首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
文章检索
  按 检索   检索词:      
出版年份:   被引次数:   他引次数: 提示:输入*表示无穷大
  收费全文   3篇
  免费   0篇
基础理论   3篇
  2013年   3篇
排序方式: 共有3条查询结果,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1
1.
The purposes of this paper are: (a) to describe a framework designed for multi-scale sustainability evaluation of Natural Resource Management Systems (NRMS), and (b) to illustrate its application for quantitative analysis using linear programming. The framework described here is intended to contribute to the operationalisation of the concept of sustainability by supporting the processes of design, evaluation and implementation of alternative NRMS at different scales. In this paper, Linear Programming is used for the quantitative analysis of indicators and their trade-offs; using a schematised example, the basic characteristics of the Multi-scale Multiple Goal Linear Programming (M-MGLP) method are described. In M-MGLP, indicators pertaining to different scales of analysis can be set as objectives or constraints for the optimisation. In this way, stakeholders interacting in a specific region can be made aware of the consequences of alternative NRMS in terms of the different indicators at the same scale and/or for indicators at other scales of analysis. The paper ends with a discussion of the main strengths and limitations of the framework and, specifically, of linear programming.  相似文献   
2.
The politics of development includes subtexts of choice, as underpinned by community consensus (or lack of it), against the larger backdrop of a liberal democracy, with its intricate power structures that influence the choice of concepts and often lead to complicity rather than consent. A dilemma exists between the understanding of field-level practitioners and that of academics, whose understandings of progress differ. Progress can (and often does) imply long-term change across generations whereas development is often more a matter of crisis management and delivering tangible results to end-users. This makes it a bone of contention across political systems, irrespective of local or global dynamics. Development can emerge as a tool to be wielded for power and further political mileage at the expense of progress. Progress cannot be studied as a counterpoint to development as the sense of history is often missing in development interventions. Development tends to be piecemeal as its very logic often stems from the rationale of power. This is not to suggest, however, that development is only about politics; it is definitely more than the politics of everyday life and involves all of civil society that requires its critical and immediate attention. In this sense, it has become a priority for politicians with an underlying agenda designed to out-manouevre dissent and all statements of protest.  相似文献   
3.
The DPSIR framework was devised in the late 1990s as a tool for the reporting and analysis of environmental problems, ranging in scale from global systems to localized watersheds. Since then, international organizations have begun to apply this framework to the evaluation of sustainable development initiatives, to better understand and overcome barriers to sustainability. While this may seem a logical application for an integrated environmental assessment tool, the use of DPSIR in sustainable development will likely perpetuate the least satisfactory outcomes of development. DPSIR cannot address the impact of aggregated, informal responses on the drivers and pressures related to environmental problems and sustainability challenges. This problem is not merely an oversight of the framework, but an issue that emerges within the structure of DPSIR itself through the unexamined, unacknowledged hierarchy of actors that this framework implicitly creates with its typology. Therefore, a DPSIR-centered approach is not a new direction for development within international organizations, but instead, a reproduction of existing inequalities between actors and stakeholders within current approaches.  相似文献   
1
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号