SUSTAINABILITY AT THE LOCAL LEVEL: MANAGEMENT TOOLS AND MUNICIPAL TAX INCENTIVE MODEL

The implementation of sustainable development may seem a simple concept when written on paper. However to carry-out long term actions put forward by the Agenda 21 (AG21) at the local level represents one of the main challenges as municipal governments in general do not have the capacity to effectively implement the process. Regional environmental assessment (REA) has shown to be effective in supporting decision-making not only to correct environmental problems due to past unsustainable social-economic developments but also help local governments to implement sustainable actions. However this requires long-term investments of AG21 plans and projects. The allocation of regular and consistent financial resources is one of the main ingredients for the sustainable development process. But traditional plans and projects financed by national and/or international funds may not be sustainable in the long-term because they become dependent on external funding. Research demonstrate that innovative economic instruments such as ecotaxes represent a feasible alternative to sponsor local sustainability because taxes are collected permanently by the government and could be invested in continuous actions. Ecotaxes experiences have provided important reference to structure a municipal incentive model (MIM) to sponsor AG21’s environmental plans and projects on a long-term (permanent) basis. However sustainable development cannot be solely through economic investments. A comprehensive municipal environmental management scheme (MEMS) has been established to support the incentive model. The scheme seeks not only to improve local institutional framework but also incentive continuous participation of local stakeholders at all levels of society. Participatory events and the provision of incentives (educational and financial) are key to motivate society to protect the environment and support actively the sustainable development process as emphasised in the RIO-92 Conference.     

区域排污权交易模型研究

本文在分析了排污权交易研究进展的基础上，指出区域污染权交易比传统的排污权交易意义更大，并提出排污权交易地区交叉补贴的设想：将发达地区的排污权交易所得向欠发达地区转移，以解决欠发达地区产业结构调整乏力以及对发达地区的二次污染和发达地区环境容量资源短缺问题。在不考虑交易成本的假设下，通过建立不同地区排污权交易模型以确定排污权交易总量及其交易价格以及交易所获净增纯收益等。太湖流域由于经济最为发达，环境问题十分突出，是目前我国最适宜率先进行区域排污权交易试点的地区。通过假定太湖流域无锡和常州两市进行排污权交易，并利用两市1991—2000年的环境统计资料等相关资料进行了验证。计算结果表明区域排污权交易不仅具有明显的经济和环境效益，而且也是协调环境区域矛盾的重要手段。因此，不同地区间进行排污权交易在我国具有重要意义，在太湖流域等经济发达地区收效尤其明显。     

The evolution of sustainability

Six separate but related strains of thought have emerged prominently since 1950 in discussions of such phenomena as the interrelationships among rates of population growth, resource use, and pressure on the environment. They are the ecological/carrying capacity root, the resources/environment root, the biosphere root, the critique of technology root, the no growth/slow growth root, and the ecodevelopment root.Each of these strains of thought was fully developed before the word sustainable itself was used. Many of the roots are based on fundamentally opposing assessments of the future of mankind. Many of the roots, such as the ecology/carrying capacity root, are based on physical concepts, and they exclude normative values. Others, such as the ecodevelopment root, include such values as equity, broad participation in governance, and decentralized government.When the word sustainability was first used in 1972 in the context of man's future, in a British book,Blueprint for Survival, normative concepts were prominent. This continued to be the case when the word was first used in 1974 in the United States to justify a no growth economy.Sustainability was first used in a United Nations document in 1978. Normative concepts, encapsulated in the term ecodevelopment, were prominent in the United Nations publications.After about 1978, the term sustainability began to be used not only in technological articles and reports but also in policy documents culminating in the use of the term in the report of the summit meeting of the Group of Seven in 1989.The roots of the term sustainability are so deeply embedded in fundamentally different concepts, each of which has valid claims to validity, that a search for a single definition seems futile. The existence of multiple meaning is tolerable if each analyst describes clearly what he means by sustainability.     

漓江流域δD和δ18O对蒸发的指示作用

以漓江流域为例查明不同水体之间氢氧稳定同位素组成特征,并探讨氢氧稳定同位素对漓江流域的蒸发过程指示作用.结果表明：流域内不同水体之间,氢氧稳定同位素表现出不同的组成特征,地表水和地下水,在丰水期δD值和δ¹⁸O值要比枯水期更容易富集,地下水的δD值和δ¹⁸O值分布范围较地表水小;随着水温的升高,δ¹⁸O的变化趋势比d-excess明显.从漓江上游到下游高程逐渐下降,河水线的斜率和截距也在逐渐减小,其中漓江下游河水线的斜率和截距要低于当地大气降水线,表明下游受到蒸发作用较强烈;地下河水线、地表河水线在一定程度上偏离当地大气降水线,但偏离程度较小,表明三者之间有很好的水力联系.受温度和湿度的共同影响,漓江干流丰水期河水的蒸发量占最初水体总量的0.7%~9.1%,枯水期河水的蒸发量占最初水体总量的2.6%~9.7%,丰水期的蒸发比例低于枯水期,从上游到下游蒸发比例在逐渐上升.研究区蒸发量估算值为959.40mm,与多年实测值少43.11mm,相对误差4.70%.氢氧稳定同位素对研究区降水、地表水、地下水之间的转换规律具有重要的实际意义,在今后的漓江流域水文研究中有着更加广阔的空间.     

河北坝上与坝下不同土地利用类型土壤入渗特征及其影响因素

为查明河北省坝上与坝下不同土地利用类型土壤入渗能力,选择张北县（坝上风蚀区）和阳原县（坝下水蚀区）作为典型研究区,采用微型圆盘入渗仪测量土壤入渗特性,并分析其主要影响因素。研究结果表明：（1）阳原县不同土地利用类型土壤渗透性能表现为：高盖度草地>低盖度草地>耕地>林地,张北县表现为：草地>耕地>灌木林地>防护林地;（2）不同入渗模型拟合度之间存在显著差异,其中Philip模型拟合效果最佳;（3）土壤初始入渗速率、稳定入渗速率、稳定入渗时间与容重呈极显著负相关关系,而与总孔隙度均呈极显著正相关关系。结果表明,该区草地土壤入渗能力最强,后期开展生态工程建设时应更加重视草地涵养水源的作用。     

气候变化和人类活动对伊逊河流域径流变化的影响

借助Mann-Kendall趋势检验和突变检验对气象水文序列进行一致性分析,划分基准期（1961—1979年）和影响期（① 1980—1989年、② 1990—1999年、③ 2000—2016年）,利用基准期校准的可变下渗容量（VIC）模型,采用步进式方法,探究气候变化和人类活动对伊逊河流域径流变化的波动影响过程。结果表明:研究区近56年年均气温显著升高,年降水量无明显变化趋势,流域年径流量下降趋势明显,季节尺度上流域非汛期降水量增加显著。气候变化和人类活动均会对径流产生显著影响且作用机理复杂,步进式方法对影响机理的研究较传统方法更能体现其变化过程;在降水丰沛的影响 ② 期,冬季降水量增加会显著增加流域径流量,而在降水略少的影响 ① 期和 ③ 期,蒸发量增加以及土壤含水量降低使得流域径流减少;人类活动耗水在影响 ① 期和 ③ 期引起流域径流减少并且影响作用逐渐增强,影响 ② 期由于城镇化和耕地扩张使得流域产流能力增强导致径流增加。深入研究气候变化和人类活动对径流的影响机制,可为流域水资源管理和规划提供理论依据。     

基于SVR的长江经济带水环境承载力评价

基于DPSIRM模型构建区域水环境承载力评价指标体系,并基于SVR模型构建了区域水环境承载力评价模型,利用交叉验证法对SVR模型参数进行优化选择,进一步提高模型预测精度.运用该模型研究了长江经济带2009~2018年的水环境承载力演变趋势及空间差异,结果表明：长江经济带水环境承载力等级整体呈现升高趋势,其中上游城市群承载等级由II级（超载）提升到了IV级（弱可承载）;中游城市群承载等级由II级（超载）提升到了IV级（弱可承载）;下游长三角区域承载等级由I级（重超载）提升到了IV级（弱可承载）.将评价结果与熵权-TOPSIS法的评价结果相比较,相同率达到91.7%,说明SVR模型评价区域水环境承载力可行,评价结果可靠.以下游区域为例,分别对其6个子系统的承载力进行剖析,并运用单因素轮换OAT法对各子系统内的评价指标进行敏感性分析,便于决策者识别指标敏感性.     

长江经济带水质目标管理平台总体设计

为强化长江经济带资源整合与共享,集成统一规范的大数据平台,基于“十一五”“十二五”国家水体污染控制与治理科技重大专项数据和模型库资源,以面向服务的架构(SOA)和模块化设计为支撑,遵循“五横两纵四统一”的平台架构设计思路,应用大数据挖掘、云计算等现代信息技术,构建长江经济带水质目标管理平台.平台基于长江经济带水生态环境功能分区,兼顾不同类别水质目标管理技术的协调性、衔接性和适应性,对水质目标管理相关信息进行跟踪、模拟、分析和三维可视化表达,在水生态环境功能分区管理、数据汇交与信息共享、容量总量管理、风险评估与预警等方面实现业务化运行,实现全景式水质达标形势研判、一体化风险联防联控.平台已在国家长江生态环境保护修复联合研究中心进行业务化运行,将有效提升长江经济带水环境综合管理能力,同时可为其他重要流域水质目标管理提供信息化工作参考.      

矿物材料吸附去除污水中磷的试验研究

采用粉煤灰、高岭土、泥渣(取电厂澄清池排泥作脱水干燥处理)作为吸附剂深度处理污水中的磷,对比分析了3种吸附剂的吸附速度、吸附性能及除磷效果。结果表明:粉煤灰和高岭土用时20 min完成对磷的有效吸附,沉降泥渣用时5 min即可实现同等吸附效果;沉降泥渣对污水中磷的吸附能力较好,投加量为0.2 g/L的泥渣对磷的去除率可达98.1%,而投加量为0.2 g/L粉煤灰或高岭土对磷的去除率仅达到77.2%。     

土地承载力研究范式的变迁、分化及其综论

基于Kuhn范式理论,将现有土地承载力研究成果显化、梳理为4种主要研究范式,即基于限制因子的研究范式、基于多因素综合的研究范式、基于参照区的研究范式、基于生态足迹的研究范式。以范式应用的时代背景、空间尺度为着眼点,对各类范式进行综合比较,结果显示：基于限制因子的土地承载力研究范式起源最早、发展最为成熟,基于多因素综合、基于参照区、基于生态足迹的3种研究范式,均是以前者为基础,按照不同的方向分化而成;范式分化的原因在于时空条件的变化所引致的亟需解释、解决的现实问题的变化。范式本身并无优劣之分,但有其独特的适应性：基于限制因子、基于生态足迹的两种研究范式适用于全球及国家等大尺度土地承载力问题,且发展较为成熟,其成果具有较强的理论和实践指导意义;基于多因素综合及基于参照区的两种研究范式适用于市县等中小尺度,但其研究较为薄弱,所得的承载力分值、承载力相对值对区域土地管理实践的指导价值有限。当前,市县等中小尺度土地承载力研究亟需加强,其指导实践的有效性与可操作性亟待大幅度提高。