保护环境 英文

保护环境 英文（通用8篇）

保护环境 英文 篇1

For cleaning environment is necessary for us to keep in mind the three items.They are reduced, reused and recycled.Reducing is the best way to protect the environment.However if you can’t reduce something we use it and if you can’t reuse it, you can recycle it.We do thing waste means shopping with environment in mind.Considered environment impact even each products before you buy it.Remember to make list what you need before you go shopping.This will reduce impulse buying.Buy in bulk which means buy in large quantities and not pack it.It’s much cheaper and it delimits small tokens and excise packaging.Avoid buy things that can’t be recycled.Second, learning to reuse is easy after you make a little practice.For example, you can reuse shopping bags by canvas bags and use them when you shop.Buy durable high quantity goods for a longer life.All the durable goods may cost a little more at first.They would save your money and help save the environment in longer.Before for anything away, think about how each item can be reused.The last of the three items that we must keep in mind is recycling.Recycling means collecting, processing, marketing and ultimately reusing material that we once thrown away.Check the yellow pages of the internet to find information about local recycle programs in your community.

保护环境 英文 篇2

关键词：隐私,法律,英国,媒体,监管

The phone hacking scandal at the News of the World in 2011has shocked the whole Britain, and raised the public’s level of awareness about privacy.The root of the scandal lies in the limited protection English laws provides in respect of the invasion of privacy.The purpose of this paper is to present the development of the privacy laws in the UK through an elaboration of the key cases in this area.

1 The Absence of Privacy Law

For a long time, there wasn’t any specific law recognising the right to privacy in the law of England.And the domestic courts did not have to consider such a guarantee.It was until 2 October 2000when the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998 incorporated into English law the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) that the development of privacy law in Britain began.The introduction of Article 8 of the ECHR guaranteed the right for everyone to respect for private life, home and correspondence.

Before the HRA came into effect, breach of confidence was regarded as a most favoured remedy used to protect privacy.The law of confidentiality dates back to the case of Prince Albert v.Strange[1849], designed to protect confidential information.Issues of privacy had to be“shoe-horned”into this action for breach of confidence, which didn’t quite fit with the misuse of private information like the“kiss&tell”stories.

The absence of privacy law made it difficult to protect individual citizens’right to privacy effectively, especially in a country where the tabloids’prurience is well known.In the case of Kaye v Robertson&Another[1991], the claimant Mr Kaye suffered from the intrusion of a journalist and a photographer while recovering in the hospital room.But instead of a breach of privacy, Mr Kaye sought to base his claim to injunctions upon libel, malicious falsehood, trespass to the person and passing off.Lord Justice Glidewell highlighted the gap in English law in his judgement:

It is well-known that in English law there is no right to privacy, and accordingly there is no right of action for breach of a person’s privacy.The facts of the present case are a graphic illustration of the desirability of Parliament considering whether and in what circumstances statutory provision can be made to protect the privacy of individuals. (1)

It is in this context that Hoffman LJ expressed concern in1994:“Publication may cause needless pain, distress and damage to individuals or harm to other aspects of the public interest.”

2 The Post-HRA Development of Privacy Laws

2.1 Clashes between privacy and freedom of expression

As we have mentioned, the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998was imported into English law in 2000.The Act include Article 8, qualified the right to privacy, offering the possibility of citizens making claims against mass media.

But the exercise of rights under Article 8 clashes with Article10 rights to freedom of expression.Section 12 of the HRA requires courts to have“particular regard”to the freedom of expression when considering imposing an injunction.The two Convention rights are of equal value, thus neither of them has overwhelming priority.In the case of Douglas v.Hello!Ltd[2001], Lord Justice Sedley stated that:“Everything will ultimately depend on the proper balance between privacy and publicity in the situation facing the court.”He was not alone in his opinion.Lord Justice Brooke said in the same case that it was well-grounded that the court should weigh privacy on the one hand and freedom of expression on the other.

From the media’s viewpoint, it should be considered that whether there is any element of public interest which will override the right to privacy.Prior to HRA, and even in the first few years after its coming into force, the public interest was a potential justification for a breach of confidence, which used as a“trump card”by the media.A significant example of“putting the record straight”is the famous case of Campbell v.Mirror Group Newspapers[2004]where all five Law Lords agreed that the Daily Mirror’s revelation of Ms Campbell’s addition to drugs was in the public interest, as she had lied about the fact.Nonetheless, a 3:2 majority of Law Lords concluded that the Mirror had breached Ms Campbell’s privacy by using long lens camera covertly to obtain the photograph.

Although the judiciary in the Campbell case showed reluctance for the creation of a separate tort of privacy, the Law Lords agreed that everyone, even public figures, are entitled to some degree of privacy.Judge Charles Gray even commented that the judgement had created a law of privacy for the first time.Also, the House of Lords had clearly stated in this case that a“threshold test”of private information should be used to see if the claimants have a reasonable expectation of privacy in any given set of circumstances.When conducting the test, both the information itself and the circumstances in which it was obtained should be taken into account.Under this context, a person could have“a reasonable expectation of privacy”in a public place if the activity is private.However, any“trivial”or“anodyne”situations described as“popping out for a pint of milk”by Baroness Hale, will not be protectable.

As illustrated in the Campbell case, the post-HRA development of privacy laws has helped provide greater protections for individual citizens, including the public figures.Desmond Browne QC (2008:1) held that under the influence of Article 8, a shift has taken place from“a tort based on infringement of confidential information to one involving the‘misuse of private information’”.However, the House of Lords did not go as far as to create a new tort of privacy, as Justice Lindsay claimed in the Douglas privacy case that“the subject is better left to Parliament”. (2)

2.2 Protection of private life extends to social dimension

The case of Von Hannover v Germany[2004]marked another important development of privacy laws.The applicant Princess Caroline took action over photographs of her daily life in public places which were taken without her consent.The European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a breach of Article 8 rights, and that German law was not adequate in protecting individuals’right to private and family life.The significance of this decision for the United Kingdom was that as a result of the HRA, when determining a question in relation to a right under the European Convention, England and Wales courts have to take account of the decisions of the ECHR.

The ECHR held that the taking and publication of the photographs in this case did not contribute to“a debate of interest”;the public does not have“a legitimate interest”in knowing details of the applicant’s private life“even if she appears in places that cannot always be described as secluded and despite the fact that she is well known to the public.”This guarantees that anyone, including celebrities, enjoys a“legitimate expectation”of protection of private life.In the judgement of the von Hannover case, the ECHR clearly stated that:“That protection...extends beyond the private family circle and also includes a social dimension.”In other words, the protection of private life began to extend to interaction with other people.

As commented by Hadwin and Bloy (2007:145) , the von Hannover case has considerably broadened judicial interpretation of private information, and set a“draconian benchmark in press terms”.Jonathan Coad held similar views in his article on the Swanturton website (2004) :

“This case is a strong warning both to the PCC and to the UKcourts that they have a positive obligation to protect the privacyrights of individuals, thereby inevitably curtailing to some degreethe freedom of the press, and in particular of press photography.”

2.3 Protection of private life extends to include relatively trivial details

The width of the notion of“private life”keeps expanding in the case of Ash v Mc Kennitt[2005].The folk singer Mc Kennitt sought injunction and damages for her former friend Ms Ash’s revealing details of her private life in a book.Although it is recognised that the interference with private life had to be of“some seriousness”, the trial judge Justice Eady ruled that even“relatively trivial details”about an individual’s home would fall within the protection of privacy:

“To describe a person's home...is generally regarded as unacceptable.To convey such details, without permission, to the general public is almost as objectionable as spying into the home with a long distance lens and publishing the resulting photographs.” (3)

In response, the defendant Ms Ash argued that Mc Kennitt was a public figure and“there was a legitimate public interest”in this affair“for that reason alone”. (3) But the Court of Appeal followed European jurisprudence in reaching the conclusion that Mc Kennitt should not be considered as a public figure, as she has always made clear distinction between her public and private life.The Court considered“recent authorities”as reference, namely, the von Hannover case and Av B Plc[2002].In these cases the ECHR held a view that a distinction should be drawn“between the watchdog role”and the“reporting of private information about people who, although of interest to the public, were not public figures.” (4)

Lord Justice Longmore pointed out in the Mc Kennitt case that when dealing with a case of misuse of private information, “the truth or falsity of the information is an irrelevant inquiry in deciding whether the information is entitled to be protected.” (5) Hadwin and Bloy (2007:155) commented on this decision, saying that it“weakens the limits of prior restraint”.

As can be seen from Justice Eady’s view, the courts are more prepared to protect citizens’Article 8 rights since the Mc Kennitt case:

“It is clear that there is a significant shift taking place as between, on the one hand, freedom of expression for the media and the corresponding interest of the public to receive information, and, on the other hand, the legitimate expectation of citizens to have their private lives protected.”

2.4 Accessibility of the information was taken into account

The case X&Y v Person or Person’s unknown[2006]in the latter part of 2006 raises the question of whether the information sought to be protected is already in the public domain.In this case, the Mirror Group and News Group Newspapers sought the discharge of an ex parte injunction granted by Justice Eady.The injunction was intended to“prevent further dissemination of allegations about the state of the Claimants'marriage”. (6) The newspaper groups claimed that the order“did not contain a public domain proviso.”The trial judge Eady J.held that the information sought to be protected should be scrutinised, which requires the applicant to provide a full and frank disclosure for the court to make judgement.The court should consider“whether the information in question is so generally accessible that, in all the circumstances, it cannot be regarded as confidential.” (7) Justice Eady stated that there should be a distinction between“the concept of being in the public eye and that of being a publicity seeker”, while sometimes the two will overlap.

2.5 Protection of children’s privacy

The judgement of the Court of Appeal in Murray v Big Pictures (UK) Ltd.[2008]illustrates another development of privacy law.In August 2007, when Dr and Mrs Murray (J.K Rowling) sought damages and an injunction on behalf of their infant son David to restrain publication of a photograph of him taken in the street, they were rejected by the High Court.It appeared that the judge followed the Campbell ruling, as the Court ruled that David did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when walking on the street, claiming that there should be a distinction between family and sporting activities and“something as simple as a walk down a street”.But on appeal in May 2008 the Court of Appeal noticed that the fact that David is a child is“of greater significance than the judge thought.”The court reached the decision that:“If a child of parents who are not in the public eye could reasonably expect not to have photographs of him published in the media, so too should the child of a famous parent.”

Desmond Browne QC (2008:16) commented that the Murray case raises an important question which the Court of Appeal did not provide a clear explanation:

“...whether adults or children (or both) have a right not to be photographed in a public place without their consent, where the resulting photograph shows nothing humiliating or embarrassing and the circumstances in which the photograph was taken did not amount to harassment.”

But just as Justice Eady (2009:5) said in his article, the outcome of the Murray case could have a“far-reaching impact on paparazzi and tabloid culture”.Keith Schilling, solicitor for the Murray couple, shared similar opinion that the case would have a profound effect, and considered it as a“major development in the law of privacy in this country”. (8)

2.6 An increase of the amount of damages

The case of Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd.[2008]marked another significant development in privacy laws.The claimant Max Mosley won￡60, 000 damages, which are the highest in recent legal history for breach of privacy.Mr Mosley sued the newspaper group for grossly invading his privacy in publishing a story of him involving in a sadomasochistic orgy with prostitutes.Justice Eady said in his judgement that Mr Mosley had“a reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to sexual activities”. (9) Eady J confirmed that individuals’sex lives are to be regarded as essentially their own business.The Max Mosley case also emphasizes that special considerations need to be attached to photographs and visual images, whose extensive intrusion to privacy had been discussed in the Von Hannover case.In his conclusion, Eady J.said:“It has to be recognised that no amount of damages can fully compensate the Claimant for the damage done.He is hardly exaggerating when he says that his life was ruined.” (9)

It can be seen from the Mosley case that there has been an increase of the amount of damages awarded for breach of privacy.In2003 the model Naomi Campbell was only awarded a compensation of￡3, 500, and in the Douglas case the couple was awarded￡14, 600.In 2008, Sienna Miller the actress gained out-of-court settlements of￡37, 500, ￡25, 000 and recently￡57, 000.Also in2008, actors Hugh Grant, Liz Hurley and her husband Arun Nayar were awarded￡58, 000 against the News of the World.

3 Recent Years Events on Privacy

There seems to be a quiet period in the privacy field between July 2008 and January 2010, say between the Mosley case and Terry v Persons Unknown (Rev 1) [2010].In the Terry case, the High Court rejected LNS’s application for an interim injunction to restrain the publication of his personal relationship with another named person.What should be noted is that the judge held that a further reason for rejecting the application is related to an“uncertainty in the law of misuse of private information”.The decision has given rise to a rash of new aggressive stories concerning celebrities.

In July 2011, following the phone hacking scandal at the News of the World, the Prime Minister appointed Lord Justice Leveson to carry out an independent public inquiry aiming to make recommendations on the ethics and practice of the press.On 29Nov 2012, LJ Leveson published his report, recommending a new self-regulatory body to replace the existing Press Complaints Commission (PCC) .On 30 Oct 2013, the Privy Council granted the Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press.The royal charter states in Article 8 of Schedule 2 that the code“must cover standards of...appropriate respect for privacy where there is no sufficient public interest justification for breach”.What’s more, the new self-regulator will have the ability to fine the newspapers up to 1 million pounds for breach of the code.However, it should be noted that the royal charter at its core is not a law, and the new body in some way functions the same with the PCC.But still, it is expected that the reformed self-regulator would provide a quicker and cheaper arbitration procedure than the law, benefiting the press and claimants.

4 Conclusion

From the above analysis, we can see that in recent years the privacy laws has been developing in the discussion of public interest, definition of private place and public place, scope of private life, the privacy of children, and the balance between individuals’right to privacy and the freedom of speech, etc.And it is recognised that even celebrities have a right to a protected private life.However, the courts still seem to be reluctant to establish a separate tort of privacy.There is further to go.Just as the report of Press Standards, Privacy and Libel said:

“The Human Rights Act has only been in force for nine years and inevitably the number of judgments involving freedom of expression and privacy is limited.We agree with the Lord Chancellor that law relating to privacy will become clearer as more cases are decided by the courts.On balance we recognise that this may take some considerable time.”

参考文献

[1]Bloy D.Media Law[M].London:Sage Publications, 2007.

[2]Bloy D, Hadwin S.Law and the Media[M].London:Sweet&Max-well, 2007.

[3]Browne D, Kiss.Tell Stories and Snatched Photographs[M]//InChancery and Professional Negligence Bar Associations Semi-nar on Privacy and Confidentiality[R].London, 2008.

[4]Coad J.Von Hannover v Germany:a summer of discontent forthe paparazzi.EB/OL].[2004].http://www.swanturton.com/arti-cles/JKCVonHannoverArticle.aspx.

[5]Culture, Media and Sport Committee.Press Standards, Privacyand Libel 2nd Report of Session 2009–10 Volume I[R].Lon-don:The Stationery Office Limited, 2010.

[6]Eady D.Privacy and the Press:Where are we now?[M]//In“Jus-tice”Conference, 2009.

[7]Huhne C.What's all the fuss about the royal charter meaningthe end of press freedom?[EB/OL].[2013-11-03].The Guard-ian.http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/03/press-self-regulation-leveson-censorship.

[8]Royal Charter on Self-Regulation of the Press[EB/OL].[2013-10-25].https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/254116/Final_Royal_Charter_25_October_2013_clean__Final_.pdf.

保护环境 英文 篇3

《商标法》第十条第一款第（一）项规定：“下列标志不得作为商标使用：（一）同中华人民共和国的国家名称……相同或者近似的……”。根据该规定，与我国国家名称相同或近似的标志，依法应当不得用作商标。这里的“国家名称”包括全称、简称、缩写、英文等。

本案中，申请人所主张的节目标识中英文分别为“中国好声音”和“The Voice of China”，含有“中国”和“China”，较容易被判定属于《商标法》第十条第一款第（一）项规定的禁用标志。《商标审查及审理标准》对含“中国”字样商标申请作出过例外规定，但是“中国好声音”中英文标识并不属于例外情形之一。国家工商总局商标局还于2010年7月发布《含“中国”及首字为“国”字商标的审查审理标准》，规定了可以申请含“中国”字样商标所需具备的四个条件，满足这些条件的商标比如中国石化、中国银行、中国黄金等，但本案“中国好声音”中英文标识并不具备这些条件。

不少意见认为，“中国好声音”整体与我国的国家名称不相同也不近似，因而并不违反《商标法》第十条第一款规定。但需注意的是，《商标法》第十条第一款对于含“中国”标志的禁止，并不仅限于“相同或者近似”的情形。正如最高人民法院在“中国劲酒”案中指出的那样，“国家名称是国家的象征，如果允许随意将其作为商标的组成要素予以注册并作商业使用，将导致国家名称的滥用，损害国家尊严，也可能对社会公共利益和公共秩序产生其他消极、负面影响。”并进一步认为，“中国劲酒”整体上并未与我国国家名称构成相同或者近似，不属于《商标法》第十条第一款第（一）项规定的禁止性标志，但此类标志若具有不良影响，仍可以按照《商标法》相关规定认定为不得使用和注册的商标。该“中国劲酒”商标最终被认定构成“不良影响”，违反了《商标法》第十条第一款第（八）项规定，未能获准注册。

“中国劲酒”案是最高人民法院适用《商标法》第十条第一款禁用标志规定的经典案例，按照这一思路，“中国好声音”即使被判定不属于《商标法》第十条第一款第（一）项规定的禁用标志，也还会面临《商标法》第十条第一款第（八）项“不良影响”标志的审查。

而从目前行政机关对商标审查的实践情况来看，对含“中国”字样的标志把握十分严格。对于含“中国”文字的商标，审查时“应当从严审查，慎之又慎”。据查询，此前曾有过25件“中国好声音”的商标申请，无一例外均被驳回。也就是说，事实上，“中国好声音”也确实未能突破《商标法》第十条第一款的禁止性规定，难以作为商标注册。

需要特别关注的是，《商标法》第十条第一款规定的措辞是相应标志不得作为商标“使用”。“在中国，不具有合法性的商标不仅不能注册，而且也禁止作为未注册商标使用。事实上，商标不具有合法性是无法弥补的严重缺陷……”【黄晖：《商标法》，法律部出版社，2016年1月第2版】。这意味着，凡属于该条款所列标志，不仅不能作为商标注册，在民事纠纷案件中请求作为未注册商标保护时，也不具备受保护基础。并且，《商标法》第十条第一款属于“绝对禁止条款”，不论是在行政确权案件还是民事侵权纠纷案件中，判断是否属于该条款所列禁用标志，标准应当是一致的。基于此，申请人主张保护的“中国好声音”和“the Voice of China”标志，难以具备作为未注册商标保护的基础。

二、给予“知名服务特有名称”的保护需以不属于《商标法》第十条所列禁用标志为前提

一般认为，《反不正当竞争法》中“知名服务特有名称”的保护，本质上就是未注册商标的保护。因此，给予某标志以“知名服务特有名称”的保护时，需要考量是否属于《商标法》第十条第一款规定的禁用标志。

“《反不正当竞争法》第5条第2项所保护的知名商品特有名称、包装和装潢，实际上就是未注册商标。”“《反不正当竞争法》对于知名商品特有名称、包装和装潢的保护，已经相当于商标专用权的保护……”“既然作为识别商品来源的商品的名称、包装和装潢属于未注册商标，当然适用《商标法》第10条第1款的规定。”【孔祥俊：《商标与反不正当竞争法原理与判例》，法律出版社，2009年7月第1版。】

“《反不正当竞争法》虽然没有直接规定对未注册商标的保护，但该法对知名商品特有名称、包装和装潢的保护实质也是对未注册商标的一种保护……”。“2007年1月公布的《最高人民法院关于审理不正当竞争民事案件应用法律若干问题的解释》基本也是处处比照商标法的保护条件和规格，规定对知名商品特有名称、包装和装潢的保护”。【黄晖：《反不正当竞争法对未注册商标的保护》，《中华商标》，2007年04期】

《最高人民法院关于审理不正当竞争民事案件应用法律若干问题的解释》第五条明确规定：“商品的名称、包装、装潢属于商标法第十条第一款规定的不得作为商标使用的标志，当事人请求依照反不正当竞争法第五条第（二）项规定予以保护的，人民法院不予支持。”

本案中，申请人唐德公司关于“知名服务特有名称”的行为保全理由得到了支持：“中国好声音”和“The Voice of China”被认定为电视文娱节目及其制作服务类的知名服务特有名称，存在较大可能性。显然，这里遗漏了是否属于《商标法》第十条第一款所规定禁用标志的初步判断。而这却是裁定被申请人停止使用包含“中国好声音”、“the Voice of China”字样的节目名称的关键理由。

实际上，本案申请人还主张相关节目标识应当作为驰名商标予以保护。对此，法院认为两标识含有中文“中国”和英文“China”，是否符合商标法有关注册商标的规定，尚需在后续诉讼中进一步审理判断。结合案情来看，此处的“是否符合商标法有关注册商标的规定”，实质上就是指是否属于商标法规定的绝对禁注情形，也就是本文重点讨论的是否属于《商标法》第十条第一款规定的禁用标志。

但问题在于，不论是“未注册驰名商标”还是“知名服务特有名称”，在判定是否属于《商标法》第十条第一款所列禁用标志的问题上，所持标准并不应该有什么不同。这是因为，两者本质上都是未注册商标。而《商标法》第十条第一款属于绝对禁止条款，不论是《商标法》里的的未注册商标（包括未注册驰名商标）保护，还是《反不正当竞争法》中的“知名商品特有名称”的保护，在判断标准上都应当是一致的。

至此，笔者认为，本案在审理是否给予“中国好声音”中英文节目标识以“未注册驰名商标”保护时，认为还需进一步审理判断该标志是否符合商标法有关规定，这一做法是审慎的。但与之相矛盾的是，在尚未考虑禁用标志问题的情况下，直接认定相应标志构成“知名服务特有名称”的可能性较大，这显然是值得商榷的。

环境保护 英文名称 篇4

环境保护 英文名称：environmental protection 定义1：人类为解决现实的或潜在的环境问题，维持自身的存在和发展而进行的各种实践活动的总称。应用学科：地理学（一级学科）；环境地理学（二级学科）定义2：防止环境破坏或变质的方法和控制措施。应用学科：电力（一级学科）；环境保护（二级学科）以上内容由全国科学技术名词审定委员会审定公布 环境保护，是指人类为解决现实的或潜在的环境问题，协调人类与环境的关系，保障经济社会的持续发展而采取的各种行动的总称。其方法和手段有工程技术的、行政管理的，也有法律的、经济的、宣传教育的等。

环境保护包括，采取行政的、法律的、经济的、科学技术的多方面的措施，合理地利用自然资源，防止环境的污染和破坏，以求保持和发展生态平衡，扩大有用自然资源的再生产，保证人类社会的发展。环境保护（environmental protection）涉及的范围广、综合性强，它涉及自然科学和社会科学的许多领域，还有其独特的研究对象。环境保护包含至少三个层面的意思：

经济发展与环境保护英文作文 篇5

Protection

There are some individuals who argue that, compared to the environment protection, the top priority is supposed to given to economic development.They deem that environmental problems are inevitable and unavoidable in the process of economic development.They are only the by products of economic development, which can be handled later when we have the time and money.However, other individuals hold different opinions that(or：other holders of the opposite opinions argue that)environment protection should be attached more importance than economic development in that present serious environmental problems will threaten the health of the residents and hinder the advance of the economy.As far as I am concerned,environmental protection and economic development can coexist in parallel and can stay in harmony.Our ultimate aim in economic development is to provide a comfortable and happy life for our people.What is the point of economic development if we achieve it at the cost of our environment? There has been much evidence to prove that a balance between the two helps more rapid and continuous development of the society.Study the two pictures above carefully and write an essay entitled “On the Relationship between Environment and Economy” In the essay, you should(1)describe the pictures and interpret their meaning(2)give your opinion with some proof

Study the two pictures above carefully and write an essay entitled “On the Relationship between Environment and Economy” In the essay, you should(1)describe the pictures and interpret their meaning(2)give your opinion with some proof(3)give your conclusion.You should write about 200

words neatly on ANSWER SHEET 2.(20 points)

On the Relationship between Environment and Economy

The two pictures above are both about the relationship between the environment and the economic development.In the first picture, GDP is

on the rise while the environment is drastically polluted.In the second picture, economic efficiency progresses with environmental protection.It’s easy to get the conclusion that development according to the second picture is more reasonable than that in the first one.In the early development of socialism, our country didn’t pay much attention to the issue of environmental protection and savored the bitterness.Now, the government has taken many measures and is

怎么保护地球英文作文 篇6

How long haven’t you saw the star at night in the city? Would you miss the fresh and 本文来自air? Have noticed the river had seriously been polluted? Would you mind listening the crazy honking car horns instead of the birds’ ringing everyday? Could you be calm down if leave the air conditioning room in summer? Around us a little observation , air pollution, drought, flood, global warming, tsunami, earthquake and so on, was more closer to us. Caring for our earth, imminently! Not only for ourself, but for our further generations. As a teenagers, especially a college student, there are lots of things we can do to stop damaging our environment. Firstly, changing the way we think of our environment, facing the reality of our environment which have been seriously damage. Secondly, take some actions and from the side small start like play a tree, install low-flow shower heads and applicants, use public transport , less plastic bags and so on. The last but not the least, influence our neighbors by our behavior and let more and more people care for our motherland. Caring for our earth, all of us join together, with our heart and efforts, more blue days, cleaner water, peaceful

world ,that would not be a dream!

保护环境 英文 篇7

1.1 Learning Motivation

In simple words,motivation is what moves us from boredom to interest.However,the concept of motivation has passed through a number of different interpretations for the change of psychology theories.Gardner and Lambert(1972)[1]define language learning"motivation"as the foreign language learners'overall goal or orientation.

Motivation is believed as a key factor in foreign language learning,whose importance can be summarized in Corder's phrase"Given motivation,anyone can learn a language.According to Dulay e al,three types of motivation affect language learning most:integrative motivation,instrumental motivation and social-group-identification motivation.

Integrative motivation may be defined as the desire to achieve proficiency in a new language in order to know about the other culture,participate in the life of the community that speaks the language(Wang Lifei,2000:163)[6].

1.2 Learning Attitude

Most of the theories refer the notion to some aspects of an individual's response to an object or class of objects and situation which it is related(Wang Lifei,2000:164)[5].Attitude can be dichotomized into negative and positive aspects.Researchers find that positive attitudes benefit foreign language learners while negative attitudes may lead to decreased motivation,input and interaction,and eventually to unsuccessful achievement of language proficiency.

1.3 Learning Personality

Compared with attitude and motivation,personality factors have received scant attention in the study of affective factors influencing foreign language learning.However,in the eyes of many language teachers,the personality of their students is a major factor contributing to success or failure in language learning.Personality involves many aspects.This paper mainly discusses three of them:self-esteem,anxiety and inhibition.

People's self-esteem largely depends on their experience,negative or positive,that they have in their environment,on how they are viewed by the significant others and how they see themselves.

Research evidence shows that anxiety comes from a considerable number of potential sources anxieties..The construct of anxiety plays an important affective role in language learning.Just as Scovel[4](1978139)comments,"Facilitating anxiety motivates the learner to fight the new learning task;it gears emotionally for approval behavior Debilitating anxiety,in contrast,motivates the learner to flee the new learning task;it stimulates the individual emotionally to adopt avoidance behavior".

2 The Strategies of Avoiding Negative Affects and Creating Positive Affects

2.1 Boosting Motivation in Foreign Language Learning

As the saying goes,"interest is the best teacher".Interests kept for a long time will be eventually transformed to a kind of love to the language,which becomes a strong internal drive.

Competition is originally an external force;however,it has become a characteristic of learning nowadays.Competition can be carried out in the classroom for vocabulary memorizing,stories retelling,etc,or be enlarged to the whole school as language competence competition However,the competition utilized should not be too fierce,or it may lead to great anxiety and inhibition.

Praise,encouragement and criticism are actually expressions of agreement or disagreement to learners'behavior or attitude Experiments(quoted in Wang Yunying,1990:116-118)[6]have been made to examine the effects of praise and criticism.The results show that students given praise gain best achievement in learning,those criticized rank second while those given neither perform worst.So,the teachers should make proper remarks to the students'performance and provide more praise rather than criticism so as to raise learners'internal drives.

2.2 Making Proper Feedback

In the process of foreign language learning and teaching,learners are most sensitive to teachers'response to them.They are always aspiring for feedback from their teachers.

Proper feedback should be effective but never hurt learners.The way of making feedback is of crucial importance.

Public negative feedback will undoubtedly bring learners greatest hurt,which will make learners who may originally possess anxiety inhibited to take any risks.All in all,making proper feedback is an essential duty of facilitators who aim at leading learners into effective language learning and development as a whole person with low affective filter.

参考文献

[1]Garder,R·C·and W·Lambert.Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning[M].Rowley,MA:Newbury House,1972.

[2]Guiora,A.et al.The effects of experimentally induced changes in ego states on pronunciation ability in second language:An exploratory study[J].Comprehensive Psychology,1972.

[3]Rogers,C.R.Client Centered Therapy[M].Boston:Houghton Mifflin Company,1951.

[4]Scovel,T.The effect of affect on foreign language learning:a review of the anxiety research[J].Language Learning,1978.

[5]万云英.学习心理学[M].长春:吉林教育出版社,1990.

保护环境 英文 篇8

关键词：土壤环境保护；立法体系；依据

一、土壤环境保护

众所周知，土地具有自然与经济属性，自然属性的土地以土壤形式呈现。土壤，是由一层层厚度各异的矿物质成分所组成大自然主体。本文中的土壤在水平幅度上仅仅包括地球陆地表层的土层和岩石圈部分，不包括河流、湖泊、水库、坑塘等内陆水域和滩涂；在垂直幅度上仅指整个地表的岩土，不包括大气层，在物质构成上，仅指构成岩土的各种有机物和无机物质，不包括地表以上的大气、水和各种生物。

土壤环境污染大致可分为无机污染物和有机污染物两大类。当土壤中含有害物质过多，超过土壤的自净能力，就会引起土壤的组成、结构和功能发生变化，微生物活动受到抑制，有害物质或其分解产物在土壤中逐渐积累通过“土壤→植物→人体”，或通过“土壤→水→人体” 间接被人体吸收，达到危害人体健康的程度，就是土壤污染。

目前我国的土壤环境保护包括：环境保养、风险管控和土壤修复。环境保养即通過先进的预防手段对我国的土壤利用现状进行监控，防止土壤环境污染的发生；风险管控指按照恰当的法规原则，选用有效的土壤污染控制技术，进行削减风险的费用和效益分析，确定可接受风险度和可接受的污染损害水平，并进行政策分析及考虑社会经济和政治因素，决定适当的管理措施并付诸实施，以降低或消除土壤污染安全事故的风险度，保护人群健康与生态系统的安全；土壤修复包括物理、化学和生物三种方法，目的是使遭受污染的土壤回复正常功能的技术措施。

二、我国土壤环境污染现状

（一）在污染形式上，环境污染正由水污染、大气污染向土壤污染转移。根据可靠数据显示：自2001年到2011年，我国城市化率为51.27%，到2020年，我国的城市化率会以0.8——1个百分比稳定提高。从2001年到2011年，全国污水排放量从328.5亿立方米增加到403.7亿立方米，增长率为22.9%。二氧化硫的排放量从2010年的1947.8万吨到2011年的2217.9万吨，增加了13.9%，其中在2005年向后，二氧化硫、烟尘的污染排放量出现了不同程度的下降。然而，土壤污染却显得尤为严重，在2007年的1.5亿亩到当前的2亿亩，增长了近一倍，这是多么值得我们警觉的数字。

（二）在污染领域方面，土壤污染正由工业向农业转移、城区向农村转移、地表向地下转移、上游向下游转移。形成的污染具有突发性、区域性、连锁性的特点。更令人担心的是，土壤污染之一的重金属污染其潜在的危害正在升级，导致食物链正在受到侵蚀，人类是站在食物链顶端的生物，生命安全正在受到挑战。

（三）环境污染总体情况令人堪忧。综上所述，我国土壤环境污染当前呈现出：中国南方土壤污染严重与北方，长三角、珠三角、老工业基地等部分地区土壤污染问题尤为突出。而这几个地区恰好是我国人口密集地区。土壤污染主要以：镉、镍、砷、汞、铅、铬等重金属以及滴滴涕等农药中的有机物为主，有些污染超标达几十倍甚至几百倍。

三、我国土壤环境保护立法现状

从法的渊源来看，我国关于土壤生态环境保护的立法，既有综合性的法律法规，也有专门的法律法规对土壤污染进行限制和治理。

（一）《宪法》中规定：国家保障自然资源的合理利用，保护珍贵的动物和植物。禁止任何组织或者个人用任何手段侵占或者破坏自然资源；国家保护和改善生活环境和和生态环境，防止污染和其他公害。

（二）《环境保护法》中提到：各级人民政府应当加强对农业环境的保护，防治土壤污染、土地沙化、盐渍化、贫瘠化。沼泽化、地面沉降和防治植被破坏、水土流失、水源枯竭、种源灭绝以及生态失调现象的发生和发展，推广植物病虫害的综合防治，合理使用化肥、农药及植物生长激素。在今年4月份修订的新版《环境保护法》中，第49、50条中对农业生产经营活动的极易产生污染的农业污染源做出规定，表面我国对于土壤环境保护监管模式上的重心发生了重大变化，由以往的仅仅重视工业的防治转为对工业、农业的多产业防治，这必将有利于当今农村土壤污染日益严重的现状；《土地管理法》第35条中指出：各级人民政府应当采取措施，维护灌溉工程，改良土壤，提高地力，防止土地荒漠化、盐渍化、水土流失和污染土地；《农业法》中也提到：农业资源和农业环境保护对农用土地的生态保护做了较为明确的规定。

（三）《中华人民共和国水土保持法》、《中华人民共和国防砂治沙法》、《固体废物污染环境保护法》、《水污染防治法》、《大气污染防治法》等部门法，对我国土壤污染的各种成因都做出了明确的限制。

（四）相关的法律规定包括：《农药管理条例》、《土地复垦规定》等等。值得一提的是我国环保部于2014年3月18日常务会议上审议并原则通过了《土壤污染防治行动计划》，该计划中明确提出到2020年，农用地土壤环境将得到有效保护，土壤污染恶化的趋势得到遏制，部分地区土壤环境质量得到改善，并就此目标计划制定了详细而又周密的行动方案。

四、现行土壤环境保护法律的缺陷

（一）保护土壤环境污染的法律效力层级不够，难以协调专项的土壤生态保护法律。总所周知，现行的《环境保护法》、《土地管理法》在立法之初，本是作为统领所有与环境保护、土地管理相关的法律、法规、规章的法律而设计的，即基本法的作用。但是依据《立法法》规定，成为基本法的必要条件之一就是该法应当由全国人大审议通过，然而，《环境保护法》、《土地管理法》包括刚刚审议的《新环保法》都是由全国人大常务委员会通过，因而《环境保护法》、《土地管理法》仍不是基本法而作为基础法存在于我国的土壤环境保护法律体系中。在法律关系间发生冲突的时候，这两部法律的效力等级不高于《农业法》、《林业法》、《草原法》、《水法》等专项法律，以至于在具体适用环节，法律的相关规定往往得不到实施。难以使得环保、农业、国土、林业等部门形成合力。

nlc202309020718

（二）无论是从新修订的《环境保护法》中，还是从刚刚通过的《土壤污染防治行动计划》都可以看出，我国对于土壤污染的管理还是停留在防治层面。鉴于土地污染修复的成本过高，我国在土壤修复方面的技术尚不够成熟，然而，现实的情况是我国土壤环境污染问题严重，必须通过土壤环境保护来达到杜绝污染可能性很小，应担加大对土壤修复的资金投入补贴。

（三）当今的土壤保护法律虽然已经形成一定的体系，不过纵观所有的相关法律，无一不是在相关法律的某一条、某一点中提出的土壤环境保护的观点，这样做在具体实施起来的时候会发现，众多法律针对同一点问题有不同的解释，众口难调，难以统一，因此，应当从生态安全的高度来制定和完善土地方面的法律法规，在涉及土壤土地的规划。建设、评价、监测、预警等方面制定一份纲领性的法律规定处理这些关系。

（四）目前的部門法中的规定内容空洞，缺乏具体的土壤环境保护的做法规定。针对土壤污染，《环境保护法》中仅仅一句“各级人民政府应当加强对农业环境的保护，防治土壤污染、土地沙化、盐渍化、贫瘠化。沼泽化、地面沉降和防治植被破坏、水土流失、水源枯竭、种源灭绝以及生态失调现象的发生和发展。”来规定了土壤环境保护的大致方向，缺乏硬性的规范。

五、《土壤环境保护法》的初步架构

（一）完善土壤的环境保护体制，将原先空洞的行政口号转换成具体的土壤环境保护政策法规。根据今年的调查显示，我国即将颁布的《土壤环境保护法》中应当包括：农用地和集中式引用水源地土壤环境保护、新增建设用地土壤环境调查、被污染地块环境监管等管理办法。

（二）加强土壤环境保护的行政问责制，加强土壤环保执法中的执法力度。在今年刚刚颁布的新《环保法》中提到：当前的污染问题和生态破坏问题之所以如此严重：一是在环境执法中，环保执法工作者无强权可用，立法授予的监管措施缺乏强制手段，造成执法过程中无权可用的窘境。二是有强权不尽职，环保部门消极履职、执法不严，甚至出现以权谋私的情况。新法中尽管并未涉及如何加强土壤的环境保护手段，不过却提及了区域限批、越级举报、环境考评、人大监督等机制。对于《土壤环境保护法》的制定具有深远意义。

（三）设计土壤修复制度，改善部分区域的土壤环境质量。2014年3月18日召开的环保部常务会议通过的《土壤污染防治计划》指出，2020年，我国的农用地土壤环境将得到有效保护，强调土壤修复将成为以后工作的重中之重。2014年8月5日的土壤修复企业座谈会更是讨论了法律草案中的有关土壤修复制度设计。在《土壤环境保护法》中，建议将土壤的环境修复列入市场的调节，土壤修复的市场化运营无疑将减少工作中的成本，提高资源配置的效率。同时，市场化的机制还会强化公众对于土壤环境保护的意识。

结束语：治理土壤污染，首先需要监督地方政府追求GDP忽视环境污染的行为，还要统一规范自上而下的土壤环境保护体系，形成成文的环境评估标准、环境信息标准以及合理的土壤修复补贴标准；同时，还要改变农业、环保、国土资源、地矿部门等各自为政的弊端。总之，尽快制定土壤污染控制与治理的统一制度框架使得土壤环境保护变得有法可依是我国当前环保立法的当务之急。

参考文献：

[1]刘胜华.我国土地生态安全问题及其立法[J]环境与生态，2004，53-04

[2]常纪文，焦一多.新《环境保护法》的立法突破、缺陷与时效问题[J]中国经济导刊，2014，6-50

[3]杨京平，卢剑波.生态安全的系统分析[M]北京：化学工业出版社，2002

[4]陈建鹏，李佐军.新世纪以来中国环境污染治理回顾与未来形式展望[J]环境与可持续发展，2013，2-0007-05

[5]马克伟，张巧玲.认清土地国情珍惜有限土地[J]中国农业资源与区划，2001，（22）：3

[6]李艳涛.对有机污染物的修复技术的探讨[J]知识经济，2009，（128）：5