垃圾治理的多中心特征:对上海、东京和香港的比较研究

IF 9.1 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES npj urban sustainability Pub Date : 2024-08-06 DOI:10.1038/s42949-024-00179-4
Xinyu Hao, Liang Dong, Xuepeng Qian, Steuer Benjamin, Hongzhou Wang, Peixiu Chen, Xiaofei Wang, Wenting Ma, Jiaying Li, Xin Tong, Xiaoling Zhang
{"title":"垃圾治理的多中心特征:对上海、东京和香港的比较研究","authors":"Xinyu Hao, Liang Dong, Xuepeng Qian, Steuer Benjamin, Hongzhou Wang, Peixiu Chen, Xiaofei Wang, Wenting Ma, Jiaying Li, Xin Tong, Xiaoling Zhang","doi":"10.1038/s42949-024-00179-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The mismanagement of waste is jeopardizing urban sustainability. Although polycentric waste governance (PWG) has been introduced, characterizing the PWG remains challenging. This paper employs game theory to illustrate polycentricity by investigating the equilibrium state from the stakeholders’ perspective. Shanghai, Tokyo, and Hong Kong are selected as target cities for comparative analysis. The findings reveal the heterogeneous characteristics in three megacities’ PWG—the collaboration by principal stakeholders (formal recyclers, informal recyclers, households) in Shanghai, the exclusion of informal recyclers in Tokyo, and the limited contribution provided by the formal recyclers in Hong Kong. The divergent PWG characteristics can be attributed to variations in governance patterns, socioeconomic factors, and policy formulation. Regarding urban sustainability, Tokyo and Shanghai’s PWG contribute to the circular economy’s expansion, while Hong Kong’ potential, in this regard, is undervalued. Despite Tokyo’s improved social recognition to practitioners, this PWG mode, primarily driven by formal recyclers and households, presents limited inclusion of low-income groups. Additionally, it is crucial for the authorities in Shanghai and Hong Kong to acknowledge the potential pollution of informal recyclers’ non-environmental behavior. This paper offers a valuable model for characterizing and analyzing PWG across different cities, facilitating knowledge aggregation and the implementation of PWG practice.","PeriodicalId":74322,"journal":{"name":"npj urban sustainability","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s42949-024-00179-4.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Characterizing the polycentricity in waste governance: a comparative study on Shanghai, Tokyo, and Hong Kong\",\"authors\":\"Xinyu Hao, Liang Dong, Xuepeng Qian, Steuer Benjamin, Hongzhou Wang, Peixiu Chen, Xiaofei Wang, Wenting Ma, Jiaying Li, Xin Tong, Xiaoling Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s42949-024-00179-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The mismanagement of waste is jeopardizing urban sustainability. Although polycentric waste governance (PWG) has been introduced, characterizing the PWG remains challenging. This paper employs game theory to illustrate polycentricity by investigating the equilibrium state from the stakeholders’ perspective. Shanghai, Tokyo, and Hong Kong are selected as target cities for comparative analysis. The findings reveal the heterogeneous characteristics in three megacities’ PWG—the collaboration by principal stakeholders (formal recyclers, informal recyclers, households) in Shanghai, the exclusion of informal recyclers in Tokyo, and the limited contribution provided by the formal recyclers in Hong Kong. The divergent PWG characteristics can be attributed to variations in governance patterns, socioeconomic factors, and policy formulation. Regarding urban sustainability, Tokyo and Shanghai’s PWG contribute to the circular economy’s expansion, while Hong Kong’ potential, in this regard, is undervalued. Despite Tokyo’s improved social recognition to practitioners, this PWG mode, primarily driven by formal recyclers and households, presents limited inclusion of low-income groups. Additionally, it is crucial for the authorities in Shanghai and Hong Kong to acknowledge the potential pollution of informal recyclers’ non-environmental behavior. This paper offers a valuable model for characterizing and analyzing PWG across different cities, facilitating knowledge aggregation and the implementation of PWG practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"npj urban sustainability\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s42949-024-00179-4.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"npj urban sustainability\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s42949-024-00179-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"npj urban sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s42949-024-00179-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

废物管理不善正在危及城市的可持续发展。虽然多中心废物治理(PWG)已被提出,但描述多中心废物治理的特征仍具有挑战性。本文采用博弈论,从利益相关者的角度研究均衡状态,以说明多中心治理。本文选择上海、东京和香港作为目标城市进行比较分析。研究结果揭示了三个特大城市的公共利益集团的异质性特征--上海的主要利益相关者(正规回收商、非正规回收商、家庭)的合作,东京的非正规回收商的排斥,以及香港正规回收商的有限贡献。公共工程小组的不同特点可归因于治理模式、社会经济因素和政策制定方面的差异。在城市可持续发展方面,东京和上海的公共机构为循环经济的发展做出了贡献,而香港在这方面的潜力却被低估了。尽管东京的实践者得到了更多的社会认可,但这种主要由正规回收商和家庭推动的公共工程小组模式对低收入群体的包容性有限。此外,上海和香港当局必须认识到非正规回收者的不环保行为可能造成的污染。本文提供了一个有价值的模型,用于描述和分析不同城市的公共工程小组,促进知识汇总和公共工程小组实践的实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Characterizing the polycentricity in waste governance: a comparative study on Shanghai, Tokyo, and Hong Kong
The mismanagement of waste is jeopardizing urban sustainability. Although polycentric waste governance (PWG) has been introduced, characterizing the PWG remains challenging. This paper employs game theory to illustrate polycentricity by investigating the equilibrium state from the stakeholders’ perspective. Shanghai, Tokyo, and Hong Kong are selected as target cities for comparative analysis. The findings reveal the heterogeneous characteristics in three megacities’ PWG—the collaboration by principal stakeholders (formal recyclers, informal recyclers, households) in Shanghai, the exclusion of informal recyclers in Tokyo, and the limited contribution provided by the formal recyclers in Hong Kong. The divergent PWG characteristics can be attributed to variations in governance patterns, socioeconomic factors, and policy formulation. Regarding urban sustainability, Tokyo and Shanghai’s PWG contribute to the circular economy’s expansion, while Hong Kong’ potential, in this regard, is undervalued. Despite Tokyo’s improved social recognition to practitioners, this PWG mode, primarily driven by formal recyclers and households, presents limited inclusion of low-income groups. Additionally, it is crucial for the authorities in Shanghai and Hong Kong to acknowledge the potential pollution of informal recyclers’ non-environmental behavior. This paper offers a valuable model for characterizing and analyzing PWG across different cities, facilitating knowledge aggregation and the implementation of PWG practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Post construction infrastructural adaptation of social practices in Dhaka’s under flyover spaces More extremely hot days, more heat exposure and fewer cooling options for people of color in Connecticut, U.S. Stakeholders’ perceptions of and willingness to pay for circular economy in the construction sector Accelerating circularity systemically: three directions for impactful research Cross-scale consumption-based simulation models can promote sustainable metropolitan food systems
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1