为什么要上市?荷兰的公共配置以及对公共区域供暖的支持和分歧意见

IF 2.4 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Frontiers in Sustainable Cities Pub Date : 2023-08-24 DOI:10.3389/frsc.2023.1220884
Sara Herreras Martínez, R. Harmsen, M. Menkveld, G. Kramer, A. Faaij
{"title":"为什么要上市?荷兰的公共配置以及对公共区域供暖的支持和分歧意见","authors":"Sara Herreras Martínez, R. Harmsen, M. Menkveld, G. Kramer, A. Faaij","doi":"10.3389/frsc.2023.1220884","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cities are taking up services of social importance under the (re)municipalisation movement. The Dutch government embarked on an ambitious heat transition and proposed in 2022 to make all district heating projects public or semi-public, with a majority public share. This proposal has sparked intense debates among groups in favour of and against a shift to public ownership.This study assessed 16 public projects through qualitative research and uncovered the arguments for and against public ownership among key public and private stakeholders.While public ownership is deemed necessary to meet social objectives and address the shortcomings of private models, critical views question the economic performance and inappropriate political choices in some public projects. These critical views propose alternative ways to safeguard public values, such as ensuring affordability and meeting climate goals. Despite disagreements, public and private actors recognise the shared responsibility and the importance of the other's role. They agree that the central government's proposed mandate for public ownership may limit flexibility at the local level and prevent other effective configurations like public-private partnerships with equal public-private shares.Reflecting on the study findings, it is debatable whether mandating public ownership nationwide, as proposed by the Dutch government, should become the approach to tackle current challenges instead of allowing more flexibility. The upcoming Heat Act may reduce key issues justifying public ownership, such as affordability, cherry-picking and the lack of transparency of private projects. Further research is needed to determine whether public ownership would enhance citizens' support and speed up realisation. Public ownership may still be necessary if social and cost benefits outweigh those from other configurations or long-term concession contracts are too risky. Implementing regulations protecting public values and enabling the coexistence of public, private or public-private configurations tailored to each unique local context could be an alternative, as successful district heating sectors abroad demonstrate.","PeriodicalId":33686,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sustainable Cities","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why go public? Public configurations and the supportive and divergent views towards public district heating in the Netherlands\",\"authors\":\"Sara Herreras Martínez, R. Harmsen, M. Menkveld, G. Kramer, A. Faaij\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frsc.2023.1220884\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Cities are taking up services of social importance under the (re)municipalisation movement. The Dutch government embarked on an ambitious heat transition and proposed in 2022 to make all district heating projects public or semi-public, with a majority public share. This proposal has sparked intense debates among groups in favour of and against a shift to public ownership.This study assessed 16 public projects through qualitative research and uncovered the arguments for and against public ownership among key public and private stakeholders.While public ownership is deemed necessary to meet social objectives and address the shortcomings of private models, critical views question the economic performance and inappropriate political choices in some public projects. These critical views propose alternative ways to safeguard public values, such as ensuring affordability and meeting climate goals. Despite disagreements, public and private actors recognise the shared responsibility and the importance of the other's role. They agree that the central government's proposed mandate for public ownership may limit flexibility at the local level and prevent other effective configurations like public-private partnerships with equal public-private shares.Reflecting on the study findings, it is debatable whether mandating public ownership nationwide, as proposed by the Dutch government, should become the approach to tackle current challenges instead of allowing more flexibility. The upcoming Heat Act may reduce key issues justifying public ownership, such as affordability, cherry-picking and the lack of transparency of private projects. Further research is needed to determine whether public ownership would enhance citizens' support and speed up realisation. Public ownership may still be necessary if social and cost benefits outweigh those from other configurations or long-term concession contracts are too risky. Implementing regulations protecting public values and enabling the coexistence of public, private or public-private configurations tailored to each unique local context could be an alternative, as successful district heating sectors abroad demonstrate.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Sustainable Cities\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Sustainable Cities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2023.1220884\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sustainable Cities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2023.1220884","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在(重新)市民化运动下,城市正在承担起具有社会重要性的服务。荷兰政府启动了一项雄心勃勃的热转型计划,并于2022年提议将所有区域供热项目公有化或半公有化,大部分由公众持股。这一提议在支持和反对向公有制转变的团体之间引发了激烈的辩论。本研究通过定性研究评估了16个公共项目,揭示了主要公共和私人利益相关者之间支持和反对公有制的争论。虽然公有制被认为是实现社会目标和解决私人模式缺点的必要条件,但批评意见质疑一些公共项目的经济表现和不适当的政治选择。这些批判的观点提出了维护公共价值的替代方法,例如确保负担能力和实现气候目标。尽管存在分歧,但公共和私人行为体认识到共同的责任和对方作用的重要性。他们一致认为,中央政府提出的公有制授权可能会限制地方层面的灵活性,并妨碍其他有效的配置,如公私合营、公私份额均等。反思研究结果,荷兰政府提出的在全国范围内强制实行公有制,而不是允许更多的灵活性,是否应该成为应对当前挑战的方法,这是有争议的。即将出台的《热力法》(Heat Act)可能会减少证明公共所有权合理性的关键问题,比如可负担性、选择性和私人项目缺乏透明度。要确定公有制是否会增强公民的支持并加速实现,还需要进一步研究。如果社会效益和成本效益超过其他配置的收益,或者长期特许合同风险太大,那么公共所有权可能仍然是必要的。正如国外成功的区域供热部门所展示的那样,实施保护公共价值的法规,并根据每个独特的当地情况,使公共、私人或公私配置共存,可能是一种选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Why go public? Public configurations and the supportive and divergent views towards public district heating in the Netherlands
Cities are taking up services of social importance under the (re)municipalisation movement. The Dutch government embarked on an ambitious heat transition and proposed in 2022 to make all district heating projects public or semi-public, with a majority public share. This proposal has sparked intense debates among groups in favour of and against a shift to public ownership.This study assessed 16 public projects through qualitative research and uncovered the arguments for and against public ownership among key public and private stakeholders.While public ownership is deemed necessary to meet social objectives and address the shortcomings of private models, critical views question the economic performance and inappropriate political choices in some public projects. These critical views propose alternative ways to safeguard public values, such as ensuring affordability and meeting climate goals. Despite disagreements, public and private actors recognise the shared responsibility and the importance of the other's role. They agree that the central government's proposed mandate for public ownership may limit flexibility at the local level and prevent other effective configurations like public-private partnerships with equal public-private shares.Reflecting on the study findings, it is debatable whether mandating public ownership nationwide, as proposed by the Dutch government, should become the approach to tackle current challenges instead of allowing more flexibility. The upcoming Heat Act may reduce key issues justifying public ownership, such as affordability, cherry-picking and the lack of transparency of private projects. Further research is needed to determine whether public ownership would enhance citizens' support and speed up realisation. Public ownership may still be necessary if social and cost benefits outweigh those from other configurations or long-term concession contracts are too risky. Implementing regulations protecting public values and enabling the coexistence of public, private or public-private configurations tailored to each unique local context could be an alternative, as successful district heating sectors abroad demonstrate.
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
4.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Biodiversity and quality of urban green landscape affect mental restorativeness of residents in Multan, Pakistan The presence of polluting sites in urban contexts: an analysis of the effects on the dynamics of the residential real estate market The factors that influence the growth and performance of micro and small-scale enterprises in Dessie Town administration Diagnosing the voids of knowledge in the transformation process in managing and standardizing smart city development: the case of the government of Indonesia Do individuals' resist green home investment decisions? An empirical study from status quo bias and inertia perspective
×
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