文章 Articles

放弃绿色GDP,又该用什么调整政绩观?

中国引入绿色GDP核算的努力结束了。中国的环境还因盲目追求GDP增长的政绩观在恶化。马军对此进行了报道。

Article image

随着中国国家统计局明确表示无法将绿色GDP数据对外公布,绿色GDP项目技术组组长王金南也宣布“无限期推迟”发布报告,这一开展了三年的艰苦尝试似乎走到了尽头。除了从技术角度认为绿色GDP的核算方法尚不成熟外,国家统计局放弃绿色GDP的主要理由,是国际上还没有哪一个国家的政府部门正式公布他们的绿色GDP价值量核算结果。

诚然,国际上绿色国民经济核算的分析常常是由非政府研究机构完成的,政府公布绿色GDP核算的情况确实不多见。但我们也应该看到,国际上很少有地方政府像我们的各级政府这样,对达成发展和保护的平衡负有如此巨大的责任。正因为如此,要实现可持续发展,中国对绿色GDP核算体系的需求比许多国家要大得多。

为官一任,造福一方,追求良好政绩,现代政府概莫能外。经济发展事关人民收入、就业、生活水平,因此各国政府多把经济增长指标看做是重要的政绩标尺。GDP代表着经济产出总量,可以反映一个国家国民收入的水平。但如果某一地区盲目地拼环境、拼资源来求得经济发展,其引发的环境污染和生态破坏以及对人民健康福祉的损害,却难以为GDP核算所反映。

那么为什么西方国家没有广泛开展绿色GDP核算呢?因为在实践中,其政府想要抛开环境保护,一味追求GDP增长,常常是困难的。其政府行为除了受到议会和法院的制约外,更受到当地选民的直接制约。通常当地社区既不会支持只保护不发展,也绝不会支持为发展经济而牺牲环境。一个为经济发展而污染当地饮用水源、毒化当地空气的地方政府是难以连任的。新当选的地方领导通常要顺应民意调整政策,发展和保护又会走向相对平衡。 

由于政绩评价体系不同,我们的地方政府官员对平衡发展和保护承担的责任要比西方政府大得多。在西方,各利益方的参与和博弈,使得地方政府在施政方针上只有有限的选项;由于我们环境保护工作中公众参与还很有限,地方官员们主要依照既定的发展方针来制定自己的发展规划。而在规划管理中手握极大的自由裁量权力,也意味着我们的官员必须为发展和保护的平衡承担全责。

遗憾的是,我们的一些地方政府常常找不到这个艰难的平衡点。由于长期以来“发展是硬道理”被一些人误读为GDP增长是硬道理,GDP增长数字因此成为政绩评价中最硬的指标。一些地方政府官员因此在项目决策中任意降低环境门槛,引入大量高污染、高风险的企业;在环境管理中为污染大户撑起保护伞,干扰当地环保部门的环境执法;环境污染了,而当地官员却因高企的GDP发展数字而纷纷升迁,盲目追求GDP增长的政绩观因此更加强化。

今天,中央政府将贯彻科学发展观提到了前所未有的高度,强调要统筹人与自然的和谐。但真要将中央政策转化为各级政府的行动方针,必须扭转各级政府首脑盲目追求GDP增长的政绩观;而要扭转他们的政绩观,则必须改变现行的干部评价体系。对中央政府而言,在中国的现实条件下,选择在经济核算中加入环境保护指标的绿色GDP体系,恐怕是干部评价体系改革中成本最低的一种可行变动了。

绿色GDP面临的困境是现阶段中国发展和保护的现实矛盾的集中反映,说明仅靠一套核算体系难以扭转固有的发展观和政绩观。对此环保部门早有清醒认识,正如绿色GDP项目的领导者所言:“科学的绿色GDP数据有助于科学决策,公众参与和民主法治,才能保证每项决策能真正服务于大多数人的利益。”我们应大力推动公众依法有序参与环境保护,相信当地方官员在决策和管理中真切感受到公众对环境保护的强烈要求时,他们不但要调整自己的政绩观,也会对能够计算出需要扣除的环境成本的绿色GDP产生真正的需要。

本文摘编自《南方都市报》。

马军是公众与环境研究中心主任。该中心开发了中国水污染数据库和网站, 该网站于2006年9月14日公布。他也是博信国际信息咨询公司(Sinosphere Corporation)的环境顾问。

首页图片由Brian's Eye

发表在“中外对话“上的更多有关绿色GDP的文章:

1. 中国的绿色发展之路

2. 中国发展的平衡力量

3. 绿色GDP的运用充满挑战和希望

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

无疾而终,令人心痛

无疾而终,令人心痛。文章说得对,对地方政府行为的制衡需要更有效的方法。

Sadness

It feels bad to see the setback of China's green GDP. I agree that effective ways must be figured out to force local governments to do the right things.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

唉!

无言以对!

Sigh

Don't know what to say!

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

学会成熟!

从前在西部有一个年轻人,他来自一个富裕的小家庭,并且十分努力地工作养活一家人。这个家族逐渐扩大,到他中年时已经积累了更多的财富。可由于年轻时的辛苦工作,他的健康每况愈下。后来,在东部又有一个年轻人,他出生在一个家道中落的大家庭,他很爱自己的家人,并且比别人辛苦一百倍地工作来养活众多兄弟姐妹,和努力恢复家族的名望。他每天工作14小时,甚至没有机会恢复过度劳累的身体。他在短时间内取得了巨大的成就,可谁也没有注意到过量的工作正一寸一寸侵蚀他的健康,耗尽他的能量。悲哀的是,当有人告诉他这个事实时,他担心的并不是自己的健康,而是家族和名誉。。我相信每个人都知道发展是一个良好的愿望,可到底什么才可以称作“发展”,它到底意味着什么?是挣得更多财富吗,或是盘踞时尚公寓?人总是不到黄河心不死,不见棺材不掉泪。其实所谓成熟,并不是从年幼的孩童一跃而成稳重的智者,而是更深刻稳重地看待得失平衡。

Learn to be mature!

There is a young man lived in the West. He comes from a small but wealthy family and works very hard to feed everyone in the house. When this young man step into middle-age, the family was enlarged and he earned more property for the family, but his healthy was declined very much due to the overload of work when he was young.

Now there is another young man in the East. He was from a huge and declined family. He loves his family very much and worked 100 times harder than others in order to feed his brothers and sisters, and also to rebuild the reputation of his family. He spent 14 hours to work a day which made he has not time to rest and recovery. His hard work gained great achievement in a short time, but he and his family does not really realized that the excessive work is nibble his health, depleted his energy. Sadly, one day when someone told him the health situation, what he worried is not his health, but the task to help his family and rebuild the reputation.

I believe everyone knows development is the really goal. But what does it mean “DEVELOPMENT”? To make more money, or to live in modern flat? Maybe it means to be mature, more understand how to balance the gain and loss.

However, one may never know what does “gain” mean before you make it and the taste of “loss” before you did. This is the way to mature, we can not jump from the extravagant teenage to the considerate adult.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

三楼的评论,好!

赞一个!这个比喻打得好!
焦虑和恐慌正在侵蚀这个古老国度优雅闲适的灵魂;污染和能耗正在毁灭这个古老国度自然美丽的身体。

Comment 3 is great

It is a good comment by way of figuration.

The elegance and spirit of this nation with old civilization is being encroached by anxiety and panic; And its beauty is damaged by pollution and excessive resource consumption.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

有意思

3楼的评论很有意思 呵呵 比喻把抽象的东西一下子具体化了

Interesting comment

The 3rd comment is very interesting, as abstract conceptions have been made clear and embodied by metaphor.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

分析解决办法

对于为什么中国须要/发觉有用的绿色GDP体系, 即使是西方国家并不采纳这一所谓有用的绿色GDP,所作出的解释确实是很动听。我认为利益方面也必须被列入讨论的话题。我正怀疑如何确保绿色GDP成果的一致性。当然我们能够看到的是环境的退化,因此,最重要的是把焦点集中在如何尽快的实施预防和解除问题的办法,那为什么必须把焦点放在成本上呢?

Analysis to solutions

Very clever explanation about why China might need/find useful Green GDP even if western countries don't use it.
I think whats also needed is to talk about the benefits.
I also wonder about how to ensure the integrity of green GDP results. Surely we can all see the enviro degredation anyway, so why do we need to focus on the cost, when whats more important is focussing on implementing prevention and clean-up solutions as fast as possible?

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

是的,加上相关成本

评论6给出了前进的方向。政客们喜欢未调整的GDP,因为它把有产出和没产出的成本都算上了,从而神奇的变废为宝。不管政府政策是在创造奇迹还是摧毁一切,GDP总是看涨的。这方面政客是不会轻易罢手的,但是我们的尝试并非无路可走。

首先你需要展示出常规GDP是死路一条。关键在于它并不计算经济的非活跃部分-当损害使得材料、生态、土地、水、人和社区为明天的GDP做贡献的能力被剥夺的时候(我们在GDP里是看不出来的)。斯特恩报告警告说,单从气候变化的影响来看就可能将GDP扣去20%。

第二个诀窍就在评论6里。经济高速增值的相关成本是用于预防的成本。关于损害,已经知晓了数十年了,带来的却只有小打小闹的修补。

第三个步骤是“外部性的内部化”——让预防成本内化进价格里。这是比试图修正GDP来得有力得多的。有这个能力的新型经济工具是有的,它们能够帮助中国真正实现“循环经济”的崇高目标,并使得经济增长可持续的继续下去。

James Greyson www.blindspot.org.uk

Yes, include the relevant costs

Comment 6 offers a way forward. Politicians love uncorrected GDP since it adds up both productive and unproductive costs, magically turning damage into a positive indicator. Whether government policies work wonders or wreak everything, GDP tends to keep going up. Politicians won't give this up easily but there are ways to try.

Firstly you need to show that GDP as usual is a dead end. The key is that it doesn't measure economic inactivity - when damage makes materials, ecosystems, land, waters, people and communities unavailable to contribute to tomorrow's GDP. The Stern report warns that this could cut GDP by up to 20% just from climate effects alone.

The second trick is given in comment 6. The relevant cost to quickly build into economics is the cost of prevention. Knowledge about damage has been around for decades and has brought only minor tinkering improvements.

The third step is to 'internalise the externalities' - to allow the price of preventing problems to be built into prices. This is far more powerful than trying to correct GDP. New forms of economic instruments are available which could do this, turning China's lofty goal of 'circular economics' into a reality and allowing economic growth to continue sustainably.

James Greyson www.blindspot.org.uk

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

应多考虑经济手段控制污染

采用绿色GDP的方式考核其实还是试图使用计划经济的方式来解决环境保护的问题。这样做是寄希望于政府的绝对作用,忽视了企业自身的能动性,同时,在具体操作上存在太多问题,可能压根就是错误的思路。何况对于中国而言,环保总局本身是一个弱势部门,它提出的绿色GDP的概念如果得不到其他强势部门,如:财政部、发改委的支持,根本就没人会重视。

对于环境保护而言,应该更多地考虑使用经济手段来控制污染,比如对企业征收环境方面的税收,迫使其将对环境的影响真正纳入自身经营成本的考虑范围内。这样有可能形成市场化的调节机制,使企业以及社会其他成员主动担负起应当担负的环境责任。

[email protected]

More economic tools to fight against pollution

Evaluating performance using Green GDP is still a planning way to approach environmental problems. It depends absolutely on the functioning of the government, while ignores the subjective initiatives of firms themselves. At the mean time, there are too many problems in its actual implementation. This approach is probably fundamentally wrong. Moreover, in China, SEPA itself is powerless. If SEPA raised a concept called Green GDP without the support of other powerful departments like the Ministry of Finance and the Development and Reform Committee, no one will really treat it seriously.

In order to protect the environment, we should think more in economic terms, employing more economic tools to control pollution. For example, environmental tax can be introduced to firms, forcing them to really include environmental effects into operational costs, thus their decision making process. Only within this market mechanism can firms and other members of the society really shoulder the responsibility of environmental conservation.

[email protected]