日本战略环境评价的经验及对我国的启示

战略环境评价（SEA）在日本已成为政府和地方公共团体实施可持续发展战略的一个重要手段。简要回顾了日本战略环境评价的发展情况，着重介绍了开展战略环境评价的基本指导原则及实施过程中的注意事项。综合日本的实践经验及我国的实际情况。提出了我国开展SEA的几点建议。     

战略环境评价的几个基本问题

阐述了战略、环境效应与环境影响、战略环境评价等基本概念，分析了战略环境影响发生机理，提出战略环境评价的三种类型，即预测型ＳＥＡ、监控型ＳＥＡ和回顾型ＳＥＡ，并探讨了三类ＳＥＡ的区别和联系。     

论战略环境评价中的公众参与

介绍了公众参与对于战略环境评价 ( SEA)的意义 ;着重分析了 SEA中公众参与实施的关键环节 :即公众参与者界定 ,公众参与内容 ,公众参与时机 ,公众参与方式及公众参与反馈信息处理 ,并阐述了 SEA中公众参与的局限性。     

International externalities, strategic interaction, and domestic politics

Domestic politics can sometimes play an influential role when externalities have strategic and international implications. If voters delegate the choice to policymakers and if individual countries independently determine their environmental policy using a consumption tax on the emissions generating good, the result could be an outcome that is inferior to the one preferred by the median voter in the absence of delegation. On the other hand, if the international externality is unilateral in nature, rather than reciprocal, we find that delegation is largely irrelevant, since voters’ choice of policymaker is no longer strategic in character. Similarly, if voters anticipate policymakers successfully coordinating their policies at a later stage, there also will be no difference between the policymakers’ and the median voters’ aggregate weighting of environmental emissions.     

战略环境影响评价与项目环境影响评价之比较

从单个项目环境影响评价(简称EIA)的局限性出发,论述了战略环境影响评价(简称SEA)产生的原因、概念及发展现状,通过SEA与EIA的比较,说明SEA区别于EIA的特点,指出开展SEA研究的重要意义。     

生态学理念在城市化进程战略环境评价中的应用

城市化，生活化是人类历史发展的必然趋势，城市化进程中，SEA是实施城市可持续发展战略的有效工具，在城市化进程SEA中引入以可持续发展为核心的生态学理论是引导城市环境协调发展的重要一环，本文探讨了生态学理论在SEA中运用，为保证城市的持续有序发展，在城市化进程中，SEA应充分考虑环境可持续性，社会可持续性，经济可持续性，土地可持续性。     

战略环境评价的国际研究动向

战略环境评价是国际上近年来的研究热点,但就目前来看还没有对其形成统一的认识和理解。以近年来相关研究的文章和案例为基础,总结并阐述了国际上战略环境评价研究的3个明显的动向:以决策为目标的战略环境评价,以传统环境影响评价为基础的战略环境评价和与可持续发展战略结合的战略环境评价。     

两种管理科学方法在城市化SEA中的应用

城市化和城市发展已经成为世界关注的焦点。正确看待城市化SEA，并将管理科学中的方法结合，从定性到定量综合集成(meta—synthesis)引入城市化SEA进行初步探讨。     

Beyond Frames: Recovering the Strategic in Climate Communication

Recent calls for communication scholars and practitioners to identify effective communication means for mobilizing constituencies to address climate change often fall to distinguish between communicative acts that “mobilize” and mobilization that enables a particular end. The latter presupposes an account of the intentional or strategic alignment of mobilization, that is, the predicted or assumed relationships among a mobilized public, the mode(s) of influence or leverage this creates, and the expected consequences of such influence, i.e., how specific communicative efforts are related to outcomes or “effects” within a system. This essay argues that the neglect of strategic alignments in some recent climate communication campaigns have caused these campaigns to be non-adaptive at the scale and/or urgency required. Drawing on case studies of the 2007 Step It Up initiative and the Sierra Club's “Beyond Coal” campaign, the essay proposes viewing the strategic as an heuristic for identifying openings within networks of contingent relationships and the potential of certain communicative efforts to interrupt or leverage change within systems of power.     

Positive framing does not solve the tragedy of the commons

We investigate whether positive framing increases cooperation in three social dilemmas with slightly different properties: a linear public goods (PG) game, a non-linear PG game, and a common pool resource (CPR) game. Results from our laboratory experiments show that contributions to a linear PG are higher if the externality is framed positively, rather than negatively, corroborating earlier findings by Andreoni (1995). By contrast, we find no such framing effects in the non-linear PG game or the CPR game. In these games, the best response in the material payoffs is to contribute less if others contribute more, counteracting effects of pro-social preferences. Positive framing therefore does not help to solve the tragedy of the commons.