Dynamics and Causation of Environmental Equity, Locally Unwanted Land Uses, and Neighborhood Changes

/ Why are some environmental risks distributed disproportionately in the neighborhoods of the minorities and the poor? A hypothesis was proposed in a recent study that market dynamics contributed to the current environmental inequity. That is, locally unwanted land uses (LULUs) make the host communities home to more poor people and people of color. This hypothesis was allegedly supported by a Houston case study, whereby its author analyzed the postsiting changes of the socioeconomic characteristics of the neighborhoods surrounding solid waste facilities. I argue that such an analysis of postsiting changes alone is insufficient to test the causation hypothesis. Instead, I propose a conceptual framework for analysis of environmental equity dynamics and causation. I suggest that the presiting neighborhood dynamics and the characteristics of control neighborhoods be analyzed as the first test for the causation hypothesis. Furthermore, I present theories of neighborhood change and then examine alternative hypotheses that these theories offer for explaining neighborhood changes and for the roles of LULUs in neighborhood changes. These alternative hypotheses should be examined when analyzing the relationship between LULUs and neighborhood changes in a metropolitan area. Using this framework of analysis, I revisited the Houston case. First, I found no evidence that provided support for the hypothesis that the presence of LULUs made the neighborhoods home to more blacks and poor people, contrary to the conclusion made by the previous study. Second, I examined alternative hypotheses for explaining neighborhood changes-invasion-succession, other push forces, and neighborhood life-cycle; the former two might offer better explanation.KEY WORDS: Environmental equity and justice; Locally unwanted lane uses; Siting; Market dynamics; Invasion-succession; Neighborhood changes     

Sustainability: a Dissent

Abstract:  Broadly conceived and considered in its many usages, sustainability has grave defects as a planning goal, particularly when used by conservationists: it confuses means and ends; it is vague about what is being sustained and who or what is doing the sustaining; it is uninspiring; it is little more than Pinchot-era conservation (and thus ignores the many lessons learned since then); it need not be linked to land, to the land's functioning, or to any ecological science; it need not include a moral component; it is consistent with the view of humans as all-powerful manipulators of the planet; and, in general, it is such a malleable term that its popularity provides only a facade of consensus. When sustainability is defined broadly to include the full range of economic and social aspirations, it poses the particular risk that ecological and biodiversity concerns will be cast aside in favor of more pressing human wants. Given these many defects, the conservation movement should discard the term in favor of a more alluring goal, attentive to nature and its ecological functioning. A sound goal would incorporate and distill the considerable ecological and moral wisdom accumulated since Pinchot's day while giving conservationists the rhetorical tools needed to defend the land against competing pressures. In our view, conservation would be well served by an updated variant of "land health," Aldo Leopold's ecologically grounded goal from the 1940s. Land health as an independent understanding should set the essential terms of how we live and enjoy the earth, providing the framework within which we pursue our many social and economic aims.     

三江平原地貌因子及其主要环境地质问题

地貌因子有其不可替代的作用和功能,是决定环境的主要因子,是生态地质环境中最积极最活跃的主导支力条件;是生态平衡的重中之重;是生态地质环境的基础,并影响其它因子或成份.如地貌因子或成份发生了变化,其它因子或成份就会发生一系列连锁反应;地貌因子发生变化或失去平衡,其它因子也会发生变化或失去平衡.文本论述了三江平原地貌特征,详细地分析了地貌的作用,阐明了有关地貌的主要环境地质问题.     

中国经济的“阿基米德支点”

资源是经济发展的“阿基米德支点”：世界十大经济国每年能源的生产占全球的６２．１％，消费为７１．０％。重要矿产资源的生产多排在世界前１０名生产国之，外面是消费则多排在１０名之内，且对这些矿产资源的消费量多在９５％以上。     

The evolution of sustainability

Six separate but related strains of thought have emerged prominently since 1950 in discussions of such phenomena as the interrelationships among rates of population growth, resource use, and pressure on the environment. They are the ecological/carrying capacity root, the resources/environment root, the biosphere root, the critique of technology root, the no growth/slow growth root, and the ecodevelopment root.Each of these strains of thought was fully developed before the word sustainable itself was used. Many of the roots are based on fundamentally opposing assessments of the future of mankind. Many of the roots, such as the ecology/carrying capacity root, are based on physical concepts, and they exclude normative values. Others, such as the ecodevelopment root, include such values as equity, broad participation in governance, and decentralized government.When the word sustainability was first used in 1972 in the context of man's future, in a British book,Blueprint for Survival, normative concepts were prominent. This continued to be the case when the word was first used in 1974 in the United States to justify a no growth economy.Sustainability was first used in a United Nations document in 1978. Normative concepts, encapsulated in the term ecodevelopment, were prominent in the United Nations publications.After about 1978, the term sustainability began to be used not only in technological articles and reports but also in policy documents culminating in the use of the term in the report of the summit meeting of the Group of Seven in 1989.The roots of the term sustainability are so deeply embedded in fundamentally different concepts, each of which has valid claims to validity, that a search for a single definition seems futile. The existence of multiple meaning is tolerable if each analyst describes clearly what he means by sustainability.     

构建人类命运共同体、应对气候变化与生态文明建设

全球气候变化给人类社会文明带来严峻挑战,需要人类社会采取共同措施和行动积极应对。应对全球气候变化是当今世界最能体现人类共同命运的领域,深度参与并积极推动全球气候治理体系改革和建设是中国推动构建人类命运共同体的重要实践,也是生态文明理论和实践的重要方面。应对气候变化是我国生态文明建设的重要内容和内在要求;以共同价值理念构建人类命运共同体,凝聚各国力量携手合作应对全球气候变化,是全球生态文明建设和构建人类命运共同体的具体实践,也为应对全球气候变化提供了良好载体和国际平台。文章通过分析可知,应对气候变化、生态文明建设与构建人类命运共同体三者之间,呈现出相互促进、和谐共生的"三位一体"特征;人与自然共生的生命共同体是前提条件,人类的任何实践活动都要以自然生态系统为基础和前提;人类命运共同体在整合各国力量方面,为生态文明建设提供了社会基础;生态文明包容各国文明,凝聚价值共识,成为生命共同体和人类命运共同体的价值导向。中国倡导人类命运共同体理念,是全球生态文明和人类命运共同体的积极倡导者、推动者和践行者,既为应对全球气候变化提供了价值基础,也提供了强有力的实践支撑;应对气候变化是全球生态文明建设和人类命运共同体构建的生动实践。因此,加强生态文明建设和构建人类命运共同体,为全球应对气候变化提供了理论基础和国际平台,也将为全球可持续发展贡献中国智慧和中国案例。     

省以下生态转移支付制度环境保护激励效应

现有文献认为生态转移支付具有基本公共服务均等化与提升地方生态环境质量双目标,而目标的多样性会影响地方财政转移支付资金效果及目标的实现。文章基于环保支出和农林水支出的中介与调节效应,对生态转移支付的生态环境目标进行了理论分析,利用2010—2018年甘肃、贵州、湖北及河南四省的199个县的面板数据进行实证检验。实证研究表明:在样本期内,生态转移支付促进了地方生态环境质量的提升,中介效应和调节效应模型的结果表明,中国地方生态转移支付资金对辖区环境保护效果中,环境保护支出起到部分中介效应,农林水支出不仅调节了生态转移支付的地方环境保护支出效果,而且调节了环境保护支出对地方环境质量的影响。因此,由于地方政府具有环境治理信息优势,省以下制度目标更能体现辖区生态需求,省对县生态转移支付制度会有效促进地方生态环境质量的改善,环保激励效应较为明显。同时,县级地方政府应该逐步摆脱"先污染后治理"的路径依赖,逐步转向经济与环境"双目标协同发展"模式。为了协同生态转移支付的双目标,"自下而上参与式决策"可以作为环境治理的有益补充,通过地方政府多元化实践改善环境质量。     

北京市农业机械排放因子与排放清单

利用车载排放测试技术对典型的联合收割机、拖拉机、农用运输车和农田建设机械实际工况下的尾气进行测试,建立了实际工况下农业机械的排放因子和2017年北京市农用机械排放清单.结果表明,不同的工作状态对农业机械尾气排放有较大的影响,怠速和行走时CO、NO_x、HC和PM排放趋于平稳;而切地和翻地模式下的波动较为明显.根据各类机械的分类和排放标准对排放因子进行细化,建立了较为完整的实际工况下的排放因子.根据农业机械排放因子和燃油消耗量计算出2017年北京市CO、NO_x、HC和PM的排放量分别是2 566.60、 1 239.29、 563.08和538.32 t.拖拉机、运输机械和联合收割机的污染物总量占CO、NO_x、HC和PM这4种污染物总量的98%、 95%、 95%和98%.因此,农用拖拉机、运输机械和联合收割机在农业机械污染减排中应作为重点控制对象.     

基于OMI数据的东南沿海大气臭氧浓度时空分布特征研究

基于臭氧监测仪(OMI)卫星反演数据,对2005—2018年东南沿海5省区域大气臭氧柱浓度数据进行提取及分析,探讨其时空分布格局及影响因素.结果表明:①在时间变化上,14年间,该区域大气臭氧柱浓度整体呈先上升后下降的趋势,2005—2013年臭氧柱浓度持续升高,最高值为324.52 DU,高值区不断向南部区域扩大;2013—2018年臭氧柱浓度呈下降趋势,最低值为228.27 DU,但在2017、2018年略有上升.②在空间分布上,臭氧柱浓度自北向南逐渐降低,高值区集中分布在江苏及浙江省北部;低值区集中于福建省南部及广东省大部分地区.③在季节变化上,大体呈现出春夏季高于秋冬季,高值区在春夏季交替出现,秋季略高于冬季,但差异不明显.④稳定性分析表明:研究区臭氧柱浓度整体呈现中部分散、南北部集聚、差异较显著的分布格局.⑤自然因素中,风向、气温均呈现显著正相关,江淮地区的梅雨季节(降水)及华南地区的台风和暴雨也起到显著作用.⑥人文因素中,臭氧柱浓度与地区生产总值、各产业生产总值及机动车保有量均表现出正相关,其中,臭氧柱浓度与第二产业的相关度最高.另外,臭氧柱浓度与NO_x排放量表现出显著相关性.VOC_s对臭氧柱浓度的影响中,工业源是主控因素,交通源和居民源次之,电厂源对臭氧柱浓度的影响最弱.这进一步说明臭氧浓度的变化受到了诸多因素的综合影响,但气温、NO_x及VOC_s的排放是臭氧浓度变化的主导因素.     

典型西南工业城市柳州市核心区大气污染物时空分布与气象因素研究

为研究柳州市核心区大气污染物浓度时空变化规律与气象因素之间的关系,统计分析了2018年全年研究区内6个自动监测站点PM_(2.5)、PM_(10)、SO_2、NO_2、O_3和CO的浓度监测数据和气象站气象数据,并对28次超标日污染物来源进行了解析.结果显示:①核心区颗粒污染物污染较为严重,且以PM_(2.5)为主的细颗粒污染物仍为柳州市主要的大气污染物;各污染物月均浓度季节差异显著,除NO_2外柳州大气污染物浓度下降明显,指示柳州市多项节能减排综合整治措施成效显著;PM_(2.5)、PM_(10)、CO受早晚高峰期影响,浓度日变化均呈双峰型;NO_2在不同季节峰型不同,作为O_3前体物其浓度日变化与O_3相反,呈现"早峰午谷"的变化趋势.②通过对污染物浓度插值发现,由于核心区主要工商业区位于西部且处于主导风向下风向,故PM_(2.5)和SO_2浓度西北高、东南低,PM_(10)、NO_2和CO浓度西南高、东北低;核心区东部的山区为O_3生成带来大量前体物,使O_3浓度东南高、西北低.③由于气候特征,核心区春、夏季主要气象因素均为降水量;秋季的主要气象因素是风速,风速与污染物的负相关关系表明了风的扩散效应;冬季大部分污染物与气象因素的相关性不显著,表明人为因素对污染物的影响大于气象因素;核心区大气污染物主要来源于局地排放和区域传输,且南北主导风向对大气污染影响最大.④HYSPLIT模型结果指示柳州超标日大气污染物主要来自于珠三角地区,且陆源颗粒物浓度普遍比海洋源高,来自南部的远距离输送气流颗粒物含量最低,表明远距离输送为影响颗粒物传播的主要原因.