Integrated strategies to reduce vulnerability and advance adaptation,mitigation, and sustainable development

Determinants of adaptive and mitigative capacities (e.g., availability of technological options, and access to economic resources, social capital and human capital) largely overlap. Several factors underlying or related to these determinants are themselves indicators of sustainable development (e.g., per capita income; and various public health, education and research indices). Moreover, climate change could exacerbate existing climate-sensitive hurdles to sustainable development (e.g., hunger, malaria, water shortage, coastal flooding and threats to biodiversity) faced specifically by many developing countries. Based on these commonalities, the paper identifies integrated approaches to formulating strategies and measures to concurrently advance adaptation, mitigation and sustainable development. These approaches range from broadly moving sustainable development forward (by developing and/or nurturing institutions, policies and infrastructure to stimulate economic development, technological change, human and social capital, and reducing specific barriers to sustainable development) to reducing vulnerabilities to urgent climate-sensitive risks that hinder sustainable development and would worsen with climate change. The resulting sustainable economic development would also help reduce birth rates, which could mitigate climate change and reduce the population exposed to climate change and climate-sensitive risks, thereby reducing impacts, and the demand for adaptation. The paper also offers a portfolio of pro-active strategies and measures consistent with the above approaches, including example measures that would simultaneously reduce pressures on biodiversity, hunger, and carbon sinks. Finally it addresses some common misconceptions that could hamper fuller integration of adaptation and mitigation, including the notions that adaptation may be unsuitable for natural systems, and mitigation should necessarily have primacy over adaptation.

环境友好城市建设初探——以上海为例

文章试图在可持续发展思想的引导下,运用"环境友好"的理念,研究和阐述了"环境友好城市"的内涵。并以上海为例,提出了环境友好城市的发展目标和建设方向,选用构建指标体系的方式,对城市的环境友好程度进行评估,提出了推进和实施环境友好城市建设的保障措施体系。     

北京山区小流域治理措施综述

山区小流域综合治理,是中国治理水土流失的主要形式.近10年来,随着可持续发展概念的引入,山区小流域治理与经济开发、资源保护相结合的战略思想逐渐被人们认识和接受,实现流域的可持续发展,已成为当今小流域治理活动的准则.综述主要对北京山区小流域治理措施进行了总结,并指出小流域治理需要综合运用多种措施;小流域治理必须充分考虑流域特征,因地制宜,分类治理.     

矿区可持续发展能力建设中生态环境管理研究

实现矿区的可持续发展有赖于发展模式的转变,转变传统的生态环境管理的基本观念,提出要完善和优化矿区的生态环境管理体制,建立矿区"环境-资源-经济"信息管理系统和生态环境综合分析决策模型,寓经济发展于环境管理中,寓环境管理建设于经济发展中,寓矿区发展于环境和经济的协调发展之中,推进矿区持续发展,为矿区环境保护和经济发展建立一个和谐的可持续发展模式.     

Applying the precautionary principle to consumer household cleaning product development

Hazardous chemicals are pervasive in household disinfectant products. Many ingredients have established associations with acute and chronic human health conditions as well as with environmental damage. Although these associations are suggested but not proven, they are of great concern. This article describes the application of the precautionary principle to the selection of an anti-microbial active ingredient for a botanical disinfectant when significant uncertainty exists around the hazard and risk of traditional disinfectant active ingredients. We show that application of the precautionary principle does not stifle innovation and facilitates a responsible approach to product development.     

An environmental impact assessment of quantum dot photovoltaics (QDPV) from raw material acquisition through use

Some emerging technologies are expected to be pivotal for solving many of the environmental challenges faced today, especially those related to energy. However, many of these technologies may incur significant environmental impacts over their life cycle, while having environmental benefits during their use. This paper presents results of a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of a proposed type of nanophotovoltaic, quantum dot photovoltaic (QDPV) module. The LCA is confined to the stages of raw materials acquisition, manufacturing, and use. The impacts of QDPV are compared with other types of PV modules and energy sources - both renewable and nonrenewable. To provide a comprehensive comparative assessment, QDPV modules were compared with mature as well as emerging PV types for which data are available. Comparative assessment with other types of energy sources includes coal, oil, lignite, natural gas, diesel, nuclear, wind, and hydropower.QDPV modules may have the potential to overcome two current barriers of solar technology: low efficiencies and high manufacturing costs. If higher efficiencies are realized, QDPV modules could pave the way to large scale implementation of solar energy, helping nations move toward greater energy independence. On the other hand, candidate materials as quantum dots for solar cell applications are mostly compound semiconductors such as cadmium selenide, cadmium telluride, and lead sulfide which may be toxic and for which renewable options are limited. Toxic effects of these materials may be exacerbated by their nanoscale features.The LCA was carried out using the software SimaPro, and the Ecoinvent Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) database supplemented with available literature and patent information. Our results indicate that while QDPV modules have shorter Energy PayBack Time (EPBT), lower Global Warming Potential (GWP), SO_x and NO_x emissions than other types of PV modules, they have higher heavy metal emissions, underscoring the need for investigation of emerging technologies, especially nano-based ones, from a life cycle perspective. QDPV modules are better in all impact categories assessed than carbon-based energy sources but they have longer EPBT than wind and hydropower and higher GWP.     

Assessment of eco-labelling criteria development from a strategic sustainability perspective

To turn current patterns of consumption and production in a sustainable direction, solid and understandable market information on the socio-ecological performance of products is needed. Eco-labelling programmes have an important role in this communication. The aim of this study is to investigate what gaps there may be in the current criteria development processes in relation to a strategic sustainability perspective and develop recommendations on how such presumptive gaps could be bridged. First a previously published generic framework for strategic sustainable development is described and applied for the assessment of two eco-labelling programmes. Data for the assessment is collected from literature and in semi-structured interviews and discussions with eco-labelling experts.The assessment revealed that the programmes lack both an operational definition of sustainability, and a statement of objectives to direct and drive the criteria development processes. Consequently they also lack guidelines for how product category criteria might gradually develop in any direction. The selected criteria mainly reflect the current reality based on a selection of negative impacts in ecosystems, but how this selection, or prioritization, is made is not clearly presented. Finally, there are no guidelines to ensure that the criteria developers represent a broad enough competence to embrace all essential sustainability aspects.In conclusion the results point at deficiencies in theory, process and practice of eco-labelling, which hampers cohesiveness, transparency and comprehension. And it hampers predictability, as producers get no support in foreseeing how coming revisions of criteria will develop. This represents a lost opportunity for strategic sustainable development. It is suggested that these problems could be avoided by informing the criteria development process by a framework for strategic sustainable development, based on backcasting from basic sustainability principles.     

Critical perspectives of sustainable development research and practice

Sustainable development has been intensely debated for more than twenty years, but real progress of our societies to become more sustainable is very slow. Therefore this special issue provides a forum for critical perspectives of Sustainable Development Research and Practice. The papers are grouped into three clusters: a. Sustainability Science, b. Economic Problems and c. Corporate Contributions to Sustainable Development.Although a single special issue cannot address the entire array of issues pertaining to progress of sustainability related research, the selected papers highlight special aspects of sustainability research either due to their theoretical contributions or because they report on valuable empirical evidence. The main goal of sustainability research should be to contribute to our understanding of sustainability problems and to develop and help to implement solutions to solve them. This can be described as the relevance of sustainability research. A precondition to gain relevance is the rigor of sustainability science: it has to be based on solid scientific principles and methods. Additionally it has to be regarded that Sustainable Development is dynamic and that it has both normative and practical aspects. It is concluded that sustainability science and practice should be based upon these four central aspects: rigor, relevance, normative aspects and dynamic     

中国区域可持续发展综合优势能力空间关联分析

采用空间统计方法研究了中国31个省、市、自治区的可持续发展综合优势能力的空间关联关系,结果显示中国可持续发展的总资产能力、总负债能力和综合优势能力均存在较强的空间依赖性。综合优势能力Z值与总资产Z值存在显著正相关（R=0.944）,而与总负债Z值存在显著的负相关（R=-0.952）。利用综合优势能力空间关联Z值对中国可持续发展能力进行初步的分区,并采用古典聚类（K means）方法对中国可持续发展能力进行同质性研究,利用K聚类结果对空间聚类（G统计）结果进行修正,将中国可持续发展能力划分为3种区域类型：中国东部沿海强发展区域、中国中部中等发展区域和中国西部弱发展区域。分区结果与中国传统的东部、中部、西部区域划分基本对应,东部沿海省市除海南和广西处于中等发展类型外,其他省市均处在强发展类型之列,中国中部全部省市均处于中等发展类型而中国西部全部省市均处于弱发展类型。     

可持续发展中的代际关系研究

人类社会的发展是一个世代发展的过程。因此．代际公平是可持续发展的根本所在。根据“代际”一词有不同的理解。“公平”在不同的社会有不同的含义,尤其是对代际公平的含义、原则进行了探讨。代际公平实现的策略是：基于压力-状态-反应的人力资源可持续开发;基于艾奇沃斯方框图分析的自然资源可持续利用;鉴于客观上当代具有优先权,代际之间在环境污染上则采用非合作博弈。