我国农村公路建设中的资金问题

在当前全国各地纷纷加大农村公路建设的背景下,抓住机遇,积极摸索创造出一条适合于各地区农村自身特征的融资之道,在实践中逐步建立起国家扶持引导、地方主体投资、市场化融资和社会筹资相结合的多渠道、多形式的农村公路建设资金筹集体制,具有十分重要的现实意义.     

连片特困地区可达性与贫困程度的空间耦合模型

为获取连片特困地区综合交通可达性与贫困程度的空间耦合特征,基于空间截面数据,构建了因子分析—熵权多维贫困测度模型、综合交通可达性评估模型和空间耦合协调模型,并以滇西边境山区为例进行分析验证.结果表明:整体空间上,贫困程度表现出由中心向外围扩散的模式,呈现南部高于北部、边缘高于中心的空间特征;综合交通可达性空间分异显著,可达性值呈"偏左正态分布",并在主要节点形成了"Y字型"综合交通可达性优势带;贫困程度与综合交通可达性的耦合协调水平两极化特征明显,中心区域及边缘地带上的空间耦合关系显著,协调发展水平较高;其他县域耦合协调发展水平偏低,交通基础设施的扶贫效应有待发挥.     

USING STR POLYMORPHISM TO STUDY THE GENETIC RELATIONSHIPS AMONG A CHINESE KOREAN POPULATION AND OTHER GROUPS

Shorttandemrepeat(STR)polymorphismsare mainlyusedintheforensicfieldforpaternitytests andpersonalidentificationatpresent.Multiplex PCRamplificationandtypingsystemwithmulti coloredfluorescentlabeledprimershavemadeit convenienttogenotypeSTRsusingcommerciall…     

山区灾害多发区段路线方案的多级模糊综合评价

根据山区灾害多发区段线路方案优选问题具有多因素和模糊性的特点,在建立多级模糊综合评价的指标体系的基础上,采用层次分析法合理确定路线方案各影响因素及其各子因素的权重,运用模糊数学理论,建立了山区灾害多发区段路线方案的二级模糊综合评选的数学模型,提高了山区灾害多发区段路线方案评选的客观性和科学性.并以山地灾害多发的迫隆藏布流域段为实例进行了研究,证明了这种方法的合理性和有效性.     

基于海明距离-TOPSIS法的山区公路隧道扩建方案直觉模糊优选

为了解决山区高速公路隧道改扩建方案选取决策困难而又缺乏理论依据的问题,基于直觉模糊数的海明距离,结合TOPSIS方法,增加专家权向量修正,进而得到处理具有优先级别关系的多属性问题的决策方法。分析山区高速公路隧道改扩建的影响因素,建立隧道扩建方案影响指标体系。从依托工程实际出发,邀请指定的专家对指标优先级别排序,然后利用已建的数学模型实现扩建方案寻优。该方法在厦蓉高速公路隧道改扩建施工方案优选中得到有效运用,说明该方法实用可行,对隧道改扩建施工方案以及类似工程方案优选问题具有重要的指导意义。     

基于通勤模式的都市圈中心结构判别研究

面对日益严重的城市交通问题，城市管理者尝试从城市空间规划层面引导交通出行模式的转型，调节供需关系，缓解交通问题，而中心结构识别作为城市空间规划的重要步骤，在分析方法与数据应用等方面仍然受限。本文利用百度位置数据挖掘出的都市圈通勤数据，采用基于网格的DBSCAN(Density-Based Spatial Clustering of Applications with Noise)密度聚类算法，识别出我国35个主要都市圈的中心布局，并根据5种通勤模式的理论模型和相应的量化指标对都市圈中心结构进行判别，最后对主要中心结构下影响通勤效率的因素进行回归分析。研究发现，虽然不同都市圈的中心布局差异明显，但大部分都市圈表现为非均衡多中心结构。不同中心结构的 分布呈现出一定的地域特征，单中心结构都市圈主要位于中西部城市，而约束扩散结构和均衡多中心结构都市圈大多是由东部沿海开放城市发展形成。城市规模与通勤时耗的相关性最为显著，职住平衡度对通勤时耗也有较大影响。上述研究结果为针对性地制定不同都市圈的资源配 置策略和通勤效率优化策略提供了有效支撑，对都市圈空间规划和交通可持续发展具有一定的理论价值和现实指导意义。     

山岭重丘区高速公路的选线研究

高速公路在山岭重丘区的路线设计受到地形、地势、地质、水文等诸多自然条件的制约和限制。结合工程实例,对山岭重丘区高速公路选线进行分析和研究,寻找出运行安全、生态环保、易于实施、并且具有项目可持续发展的路线设计方案。     

Do Marine Protected Areas Affect Human Nutrition and Health? A Comparison between Villages in Roviana,Solomon Islands

The implementation of marine protected areas (MPAs) for fisheries management has increased recently due to the perceived role of MPAs in conserving biodiversity, increasing fish stocks, and enhancing the food security of coastal communities. However, it is unclear whether MPAs may restrict the availability of marine resources and decrease overall food security and the health of the people. In the Roviana Lagoon of the Solomon Islands, we conducted cross-comparisons of villages with MPAs and a village without an MPA to assess whether MPAs influenced local perceptions of governance, environmental change, livelihood strategies, and actual human nutrition and health. Results showed that residents of villages with effective MPAs had higher energy and protein intake than those who had no MPA or an ineffective MPA. We conclude that “no-take” marine reserves do not have adverse effects and that when MPAs are effectively sustained they may enhance local nutrition and health.     

Investigating Information Requirements for Evaluating Effectiveness of Marine Protected Areas—Indonesian Case Studies

Identifying the information needs of managers and other stakeholders is an important first step in designing an evaluation of management effectiveness for marine protected areas (MPAs) that will be relevant to local circumstances and useful for improving management practices. Information requirements for evaluating effectiveness were investigated at two MPAs in Indonesia. Results show that, despite similar management objectives, information needs for evaluation differ between sites and those differences reflect the unique context within which management operates in each case. The scope of information needs at each site covers a broad range of issues including context, planning, resources, processes, outputs, and outcomes. Relevant components of a variety of different evaluation tools will need to be used to satisfy information needs at these sites. Evaluation tools that are based primarily on stated management objectives or the expressed views of a few key stakeholders are unlikely to be very useful for improving management in these cases.