The Network Structure and Evolution of Collective Actions for Environmental Governance of Urban Agglomerations ——A Comparati
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The Network Structure and Evolution of Collective Actions for Environmental Governance of Urban Agglomerations ——A comparative study of air pollution control and water pollution control Liming Suo Doc/Prof University of Electronic Science and Technology School of Public Administration [email protected] • Research Background • Research status • Questions raised Outline • Theoretical analysis • Research methods and data sources • The study found • Summary and discussion 2 2 1.Research Background Micro-governance selection Cross-river Cross-regional Macro-network structure Hezhang system characteristics “Regional joint in China prevention and control mechanism” Beijing- Pearl River Chengyu City Yangtze Tianjin- Delta City Group River Delta Hebei city Group group n Question: Facing regional and watershed environmental pollution with strong spatial externalities, local governments in the region often fall into the collective action dilemma of environmental governance. n Collaborative Mechanism Practice: The Yangtze River Delta Regional Air Pollution Prevention and Control Group and the Yangtze River Delta Regional Water Pollution Prevention Collaborative Team 2. Research status The Logic and Macroscopic Network Structure of Local Governments in Different Environmental Governance Areas ??? l Theoretical& Empirical： Ø Local government cooperation in different fields will adopt different cooperation organizations, cooperation partners and forms of cooperation due to the different characteristics of their commodity services, so as to obtain better cooperation benefits and form different cooperation network structures.（ Feiock，2007；Andrew, 2013；Liming，Zhufeng，2016）。 Ø Yi Hongtao et al (2017) used the institutional framework for collective action to construct a model of regional environmental cooperation governance in China.。 Ø Liming et al. (2017) portrayed the network structure of the environmental area of the Pan-Pearl River Delta Cooperation Zone and revealed the cooperative decision-making behavior of the local government. 3. Questions raised In a specific region, cross-administrative district local governments involved in geospatial linkages form a static relationship structure and dynamic relationship behavior based on common goals or common problems. Ø What are the differences in the behavioral characteristics and macro-structures of the two areas of environmental cooperation governance in specific regions? Ø How do network behavior decisions, network relationships, and network structures evolve in different period of governance? 4. Theoretical analysis The Micro-mechanism of Institutional Collective Action: Network Decision-making • Local government regional cooperation decision-making is essentially a network decision-making: decision-making in the existing network, network relationship attributes, network status, forming a new network structure • The content of decision-making is “relationship”:From “single attribute relationship” to “spatial network relationship”, all “relationships” are networked, thus redefining various “relationships” among local governments. Network Local Network 1 Acctor 2 Regional Cooperative Network Governance Logic Two Paths to Network Decisions：Bonding&Bridge “Bonding”——Reduce network risk “Bridge”——Expand network impact Network structure: Shared Network Governance (SG), Leadership Network Governance (NLO), Administrative Network Governance (NAO) Provan and Kenis emphasized that when the network boundaries and network members are uncertain, the different types of interactions among the network members, the allocation of rights, and the apportionment of governance costs determine the number of network members and the corresponding structure types. (Provan and Kenis, 2008) 5. Research methods and data sources p Research Method: Social Network Analysis Method (SNA) p Analysis Tools: Ucinet - Density, Centrality, Core-Periphery, cliques p Case selection: Intergovernmental cooperation on water pollution control and air pollution control in 30 cities in the Yangtze River Delta p Source of data: China Digital Garden Newspapers Database, Annual Working Reports and Statistical Yearbooks by Provincial and Municipal Governments p Collaborative text analysis: 220 effective cooperation texts ，including 98 inter-governmental cooperation data on air pollution control and 122 inter-governmental cooperation Figure Area of Yangtze River Delta City Cluster data on water pollution control. water pollution Air pollution Total Figure 2009-2015 Number of 30 Environmental Cooperation Areas in the Yangtze River Delta Table 2009-2015 Types of Environmental Governance Cooperation in the Yangtze River Delta cooperation Water pollution Air pollution cooperation The proportion of water The proportion of air method cooperation governance governance pollution cooperation pollution cooperation Inspection 55 54 41.67% 49.09% Conference held 53 30 40.15% 27.27% sign the 24 26 18.18% 23.64% agreement Total 132 110 100.00% 100.00% 6. Research Findings - Overall Network Description Table 2009-2015 Water Pollution and Air Pollution Collaboration Governance Network Density/Centrality Comparison betwee degree Strong tied- Strong tied- Max nness Environmental Total data MIN cooperation centrality degree betweenne centrali cooperation density of a centrality ss centrality governance sample cities ty of a cities graph of a graph of a gragh gragh Water pollution （ ） （ ） coordination governance 122 Shuzhou 171 Xuancheng 21 3.308 9.77% 40.64% 0.18% 17.91% Air pollution Wenzhou、Lishui 98 Nanjing（174） 2.853 12.25% 31.77% 0.5% 6.86% cooperation governance （0） Table Comparison of Core and Peripheral Environment of Water Pollution and Air Pollution Collaboration Governance Network Environmental Core Periphery Final Core Periphery governance Density Density fitness Shanghai、Xuzhou、Nantong、Lianyungang、 Huaian、Yancheng、Yangzhou、Zhengjiang、 Water pollution Nanjing、Wuxi、 Taizhou、Suqian、Hangzhou、Ningbo、 coordination Changzhou、 Shuzhou、 0.7883 Wenzhou、Shaoxing、Jinghua、Quzhou、 13.200 2.627 governance Huzhou、jiaxing Zhoushan、Taizhou、Lishui、Hefei、Wuhu、 Maanshan、Chuzhou、Xuancheng Nanjing、Wuxi、 Changzhou、Shuzhou、 Shanghai、Xuzhou、Nantong、Lianyungang、 Air pollution Huaian、Yangzhou、 Yancheng、Taizhou、Suqian、Wenzhou、 cooperation Zhengjiang、 Shaoxing、Huzhou、Jinghua、Quzhou、 6.576 1.248 0.7571 governance Hangzhou、Ningbo、 Zhoushan、Taizhou、Lishui、Hefei、Chuzhou、 jiaxing、Wuhu、 Xuancheng Maanshan Figure a Analysis of cliques in Water Pollution Cooperative Governance in Figure b Analysis of cliques in Air Pollution Cooperative Governance in Yangtze River Delta City Group Yangtze River Delta City Group 6. Research findings - evolution trend description Table 2009-2012 Comparison of Water Pollution and Air Pollution Collaboration Governance Network Density and Center Potential Environm Strong tied- Strong tied- Max MIN degree betweenness ental Total data degree betweenness cooperation cooperatio density centrality of centrality of governan sample centrality of centrality of cities n cities a graph a gragh ce a graph a gragh Water pollution Shuzhou Xuancheng coordinatio 61 （ ） （ ） 2.754 8.99% 30.05% 0.22% 14.61% n 137 21 governance Air Lishui、 pollution Nanjing Wenzhou、 50 0.720 8.61% 29.31% 4.37% 4.37% cooperation （61） Quzhou governance （0） Table Comparison of Core and Peripheral Environment of 2009-2012Water Pollution and Air Pollution Collaboration Governance Network Environmental Core Periphery Final Core Periphery governance Density Density fitness Nanjing、Wuxi、 Shanghai、Xuzhou、Nantong、Lianyungang、 Changzhou、 Water pollution Huaian、Yancheng、Taizhou、Suqian、Hangzhou、 Shuzhou、Yangzhou、 coordination Ningbo、Wenzhou、Shaoxing、Jinghua、Quzhou、 6.179 2.229 0.7064 Zhengjiang、Huzhou、 governance Zhoushan、Taizhou、Lishui、Hefei、Wuhu、 jiaxing Maanshan、Chuzhou、Xuancheng Nanjing、Wuxi、 Shanghai、Xuzhou、Lianyungang、Huaian、 Changzhou、 Air pollution Yancheng、Suqian、Ningbo、Wenzhou、Shaoxing、 Shuzhou、Nantong、 cooperation Huzhou、jiaxing、Jinghua、Quzhou、Zhoushan、 2.917 0.319 0.8104 Yangzhou、 governance Taizhou、Lishui、Hefei、Wuhu、Maanshan、 Zhengjiang、Taizhou、 Chuzhou、Xuancheng Hangzhou Figure a Analysis of cliques in Water Pollution Cooperative Figure b Analysis of cliques in Water Pollution Cooperative Governance in Yangtze River Delta City Group（2009-2012） Governance in Yangtze River Delta City Group（2009-2012） 7. Summary and discussion Environmental Water pollution coordination governance Air pollution coordination governance governance Higher density and stronger network cohesion High density Network Stronger centrality is higher Stronger centrality is lower structure Fewer core cities and high density More cores and more average density distribution characteristics Less condensed subgroups, significant cross-border Disperse a number of small groups, geographical relations cooperation are obvious The density increases rapidly and the network cohesion The density does not increase quickly, and the cohesion becomes stronger of the network changes little The centrality has risen as a whole, and the status of the Evolutionary Increased centrality and reduced centralization of center of the city has risen sharply. trend central cities The number of core cities increased by more than one-third, Core cities decrease, and relationships are closer and the cooperation in the border cities increased Coherent subgroup structure stability Condensing subgroups change significantly, from decentralization to multiple small groups Figure a Network structure of water pollution cooperation and Figure b Network structure of air pollution cooperation and governance in the Yangtze River Delta in 2009-2012 governance in the Yangtze River Delta city cluster 2009-2012 .