道路选择问题是地震灾后应急救援必须解决的问题之一。为了对救援道路进行合理的选择,需要对灾区道路危险性进行综合评价。现有的综合评价中较少考虑归一化方法的选取对评价结果的影响,该文使用EM(Entropy Method)改进TOPSIS(Technique ...道路选择问题是地震灾后应急救援必须解决的问题之一。为了对救援道路进行合理的选择,需要对灾区道路危险性进行综合评价。现有的综合评价中较少考虑归一化方法的选取对评价结果的影响,该文使用EM(Entropy Method)改进TOPSIS(Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution)对汶川地震道路危险性进行综合评价,发现了不同的归一化方式会对评价结果产生不同程度的影响。通过对其影响因素进行分析,探讨合适于EM改进TOPSIS的灾区道路危险性综合评价归一化方式,其结果对地震灾后道路选择提供了新的思路。展开更多
Industrialization is one way to achieve a sustainable route out of poverty.During the implementation of industry-based poverty alleviation projects,rural households’livelihood responses to change are crucial.A strong...Industrialization is one way to achieve a sustainable route out of poverty.During the implementation of industry-based poverty alleviation projects,rural households’livelihood responses to change are crucial.A stronger livelihood response is conducive to multidimensional poverty relief due to industry-based poverty alleviation projects.Effective poverty alleviation can also stimulate stronger household responses.There is a positive cycle between livelihood response and multidimensional poverty relief effects that can help achieve sustainable poverty alleviation goals.Using a synergistic perspective on the relationship between“people–industry–land”,this paper explains the poverty alleviation logic connecting livelihood response,multidimensional poverty relief,and sustainable routes out of poverty by constructing a four-dimensional livelihood response measurement system with three elements of intensity.We analyzed survey data collected from 2363 households from 4 sample counties in 4 contiguous poverty-stricken areas,and measured and compared the characteristics of rural households’livelihood responses and the factors influencing poverty alleviation projects.Rural households’livelihood responses in four sample counties were moderate.The four dimensions of responses were ranked as livelihood strategy response,livelihood space response,livelihood output response,and livelihood capital response.The three intensities indicated that the perception and willingness elements of livelihood response were very similar,but there was a big gap between those elements and livelihood response actions.At the group level,poor households had higher and more consistent livelihood response than non-poor households.External environment factors(such as location,industry type,village organizational ability,and village atmosphere)and internal family factors(such as resource endowment,income sources,health,education,labor quantity,policy trust,credit availability,and social networks)had a significant impact on households’liv展开更多
文摘道路选择问题是地震灾后应急救援必须解决的问题之一。为了对救援道路进行合理的选择,需要对灾区道路危险性进行综合评价。现有的综合评价中较少考虑归一化方法的选取对评价结果的影响,该文使用EM(Entropy Method)改进TOPSIS(Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution)对汶川地震道路危险性进行综合评价,发现了不同的归一化方式会对评价结果产生不同程度的影响。通过对其影响因素进行分析,探讨合适于EM改进TOPSIS的灾区道路危险性综合评价归一化方式,其结果对地震灾后道路选择提供了新的思路。
基金Financial support from National Natural Science Foundation of China(Grant No.41761022)Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars of Hunan Province,China(Grant No.2020JJ2025)+2 种基金Key Program of Social Science Foundation in Hunan Province,China(Grant No.18ZDB031)Platform Program of Key Laboratory of Ecotourism in Hunan Province,China(Grant No.STLV1815)Hunan Provincial Innovation Foundation For Postgraduate,China(Grant No.CX20201061),is gratefully acknowledged.
文摘Industrialization is one way to achieve a sustainable route out of poverty.During the implementation of industry-based poverty alleviation projects,rural households’livelihood responses to change are crucial.A stronger livelihood response is conducive to multidimensional poverty relief due to industry-based poverty alleviation projects.Effective poverty alleviation can also stimulate stronger household responses.There is a positive cycle between livelihood response and multidimensional poverty relief effects that can help achieve sustainable poverty alleviation goals.Using a synergistic perspective on the relationship between“people–industry–land”,this paper explains the poverty alleviation logic connecting livelihood response,multidimensional poverty relief,and sustainable routes out of poverty by constructing a four-dimensional livelihood response measurement system with three elements of intensity.We analyzed survey data collected from 2363 households from 4 sample counties in 4 contiguous poverty-stricken areas,and measured and compared the characteristics of rural households’livelihood responses and the factors influencing poverty alleviation projects.Rural households’livelihood responses in four sample counties were moderate.The four dimensions of responses were ranked as livelihood strategy response,livelihood space response,livelihood output response,and livelihood capital response.The three intensities indicated that the perception and willingness elements of livelihood response were very similar,but there was a big gap between those elements and livelihood response actions.At the group level,poor households had higher and more consistent livelihood response than non-poor households.External environment factors(such as location,industry type,village organizational ability,and village atmosphere)and internal family factors(such as resource endowment,income sources,health,education,labor quantity,policy trust,credit availability,and social networks)had a significant impact on households’liv
