《國際城市與區(qū)域研究雜志》刊發(fā)的一項(xiàng)新研究認(rèn)為，一些科技公司雖然目標(biāo)是減少碳足跡，結(jié)果卻可能適得其反。

這項(xiàng)研究報(bào)告題為“氣候友好城市的悖論：有關(guān)生態(tài)中產(chǎn)階級(jí)化和住房公平的新視角”。報(bào)告認(rèn)為，追求可持續(xù)性實(shí)際上推動(dòng)了美國一些街區(qū)中產(chǎn)階級(jí)化，導(dǎo)致碳足跡擴(kuò)大。

美國商業(yè)雜志《Fast Company》的報(bào)道指出，問題源于，一些企業(yè)在大城市修建工業(yè)園，吸引希望乘坐公共交通工具通勤的員工。招聘成功后，員工往往想住在靠近公共交通線的地方，于是交通便利地區(qū)房?jī)r(jià)上漲，趕走了原本住在當(dāng)?shù)氐牡褪杖爰彝ァ?/p>

研究報(bào)告將該現(xiàn)象稱作“碳中產(chǎn)階級(jí)化”，因?yàn)橄嚓P(guān)地區(qū)中產(chǎn)階級(jí)化的原因并不是餐館或者商鋪等便利設(shè)施，人們搬過去本意是為了更環(huán)保。

研究人員還沒有數(shù)據(jù)能確切展示，碳中產(chǎn)階級(jí)化對(duì)一些地區(qū)和整個(gè)地球的長期影響如何。但他們認(rèn)為，盡管科技企業(yè)員工之類人群搬往交通便利地區(qū)本意是追求環(huán)保，但人們?cè)礁挥?，制造的碳足跡就比經(jīng)濟(jì)程度較低的人們?cè)礁?，最終對(duì)周圍環(huán)境造成更大的影響。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：Pessy

審校：夏林

Tech companies with a mission to create small carbon footprints might be doing the opposite, according to a new study published in the International Journal of Urban and Regional Research.

The report, called “Contradictions of the Climate-Friendly City: New Perspectives on Eco-Gentrification and Housing Justice,” alleges that the quest to be sustainable is, in fact, fueling gentrification in some neighborhoods across the United States and causing larger carbon footprints.

The issue comes from companies building campuses in major cities, attracting employees that want to do things like ride public transportation, reports Fast Company. When they do, those employees want to live near public transportation lines, causing housing prices in those area to increase and pushing out lower-income families that may have lived in those areas before.

It’s a phenomenon the paper calls “carbon gentrification,” because rather than an area being gentrified due to amenities like restaurants or stores, individuals are attempting to move there in an effort to be more “green.”

The group doesn’t have data yet on exactly what impact carbon gentrification will have on areas and the earth long term, but the thought is that more affluent people, such as tech workers, tend to have a larger carbon footprint than their less affluent counterparts, ultimately leading them to have a larger environmental impact in the areas they’re living in with the expressed purpose of having a lower one.