Improve governance system of national parks, build the world‘s largest national park system with high quality
Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, ISSN: 1000-3045, Vol: 39, Issue: 2, Page: 219-229
2024
- 1Citations
- 103Usage
- 1Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations1
- Citation Indexes1
- Usage103
- Downloads53
- Abstract Views50
- Captures1
- Readers1
Article Description
Improving the governance system of national parks is an inevitable requirement for China’s high-quality construction of the world’s largest national park system. This study analyzes the main challenges and problems faced by China’s national park governance based on long-term investigation on national parks and national park system pilot areas. Under the overall logic of modernization of China’s national governance system and governance capabilities, drawing on international experiences in sound governance of regional and watershed public goods and national parks, this study proposes a theoretical framework for establishing a “four in one” national park governance system in China, including a comprehensive decision-making mechanism, a management and execution mechanism, a scientific decision-making and consultation mechanism, and a social participation mechanism. On this basis, five suggestions are proposed to deepen the reform of the national park governance system. (1) Establish a coordinated decisionmaking mechanism to solve the coordination difficulties faced by national park construction. (2) Deepen the reform of the management system, establish a government governance system for national parks with clear responsibilities and legal administration. (3) Improve the institutional system of multi-party participation throughout the entire process to promote collaboration and broad participation in national park system construction. (4) Improve scientific decision-making and consultation mechanisms to ensure scientific, democratic and lawful decision-making. (5) Expand the scope of spatial governance in national parks, promote green development in the surrounding areas of national parks, and establish harmonious relationships between national parks and local governments.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85186897382&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.16418/j.issn.1000-3045.20230618001; https://bulletinofcas.researchcommons.org/journal/vol39/iss2/1; https://bulletinofcas.researchcommons.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2466&context=journal
Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know