ESG研究进展及其在“双碳”目标下的新机遇

环境、社会和治理（ESG）是一种由资本市场发展形成的融合多利益相关方诉求的新理念,目的是推动企业提升社会责任和实现可持续发展。推进ESG理念在中国发展,对国家扩大对外开放、增强企业国际竞争力以及实现“双碳”目标具有重大意义。本研究通过综述2019年3月—2022年3月以来国内外以ESG为主题的文献,分析ESG实践特点和发展新动向。研究发现,ESG三要素在金融投资、企业或银行财务表现、企业价值、企业社会责任绩效以及可持续发展能力方面会产生多样化影响。本文建立了一个包含ESG多利益相关方、第三方机构以及ESG代表性指南政策法规的运行体系框架,形象化地凝练了ESG的内涵和实践重点;结合理论研究,运用驱动力、压力、状态影响及响应（DPSIR）分析框架揭示了ESG理念在我国“双碳”目标下的发展方向。最后,建议从三方面推进ESG理念：以工业园区为载体推动企业整体性开展ESG实践创新;推进A股企业扩大ESG实践示范试点,引领中小企业整体提升;引导投资者积极参与ESG投资,推进企业提升现代化环境治理能力。     

湖域工业初始排污权合作配置体系构建——以太湖流域为例

针对湖泊流域工业初始排污权配置问题,在分析太湖流域工业初始排污权配置背景基础上,结合我国基本国情,从多利益相关者合作的角度出发,构建了一种政策型政府主体监管、经营型政府主体主导、多利益相关者参与的太湖流域工业初始排污权政府限额定价合作配置体系。并构建了合作配置体系的概念结构,以及合作配置路径结构,给出实现合作配置路径结构的工作流程结构。进而针对实际情况,提出保障太湖流域工业初始排污权合作配置体系应用的政策建议     

Territorial politics and the success of collaborative environmental governance: local and regional partnerships compared

The paper explores the role local governments and territorial proximity play in the efficiency of collaborative environmental governance. It develops the hypothesis that the representatives of local authorities involved in partnerships possess resources to diminish the pitfalls of sustainable governance, facilitate coordination, and contribute to the success of shared policy-making. Four French and English partnerships are presented. They include a diversity of stakeholders such as fisheries, ports, farmers, yachting associations, environmental NGOs, or local authorities. Thereby, the paper develops whether and under which conditions local governments play a positive or negative role, as well as comparing territorial levels of implementation and the effects of geographical proximity. It is shown that collaboration at the regional level prevents the integration of decision-making in organisational networks, the inclusion of citizens, and the development of social responsibility for stakeholders – the partnership acting as a formalisation of pre-existing lobbying. Locally, governments assume inter-organisational leadership and do contribute to the institutionalisation of the new forums. Yet, local successes of partnerships answer logics of social, rather than environmental, regulation. The local attenuation of usage conflicts does not necessarily reduce the negative effects of those usages on the environment. By stressing a collaborative definition of environmental problems, the partnerships tend to sideline substantial policy changes, and possibly conflict with the goals and long-term temporality of sustainable governance.