Gao Jie, Liu Chang, Chen Tian

Keywords： Brownfield Revitalization; Brownfield Liability; Financial and Tax Initiatives; Public Participation

Abstract：

This paper examines changes in US brownfield policies and programs, and analyzes their periodic characteristics since the Superfund program was introduced in 1980. Data is gathered from the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s web-based documents and related literature. Three periods are identified: environmental protection, remediation and reuse, and comprehensive planning. The transition from “Permanent Cleanup” to “Areawide Planning” is gradually realized, which effectively coordinates the ecological benefits from sustainable development with the economic and social benefits from land redevelopment. Changes in the rights of federal and state government as well as the transition from a punitive regulatory framework to a cooperation regulatory framework are two main features. Changes in the role of American public administration, upgrading of connotation of brownfield and refinement of governance policy are proved to be key factors to contribute the transition. The risk-based governance and overall-balanced liability recognition mechanisms, the multiple sustainable financing mechanisms with fairness in consideration, and the public interest  tatement platform to be implemented can provide the referential experience and ideology for brownfield governance in China.

Funds：

• [1] 王慧, 江海燕, 肖荣波, 等. 城市棕地环境修复与再开发规划的国际经验[J]. 规划师, 2017(3): 19-24.
  [2] ANDREWS R N L. Managing the environment, managing ourselves: a history of American environmental policy[M]. 2nd ed. Yale University Press, 2006.
  [3] EPA Superfund Redevelopment Program[EB/OL]. [2012-05]. www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/recycle. 
  [4] EPA Brownfields and Land Revitalization[EB/OL]. [2014-01]. www.epa.gov/brownfields.
  [5] 张百灵. 中美土壤污染防治立法比较及对我国的启示[J]. 山东农业大学学报( 社会科学版), 2011, 1: 79-84, 124.
  [6] 罗思东. 美国城市的棕色地块及其治理[J]. 城市问题, 2002(6): 64-67.
  [7] SANDRA A, VICTORIA J, PETER R, et al. The definition of brownfield[J].Journal of Environmental Planning & Management, 2000, 43(1): 49-69.
  [8] 周聪惠. 美国“超级基金“制度研究——探索污染土地修复中的用地规划协调途径[J]. 国际城市规划, 2013(6): 89-96.
  [9] REISCH M E A, BEARDEN D M. Superfund and the brownfields issue[M].New York: Novinka Books, 2003.
  [10] KIRKWOOD N. Why is there so little residential redevelopment of brownfields?: framing issues for discussion[M]. Joint Center for Housing
  Studies, Graduate School of Design [and] John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 2001.
  [11] BOWMAN A O, PAGANO M A. Transforming America’s cities: policies and conditions of vacant land[J]. Urban Affairs Review, 2000, 35(4): 559-581.
  [12] GATTUSO D J. Revitalizing urban america: cleaning up the brownfields[R].Washington, DC: Competitive Enterprise Institute, 2000.
  [13] MEYER P B, THOMAS S L. Lessons from private sector brownfield redevelopers: planning public support for urban regeneration[J]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 2000, 66(1): 46-57.
  [14] BRACHMAN L. Turning brownfields into community assets: barriers to redevelopment[M] // GREENSTIEN R, SUNGU-ERYILMAZ Y eds. Recycling the city: the use and reuse of urban land. Massachusetts:Cambridge Press, 2004.
  [15] PAULL E. The environmental and economic impacts of brownfields redevelopment[R]. Northeast Midwest Institute, 2008: 21-29.
  [16] 黄静, 王诤诤. 上海市旧区改造的模式创新研究: 来自美国城市更新三方合作伙伴关系的经验[J]. 城市发展研究, 2015(1): 86-93.
  [17] RAHM D. Superfund and the politics of US hazardous waste policy[J].Environmental Politics, 1998, 7(4): 75-91.
  [18] GIBBONS J S, ATTOH-OKINE N O, LAHA S. Brownfields redevelopment issues revisited[J]. International Journal of Environment & Pollution, 1998,10(1): 151-162(12).
  [19] 赵沁娜, 戴亚素, 范利军. 美国棕地再开发的融资模式及其对我国的启示[J]. 价值工程, 2014, 33(31): 15-17.
  [20] REHA M J. Riverside mills: a model for successful brownfields remediation and restoration[D]. Brown University, 1999.
  [21] PAGE G W. Contaminated sites and environmental cleanup[M]. The US: Academic Press, 1997.
  [22] ALEXANDER F S. Land bank strategies for renewing urban land[J]. Journal of Affordable Housing & Community Development Law, 2005, 14(2): 140-169.
  [23] BORAK D, MEEK C. Putting the pieces together: local government coordination of brownfield redevelopment[M]. International City/County Management Association, 1999.
  [24] GUTE D M, MICHAEL T. Revitalizing neighbourhoods through sustainable brownfields redevelopment: principles put into practice in Bridgeport, CT[J].Local Environment, 2006, 11(5): 537-558.
  [25] GROSS J, JANIS-APARICIO M, LEROY G. Community benefits agreements: making development projects accountable[M]. Good Jobs First,2002.
  [26] MAY P J, S?REN C W. Politicians, managers, and street-level bureaucrats: influences on policy implementation[J]. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2009, 19(3): 453-476.
  [27] HOOD C. The “new public management” in the 1980s: variations on a theme[J]. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 1995, 20(2): 93-109.
  [28] ALBERINI A, LONGO A, TONIN S, et al. The role of liability, regulation and economic incentives in brownfield remediation and redevelopment: evidence from surveys of developers[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 2005, 35(4): 327-351.
  [29] GREENBERG M, JANE L M. Brownfields redevelopment, preferences and public involvement: a case study of an ethnically mixed neighbourhood[J]. Urban Studies, 2000, 37(13): 2501-2514. [30] PAGE G W, ROBERT S B. Characteristics and land use of contaminated brownfield properties in voluntary cleanup agreement programs[J]. Land Use Policy, 2006, 23(4): 551-559.
  [31] KUSHNER J A. Brownfield redevelopment strategies in the United States[J]. Ga. St. UL Rev, 2005, 22: 857.
  [32] PIPPIN A M. Community involvement in brownfield redevelopment makes cents: a study of brownfield redevelopment initiatives in the United States and Central and Eastern Europe[J]. Ga. J. Int’l & Comp. L, 2008, 37: 589.
  [33] WOLF-POWERS L. Community benefits agreements and local government: a review of recent evidence[J]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 2010, 76(2): 141-159.
  [34] BEEN V. Community benefits agreements: a new local government tool or another variation on the exactions theme? [J]. The University of Chicago Law Review, 2010,77(1): 5-35.
  [35] MCCARTHY L. The brownfield dual land-use policy challenge: reducing barriers to private redevelopment while connecting reuse to broader community goals[J]. Land Use Policy, 2002, 19(4): 287-296.
  [36] SROKA R. TIF for that: brownfield redevelopment financing in North America and Calgary’s Rivers District[J]. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 2016, 9(2): rsw003.
  [37] ECKERD A, ROY L H. Public incentives, market motivations, and contaminated properties: new public management and brownfield liability  eform[J]. Public Administration Review, 2015, 75(2): 252-261.
  [38] KIM E J, PATRICK M. Periodic characteristics and implications of programs and policies for brownfield management in the USA[J]. Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture, 2015, 43(1): 96-107.