“垃圾全球化”凸显制度落差
唐昊
2007年2月12日
很多人称全球垃圾贸易显示出了西方国家伪善的环保做法。是国家还是企业应为垃圾的跨国流动负责任？唐昊说，在此问题相当严重的今天，政府、企业、国际社会应努力遏制这一现象的蔓延。
"发达国家和发展中国家，虽然同享经济全球化，但政治和社会发展却极不平衡，后者的环保立法、行政环境远不如发达国家。在这种情况下，发达国家才有可能凭借其制度优势，将污染危机转嫁到制度不发达的发展中国家去。"
洋垃圾源源流入发展中国家
据英国天空电视台日前报道，世界最大巨轮爱玛·马士基号载着17万吨垃圾驶进中国广东南海联滘村。这个长年以废物回收作为地方经济支撑产业的地方，如今是烟囱冒黑烟、河涌流黑水、垃圾堆成小山，被污染的土地和水100年都难以恢复。此话题在中国和英国立刻引起了强烈反响。
其实，洋垃圾的危害早已不是什么新鲜话题。上世纪60、70年代以来，西方国家就开始将未经处理的垃圾转移到发展中国家，并引发了巨大的灾害性后果。2006年8月，一艘荷兰公司的租轮将数百吨有毒垃圾运抵科特迪瓦，导致7名当地居民死亡，24人住院，近4万人不同程度受伤。
对于类似现象，网上评论一边倒地认为这是西方国家在环保问题上执行双重标准。但事实上，倾倒洋垃圾不是国家行为，而是企业行为：
对垃圾出口企业来说，这样做既可以赚取政府的垃圾处理费，又减少了垃圾处理成本，避开政府监管，还能从国外进口商那里获得出口收入；对发展中国家企业来说，则可补充其生产原料不足，如中国是世界第二大塑料制品国，作为原料的合成树脂市场价格为1.1万元/吨，而进口废塑料却只有4000元/吨左右；此外，对于垃圾分拣工人来说，这种肮脏的工作也比在地里干活要挣得多。在电视台对本次“洋垃圾”事件的采访中，一位陈姓村民说，种地每年的收入在2000元左右，而处理垃圾则可月入800元。只要有这样的价格落差，就会有人不顾他人的死活而去做垃圾生意，也会有人不顾自己的健康而去承担这样的工作。这是人们违反不了的经济规律。
制度落差导致垃圾顺流而下
但是，从另一个角度来看，这又不纯粹是一个经济问题。可想而知，在英国，如果没有严厉的环保制度，处理垃圾也同样可以赚钱的话，就没有企业会把垃圾倾倒到中国。正是因为发达国家在环保事业上法制完备、社会监督完善、政府行政到位，垃圾处理和排污需交纳高额费用，这些洋垃圾在其本国才无处容身。
可在中国，垃圾处理成本之低、利润之高令人吃惊，废旧品回收成为一个暴利行业！同时政府监管又极为宽松，大多只是罚款了事，而且这些罚款直接进入财政，那些受污染危害的公民却不能从这些罚款中得到合理补偿，制造污染的企业和人也不会受到致命打击。
发达国家和发展中国家，虽然同享经济全球化，但政治和社会发展却极不平衡，后者的环保立法、行政环境远不如发达国家。在这种情况下，发达国家才有可能凭借其制度优势，将污染危机转嫁到制度不发达的发展中国家去。所以，经济落差、环保落差的实质是制度落差。
落差导致流动。经济全球化加大制度与制度之间的互动，制度落差也由此更为凸显。在制度落差下，那些不守规矩、寻求冒险的海外投资会滚滚而来，洋垃圾同样也会滚滚而来。
完善制度是“垃圾全球化”的解决之道
目前垃圾跨国流动问题已经相当严重，政府、企业、国际社会应做出持续性努力以遏制这一现象的继续和蔓延。
首先要完善国际公约，引进第三方力量。对这种跨国问题，联合国或者由世界环保团体制定的国际制度应介入，调节这一由于制度落差而造成的对发展中国家的负面势能。对于发展中国家，应有第三方能协助和分担其环境保护成本。
其次要控制洋垃圾产生及泛滥的上下游环节。在本次洋垃圾事件中，从严格遵循国际公约的角度来看，英国政府必须承担监管不严的责任，把垃圾运回去；并与中国地方政府协商更有效的垃圾跨国流动管理机制。同时，中国只有通过制度建设提高垃圾制造和垃圾入口的成本，缩小制度落差，才有可能从源头上解决这个问题。否则不但洋垃圾问题难以解决，其他“洋灾难”也会“顺流而下”。
目前中国政府已经认识到法律空白所造成的危害，《固体废物法》正在紧急立法进程中。应该说，类似法律和行政举措的出台将会减少中国目前固体废物进口管理体制中存在的弊端，降低“洋垃圾”对环境的威胁。但令人担心的是，法律法规的出台和执行的前景不容乐观，垃圾处理企业可能不会消失而是大规模转场。因为这些举措牵扯到的是垃圾回收产业、塑料制造业等这些在中国仍存在暴利的行业。
还有一个最重要、最根本的举措就是重建制度发展的社会动力。在西方国家，突破利益集团阻碍、改变政府的不作为、制定严厉的环保政策，是在公民与社会的强力介入下发生的。西方各国在上世纪六七十年代发生多起公害事件，并引发了大规模的群众运动，由此才建立和完善了环保制度和公民社会监督环保的传统。
绿色和平组织等公民团体、媒体监督、严厉的环保法规、负责任的地方政府，这些应是中国环保事业发展的必要前提。如果有媒体、环保NGO的监督和地方政府的负责任，像南海这样受“洋垃圾”污染达十几年之久的地方，就不至于为制度落差付出如此巨大的代价，更不必付出得如此之久。
唐昊，广州学者，擅长时政评论。
除非其他申明,本网站及其内容受知识共享组织的“署名-非商业性使用-禁止演绎"2.0 英国：英格兰和威尔士协议和 2.5 中国大陆协议的保护。
Unless otherwise stated, this work is under Creative Commons' Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 England & Wales License and 2.5 China License.
参与讨论 COMMENTS
参与讨论
我建议读者点击这里到Salon.com上阅读Andrew Leonard的有趣的观点。它把全球的垃圾交易和中国对海外资源的需求联系了起来。
Andrew说唐昊在文章中指出，垃圾贸易的问题比蒋高明（在中外对话上谈有关问题时候）的民族主义观点要复杂。唐昊在文章中还谈到了无规则的全球贸易。
唐昊提出了问题：这样会如何来影响我们对中国和非洲通常无规则贸易的看法？
I advise readers to look at Andrew Leonard's interesting point on Salon.com here , which links the global waste trade to China's quest for resources overseas. He says that Hao Tang's article complicates the simple nationalism of Gaoming Jiang's recent column on chinadialogue, and raises questions about unregulated, globalised trade. The question he then raises is: how does this affect our view on China's often under-regulated trade with Africa? -SL
不错，垃圾贸易不仅仅是谁对谁错的问题，各种原因非常复杂，唐先生的解读非常深入。
Indeed, waste trade is not only a matter of who wrongs. Reasons behind each position are extremely complicated. And Mr Tang’s untangling thereof, is very thorough.
针对中国的洋垃圾贸易，不仅仅是英国。无论是什么形式的入侵，都是八国联军式的，一个集团对一个集团，先进对落后，发达对发展。
In connection with China’s foreign trade in waste, we should remember that it is not only England. No matter which form the invasion takes on, all of them are comparable to those led by the Eight-Nation Alliance. It is one group pitched against another; the more advanced against those lagging behind; developed versus developing nations.
这篇文章的作者竟然费了这么多口舌去说是英国的更有力度的环境法规迫使英国公司向海外倾泻垃圾。对于这点本人实在不敢苟同。总体来说，这些西方国家公司就是如此行事。
垃圾回收虽然并不是什么光彩的工作，但是仍然会制造工作机会，给政府带来更多税收收入。如果发展中国家的政府能把对垃圾处理的收费定价更高，他们就能增加收入，减少垃圾流入并且同时还能获得廉价的生产原材料（运入的垃圾）。
在这个文章的作者身处的国家，公司管理者不可以随意行动，所以他并不明白为什么西方国家的企业管理者可以不用向政府申请就可以在外国任意妄为。nanheyangrouchuan
The article's auther goes so far as to claim that the UK's tougher environmental laws force companies to dump waste overseas and not reprocess it at home.
Utter rubbish, it is the bottom line that forces UK and western companies in general to do this. Recycling, though unglamorous, still creates jobs, thus creating more tax revenue and increasing consumer spending in a developing country. Perhaps if developing countries made waste disposal fees painfully high, they could increase revenue, reduce total waste inflow and still have access to cheap sources of raw materials that are brought to their country as waste.
These writers come from countries where executives aren't free to act so they can't understand that western managers don't need to ask their gov't to do things outside of their countries'
borders.
nanheyangrouchuan
经济全球化,在缺乏政治全球监管的情况下,总会造成意想不到的灾难.推动全球垃圾贸易监管的责任在发达国家——那些从垃圾贸易中获得了直接或者间接好处的国家. -fying
Without a world surveillance structure, economic globalisation will cause unexpected disasters. Setting up such a surveillance structure is the responsibility of developed countries, which are exactly those, who gain from the waste trade, either directly or indirectly. -fying
给评论4:你没有看明白作者在说什么,事实上,无论是在中国还是在西方,公司管理者当然是不可以随意行动的，因为他们的行为在很多时候都是不负责任的,所以必须要有相应的法律监管.在跨国的垃圾贸易中,正是因为缺乏国际监管才导致西方国家的企业管理者可以在外国任意妄为.
此外,垃圾回收虽然会制造工作机会,但从长远来看,其惨重的代价比这些短期利益要大得多,垃圾贸易是在透支这些国家人们的未来.鼓励垃圾贸易的人根本没有为这些人们真正的长远利益着想,强调这些短期利益实际上是一种伪善.
文章中说因为制度落差是无法在短时间内弥补的,所以要加强国际社会对垃圾贸易的监管,通过国际社会的努力来弥补这种制度落差.在现有条件下,这是缓解垃圾贸易对发展中国家危害的不多的可行的办法之一.因此推动这种垃圾贸易的国际监管制度的建立,是关心环保的人士应该努力的方向.
You did not get the idea of the author. In fact, no matter in China or in the West, executives are not free to act because at most time they behave in an irresponsible way, so related laws are needed to regulate their work.
In the international trash trade, the lack of international regulations causes the irresponsible businesses conducted by western executives overseas. Although recycling creates jobs and it brings in short-term profits (for developing countries), it has huge negative impacts on the development of those nations.
Those encouraging trash trade do not really care for these people’s long-term well-being at all. Emphasizing short-term benefits is actually a hypocritical act. The article says that the gap between the systems cannot be filled shortly, so international efforts are needed to enhance regulations.
Under current situation, to strengthen international relations is one of the practical approaches to help reduce the impacts on developing countries by trash imports from the West. People who really care for the environment protection should strive to build international rules to regulate the trash trade.
从垃圾贸易的长链条中的每个环节来分析，各方都有责任。全球化和制度差异带来了资源的重新配置和流动，不是民族主义和情绪化那么简单的事。解决问题要从制度和激励机制上找出路。
由此联想到垃圾（或叫做另一种资源）的贸易与碳交易可有一比。京都议定书下的Clean Development Mechanism CDM同样反映的是制度差异和减排二氧化碳成本差异的问题，力图实现联合国监管下的双赢机制，把发达国家的高成本减排义务放在发展中国家以较低成本实现。为什么CDM能得到联合国和各国的鼓励和提倡？无害化做得好？
If decomposing the long chain of waste trading and analyzing each one of the components, we will find that all stakeholders should claim responsible for this result. It is globalisation and institutional differences that brought in the reallocating flow of resources. It is way more complicated than the interpretation of "being national and emotional". Problem solving should start from institutional factors and the design of incentive policies.
Actually waste (or, an alternative resource) trading is parallel to carbon trading in a sense.
The CDM (Clean Development Mechanism) under Kyoto is also a reflection of the existing differences on institutions and abatement costs of CO2 across different countries. It strives to follow the win-win approach under the supervision of UN and to shift the mitigation responsibilities from high-cost advanced economies to low-cost developing countries. How can CDM get so much support from the UN and its member countries? Good at making it harmless?
国际上针对有害废弃物和无害废弃物贸易有不同的规定。根据《巴塞尔公约》，发达国家（经济发展组织成员国）向发展中国家（非经济发展组织成员国）出口废物的行为是被禁止的。
有害及无害废弃物贸易需遵守以下三个条件。
第一，通过国际或国内的立法，发达国家和发展中国家的企业必须对其破坏环境的行为负责，无论这些行为发生在哪里。（这项针对跨国公司的法规由于公司的游说力而变得在政治上不可行）。
第二，针对有害废物贸易的国际条款有待加强。比如，明确《巴塞尔公约》中有害废物贸易禁令（修正条款）的法律地位，并扩大对电子垃圾和拆船行为的管制。
第三，中国需改善自身处理无害废弃物的规章制度，并在进口原料是多考虑环境因素。虽然这些会让企业遭受损失，但是却可以带来长期的环境利益。但是中国政府和公众是否能够对此达成协议还有待观望。
-Andrew Stevenson
International regulations distinguish between hazardous and non-hazardous waste. Under the Basel Convention, hazardous waste exports from developed (OECD) countries to developing (non-OECD) countries, including China, are banned.
Tackling the issue of trade in both types of waste requires that three conditions are satisfied.
One, developed and developing countries must ensure that their corporations are held to account for environmentally destructive actions no matter where they occur. This could be done internationally (binding code of conduct for transnational corporations; but this is politically unlikely, given the power of the corporate lobby) or by national legislation.
Two, international rules governing hazardous waste trade need to be tightened - for example, clarifying the legal status of the international ban on hazardous waste shipments under the Basel Convention (the Ban Amendment), and extending controls over e-waste and shipbreaking.
Three, China needs to improve its regulation of non-hazardous waste processing at home, and put far more emphasis on environmental considerations when sourcing resources abroad. Both will require accepting higher costs and potential losses to business competitors, in return for huge but diffuse health and environmental benefits. It remains to be seen whether either the Chinese government or public is willing to strike this deal.
- Andrew Stevenson
我是一名中国大学生，我爱中国，但是我更爱我生存的这个地球。我希望中国能干净起来，绿色化，但是我更喜欢整个地球都能变干净变绿色...不论所有那些“谁在利用谁”“全球化的利与弊”等等的争辩，但看谁是真正的关心环境和地球胜过金钱和政治的？？？让我这么说吧，是的，也许中国正在快速的被污染，但是至少她在减少着大量的本要倾倒进海里的垃圾。我才不管那是英国的领海或是美国的领海，归根结底，这是我们的海！！！！！我不是说其他国家应该把垃圾运到中国好自享一个更加干净的国土。但想想看，如果中国在为世界做清洁并且能同时赚到钱，那为什么不做呢？为什么我们要把问题搞得这么复杂？？？？？？也许只是我太年轻太愚钝，但这就是我的想法。
I am a chinese uni student, i love china, but no more than the planet im living on;i would love china to be clean and green, but i want the whole earth to be clean and green even more..
despite all the "whos taking adevantage of whom" "pros and cons of globlisation" bla bla bla debates, who is really thinking about the enviornment or the globe other than money and politics????
let me put it this way, yes, maybe china is getting polluted rapidly, but at least she is reducing a huge amount of rubbish that was supposed to be dumped in the ocean. who cares if its the UK's ocean, or the States' ocean. in the end its OUR ocean!!!!!!!!
im not saying other countries should ship their rubbish to china so they can have a cleaner country. but come on, if china is cleaning up the world and making some money at the same time, then why not? why do we have to make the problem so complicated??????
maybe im just young and dumb, but thats what i think anyway
给评论8:
你好,我是一名在新西兰读书的中国学生.平时我一有空就出去camping, hiking, 因为新西兰的环境实在是太好了. 跟我住一起的有两个当地人, 他们告诉我, 新西兰处理不掉的垃圾, 就往中国运. 国际上是明文规定禁止这种垃圾运输, 但大家都在这样做...:(
顺便, 请问Andrew Stevenson先生是不是 Kiwi Tracks 的作者?
to Comment 8:
Hello, I'm a Chinese student in New Zealand. I'd like to go camping and hiking whenever I have time, as the nature in New Zealand really looks great. There are two locals living together with me. They told me that the waste that can't be processed by New Zealand are shipped to China. People are doing this, although this type of waste shipment is clearly forbidden by the law....:(
btw, may I ask whether Andrew Stevenson is the author of Kiwi Tracks?
Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated.
我们建议你在评论后署名, 以便其他浏览者能更好地与你交流。你没有必要使用真名，但你的署名将会协助我们维护网站的信息交流畅通。
We suggest you add your name to your comments so that other readers can respond to you more easily. You don’t have to use your real name, but providing a name will help make communication clearer for other forum participants.