城市能源利用与环境保护的综合管理初探

能源短缺和环境污染已成为中国推行全面协调可持续发展的重要制约因素,作为能源消耗的主体和环境污染的控制重点,在城市层面推动能源发展战略的转变和强化环境保护是发展的基本要求.鉴于能源与环境之间的高度关联性,在管理方面要求对能源发展和环境保护进行统筹考虑和综合管理,充分强调能源经济效率和环境制约因素在能源发展中的作用.通过制定合理的产业能效标准和排放绩效标准,为城市经济、能源和环境的可持续性发展提供科学性、系统性决策支持.     

基于大数据挖掘技术的地震舆情感知研究

对地震舆情信息的深入感知和有效管理,能够保障社会和谐发展.提出一个基于大数据技术和深度学习的地震舆情感知平台,基于Hadoop和MongoDB大数据技术实现对海量实时地震舆情数据的处理和存储.基于Word2vec和LSTM的融合模型能够有效实现震后网民的情感识别,为舆情预警提供支持.以台湾5.8级地震舆情数据为例,对该...     

考虑公众选择偏好的应急避难安置双阶段选址-分配模型

为使开放避难场所符合公众自行避难的实际情况,借鉴Huff模型量化公众选择行为,构建双阶段选址-分配模型,第1阶段确定开放避难场所位置,第2阶段将溢出容量的灾民二次分配到有剩余容量的避难场所,并利用改进粒子群算法进行求解。研究结果表明：双阶段选址-分配模型能够实现同一需求点灾民前往不同避难场所的过程,管理者干预政策能够使服务人数大幅度增加,避免资源浪费、灾民流离失所且二次分配情况主要依赖于第1阶段的结果。研究结果可为管理部门规划应急避难场所提供参考。     

Privatisation and outsourcing in wartime: the humanitarian challenges

The tendency today to privatise many activities hitherto considered the exclusive preserve of the state has given rise to sharp debate. The specific nature of humanitarian emergencies elucidates in particularly stark contrast some of the main challenges connected to the privatisation and outsourcing of essential public services, such as the provision of drinking water and health care. Privatising the realms of defence and security, which are at the very core of state prerogative, raises several legal and humanitarian concerns. This article focuses on the roles and responsibilities of the various parties involved in armed conflicts, especially those of private companies engaged in security, intelligence and interrogation work, and in the provision of water supply and health services. It highlights the need for humanitarian and development actors to grasp better the potential risks and opportunities related to privatisation and outsourcing with a view to supplying effective protection and assistance to communities affected by war.     

突发事件下安全舆情的传播与演变——以江苏响水天嘉宜化工有限公司“3.21”特别重大爆炸事故为例

为明确突发事件安全舆情传播与演变路径,提高企业防控突发事件安全舆情传播风险能力,降低衍生灾害发生概率,在文献分析及事故致因理论基础上,构建突发事件安全舆情传播与演变过程的系统动力学（SD）模型,并运用Vensim软件对以江苏响水天嘉宜化工有限公司“3.21”特别重大爆炸事故为例进行仿真实验,模拟安全舆情传播与演变动态过程。结果表明:突发事件安全舆情传播与演变主要受事件自身、媒体、相关企业监管层、相关企业执行层4个主体的共同影响,其中事件自身因素起效时间最早,相关企业监管层影响作用最大、维持时间最持久,相关企业执行层影响最直接。     

基于改进模体方法的国家应急组织合作网络基元比较

为分析和比较应对非常规突发事件过程中,由不同类型组织个体及其不同频次合作关系构成的应急复杂组织网络的微观结构特征,研究运用表征个体差异和关系强弱的改进模体分析方法,以中国和美国国家应急组织合作网络为例,比较分析其基元同构与异构特征。结果表明:中美应急组织系统不同类型的应急主导和支持组织构成的主要合作模式具有同构性,但子图结构数量分布具有异构性;考虑个体间关系频次差异,中美应急组织网络基元合作模式具有形式同构但相对数量分布异构的特征;比较而言,美国合作网络为分布式、分权化和关系型基元构型,中国合作网络具有集中式、集权化和契约型基元特征。     

环境司法专门化下的特殊环境诉讼规则

我国的环境司法处于发展初期,有关环境纠纷的司法救济程序散落在不同的部门法中。为了维护国家环境安全和公共环境利益,构建环境司法专门化势在必行,但是在特殊的环境保护法院进行专门化的环境审判过程中,出现环境诉讼保护对象的争议性、生态环境损害责任承担的特殊性等问题亟待解决,环境民事公益诉讼和生态环境损害赔偿诉讼等特殊环境诉讼规则应运而生,虽然目前还面临着一些困境,但是整体上构建环境司法体系的进程依然在不断推进。     

生态环境损害赔偿诉讼：定义与定位矫正

面对生态环境损害赔偿诉讼这一新型诉讼形式,准确把握其定义和定位至关重要。现有生态环境损害赔偿诉讼按国家自然资源所有权私权化路径进行制度构建,其现行定义为特殊私益诉讼,现行定位为环境行政替代工具。这种定义与定位导致其与环境公益诉讼割裂,运行序位上优先于环境民事公益诉讼,引起国家机关角色错位。生态环境损害赔偿诉讼与环境民事公益诉讼的诉讼标的相同,救济和保护的利益均为环境公益,其定义应回归公益诉讼本位;政府在环境公益保护上有着广泛的职权和手段,是环境公共治理的优先主体,仅在少数行政不能的情形下才有借助司法的必要性和合理性,其在定位上应作为环境行政执法的补充机制在有限范围内发挥作用。据此,生态环境损害赔偿诉讼在制度体系上应与既有环境民事公益诉讼置于同一诉讼系属统筹立法,在诉讼序位上应让位于社会组织提起的环境民事公益诉讼。     

浅谈如何开展环境监测类设施公众开放日活动

随着城市工业化的快速发展,突发性环境污染事故逐渐增多,因此,环境公众开放日活动显得尤为重要。本文结合实际情况,探讨如何开展监测类公众开放日活动。     

Evaluation of give kids a boost: A school-based program to increase booster seat use among urban children in economically disadvantaged areas

Objective: This study evaluated the effectiveness of a series of 1-year multifaceted school-based programs aimed at increasing booster seat use among urban children 4–7 years of age in economically disadvantaged areas.

Methods: During 4 consecutive school years, 2011–2015, the Give Kids a Boost (GKB) program was implemented in a total of 8 schools with similar demographics in Dallas County. Observational surveys were conducted at project schools before project implementation (P₀), 1–4 weeks after the completion of project implementation (P₁), and 4–5 months later (P₂). Changes in booster seat use for the 3 time periods were compared for the 8 project and 14 comparison schools that received no intervention using a nonrandomized trial process.

The intervention included (1) train-the-trainer sessions with teachers and parents; (2) presentations about booster seat safety; (3) tailored communication to parents; (4) distribution of fact sheets/resources; (5) walk-around education; and (6) booster seat inspections.

The association between the GKB intervention and proper booster seat use was determined initially using univariate analysis. The association was also estimated using a generalized linear mixed model predicting a binomial outcome (booster seat use) for those aged 4 to 7 years, adjusted for child-level variables (age, sex, race/ethnicity) and car-level variables (vehicle type). The model incorporated the effects of clustering by site and by collection date to account for the possibility of repeated sampling.

Results: In the 8 project schools, booster seat use for children 4–7 years of age increased an average of 20.9 percentage points between P₀ and P₁ (P₀ = 4.8%, P₁ = 25.7%; odds ratio [OR] = 6.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.5, 8.7; P < .001) and remained at that level in the P₂ time period (P₂ = 25.7%; P < .001, for P₀ vs. P₂) in the univariate analysis. The 14 comparison schools had minimal change in booster seat use. The multivariable model showed that children at the project schools were significantly more likely to be properly restrained in a booster seat after the intervention (OR = 2.7; 95% CI, 2.2, 3.3) compared to the P₀ time period and compared to the comparison schools.

Conclusion: Despite study limitations, the GKB program was positively associated with an increase in proper booster seat use for children 4–7 years of age in school settings among diverse populations in economically disadvantaged areas. These increases persisted into the following school year in a majority of the project schools. The GKB model may be a replicable strategy to increase booster seat use among school-age children in similar urban settings.