从“邻避效应”到“邻利工程”——九峰垃圾焚烧发电工程社会伦理治理的案例研究

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

邻避效应作为环境敏感型工程建设的典型治理难题,本质源于技术理性与社会伦理价值的结构性失衡。本文基于社会伦理治理视角,以杭州九峰垃圾焚烧发电工程为案例,在实地调研基础上系统解析其从“邻避效应”向“邻利工程”转变的内在机制与实践路径。九峰工程通过树立“大工程”理念重构治理范式,将垃圾焚烧项目定位为技术工程与社会工程的有机结合,从技术创新与社会变革双重维度构建邻避效应治理机制;通过技术革新、经济补偿和社会协同三维联动拓展项目利益空间,实现环境效益与社会效益的共生增值;基于利益相关者分析构建动态协调机制,形成合理的风险分担与利益分配方案,推动可持续的利益平衡;通过规范政府、企业与公众三方主体行为,建立持续迭代的社会伦理治理体系。九峰工程从“邻避效应”到“邻利工程”的治理经验为同类工程破解邻避难题提供了实践样本。

关键词: 邻避效应, 邻利工程, 九峰垃圾焚烧发电工程, 利益协调, 风险治理

Abstract:

The Not-In-My-Backyard (NIMBY) effect, as a typical governance challenge in environmentally sensitive infrastructure projects, fundamentally stems from the structural imbalance between technological rationality and socio-ethical values. From the perspective of socio-ethical governance, this study takes the Hangzhou Jiufeng Waste-to-Energy Project as a case to systematically analyze the internal mechanisms and practical pathways of its transformation from the "NIMBY effect" to a "Neighborhood-Benefit Project," based on field investigations. By adopting a "macro-engineering" philosophy to reconstruct governance paradigms, the Jiufeng Project repositions waste incineration as an organic integration of technological and social engineering, establishing a NIMBY governance mechanism through dual dimensions of technological innovation and social reform. Through tripartite synergies of technological advancement, economic compensation, and social collaboration, the project expands its value space to achieve symbiotic enhancement of environmental and social benefits. A dynamic coordination mechanism is developed via stakeholder analysis to formulate rational risk-sharing and benefit-distribution schemes, thereby promoting sustainable interest balance. Additionally, by standardizing the behaviors of government, enterprises, and the public, the project establishes an iterative socio-ethical governance framework. The governance experience of the Jiufeng Project in transitioning from a "NIMBY effect" to a "Neighborhood-Benefit Project" provides a practical model for resolving similar governance dilemmas in comparable infrastructure projects.

Key words: NIMBY effect, neighborhood-benefit project, Hangzhou Jiufeng Waste-to-Energy Project, interest coordination, risk governance

中图分类号:

B029

顾萍. 从“邻避效应”到“邻利工程”——九峰垃圾焚烧发电工程社会伦理治理的案例研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2026, 44(6): 1288-1296.

GU Ping. From "NIMBY Effect" to "Neighborhood-Benefit Project": A case study on socio-ethical governance in the Hangzhou Jiufeng Waste-to-Energy Project[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2026, 44(6): 1288-1296.

图/表 5

参考文献 16

[1]	Gent W. Not in my back yard:Democratic rhetorics in spatial gatekeeping[J]. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 2022 (2):140-157.
[2]	Portney K E. Siting Hazardous Waste Treatment Facilities: The Nimby Syndrome[M]. New York: Auburn House Press,1991:99.
[3]	周亚越, 周鹏飞, 俞海山. 邻避设施选址决策中的供需分析[J]. 浙江社会科学, 2016(6):89-94.
	Zhou Y Y, Zhou P F, Yu H S. The analysis on the site selection decision for NIMBY facilities[J]. Zhejiang Social Sciences, 2016 (6):89-94.
[4]	朱正威, 王琼, 吴佳. 邻避冲突的产生与演变逻辑探析——基于对A煤矿设施当地民众的实证调查[J]. 南京社会科学, 2017(3):81-89.
	Zhu Z W, Wang Q, Wu J. The occurrence and evolution logic of NIMBY conflict:Based on the empirical investigation of the local people of a coal mine facilities[J]. Nanjing Social Sciences, 2017(3):81-89.
[5]	张春敏. 邻避风险治理模式的有效选择——以包容性治理为视角[J]. 西南石油大学学报(社会科学版), 2025(1):10-17.
	Zhang C M. Inclusive governance:An effective choice of NIMBY risk governance model[J]. Journal of Southwest Petroleum University(Social Sciences Edition, 2025(1):10-17.
[6]	杨雪锋, 孙震. 环境设施邻避效应发生机理——基于杭州余杭事件的分析[J]. 区域经济评论, 2016(5):143-150.
	Yang X F, Sun Z. The mechanism of NIMBY in environmental facilities—A survey on Yuhang event in Hangzhou[J]. Regional Economic Review, 2016(5):143-150.
[7]	Wright P D. Rethinking NIMBYism:The role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place protective action[J]. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 2009(19):426-441.
[8]	Lois T. The socio-spatial stigmatization of homelessness and HIV/AIDS:Toward an explanation of the NIMBY syndrome[J]. Social Science and Medicine, 1997(45):903-914.
[9]	朱阳光, 杨洁, 邹丽萍, 等. 邻避效应研究述评与展望[J]. 现代城市研究, 2015(10):100-107.
	Zhu Y G, Yang J, Zou L P, et al. Progress in study of not in my back yard effect[J]. Modern Urban Research, 2015(10):100-107.
[10]	Jenkins-Smith H, Kunreuther H. Mitigation and benefits measures as policy tools for siting potentially hazardous facilities:Determinants of effectiveness and appropriateness[J]. Risk Analysis, 2001(2):371-382. PMID
[11]	陈宝胜. 公共政策过程中的邻避冲突及其治理[J]. 学海, 2012(5):110-115.
	Chen B S. NIMBY conflict in the public policy process and its governance[J]. Academic Bimestris, 2012(5):110-115.
[12]	张向和, 彭绪亚. 基于邻避效应的垃圾处理场选址博弈研究[J]. 统计与决策, 2010(20):45-49.
	Zhang X H, Peng X Y. Research on the site selection game of waste disposal facilities based on the NIMBY effect[J]. Statistics and Decision, 2010(20):45-49.
[13]	Smith A B. Technological determinism in waste-to-energy systems:Maximizing efficiency and minimizing emissions[J]. Environmental Engineering Journal, 2009(3):45-60.
[14]	Lake R W. Rethinking NIMBY[J]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1993(1):87-93.
[15]	Rawls J A. Theory of Justice[M]. Harvard University Press,1971:302.
[16]	Vinnem J E. Risk analysis and risk acceptance criteria in the planning processes of hazardous facilities—A case of an LNG plant in an urban area[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2010(8):662-670.

研究方法	研究内容
历时性研究	2013-2023年项目政策轨迹与社会响应追踪
参与式观察	3公里范围内7个社区,200余天实地调研
深度访谈	政府部门12人、运营方8人、居民46人、专家6人
梳理文件	政策文件43份、媒体报道200余篇、文献100余篇

研究方法	研究内容
历时性研究	2013-2023年项目政策轨迹与社会响应追踪
参与式观察	3公里范围内7个社区,200余天实地调研
深度访谈	政府部门12人、运营方8人、居民46人、专家6人
梳理文件	政策文件43份、媒体报道200余篇、文献100余篇

序号	利益相关者
1	属地群众	街道村民、社区居民
2	属地产业	茶叶、水果生产销售行业及科技城相关企业
3	政府机关	政府、街道办事处
4	项目建设和运营方	九峰工程业主单位
5	社会媒体	报道九峰工程的新闻媒体
6	社会环保组织	维护环保与公共利益的非政府组织

序号	利益相关者
1	属地群众	街道村民、社区居民
2	属地产业	茶叶、水果生产销售行业及科技城相关企业
3	政府机关	政府、街道办事处
4	项目建设和运营方	九峰工程业主单位
5	社会媒体	报道九峰工程的新闻媒体
6	社会环保组织	维护环保与公共利益的非政府组织

序号	利益相关者	利益诉求
1	属地群众	环境污染健康隐患、全程监管、明确拆迁补偿、政府主导运营、参与项目监管
2	属地产业	产业扶持、出台产业规划引导政策
3	政府	社会稳定、舆情控制、产业规划与监管政策制定
4	业主单位	项目顺利运营、政府合理监管、保障经济收益
5	社会媒体	真实报道项目情况与社会影响
6	社会环保组织	生态保护、垃圾处理绿色化、公众权益保障