“十二五”以来中国应对气候变化政策和行动评述

基于广泛系统的文献梳理和总结,凝练了“十二五”以来中国应对气候变化政策和行动的现状、特点及成效,并提出针对性建议。主要结论包括:从外部环境看,国际形势对中国应对气候变化事业的推动作用呈现递减态势,之前“以外促内”的国内气候治理特点逐步转化为“内生动力为主”和“内外协调”;从政策制定和执行模式看,“集思广益”“上书模式”持续,“上下互动”“智库支持”的政策学习特点更加明显;从政策体系上看,已经形成相对成熟的符合中国国情的完整体系,推动气候治理能力显著提高;从政策总体特点看,呈现规划主导并引领、行政手段先行市场机制跟进、由点到面有序扩展、环境与气候协同治理、中央和地方互动博弈形成动态平衡、短期内政策成本较高等特点。“十二五”至今,中国应对气候变化政策行动效果明显,提前实现了2020年应对气候变化目标,并在污染治理、经济发展等方面产生广泛协同效应。“十三五”中期以来,中国应对气候变化组织管理机构进行了重大调整,从中央到地方气候政策和行动进入调整阶段。同时,更加强调气候政策和环境政策的协同。展望未来,中国应对气候变化政策和行动应该尽快走出调整期,充分利用新体制的优势,以碳总量控制目标为抓手,坚定推动以全国碳排放权交易为中心、多措互补的政策体系,注重适应行动以应对不断放大的气候风险,继续提高公众对应对气候变化政策的认知度、接受度和参与度,并不断加强技术研发和储备。     

Environmental solutions sparked by environmental history

Environmental solutions require a decision-making process that is ultimately political, in that they involve decisions with uncertain outcomes and stakeholders with conflicting viewpoints. If this process seeks broad alignment between the government and public, then reconciling conflicting viewpoints is a key to the legitimacy of these decisions. We show that ecological baselines can be particularly powerful tools for creating a common understanding for public support (legitimacy) and conformity to new rules or regulations (legality) that enable the solution. They are powerful because they move the discussion of solutions from the abstract to the concrete by providing a conceptual model for a common expectation (e.g., restoring habitat). They provide narratives of the past (ecological histories) that readjust the future expectations of individuals on how to perceive and respond to new policy. While ecological baselines offer scientists benchmarks for reinstating ecological functions, they also normalize public and government discussion of solutions. This social normalization of public issues may assist government policy and influence social views, practices, and behaviors that adopt the policy. For science to more effectively inform conservation, we encourage interdisciplinary thinking (science- and human-centered) because it can provide public support and government legitimacy for investing in environmental solutions.     

Climate pushers or symbolic leaders? The limits to corporate climate leadership by food retailers

ABSTRACT

Corporate climate leadership and its relationship with state regulations are discussed. First, a typology defining corporate climate leadership is introduced and distinguished from the other strategic behaviours corporations may adopt in response to climate change. A conceptual framework to explore the mechanisms enabling corporate climate leadership within a given policy system is then presented. This framework is applied to two big Swiss food retailers, considered as typical of corporate climate leaders, firms that showed an early interest in climate protection, as a result of ecological values, third actors’ lobbying and particular market incentives. Most importantly, the two companies were set in motion by a regulatory framework that featured stringent policy goals associated with flexible instruments and economic sanctions. The importance of these findings for understanding the role of corporate leadership in polycentric climate governance is discussed.     

The risks of risk-based regulation: insights from the environmental policy domain

Risk-based regulation has become increasingly popular in recent years. Proponents argue that it facilitates robust governance, contributing to efficient and effective use of regulatory resources and delivering interventions in proportion to risk. Critics contend that the challenges of operationalising risk-based governance mitigate its potential benefits. In this paper we start by considering what we mean by risk-based governance and discuss some of the factors shaping the adoption of such strategies. We then consider the development and operation of risk-based approaches in the environmental policy domain, focusing specifically on the regulation of contaminated land and radioactive waste. We argue that whilst risk-based approaches can offer important benefits, they face a range of epistemic, institutional and normative challenges that can play an important role in shaping the way that organisations manage both risks to society and their own institutional risks. This has profound implications for achieving regulatory objectives and, for this paper, the environmental outcomes that the regulations are designed to deliver.     

沙尘暴产生的环境管理体制根源分析及对策研究

以在内蒙古锡林郭勒盟和浑善达克沙地所做的实地调研为基础,对沙尘暴产生及治理环节中的政策和体制问题进行了探讨.分析表明,政策和体制问题才是沙尘暴问题的根源所在:以"自给自足"为核心目标的农业政策与环境政策的不协调和草地资源的公共产权是造成草地退化的诱因,在沙尘暴的治理中存在的责任机制不当、生态建设投资机制不当、草原建设管理缺位以及草原生态环境监管低效等政策和体制中存在的缺陷是沙尘暴无法得到有效控制的根本阻力.提出首先要通过协调农业和环保政策、实施可持续贸易,从源头上减少对资源的需求,从而预防沙尘暴的产生;其次要重点从明确职责和加强基层环保力量入手,提升沙尘暴的治理能力.     

浅析以科技信息为主线的环境协同治理

提高我国环境行政效率的关键是强化合作协调的环境治理理念,其核心载体是科技数据为核心的信息管理体系.科技进步与信息管理系统化决定着现代环境治理超越传统的危险防范而进入风险预防领域,也就决定了现代环境保护中合作与协调的核心理念.与环境保护的预防原则和环境许可制相适应,环境技术标准体系是现代环境科技信息体系的集中体现.同时环境法律监管体系也需要以信息系统和数据库为重点向综合环境治理发展,其中环境质量达标制(结果导向型监管)和环境治理中的规划都以环境信息综合集成管理为基础的.对于信息社会和互联网时代下、民主法治建设中、全球化进程里的中国环境治理,既有机遇又面临挑战.     

Incorporating governance influences into social-ecological system models: a case study involving biodiversity conservation

Addressing environmental problems requires sophisticated approaches to complexity and uncertainty. Conceptual models are increasingly used to improve understanding of complex system interactions. However, cursory treatment of governance limits their analytical potential. This study included governance considerations in a social-ecological system model of biodiversity conservation in the Tasmanian Midlands (Australia). Effectiveness of engagement processes and conservation programme longevity were identified as critical governance influences. The conceptual representation of this system enabled exploration of how governance influences interact with social drivers (e.g. landholder engagement in conservation practices) to modify the effect of biophysical drivers (e.g. land use) on biodiversity outcomes. Such a methodology provides essential information for identifying and guiding governance related points of intervention.     

Conservation Success as a Function of Good Alignment of Social and Ecological Structures and Processes

How to create and adjust governing institutions so that they align (fit) with complex ecosystem processes and structures across scales is an issue of increasing concern in conservation. It is argued that lack of such social‐ecological fit makes governance and conservation difficult, yet progress in explicitly defining and rigorously testing what constitutes a good fit has been limited. We used a novel modeling approach and data from case studies of fishery and forest conservation to empirically test presumed relationships between conservation outcomes and certain patterns of alignment of social‐ecological interdependences. Our approach made it possible to analyze conservation outcome on a systems level while also providing information on how individual actors are positioned in the complex web of social‐ecological interdependencies. We found that when actors who shared resources were also socially linked, conservation at the level of the whole social‐ecological system was positively affected. When the scales at which individual actors used resources and the scale at which ecological resources were interconnected to other ecological resources were aligned through tightened feedback loops, conservation outcome was better than when they were not aligned. The analysis of individual actors’ positions in the web of social‐ecological interdependencies was helpful in understanding why a system has a certain level of social‐ecological fit. Results of analysis of positions showed that different actors contributed in very different ways to achieve a certain fit and revealed some underlying difference between the actors, for example in terms of actors’ varying rights to access and use different ecological resources. El Éxito de la Conservación como Función de una Buena Alineación de Estructuras y Procesos Sociales y Ecológicos     

Managing water through change and uncertainty: comparing lessons from the adaptive co-management literature to recent policy developments in England

Water management is set to become increasingly variable and unpredictable, in particular because of climate change. This paper investigates the extent to which water policy in England provides an enabling environment for ‘adaptive co-management’, which its proponents claim can achieve the dual objective of ecosystem protection and livelihood sustainability under conditions of change and uncertainty. Five policy categories are derived from a literature review, and are used to conduct a directed content analysis of seven key water policy documents. The findings reveal that although, in part, English water policy serves as an enabling environment for adaptive co-management, there is a level of discrepancy between substantive aspects of the five policy categories and water policy in England. Addressing these discrepancies will be important if English water policy is to allow for the emergence of processes, like adaptive co-management, that are capable of coping with the challenges that lie ahead.     

Achieving Open Access to Conservation Science

Conservation science is a crisis discipline in which the results of scientific enquiry must be made available quickly to those implementing management. We assessed the extent to which scientific research published since the year 2000 in 20 conservation science journals is publicly available. Of the 19,207 papers published, 1,667 (8.68%) are freely downloadable from an official repository. Moreover, only 938 papers (4.88%) meet the standard definition of open access in which material can be freely reused providing attribution to the authors is given. This compares poorly with a comparable set of 20 evolutionary biology journals, where 31.93% of papers are freely downloadable and 7.49% are open access. Seventeen of the 20 conservation journals offer an open access option, but fewer than 5% of the papers are available through open access. The cost of accessing the full body of conservation science runs into tens of thousands of dollars per year for institutional subscribers, and many conservation practitioners cannot access pay‐per‐view science through their workplace. However, important initiatives such as Research4Life are making science available to organizations in developing countries. We urge authors of conservation science to pay for open access on a per‐article basis or to choose publication in open access journals, taking care to ensure the license allows reuse for any purpose providing attribution is given. Currently, it would cost $51 million to make all conservation science published since 2000 freely available by paying the open access fees currently levied to authors. Publishers of conservation journals might consider more cost effective models for open access and conservation‐oriented organizations running journals could consider a broader range of options for open access to nonmembers such as sponsorship of open access via membership fees. Obtención de Acceso Abierto a la Ciencia de la Conservación