中国生物质能政策变迁研究:2000—2019年

生物质柴油和生物质沼气是生物质能发展的两大着力点,两者在性质上存在较大差异,相应的政策设计和发展也各有不同。以政策网络理论、政策变迁相关理论为理论基础,通过搜集整理中央层面关于生物质柴油和生物质沼气的政策文本,采用政策计量和内容分析法,分析政策的发文时间、文本类型等文本外部属性特征,且根据政策文本内容划分了5类政策目标和13类政策工具,深入比较不同生物质能源在变迁中政策目标、政策工具和政策主体网络的差异。研究结果表明,中国生物质能的政策变迁,呈现多元化的演进动态:(1)生物质柴油与沼气政策的发文单位与发文类型在各时间段有所异同,整体来看,生物质柴油与沼气发文最多的单位为国务院和国家发展和改革委员会,不同的是生物质柴油发文数量位于第三位的是国家能源局,而生物质沼气是生态环境部和农业农村部。在发文类型方面,"通知与意见"类型构成了主要占比。(2)同一生物质的政策目标与工具在不同时期的政策变迁中,有延续性和差异性。例如,生物质柴油在各阶段始终以技术创新、能源供应连续性为主要政策目标来保证政策延续性,但在不同阶段也会关注环境可持续性、工业发展等;在政策工具上,生物质柴油即使在变迁中也都会使用财政支持,而各阶段配合使用的工具重心也不一致。(3)不同生物质能源使用的政策工具在同一时期也存在异同。如在第二阶段生物质柴油和生物质沼气所聚焦的政策目标和政策工具完全不同,在第一和第三阶段两者则存在小部分相似。(4)不同生物质能源的政策网络在各阶段表现存在异同。全国人民代表大会和国务院始终是政策网络中的重要主体,各个阶段不同生物质能发文主体的角色和协调互动情况随政策变迁而变化。最后,在研究结论的基础上提出政策目标与政策工具统筹运用、建立有效的政策网络主体协同治理机制的启示。

Policy changes in biomass energy in China:2000-2019

Biodiesel and biogas are the two main focal points for the development of biomass energy.There are big differences between the nature of biodiesel and that of biogas,and the corresponding policy design and development are also different.Based on the related theory of policy network and policy change,this study collected and sorted out the policy texts on biodiesel and biogas at the central level,adopted policy measurement and content analysis methods,and analyzed the time of policy issuance,text types and other external texts.According to the characteristics of the policy,this article identified 5 types of policy objectives and 13 types of policy tools,and compared the differences in policy objectives,policy tools and policy subject networks of different biomass energy in the changes.According to the results of the study,biomass energy policy changes in China showed a diversified evolutionary trend:(1) The policy issuing units and types of biodiesel and biogas policies had similarities and differences in various time periods.In general,the units that published the most biodiesel and biogas policies were the State Council and the National Development and Reform Commission.The difference was that the number of biodiesel policies issued in the third place was the Energy Bureau,while the number of biogas policies the Ministry of Environmental Protection and the Ministry of Agriculture.In terms of the types of postings,‘notifications and opinions’ constituted the main proportion.(2) In different periods,the policy objectives and tools of the same biomass had continuity and differences in policy changes.For example,biodiesel policies always took technological innovation and energy supply continuity as the main policy objectives to ensure policy continuity at all stages,but they also paid attention to environmental sustainability and industrial development at different stages;in terms of policy tools,biodiesel financial support was used in changes,and the focus of the tools used in each stage was not consistent.(3) There were similarities and differences in the policy tools of different types of biomass energy used in the same period.For example,in the second stage,the policy objectives and tools focusing on biodiesel and biogas were completely different,while in the first and third stages,there were some similarities between the two.(4) In addition,there were similarities and differences in the performance of different biomass energy policy networks at each stage.The National People’s Congress and the State Council were always important subjects in the policy network,and the roles,coordination and interaction of the main bodies of biomass energy at various stages changed with policy changes.Finally,based on the research conclusions,this article puts forward the implications of the coordinated use of policy objectives and tools,and the establishment of an effective collaborative governance mechanism for the main players in the policy networks.