دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی بررسی توسعه سیستم استاندارد پارک اکو صنعتی کشور چین - الزویر 2019

ABSTRACT

Eco-industrial Parks (EIP) have become a central element in China’s industrial strategy to combine industrial development while minimizing environmental impacts and improving resource efficiency. National standard system has been developed as a main tool for assessing EIPs. This paper provides a review of the development of China's EIP standard system. The focus of the analysis is the new national demonstration EIP standard (HJ/T274- 2015), including a review of calculation methods for some key indicators. The analysis also provides a comparison with previous standards to identify the main changes and improvements in the assessment of EIPs. Comparison findings illustrate that the new standard provides a more consistent indicator system by providing a consolidated standard system, and offering more comprehensive and quantitative indicators. Moreover, the new standard aims to better manage environmental issues by supplementing more comprehensive environmental indicators. The standard also strengthens the emphasis of the industrial symbiosis dimension in the evaluation of EIPs. By offering optional indicators and giving distinct targets based on contextual conditions for a number of indicators, the flexibility and rationality of the EIP assessments are also enhanced. Although many positive changes have been identified, there are still some shortcomings exist in the new EIP standard. The paper proposes a number of recommendations based on analyzing shortcomings, for instance further improving of the industrial symbiosis indicators, offering social benefit evaluation indicators, and strengthening the reduction action evaluation. China’s experience of setting EIP standards and indicators may provide lessons for other countries’ attempts to develop industrial estate indicators. In order to observe and effectively promote industrial estates at the global range, several remaining research questions that need further exploration are put forward in this study.

 Concluding remarks

China is the only country establishing and practicing national EIP standard and indicators (Cote and Liu, 2016). Reflection on the experience indicates that development of practical quantitative assessment indicators for EIPs has been a crucial factor for the ongoing success of China’s national demonstration EIP program. Up to date, EIP standard in China has already experienced several round of revision since the first rounds of declaration in 2006. In 2015, MEP released the new standard for national demonstration EIP (HJ/T274-2015) to replace the previous standards of sector-integrated EIP, sector-specific EIP and the venous industry EIP. This study gives a review of China’s EIP standard systems, and undertakes an analysis of the new released EIP standard. Comparing with indicators of previous three standard systems, the newly released EIP standard (HJ/T274-2015) has obvious improvements. Most of the previous shortcomings (e.g. Vague and intricate indicators, and lack of industrial symbiosis indicators) discussed by scholars like Geng et al. (2008, 2009, 2012) have been modified to some extent. Besides these improvements, environmental risk control indicators and more comprehensive environmental indicators are also amended in the new EIP standard (HJ/T274-2015), as environmental pollution and effective risk prevention and control remain as significant challenge in China. Through the review and analysis of China’s EIP standard, the circumstance of how China is conducting EIP management with guiding criteria is clearly shown. With accurate and programmatic indicators, EIP development can be better promoted along with efficient monitoring and evaluation. For the years ahead we propose the inclusion of more material-oriented indicators to unleash the potential of resource efficiency and boost markets for secondary resources. Such shift is likely to be in line with a more saturating Chinese economy whose demand for primary materials is likely to flatten (Bleischwitz et al, forthcoming) as well as with broader attempts in such direction in both Europe and China (McDowall et al., 2017).