走向智慧型治理:环境治理模式的变迁研究
|
摘要
改革开放以来,我国环境治理模式经历了三个阶段的变迁:1978—2001年,采取功利型环境治理模式,中央和地方政府都奉"经济发展优先"为圭臬,环境治理存在"价值理性"的缺失,沦为一种服务于国家经济大局的边缘性治理模式;2002—2013年,进入了管制型环境治理模式,中央权威矫正了功利主义,实现了"兼顾公平"的价值转向,但是,公司化的地方政府与中央权威的治理目标函数出现偏差,环境法律法规上的软约束、缺少问责、公众参与机制不畅等缺陷导致地方政府出现"象征性治污""不出事逻辑"等问题,存在"制度理性"的缺失;2014年至今,在新《中华人民共和国环境保护法》的推动下,环境治理进入了"合作型"模式,该模式融入了现代化国家治理理念,突出了政府之外的市场和社会这两极的作用,初步搭建了形式完备的权利义务结构框架。但是,在对体现"合作型"环境治理特点的"河长制"的观察中,发现合作型治理无法解决信息不对称问题。徒法不足以自行,智慧时代下应当实现制度理性和技术理性的结合,运用大数据、人工智能、区块链等技术工具,推动环境治理模式向"智慧型"环境治理的路向变迁。
Since the reform and opening-up policy was introduced,China's environmental governance model has undergone three stages of transformation. From 1978 to 2001,China adopted the utilitarian mode in environmental governance,both central and local governments gave priority to economic development. The environmental governance became a kind of marginal governance that served the overall situation of economic development,in which existed a lack of " value rationality". From 2002 to 2013,China entered the stage of the regulatory mode. The central authority corrected the utilitarianism,and " considering fairness" became its value orientation.However,there was a deviation in objective function between the corporatized local government and the central authority's governance.The defects in environmental laws and regulations,such as soft constraints,lack of accountability,and poor public participation led to the emergence of " symbolic pollution control " and " non-accident logic " in local governments. Thus,there existed a lack of " institutional rationality". In 2014,driven by the new environmental protection law,China entered a stage of cooperative governance mode,which integrated the concept of modern state governance,highlighted the role of market and society,and initially built a wellformed institutional framework. However,from the observation of the system of river chiefs,which reflected the characteristics of cooperative governance,we found that cooperative governance could not solve the problem of information asymmetry. The law alone is not enough. In the era of wisdom,we should achieve the combination of institutional rationality and technical rationality,and use technical tools such as big data,artificial intelligence,blockchain,etc. to promote the transformation of the environmental governance mode towards an intelligent mode.
Since the reform and opening-up policy was introduced,China's environmental governance model has undergone three stages of transformation. From 1978 to 2001,China adopted the utilitarian mode in environmental governance,both central and local governments gave priority to economic development. The environmental governance became a kind of marginal governance that served the overall situation of economic development,in which existed a lack of " value rationality". From 2002 to 2013,China entered the stage of the regulatory mode. The central authority corrected the utilitarianism,and " considering fairness" became its value orientation.However,there was a deviation in objective function between the corporatized local government and the central authority's governance.The defects in environmental laws and regulations,such as soft constraints,lack of accountability,and poor public participation led to the emergence of " symbolic pollution control " and " non-accident logic " in local governments. Thus,there existed a lack of " institutional rationality". In 2014,driven by the new environmental protection law,China entered a stage of cooperative governance mode,which integrated the concept of modern state governance,highlighted the role of market and society,and initially built a wellformed institutional framework. However,from the observation of the system of river chiefs,which reflected the characteristics of cooperative governance,we found that cooperative governance could not solve the problem of information asymmetry. The law alone is not enough. In the era of wisdom,we should achieve the combination of institutional rationality and technical rationality,and use technical tools such as big data,artificial intelligence,blockchain,etc. to promote the transformation of the environmental governance mode towards an intelligent mode.
引文
[1]LIEBERTHAL K.China′s governing system and its impact on environmental policy implementation China environment series [M].Washington,DC:Woodrow Wilson,1997.
[2]段蕾.新中国环保事业的起步:1970年代初官厅水库污染治理的历史考察[J].河北学刊,2015,35(5):61-65.
[3]李干杰.守护良好生态环境这个最普惠的民生福祉[N].人民日报,2019-06-03(09).
[4]WANG H,MAMINGI N,LAPLANTE B,et al.Incomplete enforcement of pollution regulation:bargaining power of Chinese factories [J].Environmental & Resource Economics,2003,24(3):245-262.
[5]冉冉.“压力型体制”下的政治激励与地方环境治理[J].经济社会体制比较,2013(3):111-118.
[6]郑思齐,万广华,孙伟增,等.公众诉求与城市环境治理[J].管理世界,2013(6):72-84.
[7]莫伊塞斯·纳伊姆.权力的终结[M].王吉美,牛筱萌,译.北京:中信出版社,2013:1-13.
[8]唐皇凤.中国国家治理体系现代化的路径选择[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版),2014(2):20-26.
[9]王树义.环境治理是国家治理的重要内容[J].法制与社会发展,2014,20(5):51-53.
[10]王曦.新《环境保护法》的制度创新:规范和制约有关环境的政府行为[J].环境保护,2014,42(10):40-43.
[11]杜辉.论制度逻辑框架下环境治理模式之转换[J].法商研究,2013,30(1):69-76.
[12]郑容坤.水资源多中心治理机制的构建——以河长制为例[J].领导科学,2018(8):42-45.
[13]王书明,蔡萌萌.基于新制度经济学视角的“河长制”评析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2011,21(9):8-13.
[14]沈坤荣,金刚.中国地方政府环境治理的政策效应——基于“河长制”演进的研究[J].中国社会科学,2018(5):92-115.
[15]余懿臻.河长制实施困境及完善对策——杭州河长制实践的成效与问题解析[J].岭南师范学院学报,2018(1):62-66.
[16]关婷,薛澜,赵静.技术赋能的治理创新:基于中国环境领域的实践案例[J].中国行政管理,2019(4):58-65.
[17]ARNSTEIN S R.A ladder of citizen participation[J].Journal of the American Institute of Planners,1969,35(4):216-224.
[18]迈克尔·麦金尼斯.多中心治道与发展[M].毛寿龙,译.上海:上海三联书店,2000:21-23.
[19]COE A,PAQUET G,ROY J.E-governance and smart communities[J].Social Science Computer Review,2001,19(1):80-93.
[20]李云新,韩伊静.国外智慧治理研究述评[J].电子政务,2017(7):57-66.
[21]LETAIFA S.How to strategize smart cities:revealing the SMART model[J].Journal of Business Research,2015,68(7):1414-1419.
[22]YIGITCANLAR T,VELIBEYOGLU K,MARTINEZ-FERNANDEZ C.Rising knowledge cities:the role of urban knowledge precincts[J].Journal of Knowledge Management,2008,12(5):8-20.
[23]BATTY M.Big data,smart cities and city planning[J].Dialogues in Human Geography,2013,3(3):274-279.
[24]郭少青.大数据时代的“环境智理”[J].电子政务,2017(10):46-53.
[25]谭娟,谷红,谭琼.大数据时代政府环境治理路径创新[J].中国环境管理,2018,10(1):60-64.
[26]梁甜甜.多元环境治理体系中政府和企业的主体定位及其功能——以利益均衡为视角[J].当代法学,2018,32(5):89-98.
[27]MURALEEDHARAN S.Role of artificial intelligence in environmental sustainability[EB/OL].[2019-05-01].https://www.ecomena.org/artificial-intelligence-environmental-sustainability/.
[28]傅毅明.大数据时代的环境信息治理变革:从信息公开到公共服务[J].中国环境管理,2016,8(4):48-51.
[29]Future Thinkers.Seven ways,the blockchain can save the environment and stop climate change [EB/OL].[2019-05-01].https://futurethinkers.org/blockchain-environment-climate-change/.
[30]易欢欢.从技术角度看绿色区块链之资产和应用平台[EB/OL].[2019-05-01].http://www.sohu.com/a/234622896_447196.
(1)参见:环保部:新《环保法》最大限度凝聚了各方共识,http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2014-05-05/073930061550.shtml.
[2]段蕾.新中国环保事业的起步:1970年代初官厅水库污染治理的历史考察[J].河北学刊,2015,35(5):61-65.
[3]李干杰.守护良好生态环境这个最普惠的民生福祉[N].人民日报,2019-06-03(09).
[4]WANG H,MAMINGI N,LAPLANTE B,et al.Incomplete enforcement of pollution regulation:bargaining power of Chinese factories [J].Environmental & Resource Economics,2003,24(3):245-262.
[5]冉冉.“压力型体制”下的政治激励与地方环境治理[J].经济社会体制比较,2013(3):111-118.
[6]郑思齐,万广华,孙伟增,等.公众诉求与城市环境治理[J].管理世界,2013(6):72-84.
[7]莫伊塞斯·纳伊姆.权力的终结[M].王吉美,牛筱萌,译.北京:中信出版社,2013:1-13.
[8]唐皇凤.中国国家治理体系现代化的路径选择[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版),2014(2):20-26.
[9]王树义.环境治理是国家治理的重要内容[J].法制与社会发展,2014,20(5):51-53.
[10]王曦.新《环境保护法》的制度创新:规范和制约有关环境的政府行为[J].环境保护,2014,42(10):40-43.
[11]杜辉.论制度逻辑框架下环境治理模式之转换[J].法商研究,2013,30(1):69-76.
[12]郑容坤.水资源多中心治理机制的构建——以河长制为例[J].领导科学,2018(8):42-45.
[13]王书明,蔡萌萌.基于新制度经济学视角的“河长制”评析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2011,21(9):8-13.
[14]沈坤荣,金刚.中国地方政府环境治理的政策效应——基于“河长制”演进的研究[J].中国社会科学,2018(5):92-115.
[15]余懿臻.河长制实施困境及完善对策——杭州河长制实践的成效与问题解析[J].岭南师范学院学报,2018(1):62-66.
[16]关婷,薛澜,赵静.技术赋能的治理创新:基于中国环境领域的实践案例[J].中国行政管理,2019(4):58-65.
[17]ARNSTEIN S R.A ladder of citizen participation[J].Journal of the American Institute of Planners,1969,35(4):216-224.
[18]迈克尔·麦金尼斯.多中心治道与发展[M].毛寿龙,译.上海:上海三联书店,2000:21-23.
[19]COE A,PAQUET G,ROY J.E-governance and smart communities[J].Social Science Computer Review,2001,19(1):80-93.
[20]李云新,韩伊静.国外智慧治理研究述评[J].电子政务,2017(7):57-66.
[21]LETAIFA S.How to strategize smart cities:revealing the SMART model[J].Journal of Business Research,2015,68(7):1414-1419.
[22]YIGITCANLAR T,VELIBEYOGLU K,MARTINEZ-FERNANDEZ C.Rising knowledge cities:the role of urban knowledge precincts[J].Journal of Knowledge Management,2008,12(5):8-20.
[23]BATTY M.Big data,smart cities and city planning[J].Dialogues in Human Geography,2013,3(3):274-279.
[24]郭少青.大数据时代的“环境智理”[J].电子政务,2017(10):46-53.
[25]谭娟,谷红,谭琼.大数据时代政府环境治理路径创新[J].中国环境管理,2018,10(1):60-64.
[26]梁甜甜.多元环境治理体系中政府和企业的主体定位及其功能——以利益均衡为视角[J].当代法学,2018,32(5):89-98.
[27]MURALEEDHARAN S.Role of artificial intelligence in environmental sustainability[EB/OL].[2019-05-01].https://www.ecomena.org/artificial-intelligence-environmental-sustainability/.
[28]傅毅明.大数据时代的环境信息治理变革:从信息公开到公共服务[J].中国环境管理,2016,8(4):48-51.
[29]Future Thinkers.Seven ways,the blockchain can save the environment and stop climate change [EB/OL].[2019-05-01].https://futurethinkers.org/blockchain-environment-climate-change/.
[30]易欢欢.从技术角度看绿色区块链之资产和应用平台[EB/OL].[2019-05-01].http://www.sohu.com/a/234622896_447196.
(1)参见:环保部:新《环保法》最大限度凝聚了各方共识,http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2014-05-05/073930061550.shtml.