福州市城区内河引闽冲污后水质变化趋势及防治对策

简述了福州市城区内河河网结构特点和河网水文特征,对1994年-2003年福州城区内河的水质变化趋势进行了分析和评价。结果表明,自1998年福州市全面开始内河引水冲污工程后,内河水质得到了改善,有机污染得到缓解,基本消除了水体的黑臭现象。指出了在内河整治中存在的一些问题。提出,应优化引水方案,最大限度发挥效益;明确河段的使用功能,发挥其潜能;开展生物防治,建立良性循环的水生生态系统,对内河实施综合管理。     

Measurement of public awareness of climate change in China: based on a national survey with 4,025 samples

Just before the new round of UN climate change conference in Bonn, a survey report, named as the Climate Change in the Chinese Mind 2017, was released in Beijing. The investigation was conducted in the form of a computer-assisted telephone survey with a sample size of 4,025 samples, covering 332 prefecture-level administrative units and four municipalities in China. Urban-rural proportion and sex proportion were specially taken into account, so as to demonstrate the Chinese public awareness objectively. The investigation measures the public awareness from six aspects, which includes climate change beliefs, impacts, response, policies, actions, and the assessment of the effectiveness of climate communication. This article presents the key findings of the survey and provides further insights behind the data.     

Moral reasoning in adaptation to climate change

Moral foundations theory argues that moral reasoning is widely observed and fundamental to the legitimacy of relevant governance and policy interventions. A new analytical framework to examine and test how moral reasoning underpins and legitimizes governance and practice on adaptation to climate change risks is proposed. It develops a typology of eight categories of vulnerability-based and system-based moral reasoning that pertain to the dilemmas around adaptation and examines the prevalence of these moral categories in public discourse about specific adaptation issues. The framework is tested using data on climate change impact, adaptation, and societal responsibility, drawn from 14 focus groups comprising 148 participants across the UK. Participants consistently use moral reasoning to explain their views on climate adaptation; these include both vulnerability-based and system-based framings. These findings explain public responses to adaptation options and governance, and have implications for the direction of adaptation policy, including understanding which types of reasoning support politically legitimate interventions.     

Do global climate summits influence public awareness and policy preferences concerning climate change?

A survey-embedded experiment implemented around the time of the 2014 annual Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (N ≈ 1200) examined whether such summits are able to increase citizens’ awareness of climate problems. This study finds that exposure to positive or negative cues about the COP increases climate change awareness, particularly among participants who start out with a low level of awareness. Neither positive nor negative cues about the COP significantly affect people’s policy preferences. Our finding resonates with Bernard Cohen’s observation that the mass media may not often be successful in telling people what to think, but they are successful in telling readers what to think about.     

Another avenue of action: an examination of climate change countermovement industries’ use of PAC donations and their relationship to Congressional voting over time

The political mobilization of American business elites in the 1970s and 1980s has been well studied by political scientists. Environmental sociologists have explored how industries in this elite countermovement have organized to prevent environmental legislation. The literature often focuses on the efforts of this movement to shape public opinion on climate change. However, political scientists argue business elites are running several parallel strategies simultaneously in order to protect their interests. FEC data are utilized in multilevel logit models to examine how donations from industrial Political Action Committees (PACs) relate to Congressional representative’s environmental voting behavior over a 20-year period. Industries associated with the environmental countermovement have increasingly used PAC donations over time, and every additional $10,000 a representative received from countermovement industries significantly decreased odds of their taking the pro-environmental stance even when controlling for representatives’ demographics, districts, Congressional polarization and time-period.     

Why does the United States lack a global warming policy? The corporate inner circle versus public interest sector elites

Why has the United States not adopted global warming policies? Because the inner circle of the corporate elite has opposed these policies despite some corporate support for cap-and-trade and other policies. Pro- and anti-positions taken by think tanks that have led the policy debate in the post-Kyoto period are analyzed in order to demonstrate this. The corporate and upper class social ties of the directors of these pro- and anti-think tanks are examined, revealing a corporate elite split between the inner circle opposing these policies, and a ‘public interest sector’ of corporate law and media corporations along with top executives from higher education and other nonprofits that is supportive of policies addressing global warming. To enable adoption of major global warming policies, the corporate inner circle will need to become supportive and forge a class-wide corporate consensus on the need to address global warming.     

Ambiguity,reasoned determination,and climate-change policy

This paper examines climate-change benefit-cost analysis in the presence of scientific uncertainty in the form of ambiguity. The specific issue addressed is the robustness of benefit-cost analyses of climate-change policy alternatives to relaxation of Savage's original axioms. Two alternatives to subjective expected utility (SEU) are considered: maximin expected utility (MEU) and incomplete expected utility (IEU). Among other results, it is demonstrated that polar opposite recommendations can emerge in an ambiguous decision setting even if all agree on Society's rate of time preference, Society's risk attitudes, the degree of ambiguity faced, and the scientific primitives. We show that, for a simple numerical simulation of our model, an MEU decision maker favors policies which immediately tackle climate change while an IEU decision prefers “business as usual”.“Each agency shall assess the costs and benefits of the intended regulation, and recognizing that some costs and benefits are difficult to quantify, propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its cost.” Executive Order 12866 of the US President.     

The climate adaptation imperative: local choices targeting global problems?

When confronted with the demands of global climate change, what causes some policy-makers to move the climate adaptation agenda forward in their communities, while others seemingly get little accomplished? To answer this question, we first discuss work on policy-drivers in a coupled human–natural systemic context. This summary review of past research helps us develop a set of competing and complementary explanations for why some communities aggressively pursue climate adaptation policies, while others do less. Following the discussion of policy-drivers, we then undertake an aggregate-level analysis of data collected across the 169 towns in Connecticut regarding climate adaptation, thus linking policy to its fundamental global cause. The quantitative data are augmented with interview data from policy-makers and activists from around the New England region.     

Blowing policy bubbles: rethinking emissions targets and low-carbon energy policies in the U.K.

The issue of proportionality is central to climate policy debates about setting targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and the development of low-carbon energy. In effect, these debates centre on whether the perceived social costs outweigh the benefits of policies and, if not, whether this may lead to over-investment or ‘policy bubbles’. Political attention, agenda setting and policy image are all crucial drivers of ambitious policy formation, as seen in the case of the United Kingdom's (U.K.) Climate Change Act (2008). However, as political salience waned and economic depression dragged on, the cost of long-term climate targets has been reconsidered. Based on documentary analysis and 33 interviews with central political actors, this article presents a detailed account of how economic arguments have been used to reinterpret and challenge policies, using the heuristics of ‘over-investment’ and ‘policy bubbles’. Ultimately, arguments about proportionality hinge on which costs and benefits are considered. In the U.K., economic and technical framings are typically prioritised, but they do not explain contradictory and politically motivated policy decisions. We discuss these dynamics within the context of maturing renewable energy technologies, high energy prices and the U.K.’s cross-party consensus approach to climate politics.     

Presenting Triple-Wins? Assessing Projects That Deliver Adaptation,Mitigation and Development Co-benefits in Rural Sub-Saharan Africa

The concept of climate compatible development (CCD) is increasingly employed by donors and policy makers seeking ‘triple-wins’ for development, adaptation and mitigation. While CCD rhetoric is becoming more widespread, analyses drawing on empirical cases that present triple-wins are sorely lacking. We address this knowledge gap. Drawing on examples in rural sub-Saharan Africa, we provide the first glimpse into how projects that demonstrate triple-win potential are framed and presented within the scientific literature. We identify that development projects are still commonly evaluated in terms of adaptation or mitigation benefits. Few are framed according to their benefits across all three dimensions. Consequently, where triple-wins are occurring, they are likely to be under-reported. This has important implications, which underestimates the co-benefits that projects can deliver. A more robust academic evidence base for the delivery of triple-wins is necessary to encourage continued donor investment in activities offering the potential to deliver CCD.