Towards a smallholder hydrology for equitable and sustainable water management

Situations of water scarcity challenge sustainability and threaten small users' access to water. In response to this problem, there has been a search for a method of hydrological analysis that can better represent the needs of small water users. While this search is rooted in the debate favouring a more participatory and inclusive allocation of the resource, it also requires a new focus on smallholder hydrology that can confront the gaps and biases found in current hydrological practices in many countries. This article looks at past hydrological practices and also at results of recent studies, highlighting the perspective of smallholder irrigators in surface water planning in Zimbabwe, and groundwater planning in India. These case studies show that wider social forces, not always best science, drive hydrological practices. However, new frameworks focusing on the water user can emerge for more equitable and sustainable water management.     

The evolution of sustainability

Six separate but related strains of thought have emerged prominently since 1950 in discussions of such phenomena as the interrelationships among rates of population growth, resource use, and pressure on the environment. They are the ecological/carrying capacity root, the resources/environment root, the biosphere root, the critique of technology root, the no growth/slow growth root, and the ecodevelopment root.Each of these strains of thought was fully developed before the word sustainable itself was used. Many of the roots are based on fundamentally opposing assessments of the future of mankind. Many of the roots, such as the ecology/carrying capacity root, are based on physical concepts, and they exclude normative values. Others, such as the ecodevelopment root, include such values as equity, broad participation in governance, and decentralized government.When the word sustainability was first used in 1972 in the context of man's future, in a British book,Blueprint for Survival, normative concepts were prominent. This continued to be the case when the word was first used in 1974 in the United States to justify a no growth economy.Sustainability was first used in a United Nations document in 1978. Normative concepts, encapsulated in the term ecodevelopment, were prominent in the United Nations publications.After about 1978, the term sustainability began to be used not only in technological articles and reports but also in policy documents culminating in the use of the term in the report of the summit meeting of the Group of Seven in 1989.The roots of the term sustainability are so deeply embedded in fundamentally different concepts, each of which has valid claims to validity, that a search for a single definition seems futile. The existence of multiple meaning is tolerable if each analyst describes clearly what he means by sustainability.     

Co-ordination for disasters

This paper was prepared in 1978 on the basis of a review of sociological and anthropological fieldwork conducted up to that time. Although theoretical in presentation its conclusions are formulated in accordance with the author's own extensive observations of organizational response to natural disasters in developing countries, especially those having sudden onset. Practical implications for co-ordination agencies and pre-disaster training are drawn.     

面向国土空间规划的“双评价”：挑战与应对

面向国土空间规划的科学性、可操作性、层级性等内涵,探讨了资源环境承载能力评价和国土空间开发适宜性评价（“双评价”）与国土空间规划之间的基本逻辑问题、应用挑战与应对方法。通过系统梳理“双评价”的理论发展和相关政策响应,剖析了“双评价”在应用探索、内涵扩充、系统支撑三个阶段的研究重点和服务目标,阐明了承载力评价与适宜性评价之间关联逻辑的演进历程。总结了当前“双评价”在应用上的几个关键挑战：一是“双评价”应用于“三区三线”划定的逻辑尚未明确;二是当前承载能力评价与未来规划决策之间存在逻辑悖论;三是“双评价”在不同层级国土空间规划中传导失灵;四是两个评价之间的关联逻辑仍存在争议。为此,提出了应对“双评价”挑战的四点建议：深化理论认知、拓展评价维度、建立传导机制、厘清内在关系,以提升“双评价”对国土空间规划决策的支撑能力。     

生态文明视角下的国土空间底线管控：“双评价”与国土空间规划监测评估预警

生态文明新时代下的空间规划体系对国土空间底线管控提出了明确要求,“双评价”与国土空间规划监测评估预警是底线思维的体现。研究“双评价”与国土空间规划监测评估预警在国土空间底线管控中的作用和地位,通过国土空间规划“一张图”实施监督信息系统的建设,对二者的联系及其相互作用进行体现,构建二者的联动方式,服务于国土空间底线管控及治理的全过程。“双评价”与国土空间规划监测评估预警共同组成底线管控的两个阶段,前者是开展底线管控的基础,后者是底线管控的路径和手段,两者皆是生态文明新时代下国土空间规划底线管控的重要工具,需以国土空间规划“一张图”实施监督信息系统为基础加强两者的有机结合。     

新时代国土整治与生态修复转型思考

针对全球变化影响下的国土空间和生态系统,生态文明建设和国土空间规划是中国在新时代的积极响应,国土整治与生态修复的转型和提升成为必然要求。在介绍国土整治与生态修复概念内涵的基础上,指出中国国土空间生态环境问题的复杂性和生态文明建设的新理念要求决定了国土整治与生态修复的转型。从工作理念、理论基础、技术体系和制度建设等方面,分析了当前国土整治与生态修复工作中存在的不足,主要包括整体综合理念滞后、理论基础体系欠缺、技术支撑相对薄弱、体制机制不尽完善等方面。针对这些不足,提出了新时代国土整治与生态修复转型的路径和策略,主要策略包括强化系统思维、提升理论体系、加强技术支撑、完善机制建设等内容,以期为国土整治与生态修复推进美丽中国建设提供科学依据。     

魅力国土空间:重塑区域特色的国土空间规划策略

国土空间规划的提出使我国的规划体系进入到新的发展时期与发展语境,国土空间开发方向已从生产空间为主导转向生态、生活、生产空间相协调。如何将基于“三生空间”概念的传统国土空间认知提升到丰富文化脉络、生态特征、生活基础的复合魅力国土空间,如何对不同区域的发展进行侧重,杜绝对单一发展模式的盲目跟风,是国家和地方面临的共同重大主题。结合国土空间在历史与现实不同时期的发展表征和形成原因,在回溯空间认知过程、反思空间规划实践的基础上,厘清了魅力国土空间的概念与内涵,提出国土空间规划体系下魅力国土空间的关注焦点,从区域发展平衡、管控弹性调整、空间要素流动、发展目标优化等方面阐述了魅力国土空间的作用与功能。     

国土空间规划新时代旅游规划的定位与转型

我国已经迈入以国土空间规划引领“多规合一”的空间治理新时代,对各专项规划的管控约束性更严、技术性和衔接性要求更高。为此,本文重新审视了旅游规划的性质和地位,并基于产业专项性和空间融合性特征,将旅游规划分为战略规划、协调规划、发展规划和开发规划。以旅游发展规划为示例,提出了六大转型:规划理念从无限思维向边界思维、融合理念和空间思维转变,编制思路从甲方意志向市场导向转变,规划内容从大而全向专而精转变,技术路线从概念逻辑向空间逻辑转变,规划方式从封闭向开放转变,规划技术从缺乏技术到技术融合转变以期推动旅游规划衔接和融入新时代国土空间规划体系,进一步引领中国旅游产业的转型升级和高质量发展。     

A study on the interactions among several plant secondary compounds and aphids

The research, focused on the specific interactions among seven plant secondary compounds and aphids, was carried out and the preliminary results showed: (1) "T-typed tube method" was regarded as the best method compared with others designed to observe the interactions. (2) Cabbage aphid was able to be attracted by laurolene while it was not susceptible to α-pinene, β-pinene and diamylene. (3) Gossypol, a major secondary substance in cotton, was able to be implicated as feeding attractant to cotton aphid. (4) Rutin might be implicated repellent to cotton aphid.     

略谈淮北市城市景观生态建设

为了保护淮北市城市生态环境，拟利用城市景观生态学原理对该市城市景观进行生态设计，包括城市自然组分、非自然组分设计。自然组分包括种群源、廊道、节点等内容，力争使自然组分成为环境质量的控制性组分，使城市生态良性循环、物种多样并持续存在和流动可达，物质循环、能量流动、信息传递畅通。