1、 0 外文翻译 原文 Industrial transformation in east asia Material Source:IHDP Update Author:David P.Angel and Michael T.Rock In the rapidly industrialising countries of East Asia,urban-industrial growth has been accompanied by lowincomeinequality, increases in per capita income and significant declines in
2、poverty and child mortality. This growth has also been accompanied by substantial increases in air and water pollution, resource degradation, escalating energy use,and attendant greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Most analysts agree that declining environmental quality within the region is closely tied
3、 to failures of policy and weakness of institutions. Where environmental regulatory institutions have been strengthened and well resourced, as, for example,in Singapore, Malaysia and Chinese Taipei (Taiwan), the result has been a reduction in industrial pollution, lan degradation and other environme
4、ntally damaging processes.However, especially within the lower income economies in the region, incremental improvements in environmental regulatory policy typically have been over-ridden by the scale effects of increased production, consumption and resource use. In response to these challenges, coun
5、tries have begun to explore additional approaches to improving the environmental performance of industry, including the direct integration of economic and environmental policy within a framework of what has been labelled policy integration.In this article we report on research that seeks to document
6、 achievements in one particular form of policy integration,i.e., the integration of environmental concerns into the mandate of economic development agencies within the region. Nowhere in the world is the challenge of industrial transformation of greater significance than in the rapidly industrializi
7、ng and urbanising economies of developing Asia. The share of industrial output in Asia increased from approximately 10% of global output in 1950 to 30% in 1995; its share is expected to reach 55% to 60% by 2025. Unless there are technological and other changes that reduce the energy, materials, wate
8、r and pollution intensities of industrial production, these absolute increases in industrial output will presage equally large increases in 1 resource use and pollution.Energy use in developing Asia, including India and China, is predicted to increase from 84.5quadrillion BTU in 2000 to 177.9 quadri
9、llion BTU in 2020. GHG emissions in Asia are expected to more than double over the next 20 years. Sometime between 2015 and 2020, Asia will likely overtake the OECD countries as the largest source worldwide of GHG emissions. Understanding the factors that determine the rate of adoption by industry o
10、f technologies that are less energy, materials and pollution intensive is thus a critical policy priority for East Asia and the other rapidly industrialising economies of Asia. Due to its openness to trade and investment and the pace of economic change, East Asia has emerged as a test case for putti
11、ng in place policies and institutional frameworks that harness contemporary processes of economic globalization with the twin goals of environmental improvement and poverty reduction. As within the OECD economies, the foundation of the policy approach towards improving the environmental performance
12、of industry within East Asia is environmental regulation. During the 1970s and 1980s, many of the developing economies of Asia established an institutional framework of environmental laws and associated institutions of environmental monitoring and regulation. The resources available to these institu
13、tions, and the effectiveness of monitoring and enforcement of environmental laws, vary widely within the region. In many of the higher income countries strong institutions of environmental protection are in place. Traditional command and control regulatory policies have increasingly been supplemente
14、d by market-based policy instruments and by so-called third generation policy approaches based upon performance measurement and information disclosure. In an effort to improve the environmental performance of industry, several countries in the region have also turned to institutions that traditional
15、ly have not played a large role in environmental protection, including agencies of economic and industrial development. Policy makers are now attempting to internalise environmental considerations within the basic economic decision making of firms and industries, and within the policies of the econo
16、mic and industrial development agencies that bear primary responsibility for promoting industrial and urban growth. Interest in linking economic and environmental performance within agencies of economic development has a number of roots. First, agencies of economic development in many cases work clo
17、sely with firms and industries in efforts to improve technological and managerial capability. Second, economic development 2 agencies have access to a wider range of resources and policy tools that can be brought to bear on improving economic and environmental performance, including policies related
18、 to investment approval, market access, facility licensing or land-use planning. Third, in contrast to the relatively weak position of many freestanding environmental regulatory agencies within developing Asia, economic and industrial development agencies typically are well resourced and have import
19、ant positions of influence with respect to industrial and development planning in industrialising economies. Stated another way, economic and industrial development agencies are embedded in the economic process in the fundamentals of investment, technology development and trade in ways that nascent
20、environmental agencies typically are not. However, many observers suggest that the economic priorities of economic and industrial development agencies are in fundamental conflict with environmental improvement, and that efforts to integrate environmental goals into the mandate of these agencies is d
21、estined to fail. Some of the earliest examples of policy integration are seen in the first-tier East Asian newly industrialized economies of Singapore and Chinese Taipei. Economic development agencies in both of these economies were heavily involved in strengthening industrial capacity, promoting te
22、chnology upgrading and developing firm-based capacities for innovation and improvement. These economies took a similar approach to improving the environmental performance of firms and industries in the region. In Singapore and Chinese Taipei, policy makers recognized that environmental success depen
23、ded on linking new environmental agencies with decision-makers in more powerful economic development and industrial promotion agencies. Close relations with those agencies proved critical in gaining support for environmental improvement in government and business and identifying cost effective abate
24、ment options as well as opportunities for lowering the energy, water and material intensities of production. Singapore gave its Ministry of the Environment (MOE) an important seat at the industrial policy table by linking the promotional decisions of its investment promotion agency, the Economic Dev
25、elopment Board, and the infrastructure decisions of its premier infrastructure agency, the Jurong Town Corporation, to a requirement that firms receiving support meet the environmental requirements of the MOE. In Chinese Taipei, the Industrial Development Board (IDB) provided tax incentives to firms
26、 for the purchase of pollution control equipment. IDB also provided assistance to firms to engage in a global scan of best available technologies and encouraged firms to meet 3 international industry best practice standards in environmental performance. It invested in the creation of a state-of-the-
27、art research programme on the energy, water, materials and pollution intensities of Taiwanese industries in the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI), the premier science and technology institute in Chinese Taipei. Figures 1 and 2 show two measures of air quality in Chinese Taipei for the
28、period 1985-2001. The first indicator, small particulate matter (PM10), decreased from 96.62 micrograms per cubic meter in 1985 to 57.87 micrograms in 2001. The pollution standards index (PSI), which measures the percentage of days in which air quality rises above a PSI of 100, decreased from 13.72%
29、 of days in 1985 to 3.42% in 2001.Many factors contributed to this improvement, including a restructuring of the sectoral composition of industry, the movement of some high polluting industries out of the country, fuel switching, and tighter regulation of mobile sources of air pollution. A major con
30、tributor to the reduction in industrial emissions was the work of the IDB and ITRI in promoting the adoption of pollution control technology and subsequently a shift toward clean production. IDB funded detailed economic and engineering studies within key industrial sectors, such as cement, steel and
31、 textiles, seeking to benchmark international best practice to identify cost effective technologies that would reduce resource and pollution intensities. One example of these policies is the improvement in water efficiencies in the paper industry in Chinese Taipei. Twenty years ago paper mills in Ch
32、inese Taipei used approximately 100 tons of water in the production of 1 ton of paper.Today most paper mills use 10 to 15 tons of water per ton of paper, and IDB is working with industry to reduce water use to below 10 tons. One of the most significant efforts to integrate economic and environmental
33、 policy in East Asia is the Model City programme in China. Building upon an earlier urban environmental indicators programme, the State Environmental Protection Agency in China has launched a programme that commits cities to achieving specific near term goals for up to 27 environmental parameters, r
34、anging from ambient air quality to treatment of hazardous waste. The key operational element of the Model City programme is the coordination of activities across the full range of economic and industrial development agencies within the city, under the direction of the mayor. In the coastal city of Q
35、uingdao, a key priority for the programme is the reduction of sulphur dioxide emissions from coal-fired boilers. Over the past three years the city has eliminated more than 2200 coal-fired boilers through a 4 combination of factory closures, fuel switching, and tax and financing incentives. Given th
36、e rate of urban-industrial growth in developing Asia, improvements in environmental quality depend on securing dramatic improvements in the energy, resource and pollution intensity of economic activity on Industrial Transformation. In seeking to improve the environmental performance of industry, eco
37、nomies in the region are experimenting with a variety of alternative policy approaches that go well beyond traditional environmental regulation. These policy experiments offer the prospect that industrializing economies in Asia can take a different path to improving environmental performance from th
38、at pursued by OECD economies over the past several decades. We are currently engaged in ongoing research that seeks to document the approach taken in these policy initiatives, as well as the results achieved in several East Asian economies. 译文 东亚产业转型 资料来源： IHDP Update 杂志 作者：大卫 P.安吉尔，迈克尔 T.瑞克 在东亚快速工业
39、化的国家中，城市工业化的增长一直伴随着低收入不平等，人均收入增加以及显著死亡率和贫困的下降。这种增长还伴随着空气和水的污染的大幅上升，资源退化，加剧了能源的消耗，以及随之而来的温室气体（ GHG）的排放。多数分析师认为，减少环境质量在一定的范围内是迫于政策的错误和体制的弱点。有些地方的环境监管部门一直在加强和储备，例如新加坡、马来西亚和中国台北（台湾），结果一直是工业污染，局部恶化，以及其 他环境问题的产生过程。然而，特别是在该地区的低收入经济体中，在环境监管的逐步改善通常已经被增加生产，消费和资源利用的规模效应所凌驾。为应对这些挑战，世界各国已开始探索其他的方法来提高行业的环保性能，包括在一
40、个直接的在经济和环境的一体化的集成和环境政策。在本文中，我们的研究报告力求达成一种文件和政策一体化的成果，即把环境问题纳入区域经济发展机构的职权内。 在世界上没有任何一个地方的产业转型所面临的挑战比起正在快速工业化和城市化的亚洲经济体更加富有意义。亚洲工业产值的比重由 1950 年的全球产值的约 10%增加到 1995年全球产值的 30%，它的出口比重到 2025年将达到 55%到 60%。除非有其他科技的因素或挑战来减缓经济，原材料，水，和工业产值的污染强度。这些在工业产值的绝对增长将预示着同样的在资源利用和污染方面的增长。在发展中的亚洲，资源的利用，包括印度和中国，被预计将从 20005
41、年的 84.5 万亿 BTU 增加到 2020 年的约 177.9 万亿 BTU。亚洲的温室气体的排放量预计在接下来的 20 年增加一倍以上。在 2015 年到 2020 年的某个时候，亚洲将要超过经合组织国际成为全球温室气体排放量最大的地区。了解确定技术产业的采用率的 因素是低能源和材料的消耗，低的污染密集是东亚和其他快速工业化的亚洲经济体的关键的政策重点。由于其在贸易和投资的开放度和经济改革的步伐，东亚已经成为在推行以改善和减少贫困为双重目标的政策和体制框架的一个测试案例。 由于经合组织经济体系内，朝着提高东亚区域内行业的环境绩效的政策方法的基础是环境监管。在 20 世纪 70 年代和 8
42、0 年代期间，许多发展中的亚洲经济体建立一个环境监测和监管的相关体系的法律体制和体制框架。这些机构的资源的可用性和环境监测和执法的有效性，在区域内有很大的不同。在许多高收入的国家强有力的环保组织是 非常到位的。传统的命令和控制监管政策越来越多地被以市场为基础的政策工具和所谓的第三代的基于环境措施和信息的公开的政策方针所辅助。为了努力地提高产业的环保绩效，该地区的一些的国家转变那种传统上没有在环境保护中发挥作用的的体系，包括工业和经济发展的机构。政策制定者正在尝试内部化环境考虑，在制定企业和行业基本经济决策内和在推动产业和城市发展承担主要责任的经济和产业发展机构的政策内。 在联系经济和经济发展的
43、机构内的环境绩效的兴趣有许多的根源。首先，经 济发展机构在许多情况下与企业紧密合作努力提高技术和管理能力。其次，经济发展机构获得的资源和政策工具，可以提高所承受经济的发展和环境的绩效，包括有关的投资审批，市场准入，设施许可证或土地使用规划。第三，相比在发展中的亚洲国家内的相对独立的环境监管机构，经济和工业发展机构通常有很好的资源并能在产业经济领域的产业和发展计划发挥重要的影响。另一种方式说，经济和工业的发展嵌入在经济的发展过程中的，在投资的基础，技术发展与贸易，新的环境机构的方式通常没有。然而，许多专家认为，经济和工业发展机构的经济优先事项是与环境改善 的根本冲突，把环境目标融入经济机构目标的
44、努力注定是要失败的。 一些政策一体化的例子最早在一些一线的东亚新兴工业化经济体新加坡和中国台北被看到。经济发展机构同这些经济体一起都积极参与加强工业能力，促进技术升级和发展企业发展创新的能力。这些区域内的经济体采取了类似的方法来提高企业和产业的环境绩效。在新加坡和中国台北，决策者认识到环境的成功依赖于联系新的经济机构和更强大的经济发展的决策者以及促进机构。与这些机构的密切联系证明获得政府和企业在环境提高的重要性，以及确定成本效益减排方案同降低能源、水和材料的生产强度同 样重要。新加坡给其环境部（教育部）重要一席在联系投资贸易机构，经济发展局，最初的基础设施机6 构的决定，玉郎镇的需求表明企业获
45、得的支持符合教育部的要求。在中国台北，工业发展局（ IDB）为那些购买环境控制的设备提供税务优惠。美洲发展银行还向企业提供援助，在全球聘用现有的最佳技术并鼓励企业符合国际工业最佳的实践标准在环境绩效内。它投资一个国家在能源、水、材料和工业技术研究院（工研院）的环保技术的研究，在台北的最初的科学技术体系。 图 1 和图 2 显示了两个措施，中国台北在 1985-2001 年间的空气质量。第一个指标，小颗 粒物（ PM10），从 1985 年的 96.62 微克每立方米下降到 2001年的 57.87 微克每立方米。标准污染指数（ PSI），度量空气质量高于 100PSI 的天数比率，从 1985
46、 年的 13.72%下降到 2001 年的 3.42%。许多因素促成了这一改变，包括对工业部门的重组，高污染企业移出国外，燃料转换，更严格的流动污染源管制。一个主要的在减少工业排放的贡献者是伊斯兰开发银行和工研院在促进污染控制技术的采用和其后向清洁生产转变的工作。美洲开发银行资助的重点行业内的经济和工程研究，例如水泥、钢铁和纺织品，寻求国际最佳实践的 基准，以确定符合成本效益的技术将降低资源和污染的强度。这些政策的一个例子是中国台北的造纸工业的一个水的效率的改善。 20 年前台北造纸厂使用约 100 吨水生产 1 吨纸，业界与美洲开发银行的合作减少水的较少水的利益 10 吨。 最重要的融入东亚
47、经济和环境政策的努力之一是在中国是城市示范项目。在以前的城市计划环境指标之上，中国国家环保局已经启动了一项计划，承诺为实现城市环境多达 27 项目标的靠进，从环境空气质量到危险废物处理。这个关键的城市示范项目的方案是城市的产业发展机构和全系列经济的协会，在市长的指挥下。在海滨城市青岛， 关键的优先事项时从燃煤和锅炉中产生的二氧化硫的减少。在过去三年全市已经消灭了 2200 个燃煤锅炉通过倒闭工厂的重组，燃料转换，税收和融资鼓励。 由于亚洲发展中城市工业增长率，环境质量的显著改善取决于确保深入的在能源、资源和经济活动污染强度的改良 基于产业转型。在寻求提高产业的环保性能，该地区的经济体正在试验各种替代的政策方法，这种方法将超越传统的环境法规。这种政策试验提供了一个亚洲工业化经济体可以采用不同的路径，以改善在过去几十年依靠经合组织来追求环境绩效的前景。目前，我们正在从事一项为寻求在这些政策措施中所 采取的做法记录的研究，同时在几个东亚经济体已经取得了成果。
