关于大型社会经营活动安全问题的探讨

笔者列举了相关事例,指出了大型社会经营活动的主要特点;从制度、操作、技术研究、教育4方面分析了目前大型社会经营活动存在的现实突出问题;重点从公共场所安全、应急、疏散、人群、活动容量、旅游安全、安全管理、工作实践这几个方面综述了大型社会经营活动安全相关研究的进展并指出不足之处;在上述研讨的基础上结合风险评价理论等,提出了一个较为完善的保障大型社会经营活动安全的构想,并详细论述其内容、方法及技术路线。该构想对开展大型社会经营活动的事故预防、风险管理、应急处理和控制具有重要参考价值。     

Significant developments in sustainable development law and governance: A proposal

This article develops a practical proposal for progress on sustainable development law. It examines the prospects for an international sustainable development law to provide a framework for more effective, coherent governance. Sustainable development law is briefly defined and an analytical framework is provided. Different degrees of integration between economic, social and environmental law are described. Certain principles of international law related to sustainable development are also highlighted. It is argued that these principles may serve to guide law‐makers and jurists where social, economic and environmental law and policy conflict or overlap. Continuing, underlying questions of sustainable development governance are addressed and its global frameworks analysed. The article also focuses on the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development, held in Johannesburg in August‐September 2002, and its specific mandate for the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) to take related legal developments into account. The article advances a proposal: that governments, economic, social and environmental intergovernmental organizations and other actors establish a ‘network of inquiry’ with members from relevant groups, including legal and academic organizations, and other expert groups, in order to follow, research, analyse and debate legal developments in a balanced way.     

基于安全投入产出模型的城市安全资源优化策略

城市安全投入与安全经济效益是制约城市安全产出的两个关键因素。为了揭示两者间的关系及其在提高城市安全度方面的作用，笔者借鉴安全经济学理论和方法，在研讨安全投入产出概论的基础上，在安全经济效益不变和安全投入量已知的情况下，提出了建立安全投入产出模型的方法。并以企业为例，从微观上验证了模型的有效性。不仅为城市安全管理决策者提供了制定安全投入目标、确定安全投入效用水平的量化工具，而且更加突出了提高安全经济效益的重要性。同时，提出了建立“资源共享”的城市重大危险源安全应急网络策略，为进一步优化城市安全资源配置和提高资源利用率奠定了基础。     

中国水灾社会脆弱性评估方法的改进与应用--以长沙地区为例

中国是洪水灾害发生频繁的国家之一,研究水灾脆弱性对中国的灾害风险管理有重要的意义.但是,合理评估脆弱性尤其是社会脆弱性却面临着极大的挑战.论文对评估社会脆弱性指数的研究现状进行了分析,指出了传统评估方法存在的问题,并尝试改进Hoovering评估模式.选择湘江流域的长沙地区为研究区,应用改进模型对研究区进行了社会脆弱性指数的评估.结果表明,长沙地区社会脆弱性从1980年至2000年基本处于下降趋势,但是在2002年和2003年增长迅速.2003年,长沙5区4县中社会脆弱性指数最大的是开福区,其次是长沙县,而宁乡县的社会脆弱性指数最低.     

Developing an interdisciplinary and cross‐sectoral community of practice in the domain of forests and livelihoods

Although significant resources are being spent researching and fostering the relationship between forests and livelihoods to promote mutually beneficial outcomes, critical gaps in understanding persist. A core reason for such gaps is that researchers, practitioners, and policy makers lack the structured space to interact and collaborate, which is essential for effective, interdisciplinary research, practice, and evaluation. Thus, scientific findings, policy recommendations, and measured outcomes have not always been synthesized into deep, systemic understanding; learning from practice and implementation does not easily find its way into scientific analyses, and science often fails to influence policy. Communities of practice (CofPs) are dynamic sociocultural systems that bring people together to share and create knowledge around a common topic of interest. They offer participants a space and structure within which to develop new, systemic approaches to multidimensional problems on a common theme. Uniquely informed by a systems‐thinking perspective and drawing from the scientific and gray literatures and in‐depth interviews with representatives of established CofPs in the natural resource management and development domain, we argue that a well‐designed and adequately funded CofP can facilitate interdisciplinary and cross‐sectoral relationships and knowledge exchange. Well‐designed CofPs integrate a set of core features and processes to enhance individual, collective, and domain outcomes; they set out an initial but evolving purpose, encourage diverse leadership, and promote collective‐identity development. Funding facilitates effective communication strategies (e.g., in person meetings). We urge our colleagues across sectors and disciplines to take advantage of CofPs to advance the domain of forests and livelihoods.     

When and how to use Q methodology to understand perspectives in conservation research

Understanding human perspectives is critical in a range of conservation contexts, for example, in overcoming conflicts or developing projects that are acceptable to relevant stakeholders. The Q methodology is a unique semiquantitative technique used to explore human perspectives. It has been applied for decades in other disciplines and recently gained traction in conservation. This paper helps researchers assess when Q is useful for a given conservation question and what its use involves. To do so, we explained the steps necessary to conduct a Q study, from the research design to the interpretation of results. We provided recommendations to minimize biases in conducting a Q study, which can affect mostly when designing the study and collecting the data. We conducted a structured literature review of 52 studies to examine in what empirical conservation contexts Q has been used. Most studies were subnational or national cases, but some also address multinational or global questions. We found that Q has been applied to 4 broad types of conservation goals: addressing conflict, devising management alternatives, understanding policy acceptability, and critically reflecting on the values that implicitly influence research and practice. Through these applications, researchers found hidden views, understood opinions in depth and discovered points of consensus that facilitated unlocking difficult disagreements. The Q methodology has a clear procedure but is also flexible, allowing researchers explore long‐term views, or views about items other than statements, such as landscape images. We also found some inconsistencies in applying and, mainly, in reporting Q studies, whereby it was not possible to fully understand how the research was conducted or why some atypical research decisions had been taken in some studies. Accordingly, we suggest a reporting checklist.     

Considering the needs of indigenous and local populations in conservation programs

Local rural and indigenous communities have assumed increasing responsibility for conservation within and between areas buffering the impacts of agricultural or resource‐extraction zones and protected areas. Empowering local communities as central partners in conservation and climate‐change mitigation has allowed many people to gain access to land and citizenship rights but has provided limited improvements in access to social services and economic opportunities even as expectation about their role as environmental stewards grows. These expectations, however, are inconsistent with reality. We conducted multiple field studies in Brazil since the mid‐1980s to illustrate the discrepancies between conservation programs and local conditions and expectations. We suggest that public policies and conservation programs should not delegate responsibility for managing protected areas to local and indigenous communities without considering local needs and expectations and locals’ attitudes toward conservation. In other words, behavior that maintains or improves the environment should not be treated as traditional based on the expectations of outsiders. Framing local populations as traditional environmentalists creates contradictions and frustrations for local populations and for conservation professionals and policy makers.     

Cautioning against overemphasis of normative constructs in conservation decision making

Questions around how to conserve nature are increasingly leading to dissonance in conservation planning and action. While science can assist in unraveling the nature of conservation challenges, conservation responses rely heavily on normative positions and constructs to order actions, aid interpretations, and provide motivation. However, problems can arise when norms are mistaken for science or when they stymy scientific rigor. To highlight these potential pitfalls, we used the ethics-based tool of argument analysis to assess a controversial conservation intervention, the Pelorus Island Goat Control Program. The program proponents' argument for restorative justice was unsound because it relied on weak logical construction overly entrenched in normative assumptions. Overreliance on normative constructs, particularly the invocation of tragedy, creates a sense of urgency that can subvert scientific and ethical integrity, obscure values and assumptions, and increase the propensity for flawed logic. This example demonstrates how the same constructs that drive biodiversity conservation can also drive poor decision making, spur public backlash, and justify poor animal welfare outcomes. To provide clarity, a decision-making flowchart we devised demonstrates how values, norms, and ethics influence one another. We recommend practitioners follow 3 key points to improve decision making: be aware of values, as well as normative constructs and ethical theories that those values inform; be mindful of overreliance on either normative constructs or ethics when deciding action is justified; and be logically sound and transparent when building justifications. We also recommend 5 key attributes that practitioners should be attentive to when making conservation decisions: clarity, transparency, scientific integrity, adaptiveness, and compassion. Greater attention to the role of norms in decision making will improve conservation outcomes and garner greater public support for actions.     

Network analysis of a stakeholder community combatting illegal wildlife trade

The illegal wildlife trade has emerged as a growing and urgent environmental issue. Stakeholders involved in the efforts to curb wildlife trafficking include nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), academia, and state government and enforcement bodies. The extent to which these stakeholders work and communicate among each other is fundamental to effectively combatting illicit trade. Using the United Kingdom as a case study, we used a social network analysis and semistructured interviews of stakeholders to assess communication relationships in the counter wildlife trafficking community. The NGOs consistently occupied 4 of the 5 most central positions in the generated networks, whereas academic institutions routinely occupied 4 of the 5 most peripheral positions. However, NGOs were the least diverse in their communication practices compared with the other stakeholder groups. Stakeholders identified personal relationships as the most important aspect of functioning communication. Participant insights also showed that stakeholder-specific variables (e.g., ethical and confidentiality concerns), competition, and fundraising can have a confounding effect on intercommunication. Evaluating communication networks and intrastakeholder communication trends is essential to creating cohesive, productive, and efficient responses to the challenges of combatting illegal wildlife trade. Article impact statement: Communication among those combatting illegal wildlife trade is confounded by stakeholder variables (ethics, confidentiality), competition, and fundraising.     

Environmental cost of using poor decision metrics to prioritize environmental projects

Conservation decision makers commonly use project‐scoring metrics that are inconsistent with theory on optimal ranking of projects. As a result, there may often be a loss of environmental benefits. We estimated the magnitudes of these losses for various metrics that deviate from theory in ways that are common in practice. These metrics included cases where relevant variables were omitted from the benefits metric, project costs were omitted, and benefits were calculated using a faulty functional form. We estimated distributions of parameters from 129 environmental projects from Australia, New Zealand, and Italy for which detailed analyses had been completed previously. The cost of using poor prioritization metrics (in terms of lost environmental values) was often high—up to 80% in the scenarios we examined. The cost in percentage terms was greater when the budget was smaller. The most costly errors were omitting information about environmental values (up to 31% loss of environmental values), omitting project costs (up to 35% loss), omitting the effectiveness of management actions (up to 9% loss), and using a weighted‐additive decision metric for variables that should be multiplied (up to 23% loss). The latter 3 are errors that occur commonly in real‐world decision metrics, in combination often reducing potential benefits from conservation investments by 30–50%. Uncertainty about parameter values also reduced the benefits from investments in conservation projects but often not by as much as faulty prioritization metrics.