中国与世界，环境危机大家谈 WHERE CHINA AND THE WORLD DISCUSS THE ENVIRONMENT
参与讨论 COMMENTS
参与讨论
这的确让我想到人类在世界各地的生活方式以及他们的足迹。我刚刚对中外对话网页链接关于生态足迹的问答题作出解答。我居住在英国伦敦, 而我的生态足迹则是星球的2.3。那其他人又是多少呢? 我真的想知道一位中国都市人的积分是多少… SL
This really got me thinking about different lifestyles around the world and their footprints. I just took the ecological footprint quiz linked at the bottom of the chinadialogue homepage. I live in London, UK, and my ecological footprint was 2.3 planets. What were other people's? I'd be interested to know what a Chinese city-dweller would score...
SL
我的生态足迹指数是1.7。但当我认真地做了一次测试，我的指数变成了2.7。 我生活在一个寒冷的气候中，但我已经不再驾车了。我使用三轮车。我只购买当地生产的食物，而抵制所有的全国连锁商店。我从当地的二手店购买很多物品。对我来说，这是一个好方法，可以让我不把钱花给大的可控制商业的商家。catnapping
My footprint was 1.7, but then when I took it more carefully, it was 2.7.
I live in a cold climate, but I no longer drive. I use my three-wheeler to get around. And I only buy my food from local people.
I boycott all national stores, and buy much from second-hand stores, locally. For me, this is also a good idea. It keeps my money out of the hands of monopolies.
生态指数测试有点意思，但得出的结果确让人有些吃惊。
我在北京的生态指数是4.5, 远高于中国平均的1.5。 这其中最大的原因是交通的问题。因为我需要每天乘车去很远的地方工作。
我在伦顿的生态指数是5.1, 相反却低于英国的平均指数5.3。我的指数中的最大因素是交通和食物。因为我还是得需要每天乘火车和汽车很长时间去上班；在英国，大部分食物都是进口的，我没有选择。
这两项测试的比较，让我得出两点结论：
1。 测试的不人性；
很多时候你的生活状况不是个人可以改变的。如果你工作在大城市，而住在郊区， 你有选择吗？
在英国如果你只有进口食品可买，你有选择吗？
一个国家的经济和社会制度很多程度上已经限制了个人生活方式改变的自由度。所以，即便个人可对生态改善有所作为，但这是一个国家，全社会努力的方向。
2。发达国家的个人生态平均指数比发展中国家
高的多。所以，的确，发达国家需要在此方面有所作为。否则，国家经济越发展，个人生态指数越高，这样下来，就违背了经济可持续发展的原则和目标。
经济的可持续发展是一个值得研究的课题。
It is interesting to take the ecological footprint test available at the bottom of chinadialogue homepage. But my test results are surprising.
My index in Beijing is 4.5, much higher China's average at 1.5. My long journey everyday to work is mainly blamed for the high index.
Well, I get an index of 5.1 in London, lower than the UK average of 5.3. The reasons are similar that I have to take train and bus to travel a long way to work in London everyday. Meanwhile, most food sold in the UK is imported. I have no other choices.
Comparing the two test results, I have two thoughts:
First: the test does not take individuals' actual situation into consideration. If you work in the downtown but live in the outskirts, how can you do with it? If only imported food is available, you have less choices.
So the economy and social system of a certain country have basically set the tone for the living style of individuals. Even an individual could do something to help improve the ecosystem, but it should be a target for the whole nation and society.
Secondly, you could tell average ecological footprint index in developed countries is much higher than that in developing countries. So the rich countries do need to take actions now, otherwise, it maybe indicate that advanced economy, higher ecological footprint index. This runs in the opposite direction of the sustainable economic development.
So, sustainable economic development is a big topic for researchers.
如评论3所说, “一些国家的经济和社会系统已经对个人的生活方式制定了节奏”。多么的真实! 欧洲国家消耗了这么多资源是无可避免的。在中国这可有分别。然而，令人震惊的是上海所消耗与欧洲平等或更多。从中让我寓意到的是21世纪的城市生活大量的消耗资源。西方国家对资源的消耗有增无减, 而我们现在的生活正是如此。为了保存这个星球,西方国家必须改变他们的态度。若他们希望中国跟随他们的步伐, 就必须设立好榜样, 否则中国人将抱怨 “你要我们对生活方式作出牺牲, 然而自己却不原意这么做。”
As comment number 3 says 'the economy and social system of a certain country have set the tone for the living style of individuals'.
How true! It's unavoidable in a European nation that you will use many resources. In China this is different. But it is shocking to find Shanghai use at European or higher levels.
The moral I draw from this is that 21st century city living anywhere on the planet draws heavily on resources. And the lessen is more for westerners as we are the ones who are living like this now. To save the planet westerners must change their ways. They can only hope that China follows suit if a good example is set, otherwise Chinese people will say 'you want us to make sacrifices and change the way we lead our lives but you are not willing to do so yourself'.
Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated.
我们建议你在评论后署名, 以便其他浏览者能更好地与你交流。你没有必要使用真名，但你的署名将会协助我们维护网站的信息交流畅通。
We suggest you add your name to your comments so that other readers can respond to you more easily. You don’t have to use your real name, but providing a name will help make communication clearer for other forum participants.
除非其他申明,本网站及其内容受知识共享组织的“署名-非商业性使用-禁止演绎"2.0 英国：英格兰和威尔士协议和 2.5 中国大陆协议的保护。
Unless otherwise stated, this work is under Creative Commons' Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 England & Wales License and 2.5 China License.