辽宁省环境区划方法和分区系统

根据全省自然环境和社会环境结构特征、分异规律、所存在的主要环境问题,依据区内相似性与区间差异性的基本原则,进行了三个层次的三级环境区划。研究各环境区的环境结构、环境特征与环境灾害、环境污染等问题之间的内在联系;揭示生态环境失调与人类生产活动之间的相互关系;探讨各环境区经济发展的环境负荷以及今后发展方向与途径;提出各环境区主要环境问题及其相应的防治、管理对策。     

论环保意识与现代化工企业的营销观

回顾了市场营销对企业发展的核心作用；讨论了环保意识的增强对营销活动的影响以及环保法规与经济调控对企业的巨大压力；介绍了适应时代要求的社会环境营销观的内容及对现代化工企业的影响，并对化工企业如何树立新型营销观进行了探讨。     

灾害发生时影响居民心理承受能力的社会心理因素分析

目的：探讨影响个体面对自然灾害时心理承受能力的社会心理因素．方法，采用问卷调查的方式，运用因素分析法和相关分析法对1000余名居民进行测评．结果。①个体面对灾害时的心理承受能力的影响因素为。灾害意识、灾时行为、灾害认知、社会支持，②通过相关分析，灾时行为对心理承受能力的影响最大。     

地震的社会经济影响

在查阅前人研究成果的基础上,分析了地震造成社会灾害严重、影响地区经济发展的现象,认为地震灾害对一个地区所造成的影响程度与该地区的承灾力有关,并影响地区经济的可持续发展.     

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.     

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.     

官方媒体参与下不同风险感知群体竞争模型及其演化规律

为识别公众风险感知的演化规律和官方媒体参与的作用机制，首先，根据公众的行为表现划分不同风险感知群体，并分析群体间的相互竞争和官方媒体的扰动作用；然后，通过扩展Lotka Volterra模型建立群体间的相互竞争模型；在此基础上，通过推导模型平衡点及其稳定性分析模型演化规律；最后，运用数值仿真考查了官方媒体的参与对模型演化的影响。研究结果表明:模型演化具有3种结果情景，官方媒体参与能够显著改变模型演化的速度和结果。     

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.