新能源汽车-英文文献

PolicySci(2007)40:1–34DOI10.1007/s11077-006-9022-7ORIGINALARTICLETheallureoftechnology:HowFranceandCaliforniapromotedelectricandhybridvehiclestoreduceurbanairpollutionDavidCalef·RobertGobleReceived:15May2005/Accepted:19July2006/Publishedonline:1March2007CSpringerScience+BusinessMediaB.V.2007AbstractAlladvancedindustrializedsocietiesfacetheproblemofairpollutionproducedbymotorvehicles.Inspiteofstrikingimprovementsininternalcombustionenginetechnol-ogy,airpollutioninmosturbanareasisstillmeasuredatlevelsdeterminedtobeharmfultohumanhealth.Throughoutthe1990sandbeyond,CaliforniaandFrancebothchosetoimproveairqualitybymeansoftechnologicalinnovation,adoptinglegislationthatpromotedcleanvehicles,prominentlyamongthem,electricvehicles(EVs).InCalifornia,policymakerschoseatechnology-forcingapproach,settingambitiousgoals(e.g.,zeroemissionvehicles),establishingstrictdeadlinesandissuingpenaltiesfornon-compliance.ThepolicyprocessinCaliforniacalledforsubstantialparticipationfromthepublic,themedia,theacademiccom-munityandtheinterestgroupsaffectedbytheregulation.Theautomobileandoilindustriesbitterlycontestedtheregulation,inpublicandinthecourts.Incontrast,inFrancethepol-icyprocesswasnon-adversarial,withminimalpublicparticipationandnegligibledebateinacademiccircles.WearguethatCalifornia’sstringentregulationspurredthedevelopmentofinnovativehybridandfuelcellvehiclesmoreeffectivelythantheFrenchapproach.However,inspiteofthedifferences,bothCaliforniaandFrancehavebeenunabletoputasubstantialnumberofEVsontheroad.Ourcomparisonofferssomebroadlessonsabouthowpolicydevelopmentswithinacultureinfluenceboththedevelopmentoftechnologyandtheimpactofhumansontheenvironment.KeywordsEnvironmentalpolicy.Technologypolicy.Policystyles.Airpollution.Sustainabletransport.ElectricandhybridvehiclesD.Calef()VisitingFellow,FondazioneEniEnricoMattei,CorsoMagenta,6320123Milan,Italye-mail:[e-mail],24,00185Rome,ItalyR.GobleResearchProfessor,EnvironmentalScienceandPolicyDepartment,ClarkUniversity,950MainStreet,Worcester,MA01610Springer2PolicySci(2007)40:1–34IntroductionInanefforttoreduceairpollutioninLosAngelesandothermetropolitanareasinthestateofCalifornia,theCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard(CARB)1adoptedinSeptember1990aplantoencouragethedevelopmentanduseofzeroemissionvehicles(ZEVs).Atthetimeonlybattery-poweredelectricvehicles(EVs)qualifiedasZEVswhileotherpotentialZEVtechnologies,suchasfuelcellsandflywheels,werefarfrombeingcommerciallyviable.TheZEVmandatewasjustonecomponentofamulti-prongedattackonpollution,butitwastheonethatattractedthemostattentionthroughoutthefollowingdecade.2TheregulationcreatedinCaliforniaisanexampleoftechnology-forcing;itrequiredtheregulatedindustrytoproduceandsellefficientEVs,withinasetperiodoftime,eventhoughthetechnologywasnotfullydevelopedwhentheregulationswerecreated.Asinthecaseofthe1970CleanAirActAmendments(CAAA)thatcompelledtheautoindustrytointroducecatalyticconverters,themajorautomakers,theoilindustryaswellasseveralpolicyanalystsbitterlycontestedtheZEVregulation.IndeedthemandateddevelopmentofEVstriggeredacontroversyaboutthemeritsofthenewtechnologythatengagedsubstantialpublicpar-ticipationinCaliforniaandintherestofthecountry.Thisisnotsurprising.Toafargreaterdegreethanpeopleinotherindustrializedcountries,Americansoftenvigorouslydebatetech-nologicalissues,whetherconcerningelectriccars,informationtechnologies,antidepressantdrugs(Prozac),publichealthmeasures(fluoridation)ornationaldefensesystems(StrategicDefenseInitiative).Andthecontroversiesthattypicallyaccompanypublicdiscourseonanyofthesetechnologieshaveusuallyintensifiedeachtimethenewtechnologywasregulatedbythefederalgovernmentor,asinthecaseoftheZEVmandate,byastateagency.3Overthesametimeperiod,startingin1992,andthroughoutthe1990s,theFrenchgov-ernmentdesignedpoliciesandpassedlegislationtoencouragethedeploymentofEVsasameanstoimproveairquality.ButinFrancetheprocessofcreatingregulationsdesignedtopromoteEVswasdevoidofconflictbetweengovernmentandindustryandtheroleofinterestgroupswasmuchmorerestrainedthanwasthecaseintheUnitedStates.IndeedonewouldhavebeenhardpressedtofindanydebateatallaboutEVsinFrance.OurstudycontraststheEVpoliciesadoptedinCaliforniaandFrance,therelationshipsbetweenindustryandgovernment,societalattitudestowardtechnologyandtheroleofin-terestgroups.WeexplorethedistinctivefeaturesofUSregulationofairpollutioninthetransportationsectoranddescribehowandwhyAmericanshavepaidheightenedattentiontoelectriccars,showhowpolarizedthedebateaboutEVswasintheUnitedStates,andcontrastthatdebatewiththecollegialatmospherethatcharacterizedtheemergenceofEVsinFrance.WecomparewhathashappenedtodateinthetwosettingswithrespecttoEVtechnologyandtheeffectsonurbanairpollution.Ourobjectiveistoextractfromthecomparisonsomebroadlessonsabouthowpolicydevelopmentswithinacultureinfluencebothtechnologydevelopmentandhumanimpactsontheenvironment.1Establishedin1967topromoteandprotectpublichealth,theCARBhasfocusedonthreemainobjectives:(1)attainandmaintainairqualitythroughoutthestate;(2)conductresea