地下水脆弱性评价和污染风险管理

地下水脆弱性评价和风险评估是地下水污染防治的有用工具和工作步骤,是地下水资源管理和地下水污染修复的重要依据。文章对地下水脆弱性评价和污染风险评价的研究背景和进展进行了简要综述,提出了目前地下水脆弱性评价研究中存在的问题,并对今后基于风险管理的地下污染环境修复及其总体思路进行了展望。     

再生水回灌地下水风险管理建议

随着经济发展、城市化速度的加快,缺水问题日益严重。再生水人工地下回灌作为水资源回用的一种新方式,已成为解决区域水资源短缺的一种有效措施。通过对再生水回灌地下水风险分析和对国内外再生水回灌地下水应用与管理现状进行梳理,为我国的再生水回灌地下水风险管理提出对策和建议。     

Ecological knowledge and North Sea environmental policies

In an analysis of North Sea eutrophication science and policies, focusing on the period 1980–2005, it was investigated how scientific information was used in policy-making. The analysis focused on the central assumptions of the rational policy-making model, i.e. that scientific information can be used to formulate decisions, based upon objective scientific information (rational decision-making), and secondly, can support implementing these decisions (rational management). In general terms, the following was concluded:

• •More knowledge has increased rather than reduced uncertainty;
• •In order to handle the problem of dealing with complexity and uncertainty at the political level, a simplification of facts has occurred, in this case focusing on nutrients as the main cause of the problem, at the same time excluding other possible causes;
• •Both the limited scientific view (i.e. the nutrient view) and the exaggeration of the seriousness of the problem (impacts, scope) have been used as an authoritative basis for the justification of political decisions. Both were not supported by the majority of the scientific community;
• •New scientific knowledge, not in support of existing policies, has been excluded from the policy process;
• •The science–policy interface, mainly consisting of “civil-servant scientists”, that emerged and increased its influence over the period of investigation, has been the central element in the simplification and exclusion process.

The main lesson learned is that work at the interface of science and policy must be subject to democratic principles, i.e. be transparent and involving all parties with a stake in the issue under consideration.     

Generation of Priority Research Questions to Inform Conservation Policy and Management at a National Level

Abstract: Integrating knowledge from across the natural and social sciences is necessary to effectively address societal tradeoffs between human use of biological diversity and its preservation. Collaborative processes can change the ways decision makers think about scientific evidence, enhance levels of mutual trust and credibility, and advance the conservation policy discourse. Canada has responsibility for a large fraction of some major ecosystems, such as boreal forests, Arctic tundra, wetlands, and temperate and Arctic oceans. Stressors to biological diversity within these ecosystems arise from activities of the country's resource‐based economy, as well as external drivers of environmental change. Effective management is complicated by incongruence between ecological and political boundaries and conflicting perspectives on social and economic goals. Many knowledge gaps about stressors and their management might be reduced through targeted, timely research. We identify 40 questions that, if addressed or answered, would advance research that has a high probability of supporting development of effective policies and management strategies for species, ecosystems, and ecological processes in Canada. A total of 396 candidate questions drawn from natural and social science disciplines were contributed by individuals with diverse organizational affiliations. These were collaboratively winnowed to 40 by our team of collaborators. The questions emphasize understanding ecosystems, the effects and mitigation of climate change, coordinating governance and management efforts across multiple jurisdictions, and examining relations between conservation policy and the social and economic well‐being of Aboriginal peoples. The questions we identified provide potential links between evidence from the conservation sciences and formulation of policies for conservation and resource management. Our collaborative process of communication and engagement between scientists and decision makers for generating and prioritizing research questions at a national level could be a model for similar efforts beyond Canada.     

Shellfish aquaculture and First Nations' sovereignty: The quest for sustainable development in contested sea space

Aquaculture tenures or leases have become an increasingly important management tool for regulating access rights to coastal and offshore marine habitat. Tenure, as a form of private property rights to marine space, is generally considered a prerequisite for aquaculture development, as are the associated exclusive access rights which provide necessary incentives for producers to invest in infrastructure. The shellfish industry in British Columbia (BC), Canada, is presented as a case study of a transition from a primarily common property wild fishery to a rights‐based system for aquaculture. In BC, seafood production has grown substantially during the past two decades as a result of aquaculture production. However, despite the inherent economic advantages of the tenuring system for increasing seafood production, rights to aquaculture sites in BC remain highly controversial, particularly in response to environmental concerns and infringements on Aboriginal territorial claims. Shellfish farming has, to‐date, been far less controversial than salmon farming; however, shellfish aquaculture has not been uniformly adopted across the province, and analyses of industry capacity or economic opportunities for coastal communities have failed to adequately explain development patterns. This paper, which identifies perceptions of the risks and benefits of the shellfish aquaculture tenuring system, presents the results of 56 interviews conducted with individuals involved in shellfish production in BC. Results indicate that heightened perceptions of risk about shellfish aquaculture tenuring are related to unresolved Aboriginal territorial claims, economic dependence on wild shellfish resources, as well as place‐based values favouring access to wild resources. Underlying values and cultural understandings also strongly shape public perceptions of the risks of aquaculture, and as such, influence local decisions to either accept or resist industry growth. In this case, interviewees' risk perceptions were found to be more important indicators of the potential for industry expansion than studies of capacity or economic cost‐benefit analyses.     

Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal relations and sustainable forest management in Canada: The influence of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples

This paper provides an overview of the emerging role of Aboriginal people in Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) in Canada over the past decade. The 1996 Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP) provided guidance and recommendations for improving Aboriginal peoples' position in Canadian society, beginning with strengthening understanding and building relationships between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal parties. This paper explores the extent to which advances in Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal relationships and Aboriginal forestry have been made as a result of RCAP's call for renewed relationships based on co-existence among nations. Such changes have begun to alter the context in which Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal relationships exist with respect to SFM. While governments themselves have generally not demonstrated the leadership called for by RCAP in taking up these challenges, industry and other partners are demonstrating some improvements. A degree of progress has been achieved in terms of lands and resources, particularly with co-management-type arrangements, but a fundamental re-structuring needed to reflect nation-to-nation relationships has not yet occurred. Other factors related to increasing Aboriginal participation in SFM, such as the recognition of Aboriginal and treaty rights, are also highlighted, along with suggestions for moving Aboriginal peoples' SFM agenda forward in the coming years.     

Hybridization,agency discretion,and implementation of the U.S. Endangered Species Act

The U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires that the “best available scientific and commercial data” be used to protect imperiled species from extinction and preserve biodiversity. However, it does not provide specific guidance on how to apply this mandate. Scientific data can be uncertain and controversial, particularly regarding species delineation and hybridization issues. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) had an evolving hybrid policy to guide protection decisions for individuals of hybrid origin. Currently, this policy is in limbo because it resulted in several controversial conservation decisions in the past. Biologists from FWS must interpret and apply the best available science to their recommendations and likely use considerable discretion in making recommendations for what species to list, how to define those species, and how to recover them. We used semistructured interviews to collect data on FWS biologists’ use of discretion to make recommendations for listed species with hybridization issues. These biologists had a large amount of discretion to determine the best available science and how to interpret it but generally deferred to the scientific consensus on the taxonomic status of an organism. Respondents viewed hybridization primarily as a problem in the context of the ESA, although biologists who had experience with hybridization issues were more likely to describe it in more nuanced terms. Many interviewees expressed a desire to continue the current case‐by‐case approach for handling hybridization issues, but some wanted more guidance on procedures (i.e., a “flexible” hybrid policy). Field‐level information can provide critical insight into which policies are working (or not working) and why. The FWS biologists’ we interviewed had a high level of discretion, which greatly influenced ESA implementation, particularly in the context of hybridization.     

Judging adaptive management practices of U.S. agencies

All U.S. federal agencies administering environmental laws purport to practice adaptive management (AM), but little is known about how they actually implement this conservation tool. A gap between the theory and practice of AM is revealed in judicial decisions reviewing agency adaptive management plans. We analyzed all U.S. federal court opinions published through 1 January 2015 to identify the agency AM practices courts found most deficient. The shortcomings included lack of clear objectives and processes, monitoring thresholds, and defined actions triggered by thresholds. This trio of agency shortcuts around critical, iterative steps characterizes what we call AM‐lite. Passive AM differs from active AM in its relative lack of management interventions through experimental strategies. In contrast, AM‐lite is a distinctive form of passive AM that fails to provide for the iterative steps necessary to learn from management. Courts have developed a sophisticated understanding of AM and often offer instructive rather than merely critical opinions. The role of the judiciary is limited by agency discretion under U.S. administrative law. But courts have overturned some agency AM‐lite practices and insisted on more rigorous analyses to ensure that the promised benefits of structured learning and fine‐tuned management have a reasonable likelihood of occurring. Nonetheless, there remains a mismatch in U.S. administrative law between the flexibility demanded by adaptive management and the legal objectives of transparency, public participation, and finality.