A framework designation for the assessment of urban ecological risks

References

• Anderson MC, Adams H, Hope B, Powell M. 2004. Risk assessment for invasive species. Risk Anal. 24(4):787–793.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Assessment ME. 2003. Assessment: ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Washington (DC): Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brahmasrene T, Lee JW. 2017. Assessing the dynamic impact of tourism, industrialization, urbanization, and globalization on growth and environment in Southeast Asia. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol. 24(4):362–371.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cao S. 2011. Research of identification ecological risk source in rapid urbanization region. In: Annual meeting article collections of Chinese Society of Landscape Architecture in 2011 (Volume 2). Beijing: China Construction Industry Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deng F, Yu YJ, Quan ZZ. 2011. Research progresses of regional ecological risk assessment. Environ Sci Technol. 34(6G):141–147.
   Google Scholar
• Hall JE. 2016. Guyton and Hall textbook of medical physiology. Philadelphia (PA): Elsevier Saunders; p. 930–937. ISBN 978-1-4557-7005-2.
   Google Scholar
• Haynes J. 1895. Risk as an economic factor. Q J Econ. 9(4):409–449.
   Google Scholar
• Hua LZ, Shao GF, Zhao JZ. 2017. A concise review of ecological risk assessment for urban ecosystem application associated with rapid urbanization processes. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol. 24(3):248–261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang S, Wang LY, Zhao Y. This issue. Ecological risk assessmentfrom the perspective of soil heavy metal accumulations in Xiamen City, China.Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14001. 2015. Environmental management systems—requirements with guidance for use. Geneva: ISO/TC 207/SC1.
   Google Scholar
• Knight FH. 1921. Risk, uncertainty and profit. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Landis WG. 2003. Twenty years before and hence: ecological risk assessment at multiple scales with multiple stressors and multiple endpoints. Hum Ecol Risk Assess. 9:1317–1326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li CM, Jiang YT, Yang XY, Chen DK. This issue. A multi-level characterization method for the assessment of urban ecological risks. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol. 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Li ZQ, Hou JY, Wang JZ. 2008. Potential ecological risk assessment model for heavy metal contamination of agricultural soils in mining areas. Adv Earth Sci. 23(5):509–516.
   Google Scholar
• Maanan M, Saddik M, Maanan M, Chaibi M, Assobhei O, Zourarah B. 2015. Environmental and ecological risk assessment of heavy metals in sediments of Nador lagoon, Morocco. Ecol Indic. 48:616–626.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mao XL, Ni JR. 2005. Recent progress of ecological risk assessment. Acta Scicentiarum Naturalum Universitis Pekinesis. 41(4):646–654.
   Google Scholar
• Nie XY, Wang WJ, Qin JX, Li TT, Liu JH, Wu H, Feng Y. 2012. Research on the framework of regional ecological risk assessment in planning environmental impact assessment. J Environ Eng Technol. 2(2):154–161.
   Google Scholar
• Power M, McCarty LS. 2002. Trends in the development of ecological risk assessment and management frameworks. Hum Ecol Risk Assess. 8(1):7–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rausand M. 2011. Risk assessment theory, methods, and applications. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Ren JM, Li TW, Huang SF. 2013. The theory and method of ecological risk assessment in regional development. Beijing: China Environmental Science Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shi LY, Zhang M, Yang B, Gao LJ. This issue. Air pollution-oriented ecological risk assessment of Xiamen City, China. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol.
   Google Scholar
• Suter GW II. 2006. Ecological risk assessment. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: The Chemical Rubber Company Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tao DL, Heng XY. 2009. Some basic issues in plant environmental stress research in China. Chin J Ecol. 28(1):102–107.
   Google Scholar
• US. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1998a. Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. In: EPA/630/R-95/002F. Washington (DC): Risk Assessment Forum, US Environmental Protection Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Wang HW, Zhu LC, Zhao CY, Zheng SN. This issue. Development of a digital platform for urban ecological risk assessmentand management. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol.
   Google Scholar
• Wang ME, Chen WP, Peng C. 2014. Urban ecological risk assessment: a review. J Appl Ecol. 25(3):911–918.
   Google Scholar
• Wu XQ, Hong SQ, Wu XC, Cai SQ. 2004. The principle, way and technique of environmental policy risk assessment—also discussing the policy environment risk assessment. Saf Environ Eng. 11(3):34–36.
   Google Scholar
• Xu T, Zhang M, Gao LJ, Yang B, Shi LY. This issue. Integrated assessment of urban ecological risks: a case study ofXiamen City, China. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol.
   Google Scholar
• Xu XQ, Zhou YX, Ning YM. 2009. Urban geography. Beijing: Higher Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Xu Y, Gao JF, Zhao JH, Chen JF. 2012. The research progress and prospect of watershed ecological risk assessment. Acta Ecologica Sinica. 32(1):284–292.
   Google Scholar
• Yan L, Xu XG. 2010. Progress of regional ecological risk assessment. Areal Res Dev. 29(1):113–118.
   Google Scholar
• Yan Y, Qian Y, Wang ZY, Yang XY, Wang HW. This issue. Ecological risk assessment from the viewpoint of surfacewater pollution in Xiamen City, China. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol.
   Google Scholar
• Yang J, Bi J, Li QL, Zhang B. 2006. Study on theory and methodology of regional environmental risk zoning. Res Environ Sci. 19(4):132–137.
   Google Scholar
• Yang XL, Cheng SB, Li YL. 2015. Spatial and temporal variations characteristic analysis on the vulnerability of environmental risk receptors in Yangtze River basin based on objective weight methods. Geogr Geo-Inf Sci. 31(2):119–124.
   Google Scholar
• Zhao J, Xiao H, Wu G. 2000. Comparison analysis on physical and value assessment methods for ecosystems services. Chin J Ecol. 11(2):290–292.
   Google Scholar