A climate-change vulnerability and adaptation assessment for Brazil's protected areas

Brazil hosts the largest expanse of tropical ecosystems within protected areas (PAs), which shelter biodiversity and support traditional human populations. We assessed the vulnerability to climate change of 993 terrestrial and coastal-marine Brazilian PAs by combining indicators of climatic-change hazard with indicators of PA resilience (size, native vegetation cover, and probability of climate-driven vegetation transition). This combination of indicators allows the identification of broad climate-change adaptation pathways. Seventeen PAs (20,611 km²) were highly vulnerable and located mainly in the Atlantic Forest (7 PAs), Cerrado (6), and the Amazon (4). Two hundred fifty-eight PAs (756,569 km²), located primarily in Amazonia, had a medium vulnerability. In the Amazon and western Cerrado, the projected severe climatic change and probability of climate-driven vegetation transition drove vulnerability up, despite the generally good conservation status of PAs. Over 80% of PAs of high or moderate vulnerability are managed by indigenous populations. Hence, besides the potential risks to biodiversity, the traditional knowledge and livelihoods of the people inhabiting these PAs may be threatened. In at least 870 PAs, primarily in the Atlantic Forest and Amazon, adaptation could happen with little or no intervention due to low climate-change hazard, high resilience status, or both. At least 20 PAs in the Atlantic Forest, Cerrado, and Amazonia should be targeted for stronger interventions (e.g., improvement of ecological connectivity), given their low resilience status. Despite being a first attempt to link vulnerability and adaptation in Brazilian PAs, we suggest that some of the PAs identified as highly or moderately vulnerable should be prioritized for testing potential adaptation strategies in the near future.     

Exploring Chemical Variables in Ligustrum lucidum Ait. F. Tricolor (Rehd.) Rehd. in Relation to Air Pollutants and Environmental Conditions

Ligustrum lucidum Ait. f. tricolor (Rehd.) Rehd. in relation to atmospheric pollutants in Córdoba city, Argentina. The study area receives regional pollutants and was categorized taking into account traffic level, industrial density, type of industry, location of the sample point in relation to the street corner, treeless condition, and topographic level. Dried weight/fresh weight ratio (DW/FW) and specific leaf area (SLA) were calculated, and concentrations of chlorophylls, carotenoids, total sulfur, soluble proteins, malondialdehyde (MDA), and hydroperoxy conjugated dienes (HPCD) were determined in leaf samples. Sulfur content correlates positively with traffic density and SLA correlates negatively with some combinations of the categorical variables; MDA correlates positively with topographic level and total protein concentration correlates negatively with treeless condition. On the basis of our results, traffic, location of trees, type of industry, situation of a tree with respect to others, and topographic level are the environmental variables to bear in mind when selecting analogous sampling points in a passive monitoring program. An approximation to predict tree injury may be obtained by measuring DW/FW ratio, proteins, pigments, HPCD, and MDA as they are responsible for the major variability of data.     

可持续旅游及其区域实现途径探讨—以井冈山风景名胜区为例

可持续旅游是 80年代中期以后提出的关于旅游业发展的新思想。经过十多年的不断拓展深化 ,已经得到世界各国的广泛认同 ,并作为跨世纪旅游业发展的战略指导思想。本文从可持续旅游的由来和对可持续旅游内涵实质的界定角度出发 ,结合可持续旅游实现途径的探讨 ,以井冈山风景名胜区为例 ,对风景区旅游业可持续发展进行了深入的探讨 ,为景区的发展规划提出了战略性构想 ,以期能对井冈山风景名胜区旅游资源的可持续利用和旅游业的可持续发展起到抛砖引玉的作用     

新时期区域公共管理创新

信息社会发展与全球化趋势，出现了区域集群、区域竞争、区域创新、学习区域等新特征，给区域管理者带来了新的挑战。区域发展需要创新，区域公共管理同样需要创新。本文从新公共管理、区域创新系统、区域核心竞争力、支持系统等方面对区域管理创新进行了探讨。     

草原旅游发展中旅游管理部门环境意识的调查研究

根据环境意识结构．设计了旅游管理部门环境意识调查问卷。其主要的指标体系包括：旅游环境知识水平、旅游环境态度、旅游环境评价和旅游环境行为四个方面。对指标体系各部分之间以及每一指标部分的每一题目之间的相对重要性进行权重的确定．而且对各部分的每道题目的各个选项予以赋分。基于权重和赋分．结合调查问卷的实际情况，设计了指标体系各部分评价模型和环境意识总体评价模型。以此来计算草原旅游发展中旅游管理部门环境意识水平的综合得分。经过分析得知，旅游管理部门环境意识模式是“环境知识制约型”模式。     

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.     

区域性“减灾十年初步规划”的编制原则

本文简要介绍区域性“减灾十年初步规划”编制的一般原则，包括规划编制的意义、目的、编制顺序和规划应注意的几个方面，并提出规划成果的实施意见。可供各地编制规划时参考。     

外商投资的区位变动分析

文章利用1983—2000年的统计数据，通过比较分析方法，分析了我国外商投资区位的转移及其影响因素的变化，综合评价了我国中部5省、华东和西部的区位优势，提出了有利于吸引外商投资的建议。     

三江平原地貌因子及其主要环境地质问题

地貌因子有其不可替代的作用和功能,是决定环境的主要因子,是生态地质环境中最积极最活跃的主导支力条件;是生态平衡的重中之重;是生态地质环境的基础,并影响其它因子或成份.如地貌因子或成份发生了变化,其它因子或成份就会发生一系列连锁反应;地貌因子发生变化或失去平衡,其它因子也会发生变化或失去平衡.文本论述了三江平原地貌特征,详细地分析了地貌的作用,阐明了有关地貌的主要环境地质问题.     

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.