可持续发展目标下环境影响评价(EIA)的新发展

描述了可持续发展的内涵及其特征，分析了传统ＥＩＡ不适应可持续发展目标的弊端，论述了为适应可持续发展目标而带来的传统ＥＩＡ的新发展，战略环境影响评价，累积影响评价以及强化ＥＩＡ中的公众参与。     

尚勇自然保护区周边地区社会经济现状及可持续发展对策

采用多种调查技术与方法 ,对尚勇自然保护区周边地区社会经济现状进行分析。该区存在群众文化素质偏低 ,医疗卫生状况较差 ,农业生产方式落后 ,保护区管理缺乏群众参与 ,保护区管理部门与周边乡村关系不够融洽等问题。针对这些问题 ,相应地提出了社区社会经济可持续发展的一系列对策     

流域水电规划环境影响的经济评价指标与方法探讨

流域水电开发在带来巨大经济效益的同时,也大范围地影响了流域生态环境。因而,开展流域水电规划环境影响的经济评价具有明显的现实意义。从社会经济和生态环境角度出发,在分析流域水电规划实施后可能产生各种影响的基础上,构建了相应的影响因素识别矩阵,进而分别探讨了社会经济10项评价指标、生态环境9项评价指标及其相应的估算方法,以期为流域水电开发决策提供科学支撑。     

太湖北部夏季浮游藻类多样性与水质评价

于2004年7月对太湖北部浮游藻类的种群组成进行了调查,分析了藻类种属组成的空间分布,利用多种多样性评价指数对水体的污染情况进行了评价,初步探讨了太湖藻类种群组成的变化特征。太湖北部浮游藻类的密度较大,介于2.54×107～8.53×108个·L-1,主要由蓝藻、绿藻、硅藻、甲藻、裸藻和隐藻等组成,以微囊藻为优势种。自湖岸向湖心,单位体积内藻类的个数及生物量逐渐递减,种属逐渐增加。其中含较多指示污染及富营养化程度的藻类种属,各种评价指数显示水体的污染程度较为严重,属中营养—富营养化范畴。     

化工项目无组织废气评价探讨

化工项目无组织废气具有排放量小、种类多、排放点广、难以量化等特点.无组织废气的评价是化工项目环评的重要组成部分,评价的主要思路是找出排放源、筛选出主要的排污环节和污染因子、确定排放源强、科学公正地作出评价结论.通过实例说明了做好无组织废气评价在实践环评工作中的重要性.     

石油石化企业HSSE管理体系运行模式和推进方法

针对石油石化企业HSSE管理体系运行中存在的问题,基于企业实际情况,采用系统方法设计提出了石油石化企业HSSE管理体系运行模式。从企业整体角度,运用战略思维提出HSSE管理体系运行的推进模型和方法,从战略、组织、能力、信息、流程、绩效6个方面,提出HSSE管理体系运行要求。通过创新HSSE管理体系运行模式和推进方法,企业能够从更加宏观的角度,整合有限资源实现HSSE管理体系有效运行,从而提升企业HSSE绩效。     

新平县生态民环境现状调查及评价

采用单因子评价和综合评价相结合的方法对新平县域的生态环境质量进行评价，根据本地区的自然生态特点，综合相关自然和社会因素，确定森林覆盖率，水土流人率，土地垦植率，人口密度等九项指标作为评价标准，评价表明，新平县域的生态环境质量为良，主要的生态问题是坡面积过大，人口密度偏高，应采取不同的措施加以解决。     

水污染环境损害鉴定评估的因果关系判定方法研究

因果关系判定包括环境暴露与环境损害间因果关系判定和环境污染物从源到受体的暴露路径的建立与验证两个部分.因果关系判定是环境损害鉴定评估的重点和难点,因果关系的判定对环境损害案例的结果起着十分重要的作用.在结合印染企业水环境污染事件案例实践基础上,对水环境污染事件环境损害鉴定评估的因果关系判定方法进行了探讨,为环境污染损害鉴定评估方法研究提供技术支持.     

公路水路交通循环经济评价指标体系构建研究

在对公路水路交通行业循环经济和相应统计的发展现状评估的基础上，分析了数据需求，并首次提出了公路水路交通行业循环经济评价指标体系的构建及其调查方法。     

Identifying robust response options to manage environmental change using an Ecosystem Approach: A stress-testing case study for the UK XXX

A diverse range of response options was evaluated in terms of their utility for sustaining ecosystem services in the UK. Robustness of response options was investigated by applying a ‘stress-testing’ method which evaluated expected performance against combined scenarios of socioeconomic and climate change. Based upon stakeholder feedback, a reference scenario representing current trends in climate and socioeconomic drivers (‘business-as-usual’) was used as a dynamic baseline against which to compare results of other scenarios. The robustness of response options was evaluated by their utility in different environmental and social contexts as represented by the scenarios, and linked to their adaptability to adjust to changing conditions. Key findings demonstrate that adaptability becomes increasingly valuable as the magnitude and rate of future change diverges from current trends. Stress-testing also revealed that individual responses in isolation are unlikely to be robust meaning there are advantages from integrating cohesive combinations (bundles) of response options to maximise their individual strengths and compensate for weaknesses. This identifies a role for both top-down and bottom-up responses, including regulation, spatial targeting, incentives and partnership initiatives, and their use in combination through integrated assessment and planning consistent with the adoption of an Ecosystem Approach. Stress-testing approaches can have an important role in future-proofing policy appraisals but important knowledge gaps remain, especially for cultural and supporting ecosystem services. Finally, barriers and enablers to the implementation of more integrated long-term adaptive responses were identified drawing on the ‘4 Is’ (Institutions, Information, Incentives, Identity) conceptual framework. This highlighted the crucial but usually understated role of identity in promoting ownership and uptake of responses.