Towards a smallholder hydrology for equitable and sustainable water management

Situations of water scarcity challenge sustainability and threaten small users' access to water. In response to this problem, there has been a search for a method of hydrological analysis that can better represent the needs of small water users. While this search is rooted in the debate favouring a more participatory and inclusive allocation of the resource, it also requires a new focus on smallholder hydrology that can confront the gaps and biases found in current hydrological practices in many countries. This article looks at past hydrological practices and also at results of recent studies, highlighting the perspective of smallholder irrigators in surface water planning in Zimbabwe, and groundwater planning in India. These case studies show that wider social forces, not always best science, drive hydrological practices. However, new frameworks focusing on the water user can emerge for more equitable and sustainable water management.     

Co-ordination for disasters

This paper was prepared in 1978 on the basis of a review of sociological and anthropological fieldwork conducted up to that time. Although theoretical in presentation its conclusions are formulated in accordance with the author's own extensive observations of organizational response to natural disasters in developing countries, especially those having sudden onset. Practical implications for co-ordination agencies and pre-disaster training are drawn.     

面向国土空间规划的“双评价”：挑战与应对

面向国土空间规划的科学性、可操作性、层级性等内涵,探讨了资源环境承载能力评价和国土空间开发适宜性评价（“双评价”）与国土空间规划之间的基本逻辑问题、应用挑战与应对方法。通过系统梳理“双评价”的理论发展和相关政策响应,剖析了“双评价”在应用探索、内涵扩充、系统支撑三个阶段的研究重点和服务目标,阐明了承载力评价与适宜性评价之间关联逻辑的演进历程。总结了当前“双评价”在应用上的几个关键挑战：一是“双评价”应用于“三区三线”划定的逻辑尚未明确;二是当前承载能力评价与未来规划决策之间存在逻辑悖论;三是“双评价”在不同层级国土空间规划中传导失灵;四是两个评价之间的关联逻辑仍存在争议。为此,提出了应对“双评价”挑战的四点建议：深化理论认知、拓展评价维度、建立传导机制、厘清内在关系,以提升“双评价”对国土空间规划决策的支撑能力。     

生态文明视角下的国土空间底线管控：“双评价”与国土空间规划监测评估预警

生态文明新时代下的空间规划体系对国土空间底线管控提出了明确要求,“双评价”与国土空间规划监测评估预警是底线思维的体现。研究“双评价”与国土空间规划监测评估预警在国土空间底线管控中的作用和地位,通过国土空间规划“一张图”实施监督信息系统的建设,对二者的联系及其相互作用进行体现,构建二者的联动方式,服务于国土空间底线管控及治理的全过程。“双评价”与国土空间规划监测评估预警共同组成底线管控的两个阶段,前者是开展底线管控的基础,后者是底线管控的路径和手段,两者皆是生态文明新时代下国土空间规划底线管控的重要工具,需以国土空间规划“一张图”实施监督信息系统为基础加强两者的有机结合。     

魅力国土空间:重塑区域特色的国土空间规划策略

国土空间规划的提出使我国的规划体系进入到新的发展时期与发展语境,国土空间开发方向已从生产空间为主导转向生态、生活、生产空间相协调。如何将基于“三生空间”概念的传统国土空间认知提升到丰富文化脉络、生态特征、生活基础的复合魅力国土空间,如何对不同区域的发展进行侧重,杜绝对单一发展模式的盲目跟风,是国家和地方面临的共同重大主题。结合国土空间在历史与现实不同时期的发展表征和形成原因,在回溯空间认知过程、反思空间规划实践的基础上,厘清了魅力国土空间的概念与内涵,提出国土空间规划体系下魅力国土空间的关注焦点,从区域发展平衡、管控弹性调整、空间要素流动、发展目标优化等方面阐述了魅力国土空间的作用与功能。     

基于土地利用视角的乡村居业协同多尺度分析——以徐州市为例

“乡村振兴”战略是解决城乡发展不协调、乡村发展不充分问题的重要抓手。居业协同作为乡村人居融合发展的高级形态,其程度能够反映乡村振兴的质量与成效。采用土地利用数据从结构和利用两个维度探索淮海经济区中心城市徐州三个尺度下的居业协同格局,结果表明：（1）徐州市土地在供给方面表现出居业失衡,宅基地供给相对于经营性建设用地优势明显;但由于使用中宅基地的空废,二者利用状态表现得更协同。（2）不同空间尺度下,居业协同状态有所差异,其中乡镇尺度居业空间关系较为稳定,基本维持相对平衡,本文认为乡镇是土地资源配置、实施乡村振兴战略的最佳尺度。（3）后续研究中,居业用地适宜的比例及农用地对居业协同的影响都需要进一步探索。     

南昌市冬季大气PM2.5中重金属元素来源分析及健康风险评价

采集2015年南昌市冬季大气PM_(2.5)样品,利用电感耦合等离子体质谱仪(ICP-MS)测定样品中重金属(V、Mn、Cr、Co、Ni、Cu、Zn、Cd、Ba和Pb)的含量,分析重金属的分布特征和来源,并对重金属健康风险进行评价。结果表明:采样期间PM2.5浓度总平均值为(29.74±16.82)μg/m~3,其中省外办最高,武术学校最低;各重金属元素总体平均浓度从高到低次序为:ZnPbCuMnBaNiVCrCdCo。因子分析结果表明:PM_(2.5)中重金属元素的来源包括道路交通尘和冶金化工排放、机动车尾气以及混合源。健康风险评价结果显示:PM_(2.5)中Mn对人体健康存在非致癌风险,其他元素(Cr、Ba、Co、Pb、Cd、Cu、V、Zn、Ni)基本没有非致癌风险;Cr对人体有较明显的致癌风险,Cd、Ni和Co对部分年龄段的人群(尤其是成年人)存在一定的致癌风险。     

关于中小城市生活垃圾的处理与回收利用的探讨

对城市生活垃圾的分类回收、处理进行了探讨，对完善城市基础设施建设，改善投资环境将起到重要作用。     

略谈淮北市城市景观生态建设

为了保护淮北市城市生态环境，拟利用城市景观生态学原理对该市城市景观进行生态设计，包括城市自然组分、非自然组分设计。自然组分包括种群源、廊道、节点等内容，力争使自然组分成为环境质量的控制性组分，使城市生态良性循环、物种多样并持续存在和流动可达，物质循环、能量流动、信息传递畅通。     

Cumulative effect assessment in Canada: a regional framework for aquatic ecosystems

Sustainable development of the aquatic environment depends upon routine and defensible cumulative effects assessment (CEA). CEA is the process of predicting the consequences of development relative to an assessment of existing environmental quality. Theoretically, it provides an on-going mechanism to evaluate if levels of development exceed the environment's assimilative capacity; i.e., its ability to sustain itself. In practice, the link between CEA and sustainable development has not been realized because CEA concepts and methods have developed along two dichotomous tracks. One track views CEA as an extension of the environmental assessment (EA) process for project developments. Under this track, stressor-based (S-B) methods have been developed where the emphasis is on local, project-related stressors, their link with aquatic indicators, and the potential for environmental effects through stressor-indicator interactions. S-B methods focus on the proposed development and prediction of project-related effects. They lack a mechanism to quantify existing aquatic quality especially at scales broader than an isolated development. This limitation results in the prediction of potential effects relative to a poorly defined baseline state. The other track views CEA as a broader, regional assessment tool where effects-based (E-B) methods specialize in quantification of existing aquatic effects over broad spatial scales. However, the predictive capabilities of E-B methods are limited because they are retrospective, i.e., the stressor causing the effect is identified after the effect has been measured. When used in isolation, S-B and E-B methods do not address CEA in the context necessary for sustainable development. However, if the strengths of these approaches were integrated into a holistic framework for CEA, an operational mechanism would exist to better monitor and assess sustainable development of our aquatic resources. This paper reviews the existing conceptual basis of CEA in Canada including existing methodologies, limitations and strengths. A conceptual framework for integrating project-based and regional-based CEA is presented.