美欧中印“国家自主贡献”目标的力度和公平性评估

基于气候公平的不同原则,采用动态的衡量指标,建立了公平分配未来碳排放空间的综合性框架,计算了基数、平等、能力、责任和混合方案下2010~2100年全球累积碳排放配额的地区分布,并评估了美欧中印“国家自主贡献（Intended Nationally Determined Contribution,INDC）”目标的力度,提出了各国减排目标力度应当增加的程度.结果表明：美欧中印总体的INDC力度离实现2℃目标仍有差距,不同方案下的排放差距为8.0~9.6Gt CO₂,超出2030年2℃目标下全球排放的比例为20%~24%.在各自最为有利的方案下,中印能满足实现2℃目标的公平分配方案的低限要求.而在所有方案下美欧距离实现2℃目标的公平分配要求均有差距,需要进一步提高力度.公平指标的动态和静态衡量方法,以及历史责任计量起始年的选取,对公平分配的结果影响很大.     

基于纳污红线的河流排污权优化分配模型

实行水功能区限制纳污红线的水资源管理制度,在理论和实践中必须要建立河流污染物总量控制管理制度,而实行污染物总量控制,首先要确定河流排污权的初始分配方案。结合我国现行流域水功能区划成果,以水功能区作为排污权初始分配主体开展排污权分配研究,提出由河流环境保护部门确定河流总体排污权,首先通过纵向配置将排污权分配给水功能区,然后通过横向配置将初始排污权分配给排污者的一种纵向加横向分配模式。以资源分配的公平性和效率为管理目标,并以污染物总量控制、浓度控制、企业生产连续性等为约束条件,建立了河流排污权多目标分配优化模型。最后利用多目标演化算法对算例进行了求解,验证了方法的可行性,且此分配方式所获得的环境节余容量最大     

基于基尼系数的水污染负荷分配模糊优化决策模型

从水污染负荷分配涉及的社会、经济、资源、环境和技术管理等领域筛选出6个指标,构建以基尼系数为度量标准的水污染负荷公平分配评价指标体系。基于统计数据信息的模糊性、不准确性以及不同评价指标重要性程度的差异,建立了带有弹性约束和信息熵权的水污染物总量分配模糊优化决策模型,并将其应用于巢湖流域COD和氨氮削减负荷的分摊。研究结果表明,所建模糊优化模型较好地克服了现有基尼系数分配方法的不足,是一种较为理想的分配模式。     

全球碳排放权分配与减排分担研究——基于环境约束与公平感受的视角

排放权分配与减排分担始终是国际气候治理的关键问题,基于2℃环境约束与公平感受视角,利用多原则综合加权的分配方法,对全球排放权分配与减排分担展开研究,其结论如下:(1)在温升控制目标下,全球年均排放空间为177.42亿t;满足公平感受要求的全球年均配额为207.59亿t;以2015年实际排放为例,全球年均贡献减排与责任减排分别为30.17亿t、120.42亿t。(2)应用六大单一原则的排放权配额分配,其结果相差悬殊;发达国家和地区普遍偏好等产出原则,发展中国家和地区偏好排放责任原则;基于公平感受的综合加权分配方案降低了单一原则分配的规则"刚性",能缓解分配中的"南北"失衡现象。(3)减排分担结果显示,分担集中于少数Ⅰ类地区的国家和地区,而大多数Ⅴ类地区的国家和地区减排分担不高,当前全球仍处于责任减排阶段。因此,排放权分配要在公平与可行、总量目标与个体标准之间寻求平衡,充分挖掘减排潜力;减排分担应坚持两个区分,减排目标实现按三阶段渐进。     

Information,beliefs, and motivation: The antecedents to human resource attributions

Despite significant interest in the attributions employees make about their organization's human resource (HR) practices, there is little understanding of the antecedents of HR attributions. Drawing on attribution theory, we suggest that HR attributions are influenced by information (perceptions of distributive and procedural fairness), beliefs (organizational cynicism), and motivation (perceived relevance). We test a model through a two‐wave survey of 347 academic faculty in the United Kingdom, examining their attributions of the purpose of their institution's workload management framework. After two preliminary studies (an interview study and a cross‐sectional survey) to establish contextually relevant attributions, we find that fairness and cynicism are important for the formation of internal attributions of commitment but less so for cost‐saving or exploitation attributions. Fairness and cynicism also interact such that distributive fairness buffers the negative attributional effect of cynicism, and individuals are more likely to attribute fair procedures to external forces if they are cynical about their organization. This study furthers the application of attribution theory to the organizational domain while making significant contributions to our understanding of the HR‐performance process.     

It is time for justice: How time changes what we know about justice judgments and justice effects

Organizational justice is an important determinant of workplace attitudes, decisions, and behaviors. However, understanding workplace fairness requires not only examining what happens but also when it happens, in terms of justice events, perceptions, and reactions. We organize and discuss findings from 194 justice articles with temporal aspects, selected from over a thousand empirical justice articles. By examining temporal aspects, our findings enrich and sometimes challenge the answers to three key questions in the organizational justice literature relating to (i) when individuals pay attention to fairness, including specific facets, (ii) how fairness judgments form and evolve, and (iii) how reactions to perceived (in)justice unfold. Our review identifies promising avenues for empirical work and emphasizes the importance of developing temporal theories of justice. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

环境政策的公平与效率分析

本文探讨了费用效益分配中的公平与效率问题，对环境管理、排污标准、环境税（费）、排污权交易等环境政策的公平与效率作了进一步的分析。     

Defining and achieving sustainable development

SUMMARY

This paper analyses the fundamental problems of defining and achieving sustainable development. A common core of the various definitions of sustainability circulating is identified. Economic and scientific approaches to operationalize sustainability generally lead to management rules, which — if obeyed — should guarantee sustainability. Since it is not possible to precisely predict the future, this scientific—technical—economic route to sustainability may fail. A second, ethical way, to sustainability which interprets sustainability as an ideal for fair play is introduced. How the two different ways may complement one another with a three-step hierarchy of political goals is elucidated.     

Practical sustainability criteria for decision-making

SUMMARY

The new paradigm of sustainability necessitates revisions to traditional decision-making processes. This paper, which is the first in a series of four, outlines the changes required for decision-making to reflect sustainability concerns. Three sustainability criteria, that are the focus of the three subsequent papers, are introduced and the rationale for each is explained. A framework for incorporating the three sustainability criteria into the decision-making process is briefly outlined. The paper ends with the introduction to a case study, the North Central Project (NCP) for electricity supply alternatives. The NCP is used in the three following papers to demonstrate the individual components of the new approach to sustainable decision-making.     

Does process fairness affect job performance? It only matters if they plan to stay

Incorporating a social exchange perspective, we examined the joint impact of process fairness and turnover intentions on job performance. Results from two independent samples suggest that employee turnover intentions moderate relations between process fairness perceptions and employee job performance. Specifically, the positive effects of the two types of process fairness on performance were stronger for employees who planned to stay with the organization than for those who intended to leave. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.