Fishing‐gear restrictions and biomass gains for coral reef fishes in marine protected areas

Considerable empirical evidence supports recovery of reef fish populations with fishery closures. In countries where full exclusion of people from fishing may be perceived as inequitable, fishing‐gear restrictions on nonselective and destructive gears may offer socially relevant management alternatives to build recovery of fish biomass. Even so, few researchers have statistically compared the responses of tropical reef fisheries to alternative management strategies. We tested for the effects of fishery closures and fishing gear restrictions on tropical reef fish biomass at the community and family level. We conducted 1,396 underwater surveys at 617 unique sites across a spatial hierarchy within 22 global marine ecoregions that represented 5 realms. We compared total biomass across local fish assemblages and among 20 families of reef fishes inside marine protected areas (MPAs) with different fishing restrictions: no‐take, hook‐and‐line fishing only, several fishing gears allowed, and sites open to all fishing gears. We included a further category representing remote sites, where fishing pressure is low. As expected, full fishery closures, (i.e., no‐take zones) most benefited community‐ and family‐level fish biomass in comparison with restrictions on fishing gears and openly fished sites. Although biomass responses to fishery closures were highly variable across families, some fishery targets (e.g., Carcharhinidae and Lutjanidae) responded positively to multiple restrictions on fishing gears (i.e., where gears other than hook and line were not permitted). Remoteness also positively affected the response of community‐level fish biomass and many fish families. Our findings provide strong support for the role of fishing restrictions in building recovery of fish biomass and indicate important interactions among fishing‐gear types that affect biomass of a diverse set of reef fish families.     

基于复杂系统建模的水管理政策研究进展

基于Agent的建模方法（ABSS）通过自下而上的方式，考察系统中主体的不同状态和行为特征、主体与环境的作用、主体之间的作用，来表征系统的宏观特征，是进行复杂社会环境系统分析和政策研究的重要手段，在水资源、水环境管理系统中得到了有效的应用。本文在大量文献调研的基础上，讨论了ABSS建模方法的基本原理、主要特征、系统构成、分类方法和开发工具等特征，总结了其供水系统发展、水资源分配和流域水资源管理、农业土地和水资源利用、居民用水行为、农业污染控制及人类活动的水环境影响等方面的应用，分析了其在研究内容、研究方法、研究结果等方面的发展趋势，讨论了利用该方法研究我国水资源管理和水污染控制政策的必要性和重要性。     

2010年上海世博会与长江三角洲都市圈的联动发展

本文在分析世界博览会发展过程的基础上，阐述了2010年上海世博会对上海乃至长江三角洲都市圈联动发展的机遇和挑战，并提出了长江三角洲都市圈空间整合与联动发展的战略措施。     

面向国土空间规划的“双评价”：挑战与应对

面向国土空间规划的科学性、可操作性、层级性等内涵,探讨了资源环境承载能力评价和国土空间开发适宜性评价（“双评价”）与国土空间规划之间的基本逻辑问题、应用挑战与应对方法。通过系统梳理“双评价”的理论发展和相关政策响应,剖析了“双评价”在应用探索、内涵扩充、系统支撑三个阶段的研究重点和服务目标,阐明了承载力评价与适宜性评价之间关联逻辑的演进历程。总结了当前“双评价”在应用上的几个关键挑战：一是“双评价”应用于“三区三线”划定的逻辑尚未明确;二是当前承载能力评价与未来规划决策之间存在逻辑悖论;三是“双评价”在不同层级国土空间规划中传导失灵;四是两个评价之间的关联逻辑仍存在争议。为此,提出了应对“双评价”挑战的四点建议：深化理论认知、拓展评价维度、建立传导机制、厘清内在关系,以提升“双评价”对国土空间规划决策的支撑能力。     

新时代国土整治与生态修复转型思考

针对全球变化影响下的国土空间和生态系统,生态文明建设和国土空间规划是中国在新时代的积极响应,国土整治与生态修复的转型和提升成为必然要求。在介绍国土整治与生态修复概念内涵的基础上,指出中国国土空间生态环境问题的复杂性和生态文明建设的新理念要求决定了国土整治与生态修复的转型。从工作理念、理论基础、技术体系和制度建设等方面,分析了当前国土整治与生态修复工作中存在的不足,主要包括整体综合理念滞后、理论基础体系欠缺、技术支撑相对薄弱、体制机制不尽完善等方面。针对这些不足,提出了新时代国土整治与生态修复转型的路径和策略,主要策略包括强化系统思维、提升理论体系、加强技术支撑、完善机制建设等内容,以期为国土整治与生态修复推进美丽中国建设提供科学依据。     

旅游发展背景下乡村适应性演化理论框架与实证

乡村转型及适应演化路径是乡村可持续发展领域重要研究内容,对实施乡村振兴战略及其多元目标的实现具有重要理论和现实意义。通过国家制度（战略）变迁关键时间节点,梳理典型案例乡村发展阶段,明确案例乡村转型适应的体制演化特征。在乡村适应性演化理论分析框架构建基础上,以体制转换明显的乡村为实证案例,结合农户调查与深度访谈数据,评估乡村适应演化下系统适应能力（结果）及农户生计响应效果,并基于归纳法和灰色关联分析,揭示乡村体制转换与微观农户生计关联的适应演化路径及机制。研究结果表明:（1）传统农业体制乡村向旅游体制转换后出现乡村经济发展和环境破坏、社会矛盾风险并存局面,农户生计适应选择对乡村转型响应呈现多样化。（2）不同适应路径农户生计恢复力存在显著差异,升级型、扩张型生计恢复力相对较高,维持型和更替型较低。（3）乡村体制转换（R₁到R_n）与农户生计适应（P₁到P₅）呈现协同且分化的演化路径,基础设施、政策扶持以及生态环境因子是乡村转型与农户生计关联适应演化的关键影响变量。     

Environmental benchmarks vs. ecological benchmarks for assessment and monitoring in Canada: Is there a difference?

Environmental benchmarks are widely used in Canadian environmental assessment as a standard against which to monitor air or water quality in response to human activities in the environment. Recent work in Canada has developed the concept of ecological benchmarks as a complement to environmental benchmarks. However, implementation of ecological benchmarks may be challenging. This paper presents an analogy between ecological benchmarks and the more commonly used environmental benchmarks, as an attempt to increase understanding and use of ecological benchmarks in resource management, assessment, and monitoring. Ecological benchmarks, and their corresponding indicators, will be challenging to identify and use. However, through the use of the principles of adaptive management, effective ecological indicators and benchmarks can be established. Although it is essential that ecological benchmarks are site-specific, the analogy and general principles outlined here are applicable to assessment and monitoring in any part of the world.     

A framework for assessment and monitoring of arthropods in a lowland tropical forest

By applying principles of adaptive management, and by using the valuable information that arthropods provide from assessment and monitoring programs, managers can identify and reduce possible impacts on biodiversity in development projects. In 1996, the Smithsonian Institution's Monitoring and Assessment of Biodiversity program worked together with Shell Prospecting and Development Peru to establish an adaptive management program to protect biodiversity in a natural gas exploration project in a Peruvian rainforest. In this paper, we outlined the conceptual steps involved in establishing an assessment and monitoring program for arthropods, including setting objectives, evaluating the results and making decisions. We also present the results of the assessment using some of groups of arthropods, and summarize the steps taken to identify appropriate groups for monitoring.     

Forest Health Assessment and Monitoring – Issues for Consideration

Part of this paper has been prepared for the lecture Forest Health Assessment-Criteria,Methods and Problems given by the author at the UIMPuniversity course Sanidad Forestal en el Bosques Mediterraneos yTemplados. Implicacion de la Contaminacion Atmosferica y del Cambio Global, held in Valencia, Spain, October, 1995. Assessment and monitoring of forest health representsa key point for environmental policy and for the management ofenvironmental resources. With the renewed interest in assessment andmonitoring of forest health generated by the suspected occurrence ofa widespread forest decline in Europe and North America, manyactivities have been undertaken: however, some questions should beconsidered and clarified when attempting to estimate forest health.Particularly, the objective(s) of the assessment and monitoringprogram should be carefully identified. Identification of a program‘stask has a number of implications and consequences: it implies adefinition of what concept of forest health (forest ecosystem health,forest health or forest trees health?) is assumed, what will be thetarget entity to be monitored, and therefore the identification of therelevant assessment questions and assessment endpoints.Consequences concern the definition of the spatial scale (frominternational to landscape and plot scale monitoring) and ecologicalcoverage (from single species population to population ofecosystems) of the program, which can have a considerable influenceon the choice of the proper sampling strategy and tactic, as well ason the most suitable methods, indicators and indices to be used.Although much of the work in the field of forest health and airpollution has concentrated on surveys on crown transparency anddiscoloration, there is an entire range of methods, indicators andindices developed to assess the health status of forests. The decisionas to which ones should be used will depend on the aim of theprogram and on economic and practical considerations. A furtherconsideration concerns the time span of the program, but anydecision in this field is subject to many limitations due to difficultiesin predicting future monitoring needs. All these points should becarefully considered and implemented according to a rigorousQuality Assurance procedure since any decision will influence futurework for many years.     

天然林保护与东北地区水患治理方略

从天然林水文功能出发，阐述了东北地区天然林削减及其与洪涝灾害的关系，提出了东北地区水患治理方略。同时建议建立防汛信息系统，提高暴雨和洪水预报准确率以及防洪保险灾后重建。