic forces such as climate change, population growth, economic growth and government initiative (policy changes) (Hailu, 1998; Desta, 2003; Dixon and Wood, 2007; EWNRA, 2008; Gebresilassie et al., 2014; Shibru and Amera, 2019).
Pressures
Human activities which directly contribute to wetlands degradation include deforestation or improper agricultural practices and expansions, urbanization, industrialization, recurrent drought, over extrapolation of wetland water, increase fish harvesting, lack of knowledge and awareness and weak policies on wetlands (Hailu, 1998; Desta, 2003; Dixon and Wood, 2007; EWNRA, 2008; Mengistu, 2008; Gebresilassie et al., 2014; Wondie, 2018, Shibru and Amera, 2019).
State changes
The existing environmental condition affected by driving forces include wetlands size reduction, reduced water quality, habitat modification, reduced biodiversity richness, reduced fish livestock, biological invasions (invasive alien species), eutrophication and siltation (sedimentation) (Gebresilassie et al., 2014; Wondie, 2018).
Impacts
are direct and indirect effects of wetlands degradation and comprises loss of biodiversity, lack of food and food insecurity or malnutrition, climatic disturbance, low precipitation pattern and effect on the health of organisms (humans and animals) (Abebe and Gehebe, 2003; Gebresilassie et al., 2014; Wondie, 2018).
Response
Human mitigation measures to overcome wetlands degradation and conserve wetlands are preferable to be applied to driving forces to alleviate pressures, state and impact. These are ways used to reverse existing wetlands degradation which may include intervening in Driver-Pressure-Impact-State change factors as well as implementing sustainable resource management and conservation practice, technical support, funding, training and awareness creation or adequate knowledge on the status and functioning of wetlands, sufficient information database on wetlands, national inventories and National directory of wetlands, political conviction (strong policy; ratifying Ramsar convention on wetlands), prioritization and management plan for wetlands, continuous monitoring plan of wetlands, monitoring of upstream-downstream users relation, carrying out Environmental Impact assessment before embarking projects that can pose on wetlands and strengthening and building partnership with stakeholders (Abebe and Gehebe, 2003, Eshet, 2008; Mengistu, 2008; Wondie, 2018). In Ethiopia, besides of high cost of intervention on degraded wetlands, the issue has gotten less attention; no quick and one-off solution to alleviate these problems (Gebresilassie et al., 2014).
Previous studies also revealed that there is little or lack of research, community awareness, knowledge of planners and resource managers and policy gaps (Bezabih and Mosissa, 2017; Wondie, 2018). The participation of the local community in wetlands conservation is also minimal (Diaxon and Wood, 2003, Belete, 2018). Even though there are intergovernmental agreements to support the wise use of wetlands, Ethiopia has yet to ratify and implement the Ramsar Convention (Deribe, 2007). Because of this, there is no stand-alone national wetlands policy or strategy and the existing policies and laws have not adequately addressed the wetlands issue, and even some laws are contradicting the wise use of wetlands (Wondie, 2018). Ethiopia has not adequate protocols for assessment, monitoring and inventory of wetlands (Getachew et al., 2012), also has not have sufficient formal institutional setup and legal framework (Hailu, 2007) and lacks specialized experts on wetlands assessment and management (Wondie, 2018). Hence, environmental problems and socio-economic factors can be modelled using different approaches. The Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework is used as a tool for integrating these socioeconomic activities that could affect the wetlands ecosystem by finding all these factors. The application of the DPSIR framework in developing countries is so limited. In Ethiopia, the general public and decision-makers compromised the management of wetlands (Teferi et al., 2010). Therefore, the DPSIR framework can also be applied effectively as an analytical tool for decision and policymakers for nature conservation. Indicators are measures that can help in assessing trends and conditions, providing reliable information for spatial comparisons, providing early warning directions and do in advance for future conditions and trends. Developing indicators and addressing the challenges of wetlands ecosystem will contribute more to suggesting sustainable wetlands conservation. More is done on wetlands and their degradation in Ethiopia. However, there is no evidence of developing indicators for wetlands conservation using the DPSIR framework. To the best of the authors knowledge, this is the first review on DPSIR indicators for wetlands conservation in Ethiopia. Therefore, the aim of this review was; (1) to highlight the importance of integrating the DPSIR framework with environmental indicators in wetland conservation and (2) to identify the current gaps in scientific investigations and provide suggestions for further studies that will promote a detail understanding of wetland conservation through the application of DPSIR indicators.