规划环境影响评价指标体系研究
|
摘要
规划环境影响评价指标体系的建立是保证规划环境影响评价贯彻实施的重要前提,它不但可以使决策者认识到规划实施过程中应优先考虑的环境因素,而且可使公众获取有关规划环境影响的有效信息。这对于发展和完善规划环境影响评价方法学体系,逐步形成一套面向宏观、中观和微观层次评价对象的环境影响评价体系,促进规划环境影响评价研究与实践的深入开展,提高规划环境影响评价的质量都具有十分重要的意义。
本论文综合历史和现状,借鉴国内外关于规划环境影响评价理论及指标体系的研究成果和实践经验,以理论分析与实例验证相结合的方法,通过对规划环境影响评价的理论、实施和方法等多方面的研究,结合我国实施和发展规划环评在理论、经验和方法方面的需求,同时,通过对《长春二道工业集中区控制性详细规划》的研究,提出可行的规划环境影响评价指标体系,为政府制定发展战略和发展规划提供科学依据。
The two tides have occurred from 1940’s on environmental problem, which took people bitter lessons and made people gradually know about the serious price of destroying environment. The promulgation of National Environmental Policy Act in the U.S. in 1969 established Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) system. In consequence, such a system was also approved in more than 100 countries like Sweden, Canada, Australia and Germany. After many years of study and practice of this issue, human beings gradually learned that traditional approach was faced with limitations in the process of its application. So it is necessary to establish and improve EIA system based on sustainable development. EIA targeting at sustainable development consists of 3 levels of macro, medium and micro impact appraisals. Within the system, appraisal targets like policies, plans, programs, and projects are located in different hierarchies, in which policies assessing environment are macroscopic, plans and programs are medium and projects are microscopic. Such EIA of different hierarchies shall be supplementary, coherent and avoid repetition.
Environmental impact assessment of planning is the procedure of analyzing, forecasting and assessing the environmental impact that are likely to occur during weaving planning, because planning is put in practice. Scholars from home and abroad have done a lot of researches and fulfillment. However, we can always find that its work objective isambiguous and its theoretic support for indicators system is insufficient.
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of regional plans is one category of SEA and the related researches are carried out primarily. In the SEA, it is urgent to develop a set of indicators to analyze and assess the plans.
Indicators refer to signals reflecting complicated matters or systems, or information revealing features of a system or predicting future occurrences. By taking number as its language, it usually exhibits quantitatively general characteristics of certain social phenomena. Indicator of Environmental impact assessment of planning carries such characteristics as targeting at clients, linking to policy, communicating internally and quantification. The establishment of indicators system shall closely keep in accordance with science, feasibility, sustainable development, independence, relevance, hierarchy, regional policy maintenance, combination of static and dynamic indicators and measurability.
The indicators for Environmental impact assessment of planning can be divided into key indicators and relevant indicators. Furthermore, key indicators can still be divided into, resource and environment indicators. Relevant indicators are composed of economic and social indicators. Hierarchy occurs on Indictors system of Environmental impact assessment of planning that can be provided into objective hierarchy, principle hierarchy and indictors hierarchy.
Indicator system for SEA in Dominative detailed planning ofIndustry concentrates area of Changchun City Erdao borough is based on the principle of environmental impact identification and design of indicator system, and is quite applicable in terms of the acquisition of both indicator data, assessment criteria, and implementation of assessment.
本论文综合历史和现状,借鉴国内外关于规划环境影响评价理论及指标体系的研究成果和实践经验,以理论分析与实例验证相结合的方法,通过对规划环境影响评价的理论、实施和方法等多方面的研究,结合我国实施和发展规划环评在理论、经验和方法方面的需求,同时,通过对《长春二道工业集中区控制性详细规划》的研究,提出可行的规划环境影响评价指标体系,为政府制定发展战略和发展规划提供科学依据。
The two tides have occurred from 1940’s on environmental problem, which took people bitter lessons and made people gradually know about the serious price of destroying environment. The promulgation of National Environmental Policy Act in the U.S. in 1969 established Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) system. In consequence, such a system was also approved in more than 100 countries like Sweden, Canada, Australia and Germany. After many years of study and practice of this issue, human beings gradually learned that traditional approach was faced with limitations in the process of its application. So it is necessary to establish and improve EIA system based on sustainable development. EIA targeting at sustainable development consists of 3 levels of macro, medium and micro impact appraisals. Within the system, appraisal targets like policies, plans, programs, and projects are located in different hierarchies, in which policies assessing environment are macroscopic, plans and programs are medium and projects are microscopic. Such EIA of different hierarchies shall be supplementary, coherent and avoid repetition.
Environmental impact assessment of planning is the procedure of analyzing, forecasting and assessing the environmental impact that are likely to occur during weaving planning, because planning is put in practice. Scholars from home and abroad have done a lot of researches and fulfillment. However, we can always find that its work objective isambiguous and its theoretic support for indicators system is insufficient.
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of regional plans is one category of SEA and the related researches are carried out primarily. In the SEA, it is urgent to develop a set of indicators to analyze and assess the plans.
Indicators refer to signals reflecting complicated matters or systems, or information revealing features of a system or predicting future occurrences. By taking number as its language, it usually exhibits quantitatively general characteristics of certain social phenomena. Indicator of Environmental impact assessment of planning carries such characteristics as targeting at clients, linking to policy, communicating internally and quantification. The establishment of indicators system shall closely keep in accordance with science, feasibility, sustainable development, independence, relevance, hierarchy, regional policy maintenance, combination of static and dynamic indicators and measurability.
The indicators for Environmental impact assessment of planning can be divided into key indicators and relevant indicators. Furthermore, key indicators can still be divided into, resource and environment indicators. Relevant indicators are composed of economic and social indicators. Hierarchy occurs on Indictors system of Environmental impact assessment of planning that can be provided into objective hierarchy, principle hierarchy and indictors hierarchy.
Indicator system for SEA in Dominative detailed planning ofIndustry concentrates area of Changchun City Erdao borough is based on the principle of environmental impact identification and design of indicator system, and is quite applicable in terms of the acquisition of both indicator data, assessment criteria, and implementation of assessment.
引文
[1] 国家环境保护总局环境工程评估中心编,环境影响评价技术导则与标准[M],北京:中国环境科学出版社,2007。
[2] 包存宽、陆雍森、尚金城等,规划环境影响评价方法及实例[M],科学出版社,2004。
[3] 侯世全、邱慧,规划环境影响评价和建设项目环境影响评价的比较[J],铁道劳动安全卫生与环保,2004,31⑶:151-153。
[4] 张红珍,规划环境影响评价探讨[J],环境污染与防治,2004,26⑷:309-311。
[5] 国家环境保护总局环境工程评估中心编,环境影响评价相关法律法规[M],北京:中国环境科学出版社,2007。
[6] 陆军、郝大举,规划环境影响评价指标体系及评价方法浅析[J],污染防治技术,2006,19⑴:26-27。
[7] 孙佑海,将规划环评制度变为现实[J],高层论坛,2005。
[8] 孙佑海,关于规划的环境影响评价[J],中国环境报,2002 年12 月 7 日。
[9] 舒廷飞、包存宽、陆雍森、王少平,规划环境影响评价与生态规划的现状及其关系[J],同济大学学报(自然科学版),2006,34⑶:382-387。
[10] 杨洁、毕军、顾朝林、周鲸波,城市规划的环境影响评价研究初探[J],环境污染与防治,2004,26⑹。
[11] 古伟宏,规划环境影响评价初探[J],黑龙江环境通报,2005,9,29⑶:33-37。
[12] 孙艳军、陈新庚、莫创荣、高长波、桑燕鸿、彭晓春、范瑞,规划环境影响评价的发展机遇与挑战[J],环境评价,2005⑻:42-45。
[13] 朱坦、吴婧,当前规划环境影响评价遇到的问题和几点建议[J],环境保护,2005,4:50-54。
[14] 陈蓉,浅论我国规划环境影响评价制度及其完善[J],规划研究,2004,28⑻:84-86。
[15] 梁学功、刘娟,中国实施规划环评可能出现的问题及其解决方法[J],环境科学,2004,25⑹:163-166。
[16] 黑宇峰,我国环境影响评价制度存在的问题及对策[J],建筑技术开发,2006,33⑹:140-141。
[17] 李明光,规划环境影响评价的工作程序与评价内容框架研究[J],环境保护,2003:31-34。
[18] Buckley R. Strategic Environmental Assessment. In ; Porter A L and Fittipaldi J J (eds) .Environmental Methods Review ; Retooling Impact Assessment for the New Century .Fargo, North Dakota, USA ;The Press Club, 1998:77-86.
[19] 李巍、杨志峰,面向可持续发展的战略环境影响评价[J],中国环境科学,1998(18):66-69。
[20] 程驭宇、暨仕臣、侯文斌,战略环境评价及其应用初探[J],重庆环境科学,2000,22⑸:24-27。
[21] 李峰、左安建,我国战略环境影响评价及其规范化初探[J],能源环境保护,2006,20⑴:56-59。
[22] 程胜高、刘卓、姚维科,战略环境评价及其在我国实施的必要性[J],安全与环境工程,2001,9:12-15。
[23] 闫育梅,战略环境评价——环境影响评价的新方向[J],环境保护,2000(11):23-25。
[24] 陈文波、赵小敏、武春友,土地利用总体规划环境影响评价理论与方法初探[J],江西农业大学学报,2006,28⑴:134-138。
[25] 陈彬、张珞平,战略环境评价研究[J],厦门大学学报(自然科学版),2001,5:770-774。
[26] 周海林,国内外可持续发展指标(体系)研究综述[J],可持续发展指标国际研讨会论文集,2000.10:68-84。
[27] 李智、鞠美庭、史聆聆、陈敏、李珀松,交通规划环境影响评价的指标体系探讨[J],交通环保,2004,25⑹:16-19。
[28] 鞠美庭、朱坦,国际战略环评实践追踪及中国对规划实施环境影响评价的管理程序和技术路线探讨[J],重庆环境科学,2003,25(11):124-128。
[29] 何仁伟、张明举,浅论土地利用总体规划环境影响评价[J],甘肃农业,2006⑵:71-72。
[30] 潘嫦英、刘卫东,浅谈土地利用规划的环境影响评价[J],中国人口资源与环境,2004,14(2):134-147。
[31] 陈文波、赵小敏、武春友,土地利用总体规划环境影响评价理论与方法初探[J],江西农业大学学报,2006,28⑴:134-138。
[32] 戴聆春、张换水,公路规划环境影响评价指标体系研究[J],企业技术开发,2006,25⑼:40-42。
[33] 肖华山,规划环境影响评价指标体系及评价方法探讨[J],金属矿山,2003(12):46-49。
[2] 包存宽、陆雍森、尚金城等,规划环境影响评价方法及实例[M],科学出版社,2004。
[3] 侯世全、邱慧,规划环境影响评价和建设项目环境影响评价的比较[J],铁道劳动安全卫生与环保,2004,31⑶:151-153。
[4] 张红珍,规划环境影响评价探讨[J],环境污染与防治,2004,26⑷:309-311。
[5] 国家环境保护总局环境工程评估中心编,环境影响评价相关法律法规[M],北京:中国环境科学出版社,2007。
[6] 陆军、郝大举,规划环境影响评价指标体系及评价方法浅析[J],污染防治技术,2006,19⑴:26-27。
[7] 孙佑海,将规划环评制度变为现实[J],高层论坛,2005。
[8] 孙佑海,关于规划的环境影响评价[J],中国环境报,2002 年12 月 7 日。
[9] 舒廷飞、包存宽、陆雍森、王少平,规划环境影响评价与生态规划的现状及其关系[J],同济大学学报(自然科学版),2006,34⑶:382-387。
[10] 杨洁、毕军、顾朝林、周鲸波,城市规划的环境影响评价研究初探[J],环境污染与防治,2004,26⑹。
[11] 古伟宏,规划环境影响评价初探[J],黑龙江环境通报,2005,9,29⑶:33-37。
[12] 孙艳军、陈新庚、莫创荣、高长波、桑燕鸿、彭晓春、范瑞,规划环境影响评价的发展机遇与挑战[J],环境评价,2005⑻:42-45。
[13] 朱坦、吴婧,当前规划环境影响评价遇到的问题和几点建议[J],环境保护,2005,4:50-54。
[14] 陈蓉,浅论我国规划环境影响评价制度及其完善[J],规划研究,2004,28⑻:84-86。
[15] 梁学功、刘娟,中国实施规划环评可能出现的问题及其解决方法[J],环境科学,2004,25⑹:163-166。
[16] 黑宇峰,我国环境影响评价制度存在的问题及对策[J],建筑技术开发,2006,33⑹:140-141。
[17] 李明光,规划环境影响评价的工作程序与评价内容框架研究[J],环境保护,2003:31-34。
[18] Buckley R. Strategic Environmental Assessment. In ; Porter A L and Fittipaldi J J (eds) .Environmental Methods Review ; Retooling Impact Assessment for the New Century .Fargo, North Dakota, USA ;The Press Club, 1998:77-86.
[19] 李巍、杨志峰,面向可持续发展的战略环境影响评价[J],中国环境科学,1998(18):66-69。
[20] 程驭宇、暨仕臣、侯文斌,战略环境评价及其应用初探[J],重庆环境科学,2000,22⑸:24-27。
[21] 李峰、左安建,我国战略环境影响评价及其规范化初探[J],能源环境保护,2006,20⑴:56-59。
[22] 程胜高、刘卓、姚维科,战略环境评价及其在我国实施的必要性[J],安全与环境工程,2001,9:12-15。
[23] 闫育梅,战略环境评价——环境影响评价的新方向[J],环境保护,2000(11):23-25。
[24] 陈文波、赵小敏、武春友,土地利用总体规划环境影响评价理论与方法初探[J],江西农业大学学报,2006,28⑴:134-138。
[25] 陈彬、张珞平,战略环境评价研究[J],厦门大学学报(自然科学版),2001,5:770-774。
[26] 周海林,国内外可持续发展指标(体系)研究综述[J],可持续发展指标国际研讨会论文集,2000.10:68-84。
[27] 李智、鞠美庭、史聆聆、陈敏、李珀松,交通规划环境影响评价的指标体系探讨[J],交通环保,2004,25⑹:16-19。
[28] 鞠美庭、朱坦,国际战略环评实践追踪及中国对规划实施环境影响评价的管理程序和技术路线探讨[J],重庆环境科学,2003,25(11):124-128。
[29] 何仁伟、张明举,浅论土地利用总体规划环境影响评价[J],甘肃农业,2006⑵:71-72。
[30] 潘嫦英、刘卫东,浅谈土地利用规划的环境影响评价[J],中国人口资源与环境,2004,14(2):134-147。
[31] 陈文波、赵小敏、武春友,土地利用总体规划环境影响评价理论与方法初探[J],江西农业大学学报,2006,28⑴:134-138。
[32] 戴聆春、张换水,公路规划环境影响评价指标体系研究[J],企业技术开发,2006,25⑼:40-42。
[33] 肖华山,规划环境影响评价指标体系及评价方法探讨[J],金属矿山,2003(12):46-49。
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |