基于全球三大经济体实践的环境影响评价改革趋势及动因研究

王清扬; 李君; 吴婧

doi:10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20220630

基于全球三大经济体实践的环境影响评价改革趋势及动因研究

doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20220630

王清扬^1,,
李君²,
吴婧^1, ,

1.
南开大学环境科学与工程学院
2.
中国电建集团北方区域总部

基金项目: 国家社会科学基金重点项目（19AZD005）

详细信息

作者简介:
王清扬（1995—），女，博士研究生，主要研究方向为环境影响评价，wangqynku@163.com

通讯作者:
吴婧（1976—），女，教授，主要研究方向为环境影响评价、环境管理与环境经济，wujing@nankai.edu.cn

中图分类号: D922.68, X820.3
计量
- 文章访问数: 299
- HTML全文浏览量: 196
- PDF下载量: 35
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2022-06-18
- 网络出版日期: 2022-10-21

Research on the trend and motivation of EIA reform based on the practice of the three global economies

WANG Qingyang^1
,,
LI Jun²,
WU Jing^{1
, ,}

1.
College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai University
2.
Northern Regional Headquarter of China Power Construction Group

摘要

摘要:
环境影响评价(简称环评)是一项重要环境管理制度，自1969年实施以来，在全球范围内经历了不断的修正和完善。特别是近10年来，在不同的政治、经济背景下，全球三大经济体——美国、中国和欧盟的环评改革均呈现出简化行政程序以及提高评价过程和报告书质量的共同趋势。采用多源流分析框架，对美国、欧盟和中国环评制度改革的根源、动力和趋势进行比较研究。结果表明，环评改革的根源在于不同国情背景下政策的实践反馈、公众环保意识的觉醒以及市场压力。
- 环境影响评价 /
- 政策改革 /
- 多源流分析框架
Abstract:
As an important system of environmental management, since its promulgation in 1969, environmental impact assessment (EIA) has undergone continuous revision and improvement globally. Especially in the past ten years, under different political and economic backgrounds, the development of EIA reforms in the three largest economies, the United States, China and the European Union, have all shown common trends of simplifying the administrative procedures and improving the quality of the EIA procedure and reports. The Multiple Stream Framework (MSF) was adopted to conduct a comparative study on the causes, dynamics and trends of EIA system reform in the selected countries/regions. The research showed that the main reason for the EIA reform lied in the practical feedback of policies under different national conditions, the awakening of public awareness of environmental protection as well as market pressure.
- environmental impact assessment (EIA) /
- policy reform /
- multiple stream framework

HTML全文

表 1 全球三大经济体环评改革动因的对比

Table 1. Comparison of the motivations for EIA reforms in three global economies

经济体	问题源流	政策源流	政治源流
美国	审查流程冗长	经济发展压力与行政负担，环境保护的使命	总统换届，固有的政治两极分化
欧盟	审查流程冗长，企业行政负担	纳入成员国现有法律，强制性范围界定的争议	国际气候政治的压力，国内公众环境意识觉醒
中国	项目环评有效性不足，规划环评落地困难	多方群体的利益协调	放管服的行政要求，生态文明制度的推进

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(37)

[1]	RETIEF F, BOND A, POPE J, et al. Global megatrends and their implications for environmental assessment practice[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,2016,61:52-60. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2016.07.002
[2]	SHAPIRO G K, GUICHON J, PRUE G, et al. A multiple streams analysis of the decisions to fund gender-neutral HPV vaccination in Canada[J]. Preventive Medicine,2017,100:123-131. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.04.016
[3]	MACEDO S V, VALADARES J L, de MELO J R R. The formulation of Brazil's mineral policy: a multiple streams explanation[J]. Resources Policy,2021,74:102270. doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102270
[4]	BRUNNER S. Understanding policy change: multiple streams and emissions trading in Germany[J]. Global Environmental Change,2008,18(3):501-507. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.05.003
[5]	KINGDON J W. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies: TBS[M]. The Book Service Ltd, 1984.
[6]	BJORKLAND R. Monitoring: the missing piece: a critique of NEPA monitoring[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,2013,43:129-134. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2013.07.001
[7]	CEQ. Fact Sheet: Modernizing CEQ′s NEPA Regulations[S/OL]. (2020-07-15)[2022-06-01]. https://ceq.doe.gov/docs/laws-regulations/ceq-final-rule-fact-sheet-2020-07-15.pdf.
[8]	European Commission. Proposal for a directive of the european parliament and the council amending directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects of the environment[S/OL]. [2022-06-01]. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52012PC0628.
[9]	KIM S. Large-scale renewable energy project barriers: environmental impact assessment streamlining efforts in Japan and the EU[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,2017,65:100-110. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2017.05.001
[10]	LI X L, YANG X J, WEI Q, et al. Authoritarian environmentalism and environmental policy implementation in China[J]. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,2019,145:86-93. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.02.011
[11]	时进钢, 张明博, 赵一玮, 等.我国规划环评制度的进展、面临的挑战及对策建议[J]. 中国环境管理,2020,12(6):43-46. SHI J G, ZHANG M B, ZHAO Y W, et al. Progress, challenges and suggestions of planning EIA system in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Environmental Management,2020,12(6):43-46.
[12]	CHE X Z, ENGLISH A, LU J, et al. Improving the effectiveness of planning EIA (PEIA) in China: integrating planning and assessment during the preparation of Shenzhen's Master Urban Plan[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,2011,31(6):561-571. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2010.12.003
[13]	黄锡生, 韩英夫.我国建设项目环评制度的现实困局及其完善路径[J]. 内蒙古社会科学(汉文版),2017,38(4):114-120.
[14]	杨轶婷, 徐鹤. 我国环境影响评价制度实践与展望: 环评法二十周年回顾[J/OL]. 环境工程技术学报, 2022. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.5972.x.20220818.0901.002.html. YANG Y T, XU H. Research on the practice and future development of China's environmental impact assessment system: review of the 20th anniversary of EIA Law[J/OL]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology, 2022. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.5972.x.20220818.0901.002.html.
[15]	全国人民代表大会. 中华人民共和国环境影响评价法[A/OL]. (2019-01-07)[2022-06-01]. http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/sjxflfg/201906/5e47c4866d5b44ff8b338997e37ee2cc.shtml.
[16]	孙冰, 田蕴, 李志林, 等.英国环境影响评价制度演进对中国的启示[J]. 中国环境管理,2018,10(5):15-23. doi: 10.16868/j.cnki.1674-6252.2018.05.015 SUN B, TIAN Y, LI Z L, et al. The evolution of UK environmental assessment system and its implications for China[J]. Chinese Journal of Environmental Management,2018,10(5):15-23. doi: 10.16868/j.cnki.1674-6252.2018.05.015
[17]	邵峰.美国政治极化的现状与未来[J]. 人民论坛,2022(2):18-21. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-3381.2022.02.003
[18]	HOURDEQUIN M, LANDRES P, HANSON M J, et al. Ethical implications of democratic theory for US public participation in environmental impact assessment[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,2012,35:37-44. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2012.02.001
[19]	European Commission. Strategic environmental assessment[S/OL]. [2022-06-01]. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/sea-support.htm.
[20]	ENRÍQUEZ-DE-SALAMANCA Á. Simplified environmental impact assessment processes: review and implementation proposals[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,2021,90:106640. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2021.106640
[21]	王金南, 董战峰, 蒋洪强, 等.中国环境保护战略政策70年历史变迁与改革方向[J]. 环境科学研究,2019,32(10):1636-1644. doi: 10.13198/j.issn.1001-6929.2019.08.23 WANG J N, DONG Z F, JIANG H Q, et al. Historical evolution and reform of China's environmental strategy and policy during the past seventy years (1949-2019)[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences,2019,32(10):1636-1644. doi: 10.13198/j.issn.1001-6929.2019.08.23
[22]	董永亮.环评中政府、企业和公众三者的利益协调探讨[J]. 低碳世界,2017(25):265-266. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-2066.2017.25.177
[23]	颜金.论政府环境责任中的利益困境: 基于府际关系视域[J]. 理论与改革,2014(3):105-107.
[24]	包存宽, 许艺嘉, 王珏.关于新时期环境影响评价“放管服”改革的思考[J]. 环境保护,2018,46(9):7-11. doi: 10.14026/j.cnki.0253-9705.2018.09.002 BAO C K, XU Y J, WANG J. On the reform of environmental impact assessment in the new period[J]. Environmental Protection,2018,46(9):7-11. doi: 10.14026/j.cnki.0253-9705.2018.09.002
[25]	李冰强, 武文娟, 邓宇冠.环境影响评价机构独立性问题探析[J]. 晋阳学刊,2018(2):117-123. doi: 10.16392/j.cnki.14-1057/c.2018.02.017 LI B Q, WU W J, DENG Y G. A study on independence of environmental impact assessment agency[J]. Academic Journal of Jinyang,2018(2):117-123. doi: 10.16392/j.cnki.14-1057/c.2018.02.017
[26]	王金南, 包存宽.构建面向生态文明新时代的环境影响评价体系[J]. 环境影响评价,2022,44(4):6-11. doi: 10.14068/j.ceia.2022.04.002 WANG J N, BAO C K. Building environmental impact assessment system under the new-era of ecological civilization in China[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment,2022,44(4):6-11. doi: 10.14068/j.ceia.2022.04.002
[27]	Dunlap R, Mccright A. A widening gap: republican and democratic views on climate change[J]. Environment Science & Policy for Sustainable Development,2008,50(5):26-35.
[28]	GUBER D. A cooling climate for change?party polarization and the politics of global warming[J]. American Behavioral Scientist,2013,57:115-93.
[29]	CEQ. National environmental policy act implementing regulations revisions[S/OL]. (2022-04-20)[2022-06-01] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/04/20/2022-08288/national-environmental-policy-act-implementing-regulations-revisions.
[30]	von LUCKE F. Principled pragmatism in climate policy: the EU and changing practices of climate justice[J]. Political Geography,2021,86:102355. doi: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2021.102355
[31]	OBERTHÜR S, ROCHE KELLY C. EU leadership in international climate policy: achievements and challenges[J]. The International Spectator,2008,43(3):35-50. doi: 10.1080/03932720802280594
[32]	SCHREURS M A, TIBERGHIEN Y. Multi-level reinforcement: explaining European union leadership in climate[J]. Research Articles,2007(3):19-46.
[33]	European Commission. Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 amending Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment[S/OL]. [2022-06-01]. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/52/oj.
[34]	MCNULTY S L, GUERRA GARCIA G. Politics and promises: exploring fifteen years of Peru's participatory decentralization reform[J]. Public Organization Review,2019,19(1):45-64. doi: 10.1007/s11115-018-0419-5
[35]	周勇飞, 高利红.环境影响评价制度程序控权的理论归位与实现路径[J]. 江西社会科学,2020,40(10):172-181.
[36]	JOHNSON T. Public participation in China's EIA process and the regulation of environmental disputes[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,2020,81:106359. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2019.106359
[37]	WANG Z S, LI W F, LI Y S, et al. The "three lines one permit" policy: an integrated environmental regulation in China[J]. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,2020,163:105101. ⊕ doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105101