风险社会中突发事件的特征与处置理念探析

突发性事件由于其本身所具有突发性、紧急性、危重性、复杂性、关联性、广泛性、政治性和不确定性等特征，所以其负面性影响很大，往往可能成为激发社会矛盾、进而爆发政治、经济和社会危机的直接原因。而经济转轨、社会转型、利益群体多元化等许多不稳定的因素，对局部地区乃至全国的经济发展和社会稳定构成了潜在威胁。在这样一个具有诸多风险因素的社会，由此而引发的突发事件又有形式多元化、规模扩大化、形态群体化、影响辐射化、目标国际化等特点。所以，在现阶段，处置突发事件的理念必须适应这种风险社会的公共危机特点，做到危机缓和，未病先防；以人为本，取信于民；利益调和，治病求本。     

露天煤矿声环境影响后评估——以胜利一号露天矿为例

本文以胜利一号露天矿为例,在主要噪声源强以及厂界和周边敏感目标的噪声级现状监测的基础上,对煤矿开发后声环境影响进行回顾性分析和验证性评价,结果表明：（1）煤矿四厂界环境噪声昼间和夜间均达到了《工业企业厂界环境噪声排放标准》（GB12348-2008）2类标准限值要求。噪声源中采掘场噪声较大,铁路装车站、铁路专用线以及破碎车间、机修车间、变电所、排水泵站、锅炉房等机修设备噪声源产生的噪声值相对较小。（2）随着煤矿开采量和开采面积的增加,露天煤矿采掘场噪声污染、厂界噪声和周边敏感点噪声会不断加大。而且,采掘场最大噪声级出现的方向也会随着开采方向的推进而变化。（3）验证性分析结果表明,胜利一号露天矿原环评结论较可靠,但预测结果相对偏低,偏低幅度昼间在5.2%-10.7%,夜间在2.4%-13.1%。（4）现状监测和回顾性分析表明,胜利一号露天矿噪声污染不太明显,目前采取的噪声防治措施起到了较好的防治效果。     

A method for regional-scale material flow and decoupling analysis: A demonstration case study of Aichi prefecture, Japan

We have developed a method to analyse the annual material flow in a prefecture and have calculated environmental indicators for a prefecture. Material flow analysis (MFA) is important to clarify the structure of a regional society and obtain environmental indicators for a circular society. However, MFA has not advanced in local governments because of few local statistics. We have developed a method to analyse the annual material flow in Aichi prefecture from 1980 to 2000 using an input–output (I–O) table and statistics of Aichi. We have verified the accuracy of this method by comparing its results for 2000 which calculated on the basis of official I–O table for 1995 with the I–O table data for 2000; the correlation coefficient obtained in this case is greater than 0.95. Moreover, by performing MFA, we have estimated the resource consumption and decoupling indicator of each industry in Aichi prefecture from 1980 to 2000. We could obtain more detailed and accurate environmental indicators by using our method. From these results, we could estimate the progress of Aichi prefecture towards a circular society.     

建设资源节约型、环境友好型社会:基于新制度经济学的视角

建设资源节约型、环境友好型社会，需要在人与自然和谐发展的共有信念下，通过制度创新和制度变迁，实现个体理性向集体理性的收敛。制度变迁是构建资源节约型、环境友好型社会的关键所在，而制度变迁的内在机理是资源相对价格和人们消费偏好的变迁。通过强制性制度变迁，建立完善的法律法规体系、政策支持体系、技术创新体系和激励约束机制，形成低投入、低消耗、低排放和高效率的节约型增长方式；通过诱致性制度变迁，唤起公众的节约意识和环保意识，从而提升整个社会的环境责任感，让足够的认知成为公众自觉行动的能力。     

从环境-社会系统的角度看"建设和谐社会"

环境-社会系统的三元结构是指人、社会和自然三元。可持续发展取决于对这三元运动机制的协调。从环境-社会系统的视角看。可持续发展是指通过三种生产的和谐运行与环境—社会系统的稳定演进．获得“经济-社会-环境”整体的高效益。人类社会发展的两大基本矛盾是资源生产的矛盾和资源配置的矛盾．因此。建设和谐社会的关键在于：在争取“人-社会-自然”和谐演进的前提下。处理好人与社会、人与自然、自然与社会以及自然的、社会的方方面面的“关系”。     

中国可持续发展指标体系建立的原则及结构

本文从中国的现实情况出发，借鉴了国外研究可持续发展指标体系的经验，提出了中国可持续发展指标体系的建立原则和结构。     

节约型社会与生态城市建设

分析了节约型社会的要求，从城市建设，城市发展和环境保护出发，分析了城市发展的过程及其出现的一些问题，分析了节约型社会建设与生态城市建设的关系，提出了建设节约型生态城市的指导思想和建设路线。     

和谐社会统计监测问题的探讨

社会主义和谐社会的内涵和基本特征体现为充分的民主、健全的法制、严正的公平、激情的正义、全社会的诚信、新型的人际关系、繁荣的文化、蓬勃的科技、健全的社会保薄体系、稳定的社会环境、循环的经济、高质量的居民生活。可归纳为经济、政治、文化、社会、生态五个方面。为此。提出由4个层次40个指标构成的统计监测指标体系。并提出采用量化值加权函数法进行综合评价。期望为社会主义和谐社会构建进程的监测提供合理的技术和方法。     

水资源约束下的山东半岛经济与环境协调状态定量评价研究

山东半岛是山东省和我国东部沿海地区经济、社会较为发达的地区之一．也是人口密度大、自然资源特别是水资源紧张的地送。随着经济规模的不断扩大，山东半岛水资源与水环境对经济、社会发展的制约作用最为明显。本研究旨在探寻山东半岛经济社会发展与水资源和水环境的协调状况．在此基础上提出经济社会发展与水资源和水环境协调的对策措施。本文在广泛占有资料和调查研究的基础上．通过计算山东半岛水资源的总量、水资源供需平衡及水资源利用效益．分析了当前水资源的开发利用现状．指明了因为不合理开发利用而导致的环境生态后果。运用特尔斐法和AHP法构建了新的评价指标体系．定量评价了山东半岛当前经济发展与资源、环境的协调程度。结果表明山东半岛正处于由弱协调型向基本协调型的过渡阶段．为实现山东半岛经济和社会的可持续发展．提供了理论依据。     

Incentives to improve farm management: EMS, supply-chains and civil society

This paper focuses on impediments to environmentally sound management practices and how these might be overcome, with an emphasis on the role of environmental management systems, supply chains and civil society. It argues that: Farmers are under increased pressure to cut costs and improve production but with little opportunity to increase prices. Commonly short-term economic interest has damaging environmental implications. Current government policy, in Australia and in many other jurisdictions, relies heavily on voluntary arrangements, education and information, as the main policy instruments through which to persuade farmers to adopt better environmental farm management - e.g. the recent push to encourage the use of voluntary environmental management systems. However, there is good evidence to suggest that these can only make a valuable contribution when combined with a range of other policy instruments, including positive and negative incentives, intervention by third parties and in some cases, an underpinning of regulation. Arguably, what is needed is a strategy that builds on the strengths of voluntary environmental management arrangements while compensating for their weaknesses by combining them with other, complementary policy instruments. If so, we must engage with a range of questions that have not so far figured substantially in the policy debate. Although the principal focus has been on the role of government in bringing about on-farm change in management practices, supply chain pressure (at least in respect of agricultural chemicals and practices which threaten food safety) and civil society action are also potentially powerful mechanisms for bringing about change. Government can and should play a role in harnessing such forces in the interests of improved environmental on-farm practices.