Governing sustainability: a dialogue between Local Agenda 21 and transition management

Since the 1990s, the local level of governance has become increasingly important in addressing the challenge of sustainable development. In this article, we compare two approaches that seek to address sustainability locally, namely Local Agenda 21 and transition management. Discussing both approaches along six dimensions (history, aim, kind of change, governance understanding, process methodologies, and actors), we formulate general insights into the governance of sustainability in cities, towns, and neighbourhoods. This dialogue illustrates two related modes of thinking about sustainability governance. We touch upon the importance of an integrated perspective on sustainability transitions through which sustainability is made meaningful locally in collaborative processes. We suggest that the explicit orientation towards radical change is a precondition for governing sustainability in a way that addresses the root causes of societal challenges. Governing sustainability should address the tensions between aiming for radical change and working with status quo-oriented actors and governing settings. We conclude that governing sustainability should be about finding creative ways for opening spaces for participation, change, and experimentation, that is, for creating alternative ideas, practices, and social relations. These spaces for innovation encourage a reflexive stance on ways of working and one's own roles and attitudes, thereby preparing a fertile terrain for actors to engage in change from different perspectives.     

Are national biodiversity strategies and action plans appropriate for building responsibilities for mainstreaming biodiversity across policy sectors? The case of Finland

The Convention on Biological Diversity's national biodiversity strategies and action plans (NBSAPs) are major mechanisms for mainstreaming biodiversity into national policies. This article examines whether and how the NBSAPs contribute to mainstreaming biodiversity across policy sectors in Finland in order to halt biodiversity loss. We have developed an innovative analytical framework where the concept of responsibility addresses how motivations for mainstreaming can be built, and the concept of social learning outcomes addresses the extent of institutional changes for biodiversity. The Finnish NBSAP processes have been able to build diverse forms of responsibility (liability, accountability, responsiveness and care) in different policy sectors by providing new knowledge, careful process design and developing institutional linkages. Despite pro-biodiversity outcomes in the targeted policy sectors, the responsibilities do not diffuse from the environmental administration to other policy sectors to a sufficient extent. Closing this ‘responsibility gap’ is a key challenge for building effective environmental policies.     

The city as a refuge for insect pollinators

Research on urban insect pollinators is changing views on the biological value and ecological importance of cities. The abundance and diversity of native bee species in urban landscapes that are absent in nearby rural lands evidence the biological value and ecological importance of cities and have implications for biodiversity conservation. Lagging behind this revised image of the city are urban conservation programs that historically have invested in education and outreach rather than programs designed to achieve high‐priority species conservation results. We synthesized research on urban bee species diversity and abundance to determine how urban conservation could be repositioned to better align with new views on the ecological importance of urban landscapes. Due to insect pollinators’ relatively small functional requirements—habitat range, life cycle, and nesting behavior—relative to larger mammals, we argue that pollinators put high‐priority and high‐impact urban conservation within reach. In a rapidly urbanizing world, transforming how environmental managers view the city can improve citizen engagement and contribute to the development of more sustainable urbanization.     

Emerging dynamics of environmental governance in northern post-productivist regions

The northern, resource-dependent regions of Canada have long faced distinctive social, economic, and environmental challenges and vulnerabilities. However, these regions and communities increasingly find themselves in a transitional and post-productivist context – the implications of which are largely unclear. Therefore, research is needed to identify the current and emerging challenges facing such regions and how environmental governance and planning must adjust to meet these challenges. We utilise the case study of the Northeast Superior region of Ontario to identify and analyse the dynamics developing in post-productivist, resource-dependent regions and what the implications may be for environmental governance. Several key themes and issues that emerged include an increasingly pluralistic context, new regionalism and north–south tensions, First Nation initiatives and power imbalances, and northern identities which are tied to ideas of historical resource-dependence, remoteness, and intimate and complex links to the landscape, all of which inform environmental governance and sustainability debates. As a result, the Northeast Superior case provides insight into these ongoing dynamics which encompass individuals, government, industry, organisations, and the landscape, with the resultant lessons being transferable to initiatives in other northern, remote, and circumpolar regions.     

基于“压力-状态-响应”模型的江苏省环境绩效评估研究

环境绩效评估通过量化环境管理效果和分析环境管理中的不足,为改善环境管理水平提供依据。本研究依据压力-状态-响应(PSR)模型和主题框架法构建了包括环境效率、环境质量、环境治理3个二级指标和15个三级指标的市级环境绩效评估指标体系,并运用目标渐进法和均权法计算了江苏省13个地级2015年的环境绩效指数。结果显示,江苏省各地级市综合环境绩效指数分布在58.41(连云港市)~74.98(苏州市)之间,且与经济发展水平正相关。从空间分布来看,位于苏中地区的城市综合环境绩效多为良好,苏南和苏北各地之间的绩效差距较大;在二级指标中,苏南环境效率和环境治理绩效相对较好,苏中环境效率和环境质量绩效较好,苏北环境质量绩效较好。此外,本研究认为三级指标中的单位GDP用水量、空气质量达良好以上天数、工业用水重复利用率、一般工业固体废物利用率以及秸秆综合利用率等是主要的限制性指标。     

开放经济、环保财政支出与污染治理——来自中国省级与行业面板数据的经验证据

首先按照各省环保财政支出占GDP比重与按主成分分析法计算的地方环境污染物排放综合指数的排名情况把中国30个省份分成两个区域,区域1环保财政支出污染治理效应较强,区域2环保财政支出污染治理效应较弱。区域1包括北京、海南等14个省市,区域2包括天津、上海等16个省市。其次基于2007—2014年中国省级和行业面板数据,分析开放经济、环保财政支出对污染治理的影响。最后借鉴门限回归模型检验开放经济是否存在环保财政支出与污染治理的门槛效应。结果显示:(1)环境污染物排放存在区域差异和行业差异,区域1呈现出开放程度和污染物排放双低的特征,而区域2则表现为双高特征。制造业、电力、煤气及水的生产和供应业污染物排放较高,采掘业污染物排放年均增长速度最快。(2)样本期内省级和行业面板数据均表明开放经济与环境污染物排放显著负相关,对外开放不是助推环境污染的原因。(3)中国环保财政支出与环境污染物排放显著负相关,环保财政支出具有显著的污染治理效应。(4)开放经济对环保财政支出的污染治理效应具有门槛效应,当进口和出口贸易总额高于门槛值-1.221、-1.016时环保财政支出的污染治理效应很难发挥。(5)以进、出口贸易总额为门槛变量时,有107个观测值低于门槛值,占总观测值的44.58%,其中有59个位于区域1,占55.14%。鉴于此应继续加大环境保护财政支出,进一步提升环保财政专项支出在GDP中所占比重,保持适度的对外开放,优化能源消费结构和实现产业结构升级,全面改善环境质量,提升开放经济下环保财政支出的污染治理效应。     

特朗普“去气候化”政策对全球气候治理的影响

美国特朗普政府宣布退出《巴黎协定》是当前全球气候治理中最受舆论关注的问题,对事态发展趋势的判断和事件影响的评估是最为亟需的。本文系统分析了特朗普政府上任后推行的一系列"去气候化"政策,以及其退出《巴黎协定》的主要动因和可能形式,同时量化评估了这些内政外交的"倒退"对美国实施国家自主贡献目标以及全球气候治理格局的实质影响,并据此提出了中国应对全球气候治理新形势变化的对策和建议。研究表明,特朗普政府"美国优先"的能源政策根植于复兴制造业和加大基础设施投资的经济利益动机,随着特朗普"去气候化"进程持续发酵,诸多气候政策面临存续风险,美国实施国家自主贡献将面临严峻挑战,"倒行政策"将有可能使美国温室气体排放出现反弹。如果不考虑中、高危气候政策,美国2025年温室气体排放也仅能相对2005年下降11.0%—14.9%,距离下降26%—28%的国家自主贡献目标相去甚远。同时,特朗普政府拒绝继续履行向发展中国家提供气候资金支持的义务,将有可能导致绿色气候基金拖欠资金总额上升117%,并进一步挫伤全球低碳投资的信心。没有美国的全球气候治理3.0时代将呈现出新的复杂特征,并不可避免地造成减排、资金和领导力缺口的持续扩大,也不排除后续会出现消极的跟随者,整体进程将可能进入一个低潮周期。虽然国际社会对中国引领全球气候治理充满期待,但中国仍应审慎对待,长远谋划应对气候变化的内政外交战略,而不应将"气候举旗"看作是一蹴而就的短期策略,对各种要求中国发挥"领导作用"的说法保持清醒头脑。在今后气候谈判中,美国仍有较大可能会二次"要价",中国作为排放大国的压力依然不容小觑,中美气候关系需要再定位。     

“十三五”时期中国环境监管体制改革的形势、目标与若干建议

本文构建了包括监管的立法、组织体系、监管权力配置、监管工具与程序、问责机制、监管能力等要素在内的环境监管体制分析框架,从污染物排放趋势、国家制度建设等角度分析了"十三五"时期中国环境监管体制改革面临的挑战、目标和思路。"十三五"时期是中国生态文明建设的重要时期,完善环境监管制度是推进生态文明制度体系建设的重要内容。面对严重环境污染所带来的挑战,在此期间加快环境监管体制改革、提高环境监管有效性是切实实现治污减排的根本保证。完善环境监管体系、改进监管方式、创新监管手段是建立治污减排长效机制的基础和前提,也是完善环境治理体系的重要内容。按照市场经济条件下政府依法行政的要求,中国环境监管体制改革的目标,就是要按照合法性、独立性、透明性、可问责性、专业性和执法能力、可信性等原则建立和完善现代环境监管体制,为此必须从专门立法、组织结构、权力分配、问责机制、监管程序与工具、监管能力建设等各方面推进改革。本文提出了"十三五"时期环境监管体制改革的思路及若干建议,主要包括:加快修订环保法律法规,提高法律的可操作性,推进环境司法常态化、规范化和专门化,进一步提升环境监管法治化水平;从纵向、横向上优化环境监管组织结构,强化区域层级的监管与督查功能,强化中央层级环境监管机构对环境信息的获取能力;优化环境保护主管部门机构设置以及相关职能,建立并完善内部机构的协调机制;完善环境监管的内外部问责机制,把做实对监管者的监管机制作为优化环境监管体制的抓手;强化对监管工具的顶层设计,做实监管程序中关键环节,建立环境监管影响评估制度;加强环境监管能力建设,推进环境监管制度队伍职业化发展,保障各级环境监管机构具有充分履职的能力。环境监管体制的改革和完善,是国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的重要内容。     

Urban sustainable energy development: A case study of the city of Philadelphia

Cities throughout the world are key sites for energy sustainability activities. However, analysis of such efforts to date has focused on a sub-set of atypical cities: early adopters and/or world cities. This article undertakes a case-study analysis for an ordinary city, Philadelphia, PA in order to assess the extent to which prior research provides adequate policy explanation for ordinary cities and to gain empirical insight on two under-researched aspects: policy actors, and the policy-making and implementation sites (action sites) for urban energy sustainability. Overall, the types of policy drivers, modes of governance, and enabling factors and barriers in the Philadelphia case fit with prior studies. Focusing on actors and action sites, however, offers insight on the city’s relative policy-making approach based on “non-controversy”, the key role of third-sector actors in both policy-making and implementation, and the diversification of action sites through external-level policy-making operationalised locally nevertheless at the expense of reduced control by urban actors. These findings lead to recommendations for urban energy sustainability research and practice.     

Cause,catalyst or conjunction? The influence of the Habitats Directive on policy instrument choice in Member States

In the process of implementing EU policy, Member States sometimes introduce new policy instruments in cases where this is not obligatory. To better understand this phenomenon, this paper reviews three cases in which new instruments emerged and develops a methodology to trace back the influence of EU Directives on instrument choice. The method is illustrated by a narrative of the emergence of new management planning instruments during the implementation of the EU Habitats Directive in three EU Member States: Finland, Hungary and the Netherlands. Three key features of a policy instrument are defined, namely, its authoritative force, action content and governance design. These are used to measure the contribution of the Habitats Directive compared to other potential explanatory causes for the emergence of the new policy instrument. In all three reviewed countries a nested causal relationship between the Habitats Directive and the introduction of the new policy instrument is identified. Based on the relative contribution of the Habitats Directive to the emergence of the new instrument a distinction is made whether the Directive acted as a cause, catalyst or if conjunction occurred.