终于感觉政府的环保部门开始做实事了，粗略地看了一下几个省级环保局的网站，都有公众参与的部分，或咨询或投诉，这挺好的！
只是，有的网站要找到这个咨询或投诉的地方，真是很困难了，要是更醒目一点就好了，就像湖北环境保护网上那样，放在最上方的位置。
Juliet

Reguarding the project of the State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA), I've seen some websites of the Local Environment Departments, they all have a corner for public participation, to give advice and make complaints: I think it' s great!

Although in some of them, it is quite difficult to find this corner, if you open your eyes you can often see it. Especially the website of the Hubei Environment Department could do better at making it more evident.

Juliet

信息不对称造成环境风险就和信息不对称造成金融风险一样，那是经济学中证明了的，所以强调环境信息公开，不如引用教科书来的好。
其二，我曾经看过国家环保总局弄的环境影响评价中的公众参与，既觉得不伦不类，且觉得操作性极差，这是环保部门引导带来的恶果。
我觉得真要信息公开，首先要告诉大家的是，环境保护部门长期监控和掌握的信息有哪些？把他们列出来，让公众讨论哪些可以和能够及时的公开，环境保护部门也该及时互动告诉大家他们同意哪些可以公开并如何公开和如何获取。或者告诉大家，哪些环境信息涉及到国家安全不能公开，大家就知道哪些信息能够公开并容易获得了。做不到这些，发多少条例都是虚假和形式。
我觉得，国家环保总局首先应该公布给大家一些东西，已示垂范：
如：全国每年进口的进口可以利用做原料的废物，批了多少许可证，多少量，涉及到哪些企业，收了多少手续费，实际进口了多少，利用了多少。这样公众才能确实关注并监督洋垃圾的问题。
再如，总局的财政经费花了多少用于全国性科技研究，这些研究被总局的下属研究部门用了多少，拨给地方多少，解释地方搞国家层面的研究为什么总是没有经费？而别的部则非常充裕。
再再如：要告诉公众，污染物没有减排，而各地环境空气质量则在改善中这个结论是怎么得到的？需要数据的支持，公开一下。
如果国家总局连这样的公开都做不好，再印多少条例也是形式的东西。
然而，我并不是泼马军先生的冷水，我总觉得，环境推进信息公开，应该在一些微观的层面上逐步推进以至于正常化，才是我们应该做的。

（不流明）

Economics texts already prove -- information asymmetry causes risks to the environment just like it does financial risks

So stressing the importance of transparent environmental information is better using quotes from textbooks.

I've also seen the results of public participation by China's environmetal protection bureau in assessing climate effects, it was neither here nor there, nor actionable, this is a fiasco in the hands of the environmetal protection authorities.

If information must be publicly available, what should first be made known is:

What information do the authorities know?

Let them list it, let the public discuss what can be released, the authorities should also let people know which information can be released, how it can be accessed, or let the public know which information is related to public security and cannot be made public

Otherwise, everything else is just window dressing.

The environmental protection authorities should let everyone know, for example: China’s imports of refuse (used as raw materials), how many permits for how much were given, which companies are involved, how much in handling fees was charged, actual imports, usage. This would raise awareness of the “foreign rubbish” issue. Or, how much of the EPA’s budget was used for national research, how much was used by its subsidiaries, local governments, why do we always hear complaints about lack of funding for such research? While other government departments are flush with cash. Or: tell the public if there was no reduction in emissions, why do local government reports say the air quality is improving? We need factual, statistical backup. If the bureau can’t even release this sort of information, no amount of clauses and regulations will help the cause. Mind you, I’m not pouring cold water on Mr Ma Jun, I just feel, the public availability of environmental information should be gradually realized at a micro level, that’s something we should be doing.

正如马主任所说的那样, 这真是一个里程碑式的环保法令. 环境信息公开能提高公众环保认识与意识, 对地方政府和环保局工作促进并监督, 并在法规与企业形象两方面对企业环保质量予以压力. 其作用将无可置疑.

但我们也必须看到, 这只是环保道路上万里长征的重要一步. 在具体实施也执行上还会有很多难题和变数. 这是解释了为什么这只是 “试行”法令.

困难一: 各个环保局的水平, 能力不一. 只怕很多环保局都没有所需要资金,设备和能力, 去获取相关的信息, 更不用说公之与众. 这有与地方政府的财政支持能力, 重视程度有关.

困难二: 不同地区, 不同经济结构, 不同发展规律阶段, 造成不同地区不同比例的污染. 对于某些污染严重的地区, 多排污同时意味着企业的增收, 地方经济的发展规律. 传统发展模式与环保有不可调和的冲突. 试想, 如果不改变地方政府单纯的经济指标考核方式, 这些地方政府如何会有动力去支持当地的环保工作. 更有可能发生的是当地政府对环保工作的阻挠. 对与发展严重落后地区, 发展是大主题的情况下, 如何处理好发展与环保和谐并进, 是一门艺术, 不是环保法令就能解决的.

困难三: 企业信息的真实度. 政府能相信企业信息披露的多少? 更不用说公众了. 这不止在中国, 在发达国家也是一个难题. 欧盟正是因为相信了企业提供的信息, 对七大污染行业大量多给了2004-2007间的CO2 排放额, 结果从2006年到2007年, 每吨CO2 (2004-2007给予的排放额) 的交易价几乎降为零. 2006年英国CO2排放量增了1.25% (2005年降了0.01%). 根据BBC的特别报道, 两年内, 整个欧盟CO2排放也增长1%至2%. 欧盟吸取教训后, 怕不再会听取企业, 行业的一面之词去设指标. 我认为, 其将任用中立的, 享有盛誉的评估质询企业代为从事相关的评估, 并监督. 在中国, 这类质询业尚在萌芽阶段, 主要力量还是环保局, 如何保证信息质量, 评估质量是一道难题.

但是, 重要的是, 我们走出了这重要的一步, 困难与机遇并存!

天明

Just as Mr. Ma says, this is a cornerstone among environmental protection regulations. Opening the environmental information to the public can raise the social awareness, supervise and empower the local government, and push the enterprises to meet environmental standard by using the legal instrument as well as building company images. It will undoubtedly take significant effect. However, we must realize that it is only a step, though important, in our a-thousand-mile long way. Even that small step would face a lot of difficulty and challenges in implementation process. This partially explains why it’s just in a “trial period”. Challenges NO.1, the capability of Environment Protection Bureaus (EPBs) varies. I’m afraid that quite a lot EPBs lack funding, equipment and capacity to implement the regulation. They might also not be able to access relevant information, let alone open to the public. It’s highly related to the support from local governments. Challenges NO.2, different level of pollution shall be attributed to different areas with diverse economic structure in various stages of social development. For those highly polluted areas, releasing more pollutants means more revenue and economic profit. Thus the traditional way of development is intrinsically in a conflict with environmental protection. Think about it, if the local government is purely using economic growth as the assessment standard, how could they be motivated to protect the local environment rather than to find fault with the protection work, which is likely to happen in this political setting? For the less developed areas, how to balance between development and environmental protection shall be a matter of arts, which could not be solely handled by law. Challenges NO. 3, how real is the information given by the enterprises? How much can the government trust the company? How much can we as ordinary citizens trust them? It’s a difficult issue as well as in advanced economy. EU mistrusted the information, thus allowed seven industries more quota for CO2 emission between 2004 and 2007. This almost eliminated CO2 emission cost for them between 2006 and 2007. Britain, in 2006, after 0.01% decrease in 2005, increased its CO2 emission by 1.25%. According to BBC’s special report,CO2 emission in EU has generally increased by 1-2% within two years. Learning a serious lesson, EU might not easily trust the enterprises any more. I assume, it would hire neutral assessment agency with high reputation to evaluate and supervise. In China, such type of agencies is still in the very beginning. The main force is still the EPB. How to guarantee the quality of information is a real challenge. But, importantly, we take a significant step. The challenges is always with the opportunity!

密尔1859年在[论自由]中谈到言论不自由时说:

“如果发表的意见是正确的，则人们改正谬误获得真理的机会就会被剥夺；如果意见是错误的，人们也不能对真理有比较清晰的理解和比较鲜明的印象，因为这样的理解和印象只有在真理同谬误的斗争中才能获得。”

In his 1859 text "On Liberty" John Stewart Mill while talking about freedom stated that,

"If the published idea is truthfull, if it provides a chance for real understanding, it will be exploited. Whereas, if the published idea is wrong, it allows the reader no further clarification or understanding of the truth. Because, this kind of explanation and impression can only be found in the battle between truth and error."