摘要
依据"元治理"理论构建大气污染防治政策框架,将政策工具分为政府直接和间接调整责任主体行为两大类。其中,政府直接调整责任主体行为包括调整自身行为、直接调整企业行为、直接调整公众行为三小类;政府间接调整责任主体行为包括引导企业公众自治和促进多方主体协作两小类。在政策框架基础上,设计了2个被解释变量、13个解释变量、4个控制变量,应用中国2013—2016年4个直辖市和27个省会城市的面板数据,分析元治理视域下大气污染防治政策工具的实施效果。结果显示:2013—2016年,政府调整自身行为中,产业结构、生活能源消费的策略调整取得成效,但工业能源结构、交运系统、绿化建设的策略调整有待改善。政府直接调整企业行为中,命令控制型政策工具优于经济激励型政策工具的效果。政府直接调整公众行为,以交通限行管制为代表,取得显著成效。政府引导企业公众自治中,引导企业自治的政策工具无效,引导公众自治的政策工具仅能提升环境意识而不能有效减少大气污染。政府促进多方主体协作中,促进公众与企业协商未取得降低大气污染的效果,促进企业与公众协作成效显著。总体来看,政府直接调整责任主体行为的政策工具优于间接调整的政策工具;政府关于产业结构的策略调整和限行管制的公众行为调整最为有效;促进新能源汽车推广方面的企业与公众协作较为有效。基于分析结果提出建议:以能源结构、交运系统、绿化建设为重点进一步优化发展策略;充分发挥经济激励型政策工具作用,建立直接调整企业与公众行为的长效机制;继续促进企业与公众协作以推广更多低能耗、低污染、低排放的产品;尽快完善引导企业公众自治、促进公众与企业协商的政策体系。
According to the theory of meta-governance,this paper builds a policy framework of air pollution prevention and control.The policy tools are decomposed into two types which are government’s direct and indirect adjustments of responsible entity behaviors.The direct tools contain 3 categories which are the government self-behavior adjustment,the enterprise behavior adjustment and the public behavior adjustment.The indirect tools contain 2 categories which are the guidance of enterprise and public autonomy and the promotion of multi-lateral cooperation.Based on this framework,2 explained variables,13 explaining variables and 4 control variables are designed.Using the data of 4 municipalities and 27 provincial capitals in China from 2013 to 2016,this paper analyzes the implementation effects of policy tools of air pollution prevention and control from the perspective of meta-governance.The results show that among the policy tools of the government self-behavior adjustment,the strategy adjustments of the industrial structure and the domestic energy consumption are effective,but the ones of the industrial energy structure,transportation system and greening construction have to be improved.Among the policy tools for direct adjastment of the enterprise behaviors,the command-and-control policy tool is superior to the economic-incentive one.The policy tools for direct adjastment of the public behaviors,represented by traffic restrictions,have achieved remarkable results.For the policy tools for the guidance of enterprise and public self-governance,the former is invalid while the latter can only raises public environmental awareness,without effective reduction of air pollution.Among the policy tools for the promotion of multi-lateral cooperation,the promotion of the public consultation with enterprises has not achieved obvions effects of air pollution reducton,but the one of collaboration between enterprises and the public has achieved great effects in the promotion of new-energy vehicle usage.In conclusion,the effect of
作者
黄清子
张立
李敏
HUANG Qing-zi;ZHANG Li;LI Min(School of Public Policy and Administration,Xi’an Jiaotong University,Xi’an Shaanxi 710049,China;School of Journalism and New Media,Xi’an Jiaotong University,Xi’an Shaanxi 710049,China)
出处
《中国人口·资源与环境》
CSSCI
CSCD
北大核心
2019年第1期126-134,共9页
China Population,Resources and Environment
基金
中国博士后科学基金"环境政策:理论解析
效应评价与体系框架设计"(批准号:2016M52813)
关键词
大气污染防治
元治理
政策框架
工具优化
air pollution prevention and control
meta-governance
policy framework
tool optimization
