Adaptation policy and community discourse: risk,vulnerability, and just transformation

How can public engagement assist in the development of just processes and outcomes in adaptation discourse and policymaking? A concern with justice is at the center of thinking about adaptation that is not only resilient, but also public, engaging, and transformative. Theoretically, the intersection of adaptation, transformation, and environmental and climate justice is examined, before exploring the specific concerns and normative foundations for adaptation policy articulated by local governments, environmental groups, and local residents engaged in adaptation planning in Australia. Despite a discursive disconnect between governmental focus on a risk or resilience-based approach and a community concern with the vulnerability of basic needs and capabilities of everyday life, deliberative engagement in adaptation planning can both address issues of justice and represent a transformative practice.     

Metagovernance and policy forum outputs in Swiss environmental politics

Policy forums are lightly institutionalized and stable forms of governance networks that include administrative authorities, interest groups, and scientists. They are said to produce different types of outputs, from simple actor coordination to position papers and implementation documents, but their productivity has also been questioned. Metagovernance strategies can improve the capability of policy forums to produce outputs. To determine how different metagovernance strategies influence the capability of forums to produce joint position papers, 29 policy forums in the Swiss environmental sector are compared through a qualitative comparative analysis. Results indicate that metagovernance strategies such as state actors as forum members or majority decision rules need to be combined with small forum size or low actor heterogeneity. Furthermore, forum foundation by the state complicates the production of position papers.     

The Tea Party versus Agenda 21: local groups and sustainability policies in U.S. cities

As local governments have moved toward adopting sustainability policies, there have been some cases where local Tea Parties have emerged as aggressive and strident opponents of such changes. Looking broadly at the Tea Party movement across the United States and systematically measuring its influence in urban America, we assess each Tea Party chapter’s capacity – its ability to convert resources into meaningful political advocacy. Data is derived from surveys of political elites in 50 cities as well as from determining the level of sustainability programming in each of these same cities. Evidence demonstrates that the Tea Party has not had a significant impact on city policymaking in the area of sustainability. Rather, the typical Tea Party chapter appears to be at best a modest presence in local politics.     

Why does the United States lack a global warming policy? The corporate inner circle versus public interest sector elites

Why has the United States not adopted global warming policies? Because the inner circle of the corporate elite has opposed these policies despite some corporate support for cap-and-trade and other policies. Pro- and anti-positions taken by think tanks that have led the policy debate in the post-Kyoto period are analyzed in order to demonstrate this. The corporate and upper class social ties of the directors of these pro- and anti-think tanks are examined, revealing a corporate elite split between the inner circle opposing these policies, and a ‘public interest sector’ of corporate law and media corporations along with top executives from higher education and other nonprofits that is supportive of policies addressing global warming. To enable adoption of major global warming policies, the corporate inner circle will need to become supportive and forge a class-wide corporate consensus on the need to address global warming.     

Environmental pollutants and type 2 diabetes: a review of human studies

The incidence of diabetes has increased dramatically in recent decades and become one of the leading health problems worldwide. Lifestyle and dietary changes alone cannot account for the dramatic rise of diabetes, while an increasing number of publications have reported the possible relationships between exposure to environmental pollutants and risk of diabetes. In the present review, our objective was to summarize the human studies on environmental pollutants, which includes persistent organic pollutants, pesticides (not on the Stockholm Convention list), bisphenol A, and phthalates, and the risk of diabetes. Currently published results suggest a positive relationship between certain persistent organic pollutants (dichlorodiphenyldichloroethene, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, hexachlorobenzene, and polychlorinated biphenyls) and bisphenol A exposure and risk of diabetes. For pyrethroids, organophosphates, carbamates, and phthalates, there are insufficient studies to reach conclusions and therefore more studies, especially prospective studies, are needed along with in vivo and in vitro studies to understand the underlying mechanisms.     

海底可燃冰开发环境风险多元共治之论证与路径展开

有效规制海底可燃冰开发伴生的多种类型生态环境风险,是保障可燃冰产业健康发展的内在需求。本文的主要目的即在中国现行法律体系规定的多元共治的环境法治理念和制度框架下,研究海底可燃冰开发环境风险多元共治的理论基础、现实必要性及其制度路径。文章主要运用类型化方法来梳理与归纳海底可燃冰开发引致环境风险的具体类型;运用理论分析与价值分析方法,论证海底可燃冰开发环境风险多元共治的必要性;运用法教义学分析、比较分析与系统分析方法,检视与剖析我国传统行政管制模式下的制度体系在规制海底可燃冰开发环境风险中的绩效与利弊,归纳与展开海底可燃冰开发环境风险多元共治的制度路径。本文的基本结论是,传统环境管制模式难以有效治理海底可燃冰开发引致的新型环境风险,当前我国所创新的环境多元共治模式,可以矫正政府单维管制海底可燃冰开发环境风险中的缺陷、弥补"监管之法"在规制海底可燃冰开发环境风险中的疏漏、克服单一行政命令方式在规制海底可燃冰开发环境风险中的困境,系统构建海底可燃冰开发环境风险多元治理体系。在完善行政监管和推进私人治理两个层面对海底可燃冰开发环境风险多元共治的基础上提出具体建议。在完善行政监管层面,我国《环境保护法》《海洋环境保护法》等法律规范经过拓展解释适用,仍然因为规制路径的间接性、零散性而产生内生弊端,亟待专门立法;在推进私人治理层面,多元共治机制分为多元主体参与机制与诉讼机制,应重视通过鼓励环保公益组织、可燃冰行业协会与私人等多元主体采取多元参与和私益诉讼方式,以发挥其在规制海底可燃冰开发环境风险中的综合效用。     

国外学术界对《巴黎协定》的评价及履约前景分析

2016年《巴黎协定》的正式生效是全球环境治理的重要里程碑,是国际社会在应对气候变化的艰难进程中迈出的重要一步,标志着全球环境治理从此进入履约阶段。本文基于宾夕法尼亚大学智库与公民社会项目(TTCSP)公布的《2015年全球智库指数报告》,选取其中排名前十位的国际环境智库的研究报告和环境领域中代表性学者的相关论文,对国外学术界有关《巴黎协定》履约前景的分析进行了系统梳理,并对此做出简要评述。文章在肯定《巴黎协定》有力推进国际气候治理进程的同时,也指出在新的国际形势之下,尤其是在英国正式启动脱欧进程和特朗普新任美国总统后,其履约过程中更是存在着协定之内和协定之外的众多挑战和不确定性,本文的基本结论如下:首先,协定之内面临着协定缔约方国内批准程序上的挑战;国家自主贡献的实现与发展中国家能力建设;2℃温升目标的实现前景;审评和盘点的效力评估;碳市场机制能否有效运行。其次,协定之外面临着英国脱欧的潜在气候政策变化及影响;美国气候政策的可能变化及其影响。基于对以上智库报告和相关研究论文的分析,笔者对《巴黎协定》的履约前景得出几点看法:(1)正视国际气候合作的机遇与挑战;(2)对具体议题的落实需充满信心;(3)理性冷静看待英美气候政策的可能变化;(4)鼓励环境类国际组织之外的非国家行为体展开通力合作。对此,我们应正视履约中的挑战与不确定性,做好充分的应对之策,确保履约进程的顺利完成。总之,《巴黎协定》的履约前景不容乐观,国际社会任重道远。     

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。     

西部大开发十五年环境效率评价及其影响因素分析

西部大开发政策实施以来,西部地区实现了快于东部和中部的经济增长。正确认识西部地区经济增长中的环境成本,评价西部地区的环境效率具有重要意义。本文运用考虑非期望产出的超效率SBM模型测算了2000—2014年西部大开发以来的环境效率。研究发现:西部地区环境效率偏低,处于相对无效状态。西部地区环境效率明显低于传统效率,经济增长付出了较高的环境代价。西部大开发以来传统效率与环境效率之间的差距呈现先扩大后缩小的"倒U"型走势变化。西部地区省份环境效率在全国排名靠后,各省份的环境效率呈现出差异化的发展态势,其中重庆和四川排名不断提升,新疆排名逐步回落,内蒙古和广西在西部地区排名相对靠前且比较稳定,云南和陕西一直处于中间水平,贵州、甘肃、青海、宁夏排名相对靠后。西部地区环境效率2000—2003年上升,2004—2010年不断下降,2010—2014年趋于平稳。西部地区环境效率低于东部地区且差距大,也低于中部地区和全国平均水平。通过收敛性检验发现,西部地区各省份间的环境效率差距呈现先缩小后扩大的趋势;西部地区与东部地区间的环境效率差距逐渐扩大,与中部地区间的环境效率差距先扩大后缩小。本文同时采用了Tobit模型进行面板回归,实证分析了西部地区环境效率的影响因素。结果表明:经济发展水平、科学技术水平、能源消费结构、环保投资力度对西部地区环境效率具有显著影响;产业结构变化和对外开放程度对西部地区环境效率影响不显著;西部地区存在环境效率的库兹涅茨曲线。     

强“波特假说”存在产业异质性吗?——基于产业碳密集程度细分的视角

强"波特假说"认为严格而恰当的环境规制政策将使企业的生产效率呈现先降后升的趋势,为验证强"波特假说"及其产业异质性,首先建立产业碳密集指数,将工业部门36个细分行业划分为高碳密集产业、中碳密集产业和低碳密集产业;接着运用方向性距离函数测算2003—2014年细分行业的绿色全要素生产率,基于系统"GMM"估计方法验证三个细分行业的环境规制强度对绿色全要素生产率的影响。研究结果显示:第一,样本期间内,高碳密集产业的环境规制强度远远高于中低碳密集产业,这表明高碳密集产业一直是产业节能减排的重点对象,而碳排放情况较为严重的中碳密集产业则为"被遗忘的角落";第二,强"波特假说"在工业部门内存在产业异质性,高碳密集产业和中碳密集产业的环境规制强度与绿色全要素生产率呈"U"型关系,而在低碳密集产业中两者则呈倒"U"型关系;第三,相对于高碳密集产业,中碳密集产业因环境规制强度较容易跨越"U"型拐点而具有较大的减排空间,低碳密集产业在达到"U"型拐点之前,环境规制为其绿色全要素生产率提升的动力。本文研究结论蕴含如下的政策建议:根据产业的碳密集程度实施针对性的环境规制政策,持续加强中碳密集产业的环境规制力度,适度加强低碳密集产业的环境规制强度,高碳密集产业需根据不同阶段的经济水平设计具有针对性的环境规制政策,逐渐将三类产业的"遵循成本"效应转化为"创新补偿"效应,实现经济增长和环境保护的双赢。