中国转型期水环境治理中的政府责任研究

水环境问题已成为制约我国长期可持续发展的主要瓶颈.如何有效治理水环境问题已引起全社会的普遍关注.本文在全面分析水环境公共物品属性以及水环境问题的客观现实的基础上,论证了政府承担治理水环境责任的必要性.进而对现阶段政府承担的水环境治理责任进行研究,归纳出其环境治理责任主要有财政责任、制度责任、监管责任和社会整合责任.然后对水环境治理中政府责任存在的现实问题进行深入分析,揭示其问题主要表现为:责任主体边界模糊、责任分布以“行政”为主导、责任履行中“越位”与“缺位”并存、责任种类中重直接投入轻间接引导.最后,提出水环境治理中的政府责任应该在坚持财权与事权统一、政府主导与责任分担统一、制度设计、监管与实施合理分离、政府引导与社会参与相结合的原则基础上,按照分类、分项、分级来构建转型期水环境治理中政府的应然责任框架体系.     

Perspectives on utilising Community Land Trusts as a vehicle for affordable housing provision

With lack of affordable housing being clearly identified as a social and economic exclusion issue for most communities, innovative ways of addressing this deficiency should be considered. Increasingly local communities are engaging with the possibility of direct provision themselves and discussion around this notion has profound implications for community cohesion. One community-based solution gaining popular support within communities, and with government ministers, is the Community Land Trust mechanism. This involves control and ownership of land to help ensure affordable housing is built and remains affordable in perpetuity for the community. The language and difficulties with definition of terms, together with the complexity of engaging relevant stakeholders in a changing policy and legislative framework can be problematic. This may lead to apparent lack of consensus within communities on the way forward. Perceptions of local housing issues and ways to address them are sometimes vague, sometimes diverse but rarely apathetic. This paper includes data from two case studies in North East England, which are examined using interviews with key players, as a means of seeking some practical solutions.     

Deliberation and ecological democracy: from citizen to global system

ABSTRACT

Ecological democracy confronts a challenge of not only reconciling democracy and ecology, but doing so where human activities and their environmental consequences are increasingly global. Deliberative scholars dealing with these issues emphasise reflexive governance, involving the contestation of discourses, as part of the solution, mostly aimed at high-level institutions and intergovernmental cooperation. However, even at this level democracy demands responsiveness to the citizen. To this end, the paper explores citizen-level deliberation to inform possibilities for ecological democracy writ large, via a growing literature on deliberative governance and polycentrism. Different system levels are connected via ecologically reflexive capacity and the discursive conditions under which it is enhanced, including in small-scale minipublics. This understanding informs mechanisms for ‘scaling up’ deliberative quality to the wider public sphere via regulating the manipulation of public discourse. Minipublic deliberation, properly harnessed, can serve to decontaminate public debate of anti-reflexive strategic arguments and reshape public discourse. Such anti-reflexive strategies seek to shape the public will, specifically by de-emphasising ecology via intuitive arguments that short-cut public reasoning. Acting as discursive regulatory trustees, minipublics can improve reflexivity in the wider system via a nested polycentric approach that discursively connects citizens’ deliberation to the global system both horizontally and vertically.     

The legitimation of contested carbon markets after Paris – empirical insights from market stakeholders

ABSTRACT

After the Paris Agreement the global carbon offset markets face regulatory uncertainty and new legitimation challenges. This paper examines the discursive legitimation of the carbon markets between 2015 and 2018 and is based on 37 qualitative interviews with market stakeholders. The results show that the carbon markets remain contested and require new ideas and concepts to construct legitimacy. Some stakeholders consider moving beyond carbon offsetting, mainly due to new risks of double counting. Others continue to portray carbon offsetting as a ‘false solution’. Nevertheless, the trust in carbon markets as an appropriate way to address climate change remains high. Therefore, new forms of international emission trading are likely to evolve under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.     

碳中和愿景下电力部门低碳转型路径研究

碳中和愿景一方面加速了全社会电气化发展,致使电力需求持续增加,另一方面对尽早实现零碳电力提出要求,电力部门低碳转型进程更加紧迫而复杂。本文首先定性分析碳中和背景下电力部门的总体转型思路和技术不确定性影响,其次采用电力部门与终端部门耦合的C~3IAM/NET模型对电力需求进行预测,同时根据关键低碳技术发展的保守预期和积极预期设计多种情景,以开展电力低碳转型路径优化和成本效益研究。结果显示,发电碳排放量峰值可能出现在40亿～42亿吨,在2049—2060年有望实现零碳电力,电力部门低碳转型速度和效果因技术不确定性而存在明显差异。2021—2060年电力低碳转型累计投入为171万亿～180万亿元,CCS技术累计减排贡献超过250亿吨,可再生能源电力占比需达到68%以上,风电和光电将成为主要电力。     

中国与欧美非道路移动机械排放标准对比分析

随着非道路移动机械保有量与使用量的不断增加,其排放造成的环境问题日益严重,相关的防治策略研究亟待加强。本研究首先总结了中国与欧美对非道路移动机械类型的划分方式及标准;其次,对中国与欧美的非道路移动机械排放标准进行归纳;最后,对现行中国与欧美的非道路移动机械排放标准进行了全面对比分析,分析发现,国内标准与欧美标准之间仍存在显著差距,以期为国内制定科学的非道路移动机械排放标准提供参考,为污染物防治策略的制定提供理论支撑。     

What happens to the state in conflict?: political analysis as a tool for planning humanitarian assistance

It is now part of received wisdom that humanitarian assistance in conflict and post-conflict situations may be ineffective or even counterproductive in the absence of an informed understanding of the broader political context in which so-called 'complex political emergencies' (CPEs) occur. Though recognising that specific cases have to be understood in their own terms, this article offers a framework for incorporating political analysis in policy design. It is based on a programme of research on a number of countries in Africa and Asia over the last four years. It argues that the starting-point should be an analysis of crises of authority within contemporary nation-states which convert conflict (a feature of all political systems) into violent conflict; of how such conflict may in turn generate more problems for, or even destroy, the state; of the deep-rooted political, institutional and developmental legacies of political violence; and of the difficulties that complicate the restoration of legitimate and effective systems of governance after the 'termination' of conflict. It then lists a series of questions which such an analysis would need to ask--less in order to provide a comprehensive check-list than to uncover underlying political processes and links. It is hoped these may be used not only to understand the political dynamics of emergencies, but also to identify what kinds of policy action should and should not be given priority by practitioners.     

Meaning work: reworking institutional meanings for environmental governance

Effective environmental governance requires institutional change. While some actors work to change institutions, others resist change by defending and maintaining institutions. Much of this institutional work is ‘meaning work’, which we define as the practice of crafting, adapting, connecting and performing meanings to purposively create, maintain or disrupt institutions. This paper constructs a concept of meaning work that highlights agency in carrying meanings across scales and between discursive layers, while noting the structuring role of prevailing discourses. It grounds the concept using two environmental governance cases at very different scales: a local democratic innovation employed by Noosa Council in Queensland, Australia; and the international campaign to divest from fossil fuels. The cases demonstrate the diversity of meaning work and the difficulty of achieving deep discursive change. They point to the need for environmental governance practitioners to rework existing meanings to construct compelling stories for change, taking advantage of narrative openings.     

Policy coherence in climate governance in Caribbean Small Island Developing States

Climate governance in Small Island developing States (SIDS) is a pressing priority to preserve livelihoods, biodiversity and ecosystems for the next generations. Understanding the dynamics of climate change policy integration is becoming more crucial as we try to measure the success of environmental governance efforts and chart new goals for sustainable development. At the international level, climate change policy has evolved from single issue to integrated approaches towards achieving sustainable development. New actors, new mechanisms and institutions of governance with greater fragmentation in governance across sectors and levels (Biermann and Pattberg, 2008) make integration of policy in the area of climate change governance even more of a challenge today. What is the Caribbean reality regarding policy coherence in climate change governance? Are the same climate change policy coherence frameworks useful or indeed applicable for environmental governance in developing states more generally and for SIDS in particular? What are the best triggers to achieve successful climate change policy integration in environmental governance—especially as the complex interconnectivity of new actors, institutions and mechanisms make the process of integration even more challenging? What facilitates and what hampers climate policy integration in the regional Caribbean context? This article reviews the debates around policy coherence for climate change governance, creates a framework to test or measure policy coherence and examines how relevant this has been to regional climate change governance processes in Commonwealth Caribbean States. The study found that though at the regional level, there is substantial recognition of the importance of and mechanics involved in climate policy coherence, this has not translated to policy coherence at the regional and national levels. There is a large degree of fragmentation in the application of climate policy in each Caribbean Island with no mechanism to breach the gap. Silos in public environmental governance architectures, unwillingness to share data, insufficient political will; unsustainable project-based funding and lack of accountability among actors are the main challenges to climate policy coherence. The findings fill a gap in the literature on the elements of climate policy coherence from a SIDS perspective.     

Making water policy work in the United Kingdom: A case study of practical approaches to strengthening complex,multi-tiered systems of water governance

We propose a suite of actions for strengthening water governance in contexts with complex, multi-tiered arrangements. In doing so, we focus on the collective water policies and approaches of the United Kingdom (UK), including those of devolved governments, which confront a host of serious water-related challenges—from massive flooding of urban areas and agricultural lands, to pressure on aquifers from rising water demand and drought. Further complexity in addressing these challenges has emerged in the wake of the June 2016 vote to leave the European Union (EU), so-called ‘Brexit’, and the ensuing ‘separation process’ with uncertainties for institutional and governance arrangements to follow. We make ten proposals for improving and reinvigorating water policy in complex, multi-layered situations, and comment specifically on their application in the UK setting. These are: put in place a system-wide water policy; fully embrace community-led nested river basin planning and management; fully fund river basin planning and management; re-focus the policy framing; use best-available data and information; create conversational spaces and become a more water-literate society; mobilise people; support and sustain core community networks; underpin river basin plans with regulatory provisions and effective monitoring and enforcement; and address systemic institutional amnesia. Individually and collectively, we contend that these actions will have a marked effect on transforming the planning and management of water resources. A system-wide water policy that maintains and builds on the substantive biophysical and socio-economic benefits delivered through implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive, together with the more recent Floods Directive, will galvanise stewardship of water in the UK. We urge more active engagement with and empowerment of the multiplicity of system ‘actors’, and highlight the role of non-government actors in a post-Brexit world as conduits for reaching out to and connecting directly with a wide range of water-related actors, especially across the EU. While attention to-date has focused on a plethora of specifically water-related projects, initiatives, plans and regulations, what is really needed is a systemic, long-term view of water resource management.