From the Heart of the Middle East, the Energy of the Future: North Adriatic LNG Terminal

Petroleum is still our most important energy source and it will certainly remain that way for a long time to come. Moreover, an end of oil use is not foreseeable at the present. However, reserves are declining. Liquefied natural gas (LNG), on the other hand, is available in abundant quantities. Nevertheless, the use of LNG is useful to solve a significant problem: the LNG power stations produce much lower CO₂ emissions than petroleum. In fact, an 80% carbon dioxide reduction should be possible, as several companies are currently working on cleaner power stations, such as the LNG ones. Alternative energies are often not used enough as sources of energy. It is therefore all the more important that energy companies put a great deal of effort into supporting sustainable energy and developing cleaner technology, in order to make people less dependent on power from petroleum.      

Developing spatial inequalities in carbon appropriation: A sociological analysis of changing local emissions across the United States

This study examines an overlooked dynamic in sociological research on greenhouse gas emissions: how local areas appropriate the global carbon cycle for use and exchange purposes as they develop. Drawing on theories of place and space, we hypothesize that development differentially drives and spatially decouples use- and exchange-oriented emissions at the local level. To test our hypotheses, we integrate longitudinal, county-level data on residential and industrial emissions from the Vulcan Project with demographic, economic and environmental data from the U.S. Census Bureau and National Land Change Database. Results from spatial regression models with two-way fixed-effects indicate that alongside innovations and efficiencies capable of reducing environmentally harmful effects of development comes a spatial disarticulation between carbon-intensive production and consumption within as well as across societies. Implications for existing theory, methods and policy are discussed.     

Institutionalized collective action and the relationship between beliefs about environmental problems and environmental actions: A cross-national analysis

How do institutions affect the relationship between an individual's beliefs and their actions? Institutionalized strategies are routine ways of addressing problems that become taken-for-granted in a society. Environmental problems constitute a collective action problem in that personal consumption often conflicts with collective interests. I test whether beliefs about environmental problems have a different impact on a person's pro-environmental behaviors, depending on how addressing collective action problems is institutionalized in their society. In particular, I use level of welfare targeting as an observable, organizational difference among societies that reflects different institutionalized strategies for addressing a prominent collective action problem. I use multilevel models on data from the 2010 International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) and measures of welfare targeting from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to answer this question. I find that in societies where the institutionalized strategy for dealing with inequality is highly targeted, individuals' beliefs that these problems are important, real, and whether they can do something about them have a greater impact on their actions. The results suggest individuals generalize taken-for-granted strategies of assuring collective welfare to implement their individual beliefs about the environment, making institutional environments important moderators of the strength of the belief-action relationship.     

Engaging with Comparative Risk Appraisals: Public Views on Policy Priorities for Environmental Risk Governance

Communicating the rationale for allocating resources to manage policy priorities and their risks is challenging. Here, we demonstrate that environmental risks have diverse attributes and locales in their effects that may drive disproportionate responses among citizens. When 2,065 survey participants deployed summary information and their own understanding to assess 12 policy‐level environmental risks singularly, their assessment differed from a prior expert assessment. However, participants provided rankings similar to those of experts when these same 12 risks were considered as a group, allowing comparison between the different risks. Following this, when individuals were shown the prior expert assessment of this portfolio, they expressed a moderate level of confidence with the combined expert analysis. These are important findings for the comprehension of policy risks that may be subject to augmentation by climate change, their representation alongside other threats within national risk assessments, and interpretations of agency for public risk management by citizens and others.     

上海生态文明建设的激励和约束机制研究

生态文明建设是一项系统工程,需要通过整体推进,构筑规划、建设、管理、技术、产业、社会和合作协同发展的综合体系。未来上海应以建立和完善市场机制为核心,以法律机制为前提,以政府监管机制为保障,以能力建设机制为基础,以社会参与机制为监督,按照"引逼结合、多方合力、突出重点、先行先试"的原则,加快上海生态文明建设机制创新。主要途径有:完善碳排放交易试点,建立长效市场机制;推进分布式能源应用,提高清洁能源比重;加快新能源汽车推广,优化交通能源结构;培育发展再制造产业,推广先进制造理念。     

WTO框架下科学不确定性问题研究

WTO作为多边体制的支柱,不仅规定了货物、服务贸易,而且包括了动植物检验检疫、环境保护等涉及科学技术的领域,但WTO对这些领域的规定含混不清,导致各国对规则的解释往往采用了非统一的科学技术界定标准,这种技术标准成为贸易保护的正当性借口,在实践中许多国家以WTO之名行贸易保护之实。从某种意义上说,全球化肇始的标志是WTO体系,全球化的进一步发展则有赖于对WTO规则的进一步诠释,在环境保护、动植物检验检疫领域采取统一科学证据要件判定体系就成为了支撑WTO自由贸易精神的一个重要制度保障。     

《周礼》的生态伦理系统思想

《周礼》以取法于天、以礼为治的思想为基础,形成了一套较为完整的生态伦理思想系统,其中包括完备的价值基础、伦理制度和具体的伦理原则。其保护对象主要有土地、山林川泽、矿藏及其他自然资源。《周礼》是世界上最早提到环境保护伦理法规的有系统的著作,其中的思想及措施总结了当时的生态伦理实践经验,对后世的生态伦理思想产生了深远的影响。     

我国社区矫正工作社会化模式的建构——基于社区矫正工作目标的分析

社区矫正是社会化的刑罚执行方式,但从实践运作看,我国社区矫正的社会化程度依然不够,没有最大效度地达到社区矫正的目标.本文在对社区矫正工作目标进行分析的基础上,提出了我国社区矫正工作的社会化模式:基于责任共担的社区服刑环境建设、基于社会工作方法的个案矫正模式、基于社会人力资源的社会帮教工作.     

生态思维方式的当代建构

生态思维的实现表达了对自然的关切与热爱，这一思维方式的形成必然具有特定的建构方式。应该从生态思维方式的兴起、生态思维方式的基点，生态思维方式的原则来阐释生态思维方式的当代建构。     

Stakeholders’ Perspective on Ecological Modeling in Environmental Risk Assessment of Pesticides: Challenges and Opportunities

The article closely examines the role of mechanistic effect models (e.g., population models) in the European environmental risk assessment (ERA) of pesticides. We studied perspectives of three stakeholder groups on population modeling in ERA of pesticides. Forty‐three in‐depth, semi‐structured interviews were conducted with stakeholders from regulatory authorities, industry, and academia all over Europe. The key informant approach was employed in recruiting our participants. They were first identified as key stakeholders in the field and then sampled by means of a purposive sampling, where each stakeholder identified as important by others was interviewed and asked to suggest another potential participant for our study. Our results show that participants, although having different institutional backgrounds often presented similar perspectives and concerns about modeling. Analysis of repeating ideas and keywords revealed that all stakeholders had very high and often contradicting expectations from models. Still, all three groups expected effect models to become integrated in future ERA of pesticides. Main hopes associated with effect models were to reduce the amount of expensive and complex testing and field monitoring, both at the product development stage, and as an aid to develop mitigation measures. Our analysis suggests that, although the needs of stakeholders often overlapped, subtle differences and lack of trust hinder the process of introducing mechanistic effect models into ERA.