Evaluative statement
As professor Peter wrote in the book, evaluation is as indispensable as the two preceding stages of programming and implementation. In this section, we will introduce the evaluative statement of air pollution policy by analyzing its three main components: the outputs, impacts and outcomes. Besides, other independent variables also are taken into consideration to help make a more comprehensive evaluation of air pollution policies in Beijing and Hong Kong respectively.
7.1 The evaluative statement in Beijing
7.2 The evaluative statement in Hong Kong
7.3 Comparative discussion
On the foundation of pictorial drawings 7.1&7.2, we will make an assay of similarities and differences of two cities in the following elements:
The beginning of air pollution policies are advocated by environmental policy and transport policy in Beijing and Hong Kong, there is a minor difference on the purpose of traffic policy (Beijing---congestion control VS Hong Kong---providing convenience and environmental issue). Additionally, Olympic games of 2008 gave the chance for Beijing to implement new measurement, but Hong Kong took actions since the air quality was out of standard.
As for output, both these two regions take steps to reduce road circulation, but they have their own focal points. Integrating all figures above, Beijing focuses on reducing the quantity of vehicles, while Hong Kong chooses to use alterative vehicles, from an aspect of quality consideration.
The impacts correspond with outputs. It is the same first impact in Beijing and Hong Kong (the number of motor vehicles on the road is reduced), however, they all have characteristics of themselves. Beijing reaches the objective by legislative enforcement, but Hong Kong achieves the goal through offering convenience, e.g.: provision of parking and ride facilities, provision of bicycle parks, rationalization of bus routes and stops, provision of transport information on the internet and mobile application. Certainly, many other variables should be thought over. (Details seen from above pictures)
The final outcome is that ambient air quality is improved. Concerning this, the below two data collections (indicators) prove a better air quality since relevant measures were adopted.
Beijing (take procedures from 2008 until now)
Source: the Environmental Protection Department of Beijing
Hong Kong (take procedures from 1997 until now)
Source: the Environmental Protection Department of Hong Kong
Other independent variables: the obvious distinction lies between Beijing and Hong Kong is that the atrocious weather also influences the impact and outcome in Beijing, but not in the case of Hong Kong.
Conclusion
Based on the comparative air pollution policy in Beijing and Hong Kong, we noticed that these two districts are almost identical in general, but when it comes to operating aspect, they all have their own features in details.
As mentioned before, since the extraordinary nature of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), it has high degree of autonomy, including executive power, legislative, jurisdiction and economic independence. These conditions make Hong Kong dominant over Beijing in the process of carrying out air pollution policy. Moreover, the geographical preponderance provides Hong Kong with another convenience. And this is the leading reason for that they differentiate from each other with regarding to different levels of political administrative authorities, the types of PAP, coordination within PAA, discrimination in AP and chosen outputs. By and large, the principle of “one country, two system” gives rise to the essential hallmark between Mainland China and Hong Kong concerning about air pollution policy.
Transparency is another point that we discovered in the study of this policy. It is palpable to observe that data in Hong Kong is easier to get than that in Beijing, thus indicating the reason why Hong Kong gets better performance than Beijing for the implementation of the same policy. At the same time, this information obstacle also leads us into a difficult position when organizing the data collection part in the case of Beijing, therefore, we sincerely hope the mainland government can promote more later in the future.
Broadly speaking, the air pollution policy has already gained achievement to some extent no matter in Mainland China or in Hong Kong. Through comparing the every phase of a policy circle in two regions, what we expect is that the two areas can have more information exchanges regarding air pollution policy to make it a progress. As this policy is a constantly developing process, we hope every district can keep upgrading in the positive directions when carrying out more air pollution programs later in the future.