期刊文献+

新西兰林业规划实施评估理论、方法与借鉴 被引量:7

Evaluation of Forest Plan Implementation in New Zealand: Theories,Methods and Implications
原文传递
导出
摘要 林业规划是指导林业发展的重要方式,林业规划实施评估有利于客观评价林业规划的实施成效,发现问题并提供建议。文中介绍了新西兰林业规划的现状,对用于林业规划实施评估的战略环境评估、基于一致性的规划实施评估、基于绩效的规划实施评估等理论进行了详细分析,并在此基础上阐述了新西兰林业规划实施评估中常用的几种方法;还分析了新西兰林业规划实施评估的特点,总结了对中国开展林业规划实施评估的启示:1)立法保障规划实施评估;2)重视生态环境影响评估和公众参与;3)目标一致性评估。 Forest planning has been increasingly regarded as an important way to manage forestry resources. The evaluation of forestry planning implementation helps evaluate objectively the implementation effects of forest planning, find problems and provide suggestions. This paper reviewed the forest plan implementation evaluation in New Zealand, made a detailed analysis on evaluation theories including Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA), conformance-based plan implementation evaluation and the performance-based evaluation, and then introduced several plan implementation evaluation methods commonly used in New Zealand based on the analysis. Finally, the characteristics of forest plan implementation evaluation in New Zealand were analyzed and the implications to China were concluded, including: 1 ) legislations to guarantee the plan implementation evaluation; 2) attaching importance to the ecological environment assessment and public participation; 3) objectives consistency method used in evaluation.
出处 《世界林业研究》 CSCD 北大核心 2014年第1期77-81,共5页 World Forestry Research
基金 引进国际先进林业科学技术项目(2012-4-69) 国家自然科学基金(31170593) 国家林业局项目国家级林业规划实施评估和监督体系试点研究 国家林业局项目国家级林业规划编制与评估
关键词 林业规划实施评估 评估理论 评估方法 新西兰 forest plan implementation evaluation, evaluation theory, evaluation method, New Zealand
作者简介 苏立娟,硕士生,研究方向:林业经济管理,E-mail:sulijuan.0@163.com 通信作者:何友均(1976-),男,博士,副研究员,硕士生导师,研究方向:森林多目标管理与评价、林业宏观战略与规划、林业政策与环境经济、森林生态学,E-mail:hyjun163@163.com
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

  • 1Ministry for the Environment of New Zealand Resource Mana^ment Act1991: No 69 [ EB/OL ] . [ 2013 - 07 - 08 ] . http://www. legislation govt nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/DLM230265. html.
  • 2巴里.德拉尔.克莱顿,巴里.赛德勒.战略环境评价:国际实践与经验[M].鞠美庭,吴波,王勇,等,译.北京:化学工业出版社,2007.
  • 3LaurianL, Day M,Berke P, et al. Evaluation plan implementation: aconformance - based methodology [ J]. Journal of the American Plan-ning Association, 2004, 70(4) : 471 -480.
  • 4MasonG. Evaluating the effectiveness of conformance - based plans:attributing built heritage outcomes to plan implementation under NewZealand’s Resource Management Act[ D]. Hamilton, New Zealand :The University of Waikato, 2008.
  • 5Wildavsky A. If planning isn’t everything, maybe it’s nothing[ J]. Poli-cy Science, 1973, 4(2): 127 -153.
  • 6DayM,Mason G,Crawford J,et al. Evaluating the effectiveness ofdistrict and regional plans prepared under the Resource ManagementAct: planing practice guide 4[ M]. Hamilton, New Zealand: the In-ternational Global Change Institute ( IGCI ), University ofWaikato, 2009.
  • 7Giera N, Bell B, Webste M, et al. Economic evaluation of wairaraparegional irrigation project [ R ] . Wairarapa, New Zealand : GreaterWellington Regional Council,2010.
  • 8Meister A. D, Rosier D J. An evaluation frameworic for the New Zealandcoastal policy statement[ M]. Wellington: Head Office, Departmentof Conservation, 1992.
  • 9郭垚,陈雯.区域规划评估理论与方法研究进展[J].地理科学进展,2012,31(6):768-776. 被引量:21
  • 10Hill M. A goals - achievement matrix for evaluating alternative plans[J]. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 1968, 34( 1 ):19-29.

二级参考文献49

  • 1Pearman A D. Unvertainty in planning: Characterisation, evaluation, and feedback. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 1985, 12(3): 313-320.
  • 2Khakee Abdul. Evaluation and planning: Inseparable con- cepts. Town Planning Review, 1998, 69(4): 359-74.
  • 3Masser I. Evaluating Urban Planning Efforts. Hampshire UK: Gower, 1983: 37-45.
  • 4Lichfield N Kettle P, Whitehead M. Evaluation in the Planning Process. Oxford, UK: Pergamon, 1975:28-31.
  • 5Young R C. Goals and goal-setting. Journal of the Ameri- can Institute of Planners, 1966, 32(2): 76-85.
  • 6Talen E. Do plans get implemented? A review of evalua- tion in planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 1996, 10 (3): 248-261.
  • 7Whelan J. Assessing urban planning schemes by means of multi-criteria evaluation techniques: The case ofpedes- trianisation. Urban Studies, 1994, 31(2): 309-329.
  • 8Innes J E. Group processes and the social construction of growth management. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1992, 58(4): 440-493.
  • 9Wildavsky A. If planning isn't everything, maybe it's nothing. Policy Science, 1973, 26: 83-89.
  • 10Sabatier P A. Top-down and bottom-up approaches to im- plementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 1986, 6(1): 21-48.

共引文献20

同被引文献146

引证文献7

二级引证文献19

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部