荷蘭的生物經(jīng)濟(jì)
——城市政策與試點(diǎn)項(xiàng)目評述

和馬町/Martijn de Geus

荷蘭的生物經(jīng)濟(jì)
——城市政策與試點(diǎn)項(xiàng)目評述

和馬町/Martijn de Geus

有些國家致力于經(jīng)濟(jì)創(chuàng)新，意圖從資源日漸枯竭、廢物排放嚴(yán)重的線性經(jīng)濟(jì)向低排放、對資源無影響的循環(huán)經(jīng)濟(jì)模式轉(zhuǎn)型，荷蘭就是其中之一。這種轉(zhuǎn)型的愿望主要驅(qū)動因素是資源和氣候需要保護(hù)，以避免對全球生態(tài)系統(tǒng)造成不可逆轉(zhuǎn)的損害或?qū)е孪嚓P(guān)經(jīng)濟(jì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。與同等國家相比，荷蘭的生物基政策發(fā)展起步較早，因?yàn)楹商m早在2007年就已經(jīng)編制了一項(xiàng)國家生物經(jīng)濟(jì)戰(zhàn)略來刺激這一轉(zhuǎn)向，并在2012年和2013年進(jìn)一步明確。一個(gè)國家性機(jī)構(gòu)——荷蘭企業(yè)代理機(jī)構(gòu)RVO——一直負(fù)責(zé)實(shí)施國家生物經(jīng)濟(jì)政策，并且有若干研究中心也已經(jīng)承擔(dān)了這一主題，其中包括荷蘭轉(zhuǎn)型研究所及專門為此建立的荷蘭生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)中心。此外，還確定或啟動了若干重要部門、7個(gè)優(yōu)先“首選地區(qū)”和各自的試點(diǎn)項(xiàng)目。國家生物經(jīng)濟(jì)戰(zhàn)略的主要目標(biāo)是實(shí)現(xiàn)可持續(xù)的生物質(zhì)能增值、生物基材料的生產(chǎn)和剩余生物燃料、電能和熱能的利用。本文介紹了荷蘭生物經(jīng)濟(jì)戰(zhàn)略的實(shí)施、考量政府政策如何適應(yīng)這一過程、并推出若干關(guān)于城市和建筑規(guī)模的相關(guān)（試點(diǎn)）項(xiàng)目。

生物經(jīng)濟(jì)，荷蘭，政策，試點(diǎn)項(xiàng)目

荷蘭經(jīng)常使用“生物經(jīng)濟(jì)”[1]這一術(shù)語，但是由于整個(gè)歐洲都已踏上資源節(jié)約型可持續(xù)經(jīng)濟(jì)之路，所以在荷蘭只要一提到生物經(jīng)濟(jì)，其含義就符合歐洲關(guān)于“生物經(jīng)濟(jì)”的定義[2,3]。根據(jù)這一定義，生物經(jīng)濟(jì)的目標(biāo)是一種更具創(chuàng)新性和低排放的經(jīng)濟(jì)模式，將“可持續(xù)農(nóng)業(yè)和漁業(yè)、糧食安全和可再生生物資源在工業(yè)方面的可持續(xù)利用，同時(shí)確保生物多樣性和環(huán)保”的要求相結(jié)合[4]。與同等國家相比，荷蘭的生物基政策發(fā)展起步較早1）[3]，主要是受經(jīng)濟(jì)目標(biāo)的推動，因?yàn)閼?zhàn)略和環(huán)境立法2-4）[2]在當(dāng)時(shí)就已經(jīng)基本到位5）[3]。追求近乎全面的落實(shí)，包括建立國家政策、執(zhí)行機(jī)構(gòu)、全面研發(fā)方案，以及在區(qū)域和地方層面的具體實(shí)施。在本文的第一部分，我們將討論國家生物經(jīng)濟(jì)政策與研發(fā)方案的建立。第二部分將以生物基三角洲地區(qū)為主要案例，討論與城市設(shè)計(jì)有關(guān)的政策影響。第三部分將簡要介紹生物建設(shè)的原則。本文將作出簡短總結(jié)，并提出政策建議。

1 國家生物經(jīng)濟(jì)戰(zhàn)略和政策

荷蘭國家生物經(jīng)濟(jì)戰(zhàn)略與這一歐洲定義緊密相關(guān)而又獨(dú)具發(fā)展特色，它于2007年初步啟動，并于2012年進(jìn)一步發(fā)展，且于2013年正式成為更廣泛的國家政府議程《綠色發(fā)展與可持續(xù)性經(jīng)濟(jì)》的組成部分。該《綠色發(fā)展計(jì)劃》是在向議會提交的一封政府信函中提出的，其中，向生物經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)型是更廣泛的政策建議框架的一部分，意思是將經(jīng)濟(jì)向循環(huán)模式轉(zhuǎn)型（圖1）。作為循環(huán)經(jīng)濟(jì)的一部分，生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)用于處理積極生產(chǎn)生物基材料、產(chǎn)品和生物能源的部分經(jīng)濟(jì)活動，并對其所需的生物質(zhì)感興趣[5]。

負(fù)責(zé)的部委包括：經(jīng)濟(jì)部（主管部委）、基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施與環(huán)境部和外交部[6]。此外，還有荷蘭生物經(jīng)濟(jì)中心，它受到多所大學(xué)及機(jī)構(gòu)的支持，包括瓦赫寧根大學(xué)和研究所（WUR）、荷蘭應(yīng)用科學(xué)大學(xué)和范哈倫斯坦應(yīng)用科學(xué)大學(xué)以及若干私營企業(yè)支持。

1.1 政府戰(zhàn)略解釋

據(jù)經(jīng)濟(jì)部長亨克·坎普及其同事基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施與環(huán)境部國務(wù)秘書威爾瑪·曼斯菲爾德介紹，《綠色發(fā)展計(jì)劃》有賴于廣泛而全面的合作[5]。因此，其政策綱要的主要原則是獲得議會、大眾社會和民營企業(yè)的支持。此外，他們還發(fā)現(xiàn)，荷蘭現(xiàn)有的開放經(jīng)濟(jì)體系有可能促成國際合作。以這種方式，該途徑可以從即將到來的綠色發(fā)展機(jī)遇中獲益更多，并創(chuàng)造一個(gè)與其他先驅(qū)經(jīng)濟(jì)體交流經(jīng)驗(yàn)的平臺。與當(dāng)時(shí)的其他歐盟國家相比，荷蘭具備一些優(yōu)勢，因?yàn)橹С稚锝?jīng)濟(jì)的部分政策制度已經(jīng)到位。這包括稅收優(yōu)惠政策，也包括作為生物經(jīng)濟(jì)一部分的私營和公共實(shí)體之間的合作，例如，政府已經(jīng)與私營企業(yè)密切合作的可持續(xù)資源開采領(lǐng)域。為進(jìn)一步說明《綠色發(fā)展計(jì)劃》的特點(diǎn)，我們可以從隨后的政策中確定4個(gè)基石：

（1）智能部署市場激勵(lì)

這意味著產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)的價(jià)格應(yīng)當(dāng)更準(zhǔn)確地反映面向自然環(huán)境的生產(chǎn)與消費(fèi)的外部效果。

（2）法律法規(guī)的激勵(lì)框架

（3）創(chuàng)新

（4）政府作為網(wǎng)絡(luò)伙伴

這意味著面向可持續(xù)經(jīng)濟(jì)的轉(zhuǎn)變進(jìn)程中，政府扮演的角色更像一個(gè)知識機(jī)構(gòu)、政府組織、自下而上的舉措與企業(yè)之間進(jìn)行合作的協(xié)調(diào)人。政府在這一進(jìn)程中的責(zé)任是管理公眾利益，維持不同利益群體間的公平性，并將地方舉措與其他國際計(jì)劃建立聯(lián)系。

在這個(gè)總體政策框架內(nèi)，加上它的4個(gè)基石，共有8個(gè)領(lǐng)域被確定為重大挑戰(zhàn)和機(jī)遇。其中一個(gè)領(lǐng)域是生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)，這些領(lǐng)域的完整列表中包括向循環(huán)經(jīng)濟(jì)的轉(zhuǎn)變，包括：

（1）能源：邁向可持續(xù)、可負(fù)擔(dān)得起且可靠的能源供應(yīng)

（2）生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)：實(shí)現(xiàn)以可持續(xù)資源（生物質(zhì)）替代有限的燃料

（3）氣候：向規(guī)模宏大的國家（國際）氣候政策轉(zhuǎn)變

（4）廢物：變廢物為資源

（5）建筑部門：建設(shè)節(jié)能型建筑環(huán)境

（6）食品：實(shí)現(xiàn)可持續(xù)農(nóng)業(yè)和糧食供應(yīng)

（7）移動性：朝著可持續(xù)發(fā)展的模式發(fā)展

（8）水：可持續(xù)性用水

除了作為有意識的資源和氣候生產(chǎn)努力的一部分之外，荷蘭社會經(jīng)濟(jì)理事會還向荷蘭政府和議會提供關(guān)于社會和經(jīng)濟(jì)政策的重點(diǎn)建議，計(jì)劃中也進(jìn)行了援引，強(qiáng)調(diào)生物經(jīng)濟(jì)對荷蘭貿(mào)易平衡以及就業(yè)機(jī)會的積極影響。以下建議概述了政府政策如何刺激生物經(jīng)濟(jì)的具體行動：

·專注于生物質(zhì)在生物精煉技術(shù)中的最佳利用，并進(jìn)一步開放和應(yīng)用生物基材料

·完善知識密集型生物制造業(yè)的結(jié)算方式

·建立歐盟可持續(xù)生產(chǎn)和資源采購標(biāo)準(zhǔn)

·鼓勵(lì)示范項(xiàng)目和試點(diǎn)工廠進(jìn)行研究、創(chuàng)新和試驗(yàn)

·廢除法律法規(guī)對生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)的限制

1.2 研究和發(fā)展

除了政策綱要外，荷蘭還為生物和生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)的研究和發(fā)展（R&D）提供了許多類型的直接支持。根據(jù)研究[3]，已經(jīng)實(shí)施了若干關(guān)于生物質(zhì)生產(chǎn)及其轉(zhuǎn)化為燃料、能源、化學(xué)品和生物材料研究的項(xiàng)目。在2013年，政策綱要?jiǎng)倓偩幹仆瓿芍?，國家投資支持總額就已達(dá)1.2億歐元。根據(jù)同樣的調(diào)查，生物能源（包括生物氣/厭氧分解、燃燒和氣化）的學(xué)科大多受益于這種支持，而生物塑料和其他生物材料則是新興應(yīng)用領(lǐng)域[3]。此外，區(qū)域投資總額達(dá)15億歐元，其中最大的份額又被分配給生物能源（高達(dá)2/3）。區(qū)域舉措主要集中在與具體市場形成有關(guān)的創(chuàng)新周期的最后階段，但表現(xiàn)出顯著的區(qū)域差異性[3]4。荷蘭公共研究項(xiàng)目在活動、工具和參與者方面有很廣泛的覆蓋面。資金主要集中在農(nóng)業(yè)生產(chǎn)以及開發(fā)和實(shí)施專用轉(zhuǎn)換技術(shù)。

The term bioeconomy[1]is often used in the Netherlands, but since Europe at large is setting course for a resource-efficient and sustainable economy, whenever there is a reference to bioeconomy in the Netherlands, it is used in accordance with the European definition of the term[2,3]. According to this definition, the goal of the bioeconomy is to create a more innovative and low-emissions economic model, which reconciles demands for 'sustainable agriculture and fisheries, food security, and the sustainable use of renewable biological resources for industrial purposes, while ensuring biodiversity and environmental protection'. Biobased policy development in the Netherlands started relatively early compared to peer countries1）[3], and is mostly driven by economic objectives, as strategic and environmental legislation2-4）[2]were already largely in place at the time5）[3]. A more or less full implementation is pursued, including the installation of a national policy, an implementation agency, a comprehensive research and development (R&D) program, and concrete implementation on both regional and local levels. In the first section of this paper, we discuss the installation of the National Bioeconomy Policy, together with the R&D Program. Te second part discusses the urban design–related implications of the policy, with the Biobased Delta region as its main case. The third part briefly introduces principles of biobased building. Te paper concludes with a short summary and policy recommendations.

1 從線性經(jīng)濟(jì)（左）到循環(huán)經(jīng)濟(jì)（右）的轉(zhuǎn)型示意，結(jié)合了資源回收的經(jīng)濟(jì)鏈條位于中心/From linear (left) to circular economy (right); with a transitional model, ie. 'chain-economy with recycling' in the centre. （圖片來源/Source: From Waste To Resource Program (VANG-program) of the government of the Netherlands）

1 National Bioeconomy Strategy and Policy

Strongly related to this European definition, but partially developed separately, is the Netherlands' National Bioeconomy Strategy, which started in 2007, was further developed in 2012, and was officially made part of a wider national government agenda on 'Green Growth and a Sustainable Economy' in 2013. This 'Green Growth Plan' was proposed in a government letter to the parliament in which the transition towards a bioeconomy was part of a larger framework of policy suggestions referring to the economic transition towards a circular model (Fig. 1). As part of a circular economy, a biobased economy is used to address that part of the economy that is active in producing biobased materials, products, and bio-energy, with interest in the biomass needed to achieve it[5].

Te responsible ministries include the Ministry of Economic Affairs (the main ministry in charge), the Ministry for Infrastructure and the Environment, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs[6]. In addition, there is the Netherlands' Centre for Biobased Economy, which is supported by several universities, including Wageningen University and Research (WUR), Inholland University of Applied Sciences, and Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Sciences, as well as private enterprises.

1.1 Government Strategy Explained

According to the Minister of Economic Affairs, Henk Kamp, and his colleague Wilma Mansveld, state secretary for the Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, the Green Growth Plan relies on broad, integral collaboration[5]. A key principle in their policy outline, therefore, is to gather support from parliament, general society, and private enterprises. In addition, they identify the existing open economy in the Netherlands as creating the possibility of enabling an international approach. Such an approach could benefit more broadly from upcoming opportunities for green growth, and create a platform for the exchange of experiences with other pioneering economies. Compared to other EU countries at the time this strategy was developed, the Netherlands had some advantages, since parts of a policy system supporting the bioeconomy were already in place. These included tax incentives as well as collaboration between private and public entities as part of the bioeconomy – for example, in the area of sustainable extraction of resources, in which the government had already been working closely with private enterprises. To further specify the characteristics of the Green Growth Plan, we can identify four cornerstones of the subsequent government policy:

(1) Smart deployment of market stimuli

Meaning that prices of products and services should more accurately reflect the external effects that producing and consumption has toward the natural environment.

(2) Stimulating framework of laws and regulations

(3) Innovation

(4) Te government as network partner

This means that in the transition process towards a more sustainable economy, the government will act more as a facilitator of collaboration between knowledge institutes, government organizations, bottom-up initiatives and companies. The government's responsibility in this process is to govern the public interest, to maintain a fair balance between the interests of the other parties, and to connect local initiatives with other international plans.

2 生物基三角洲地理位置示意，包含生物基走廊的3個(gè)主要區(qū)域：綠色化學(xué)園區(qū)（專注于化學(xué)）、Nieuw Prinsenland（生物質(zhì)處理）和穆爾代克（港口區(qū)）/Location of BioBased Delta, with three main sectors of the bio based corridor:the Green Chemistry Campus (chemistry), Nieuw Prinsenland(treatment of biomass) and Moerdijk (port area).（圖片來源/ Source: http://www.greenchemistrycampus.com/en/campus/ location/）

3 泰爾訥普生物園/Biopark Terneuzen

2 城市規(guī)劃與生物經(jīng)濟(jì)

作為對生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)和相關(guān)政策對荷蘭實(shí)際城市規(guī)劃和城市設(shè)計(jì)實(shí)施的影響的介紹，本節(jié)列舉了荷蘭西南地區(qū)的兩類相關(guān)實(shí)例。第一個(gè)例子是自上而下式舉措，緊跟在本文第一部分關(guān)于政府舉措的討論之后，與（政府）機(jī)構(gòu)、私營企業(yè)和區(qū)域利益相關(guān)者合作，共建“生物基三角洲”。第二個(gè)例子是相同三角洲地區(qū)的自下而上式自主研發(fā)提案，由荷蘭政府科研經(jīng)費(fèi)贊助的馬可·弗穆倫建筑工作室領(lǐng)導(dǎo)進(jìn)行合作研究。

2.1 生物基三角洲

第一個(gè)例子是將區(qū)域間自上而下式的舉措組合在一起，視為“生物基三角洲”（圖2）。該三角洲包括澤蘭省、南荷蘭省和布拉班特省，都位于西南河三角洲地區(qū)，那里的企業(yè)家、知識機(jī)構(gòu)和政府正在共同致力于生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)。該地區(qū)擁有大型農(nóng)業(yè)、園藝和化工部門，地理位置優(yōu)越（沿安特衛(wèi)普—鹿特丹中軸線），且具有建設(shè)各種深海港口的空間。在“生物基三角洲”計(jì)劃中，這些機(jī)會共同為跨國公司、中小型企業(yè)（SME領(lǐng)域）、知識機(jī)構(gòu)和政府機(jī)構(gòu)之間的合作提供了一個(gè)契機(jī)。各方以“生物基三角洲”的名義聯(lián)合在一起，共同致力于生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)的3個(gè)主要方面：

（1）綠色原材料

研究和開發(fā)代替或補(bǔ)充化石燃料的替代原料。該主題包括4個(gè)主要的“材料方案”，分別關(guān)注藻類和海藻、農(nóng)產(chǎn)品、天然成分，以及天然纖維。

（2）綠色建筑砌塊

這些建筑砌塊包括各種替代基礎(chǔ)材料，以代替目前由化學(xué)芳烴苯、甲苯、二甲苯和苯酚制成的合成材料、化學(xué)品和油漆、膠等涂料。這些生物基替代品是由綠色原料制成的。該部分還研究如何更有效地利用農(nóng)業(yè)的殘余液體（例如，在甜菜生產(chǎn)周期中產(chǎn)生的汁液）。

（3）可持續(xù)加工

加工業(yè)本身可以通過對各種生產(chǎn)周期和相關(guān)加工的了解得以整合改進(jìn)。清潔技術(shù)和綠色原材料及可持續(xù)能源的開發(fā)和（大規(guī)模）利用，除了更好地利用CO2、水和熱等剩余流量外，在實(shí)現(xiàn)更加可持續(xù)的工業(yè)進(jìn)程中也起著重要作用。

生物基三角洲本身包括3個(gè)主要的區(qū)域集群，與一個(gè)特別重點(diǎn)，共同形成一體化生物基走廊，即綠色化學(xué)園區(qū)（專注于化學(xué)）、普林森蘭德新區(qū)（生物質(zhì)處理）和穆爾代克（港口區(qū)）。在生物基三角洲內(nèi)，已經(jīng)確定了幾個(gè)優(yōu)先位置，標(biāo)記為“優(yōu)選位置”，標(biāo)志著該地區(qū)綠色創(chuàng)新和創(chuàng)業(yè)企業(yè)家的存在。優(yōu)選位置目前約有9處，但將繼續(xù)擴(kuò)大。這里列出了3個(gè)代表性的優(yōu)選位置集群：

·歐洲生物基地與泰爾訥普生物園

這是通過培訓(xùn)流程操作員使用模擬器組織面向年輕人的展覽以及公司之間的網(wǎng)絡(luò)活動來實(shí)現(xiàn)的。泰爾訥普生物園（圖3）刺激并促進(jìn)位于此處的公司之間的協(xié)同增效作用。該生物園參與了諸如WarmCO2等項(xiàng)目，將工業(yè)過程中的剩余熱量和CO2提供給溫室養(yǎng)殖部門。該生物園還擁有生物柴油和生物質(zhì)能生產(chǎn)基地。

·生物處理試點(diǎn)設(shè)施（代爾夫特）

在這個(gè)開放的試點(diǎn)設(shè)施中，公司、知識機(jī)構(gòu)和聯(lián)盟可以將其生物技術(shù)進(jìn)程從實(shí)驗(yàn)室擴(kuò)大到工業(yè)生產(chǎn)規(guī)模。多種產(chǎn)品通過發(fā)酵技術(shù)實(shí)現(xiàn)轉(zhuǎn)化，包括乙醇、復(fù)合生物分子和用于生物塑料的單體等小分子。

·綠色化學(xué)園區(qū)

綠色化學(xué)園區(qū)促進(jìn)了農(nóng)業(yè)與化學(xué)交界生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展。該園區(qū)提供優(yōu)質(zhì)的設(shè)施和最先進(jìn)的商業(yè)發(fā)展計(jì)劃，重點(diǎn)是生物塑料、化學(xué)品和涂料。

除了頂級位置外，生物基三角洲內(nèi)還有幾個(gè)較小的區(qū)域性舉措，圍繞生物經(jīng)濟(jì)中的特定生產(chǎn)周期展開。

Inside this overall policy framework, with its four cornerstones, a total of eight domains have been identified, each presenting important challenges and opportunities. One of these domains is the biobased economy. The full list of domains that comprise the change toward a circular economy include:

(1) Energy: towards a sustainable, affordable and reliable energy supply

(2) Biobased economy: towards a replacement of finite fuels with sustainable resources (biomass)

(3) Climate: towards an ambitious (inter) national climate policy

(4) Waste: from waste to resource

(5) Building sector: towards an energy-efficient built environment

(6) Food: towards a sustainable agriculture and food supply

(7) Mobility: toward sustainable modes of transport

(8) Water: sustainably working with water

In addition to being part of a conscious effort in resource and climate production, the Social and Economic Council of the Netherlands, which advises the Dutch government and parliament on key points of social and economic policy, is also quoted in the plan underlining the positive effects that the focus on the bioeconomy will have on the Dutch trade balance, and on employment opportunities. Actions on how government policy can stimulate specific aspects of the bioeconomy are outlined in the following recommendations:

·Focus on the optimal use of biomass for biorefinery techniques and further developing and applying biobased materials.

·Improve the settlement terms for the knowledge-intensive, biobased manufacturing industry.

·Establish EU-level criteria for the sustainable production and sourcing of resources.

·Stimulate research, innovation, and experiments for demonstration projects and pilot factories.

·Abolish the limitations for a biobased economy in laws and regulations.

1.2 Research and Development

In addition to the policy outlines, the Netherlands is also providing many types of direct support to R&D of the biobased and bioeconomy. According to research by Langeveld[3], several programs have been implemented to research biomass production and its conversion into fuels, energy, chemicals, and biomaterials. As early as 2013, just after compiling the policy outlines, national investment support totalled up to €120 million. According to the same survey, the discipline of bio energy (which includes biogas/anaerobic digestion, combustion, and gasification) is profiting most from this support, while bio plastics and other biomaterials are emerging application fields[3]. In addition, regional investments amounted to a total of €1.5 billion, with the largest share again being allocated to bioenergy (up to two thirds). Regional initiatives mostly focus on the final stage of the innovation cycle, relating to specific market formation, but showing considerable regional differentiation[3]4. Dutch public research programs are broadly oriented in terms of activities, instruments, and participants. Funding is strongly focused on agricultural production and the development and implementation of dedicated conversion technologies.

2 Urban Planning and the Bioeconomy

As an introduction to the effects of the biobased economy and related policies on actual urban planning and urban design implementations in the Netherlands, this section covers two types of related examples, both focused on the same southwestern region in the Netherlands. Te first example is a topdown initiative, directly following the government initiative discussed in the first part of this paper, with a partnership among (government) institutes, private enterprises, and regional stakeholders, working together on the 'Biobased Delta'. Te second example is a bottom-up, self-initiated research proposal for the same delta region, by a research collaborative lead by architecture studio Marco Vermeulen and sponsored by a Dutch government research grant.

2.1 Biobased Delta

The first example considers an interregional, top-down initiative, grouped together under the name 'Biobased Delta' (Fig. 2). This delta consists of the provinces of Zeeland, Zuid-Holland, and Brabant, all located in the southwestern river delta area, where entrepreneurs, knowledge institutes, and governments are working together towards a biobased economy. Te region has large agriculture, horticulture, and chemical sectors, an advantageous geographic location (along the Antwerp-Rotterdam axis), and room for various deep sea ports. In the Biobased Delta initiative, these opportunities together provide a setting for collaboration between multinationals, small-and medium-sized enterprises (the SME sector), knowledge institutions, and government agencies. These various parties are united under the name Biobased Delta, and together focus on three primary aspects of the biobased economy:

(1) Green raw materials

This includes researching and developing alternative raw materials to replace or supplement fossil fuels. This theme comprises four main material programs, focused on algae and seaweed, agricultural produce, natural ingredients, and natural fibres, respectively.

(2) Green building blocks

These building blocks include various alternative base materials to replace types of synthetic materials, chemicals, and coatings, like paint and glue, which are currently made from the chemical aromatics benzene, toluene, xylene, and phenol. These biobased alternatives are instead made from green raw materials. This sector also researches how fibres from agricultural residual flows can be utilized more effectively (e.g. in the sugar beet production cycle).

(3) Sustainable processes

The process industry itself could advance through understanding the various production cycles and related processes. Clean technology and the development and (large-scale) use of green raw materials and sustainable energy could then, in addition to better utilising residual flows like CO2, water, and heat, play an important role in achieving more sustainable industry processes.

Te Biobased Delta itself comprises three main regional clusters with a specific focus, that together form an integral biobased corridor; that is, the Green Chemistry Campus (focused on chemistry), Nieuw Prinsenland (treatment of biomass), and Moerdijk (the port area). Inside the Biobased Delta, several preferential locations, labelled as 'top locations', have been identified to mark the presence of green innovations and pioneering entrepreneurs in that specific area. Three representative top location clusters are listed below:

·Bio Base Europe and Biopark Terneuzen

The Bio Base Europe Training Centre in Terneuzen (Fig. 3) is an innovative educational centre that promotes the development of the biobased economy. Its activities include training process operators using simulators, organizing an exhibition for young people, and facilitating networking activities between companies. Biopark Terneuzen stimulates and facilitates synergy between companies in the area. The Biopark is involved in, for example, WarmCO2, which supplies residual heat and CO2from industrial processes to the greenhouse farming sector. The Biopark also houses production locations for biodiesel and biomass.

4 生物基骨干，生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)一體化/Biobased backbone; bio based economic integration（圖片來源/Source: http:// marcovermeulen.eu/projecten/se/142/biobasedbackbone/ (under creative common license)）

2.2 生物基骨干

第二個(gè)城市規(guī)劃示例是針對同一個(gè)三角洲地區(qū)的自下而上式自主設(shè)計(jì)方案（圖4），一項(xiàng)由馬可·弗穆倫建筑工作室主導(dǎo)的合作研究，參與者包括荷蘭轉(zhuǎn)型研究所、開發(fā)商BLOC公司和“綠色經(jīng)濟(jì)知識經(jīng)紀(jì)人”堅(jiān)實(shí)基礎(chǔ)機(jī)構(gòu)，并由荷蘭創(chuàng)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)基金提供的荷蘭政府科研經(jīng)費(fèi)資助。該提案最初是對三角洲地區(qū)再生改造的調(diào)查，因?yàn)槭乖摰貐^(qū)成為世界上最繁榮區(qū)域的原始條件完全以化石能源為基礎(chǔ)，這在當(dāng)時(shí)已不再適于與即將崛起的亞洲和南美市場對抗。因此，一度繁榮的地區(qū)，就業(yè)下降，地方生態(tài)系統(tǒng)也因長期過度抑制和采伐而遭受重創(chuàng)；導(dǎo)致當(dāng)?shù)厣鐓^(qū)崩潰，風(fēng)景也再不似往日那般美麗。

事實(shí)上，這項(xiàng)研究利用三角洲地區(qū)作為一個(gè)普遍問題的具體焦點(diǎn)。這個(gè)普遍問題考慮的是當(dāng)代經(jīng)濟(jì)模式對當(dāng)?shù)丨h(huán)境、氣候和對化石燃料嚴(yán)重依賴的負(fù)面影響。同時(shí)，選擇三角洲地區(qū)是為了說明特定地區(qū)如何利用其內(nèi)在潛力作為向生物經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)型的開始。西南三角洲地區(qū)有很多公司，特別是農(nóng)業(yè)、園藝和化學(xué)行業(yè)的公司。因此，由于可提供生物資源（通過農(nóng)業(yè)層面），連同強(qiáng)大的化學(xué)工業(yè)和這些行業(yè)之間的良好協(xié)作，該提案聲稱這是循環(huán)經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)型的良好起點(diǎn)。該團(tuán)隊(duì)考慮了石油化工業(yè)如何與城市供熱相結(jié)合，從而可以利用工業(yè)剩余熱量為住宅供熱。此外，生物基循環(huán)原則可為當(dāng)?shù)剞r(nóng)民提供替代性的收入來源，他們種植的作物不再僅僅是糧食，而且也是生物質(zhì)資源的一部分。這些有機(jī)資源可以成為服裝、制藥和其他產(chǎn)品生產(chǎn)中所需石油的可持續(xù)性替代品。該提案旨在將每個(gè)“農(nóng)民或市民、生物基三角洲中的每個(gè)人”轉(zhuǎn)變成生物質(zhì)供應(yīng)商[7]。該提案還聲稱，三角洲內(nèi)各部門和不同利益相關(guān)者之間的合作和互動將為所有資源和流動創(chuàng)造一個(gè)“相互依存”或“智能化”網(wǎng)絡(luò)，從而形成一個(gè)更為清潔的環(huán)境，現(xiàn)有的油氣管道可以在其中“轉(zhuǎn)換為綠色組分的運(yùn)輸”。設(shè)計(jì)人員稱，“生物基骨干”已出現(xiàn)，因此，生物質(zhì)和其他資源進(jìn)行交換的計(jì)劃的題目，正在區(qū)域范圍內(nèi)成長為“強(qiáng)大、有效和可持續(xù)的代謝體系”。由于該計(jì)劃提出了一個(gè)相互依存的體系，農(nóng)業(yè)、景觀和化工行業(yè)可以在這個(gè)體系中更好地與環(huán)境融合，景觀本身也可以轉(zhuǎn)變，從而實(shí)現(xiàn)“技術(shù)與自然之間的可持續(xù)平衡，而且生活在三角洲地區(qū)的人民的生活質(zhì)量更高”[7]。

3 生物基建筑

除了政策和規(guī)劃方面，本節(jié)還考慮了生物基建筑的建設(shè)。利希滕貝格教授指出，建筑業(yè)在全球物質(zhì)消費(fèi)中占40%以上[8]，所以，他的問題是建筑行業(yè)如何推動向生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)的轉(zhuǎn)型。為了回答這個(gè)問題，我們應(yīng)該首先了解，生物基建筑本身主要集中在兩個(gè)方面。首先，它以各種形式關(guān)注能源（能源消耗、生產(chǎn)、能源效率等），其次涉及材料。據(jù)利希滕貝格教授稱，我們“遲早會徹底解決能源問題”，但是他最關(guān)注的方面是材料和資源在實(shí)際建筑中的可持續(xù)利用。注重產(chǎn)品鏈分析的整體化方法似乎是一個(gè)合乎邏輯的答案，讓建筑業(yè)積極地將生物材料用于新建筑結(jié)構(gòu)。這種方法是更普遍化的可持續(xù)建設(shè)戰(zhàn)略的補(bǔ)充，包括使用較少的材料進(jìn)行建設(shè)、通過更有效的規(guī)劃提高空間利用率從而降低新建筑需求、建造適應(yīng)性強(qiáng)的靈活性建筑、建筑垃圾的循環(huán)利用等。關(guān)于提出的生產(chǎn)鏈方法，我們從確定幾個(gè)可以利用生物質(zhì)基（原料）資源替代化石燃料和產(chǎn)品的生產(chǎn)鏈開始。這些替代資源可以分為兩大類[8]：

·有目的培育的主要產(chǎn)品

這些被稱為“基本資源”，包括玉米、大豆、木材、麻、藻類和草等作物。

·副產(chǎn)品和廢品

這些產(chǎn)品可以從景觀管理、林業(yè)和農(nóng)業(yè)過程中產(chǎn)生，可以包括路邊草、修剪下來的枝葉、釀酒粕、糞便、有機(jī)廢物和污水污泥。

因此，生物基建筑可以被定義為一種符合“從哪里來，回哪里去”的生物性原則的施工方法，即在建筑過程中使用的材料最終（可以）再次返回到自然[8]。荷蘭和國外已經(jīng)有若干實(shí)例證明可以在建筑中使用這些生物基材料之一替代某些“傳統(tǒng)制造”的材料。例如：

·在外墻使用禾桿（比利時(shí)胡斯建筑事務(wù)所在Refuge II 使用）或者，

·在屋頂使用禾桿（瑞典Wing?rdhs建筑事務(wù)所的一個(gè)訪客中心曾使用）；

·使用夯土墻（例如，馬丁·勞奇在他奧地利自宅中的使用）；

·室內(nèi)裝飾采用全木結(jié)構(gòu)（Onix建筑師在荷蘭的一座私人住宅中使用）或者，

·使用回收的有機(jī)織物纖維作為綠植墻的基礎(chǔ)，覆蓋在建筑物的整個(gè)外觀、完整木結(jié)構(gòu)的頂部、荷蘭代爾夫特理工學(xué)院的BlackBox Stylos展覽館內(nèi)的底層（和馬町與曼納爾茲設(shè)計(jì)，圖5）。

4 結(jié)論和建議

總之，生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)首先可以被認(rèn)為是一個(gè)極具發(fā)展前景的更可持續(xù)性經(jīng)濟(jì)，也是在向循環(huán)經(jīng)濟(jì)模式轉(zhuǎn)型的同時(shí)使當(dāng)?shù)厝嗣?、?jīng)濟(jì)和環(huán)境受益的手段。

考慮到進(jìn)一步發(fā)展的建議，在過去5～10年中許多國家就已經(jīng)開始實(shí)施生物和生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)的國家戰(zhàn)略[3]，但有些國家的實(shí)施更進(jìn)一步。理想情況下，生物經(jīng)濟(jì)應(yīng)該是一個(gè)不產(chǎn)生任何浪費(fèi)的有效經(jīng)濟(jì)體系，不再完全依賴以化石為基礎(chǔ)的原料，其運(yùn)行主要依靠生物質(zhì)（植物基原材料等，如樹木、其他植被和藻類，以及動物材料，如內(nèi)臟和烹飪脂肪等）。關(guān)于荷蘭的情況，從本文概述可以看出，生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)的各個(gè)方面，如政策、大規(guī)模區(qū)域性自上而下式計(jì)劃、自下而上式研發(fā)和小規(guī)模的建設(shè)工作，的確在共同努力，為進(jìn)一步推進(jìn)這一轉(zhuǎn)型創(chuàng)造了鼓舞人心的氣氛。

然而，為了全面發(fā)展到生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)，第一個(gè)挑戰(zhàn)似乎是將生物經(jīng)濟(jì)概念的核心——主要能源載體向生物質(zhì)轉(zhuǎn)型——作為政策的必要條件。由于在過去幾年中，政治辯論已強(qiáng)調(diào)了生物燃料的潛在負(fù)面影響[9]11，治理機(jī)構(gòu)似乎“看不到我們可以更有效地利用生物質(zhì)”。換言之，它已經(jīng)“看不到”創(chuàng)建一個(gè)高效、綜合、循環(huán)的經(jīng)濟(jì)模式以便首先從生物質(zhì)中獲得最具經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值的組成部分的首要戰(zhàn)略。這一主要戰(zhàn)略可以被稱為“最佳生物能增值”，可以取代致使初級可再生資源應(yīng)用不利的政府政策，例如從農(nóng)業(yè)原料生產(chǎn)生物燃料，可以將其首先用于食品，然后再將剩余原料用于低價(jià)值應(yīng)用，如能源。

因此，除了主要關(guān)注相對低產(chǎn)能量替代品的現(xiàn)有政策制度之外，“最佳生物質(zhì)增值”似乎提供了巨大的經(jīng)濟(jì)和生態(tài)機(jī)會。它可能涉及廣泛的社會行動者，將每個(gè)人都變成“生物質(zhì)供應(yīng)商”，使每個(gè)人都成為循環(huán)經(jīng)濟(jì)的一部分，與當(dāng)?shù)厣鷳B(tài)環(huán)境息息相關(guān)。綜上所述， “只有具有生態(tài)可持續(xù)性、符合社會公正且廣受大眾支持的生態(tài)經(jīng)濟(jì)才有真正的未來”[3]。

·Bioprocess Pilot Facility (Delft)

In this open pilot facility, companies, knowledge institutes, and consortia can scale up their biotechnological processes from the laboratory to industrial production. A wide variety of products are converted using fermentation techniques, including ethanol, complex biomolecules, and small molecules like monomers for bioplastics.

·Green Chemistry Campus

The Green Chemistry Campus accelerates the biobased economy on the interface between agriculture and chemistry. The campus offers excellent facilities and state-of-the-art business development programs with a focus on bio plastics, chemicals, and coatings.

In addition to the top locations, there are several smaller regional initiatives inside the Biobased Delta that focus on a specific production cycle inside the bioeconomy.

2.2 Biobased Backbone

The second urban planning example is a bottom-up, self-initiated design proposal for the same delta region, by a research collaborative lead by architecture studio Marco Vermeulen, which also includes the Dutch Research Institute for Transitions, developer BLOC, and 'green economy knowledge brokers' The Solid Grounds, funded by a Dutch government research grant provided by the Creative Industries Fund NL (Fig. 4). Te proposal started as an inquiry into regenerating the delta region, since the original conditions for making the region into one of the most prosperous in the world were fully fossil economy–based and no longer viable against upcoming markets in Asia and South America. Terefore, in a once-prosperous region, employment was declining and local eco-systems were suffering as part of long-term control and exploitation, resulting in collapsing local communities and the loss of oncebeautiful landscapes.

In fact, the research utilises the delta region as a specific focus for a general problem. The general problem considers the negative impact of the contemporary economic model on the local environment, climate, and heavy dependency on fossil fuels. At the same time, the delta region was chosen to show how a specific region can utilise its inherent potential as a start to transitioning into a biobased economy. The southwestern delta region is abundant with companies in the agriculture, horticulture, and chemistry sectors. Thus, because of the availability of biological resources (through the agricultural sector), together with a strong chemical industry and good collaboration between these sectors, the proposal claims this is a good starting point for the transition to a circular economy. Te team considers, for instance, how the petro-chemical industry could be combined with city heating, so that residual industrial heat could be used to heat houses. In addition, the biobased circular principle could provide an alternative source of income for local farmers, who, instead of growing crops for food, could consider their crops part of biomass resources. For instance, these organic resources could be a sustainable alternative for oil in the production of clothing, medicine, and other products. The proposal aims to transform every 'farmer or citizen, everybody in the Biobased Delta' into a supplier of biomass[7]. The proposal also claims that the cooperation and interaction between sectors and stakeholders in the delta will create an 'interdependent or 'smart' grid for all resources and flows', resulting in a cleaner environment, in which existing oil and gas pipelines could be 'converted for transportation of green components'. The designers claim that a 'biobased backbone' emerges, hence the title of the plan, where biomass and other resources are being exchanged, growing into a 'robust, efficient and sustainable metabolic system on a regional scale'. And since the plan proposes an interdependent system in which the agricultural, landscape, and chemical industries are better integrated with the environment, the landscape itself could also transform, resulting in 'a sustainable balance between technology and nature, and a better living quality for the people living in the cities and towns of the delta area'[7].

5 BlackBox Stylos展館，代爾夫特理工，荷蘭，與周圍環(huán)境的對比/BlackBox Stylos Pavilion, TU Delft, the Netherlands, comparison with surrounding context（圖片來源/Source: 作者提供/Image by author）

3 Biobased Building

In addition to policy and planning, this section considers the construction of biobased buildings, since, according to Professor Lichtenberg, the construction sector accounts for over 40% of global material consumption[8]; as such, he asks how the construction industry can contribute to the transition to a biobased economy. In order to answer this question, we should first understand that biobased building itself consists largely of two aspects. Firstly, it concerns energy, in a variety of forms (consumption, production, efficiency, etc.). Secondly, it concerns materials. According to Professor Lichtenberg, we will 'definitely solve the energy aspects sooner or later', but he is mostly concerned about the sustainable use of materials and resources in the actual construction of buildings. An integral approach that is focused on production chain analysis seems to be a logical answer, in which the construction industry actively looks to utilise biobased materials in the building of new structures. This approach is in addition to more general sustainable building strategies that include using fewer materials, improving spatial efficiency with more efficient programming and thus requiring fewer new buildings, the construction of adaptable and flexible buildings, recycling of construction waste, and so on. Regarding the proposed production chain approach, we can start to identify several chains in which biomass based (raw) resources can be utilized to substitute fossil fuel–based materials and products. These alternative resources can be divided into two main categories[8]:

·Purposefully cultivated main products

These are so called 'primary resources', which include crops such as corn, soy, wood, hemp, algae, and weeds.

·By-and waste products

Tese can originate from processes in landscape management, forestry, and agriculture, and can include roadside grasses, prunings, brewers' grains, manure, organic waste, and sewage sludge.

Biobased building can thus be defined as a construction method in which the materials used in the process of building, eventually (could) return to nature again[8], according to the biotic principles of the cradle-to-cradle philosophy. There are already several built examples that have substituted certain traditionally manufactured materials with one of these biobased materials, both in the Netherlands and abroad. Examples include:

·the use of straw in exterior walls (Refuge II by Goes Architecten, Belgium)

·the use of straw in roofs (in a visitor centre by Wing?rdhs architects in Sweden)

·the use of earthen walls (e.g. by Martin Rauch, in his house in Austria)

·a full house interior in wood (by Onix architects in a private house, the Netherlands), and

·the use of recycled, organic clothing fabric as a base for a living plant wall that covers the entire exterior of the building, on top of a full wooden structure in the BlackBox Stylos pavilion for TU Delft, the Netherlands (by De Geus and Mannaerts. Fig. 5).

4 Conclusion and Recommendations

First of all, the biobased economy can be considered a highly promising aspect of a more sustainable economy, and a means by which to transition to a circular economic model, while simultaneously benefiting the local population, economy, and environment.

Considering recommendations for further development, according to Langeveld, many countries in the past five to ten years have started to implement national strategies for the bio and biobased economy, but some countries are further along in their implementation[3]. Ideally, the bioeconomy should be an efficient economic system that produces no waste and no longer relies entirely on fossil-based feedstock, but instead runs mainly on biomass (i.e. plant-based raw materials such as trees, other vegetation and algae, and animal material such as offal and cooking fat). As for the situation in the Netherlands, from the overview in this paper, it can be observed that various aspects of the biobased economy – policy; large-scale, regional, top-down plans; bottom-up research and development; and smaller-scale building works – indeed seem to work together in creating a stimulating climate for further advancing this transition.

However, to fully progress into a biobased economy, the first challenge seems to be to make the core of the bio-economic concept – the transition towards biomass as the primary energy carrier – a policy imperative. Since, in past years, the political debate has emphasized the potential negative effects of biofuels[9]11, it seems the governing bodies have 'lost sight of the possibility that we can make more efficient use of biomass'. In other words, they have lost sight of the primary strategy of creating an efficient, integrated, circular economic model that derives the most economically valuable components from the biomass first. This primary strategy could be titled 'optimal biomass valorization' and could replace government policies that promote less optimal applications of primary renewable resources, such as creating biofuels from agricultural feedstock that could have also been used for food (first), and then using what remains for lower-value applications, such as energy.

Thus, in addition to existing systems of policy that focus largely on relatively lowyielding energy replacements, optimal biomass valorization appears to offer enormous economic and ecological opportunities. It could involve a wide range of social actors, turning everybody into 'a supplier of biomass', making everybody part of the circular economy, linked to their local ecological environment. To conclude, 'the bio-economy only really has a future if it is ecologically sustainable, socially just, and publicly supported'[3].

注釋/Notes

1）基于參考文獻(xiàn)[3]：“早期生物經(jīng)濟(jì)政策戰(zhàn)略已經(jīng)被許多國家發(fā)表，如丹麥（2009、2012）、德國（2010、2014）、法國（2012）、美國（2012）、瑞典（2012）和南非（2013）”，而荷蘭開始于2007年/According to[3]: 'Early bioeconomy policy strategies have been published by a number of countries including Denmark (2009, 2012), Germany (2010, 2014), France (2012), the USA (2012), Sweden (2012) and South Africa (2013)' , compared to the Netherlands, that started in 2007.

2）例如，國家可再生能源行動計(jì)劃的一部分/For instance, as part of the National Renewable Energy Action Plan

3）Hoofdlijnennotitie Biobased Economy （2012）是生物基經(jīng)濟(jì)中的一個(gè)中長期愿景和戰(zhàn)略政策/ Hoofdlijnennotitie Biobased Economy (2012), is a midand long term vision and strategy for the biobased economy.

4）共同致力于經(jīng)濟(jì)增長和環(huán)境改善，且對生物經(jīng)濟(jì)持續(xù)支持/Jointly addresses economic growth and environmental improvement, and continued support for the Bioeconomy. 5）與同等國家相比，大多數(shù)情況下經(jīng)濟(jì)驅(qū)動力在生物經(jīng)濟(jì)政策的發(fā)展中都占居主導(dǎo)地位，戰(zhàn)略（食品安全）和環(huán)境（氣候變化，廢棄物減排）等方向的驅(qū)動是次要原因，參見參考文獻(xiàn)[3]/In fact, also when comparing to these peer-countries, in most cases, economic drivers are dominant reason for the development of a bioeconomy policy; strategic(food security, energy independency) and environmental (climate change, waste reduction)drivers are given a lower priority. See[3].

/References

[1] German Bioeconomy Council, 2014.

[2] 'Green growth' (kamerbrief-groene-groei-vooreen-sterke-duurzameeconomie.pdf' [2017-03-05] http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/bestanden/documentenenpublicaties/kamerstukken/2013/03/28/kamerbriefgroene-groei-voor-eensterke-duurzame-economie/ kamerbrief-groene-groei-voor-een-sterkeduurzameeconomie.pdf.

[3] Langeveld, JWA. et al., Te Biobased Economy and the Bioeconomy in the Netherlands, 2016, Biomass Research Wageningen.

[4] European Commission, Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe, Brussels, 2012. [2017-03-05] http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/ innovating-for-sustainable-growth-pbKI3212262/.

[5] Kamp, H., and Mansveld, W., Kamerbrief groene groei voor een sterke duurzame economie, Rijksoverheid, 2013.

[6] Burns, C., Bioeconomy Factsheet of the Netherlands, 2015, Bio Base NWE.

[7] Vermeulen, et al. Biobased Backbone (2015) [2017-03-05] http://marcovermeulen.eu/projecten/se/142/ biobasedbackbone.

[8] B?ttger, W., Bio Based Bouwen, 2016, Centre of Expertise Bio Based Economy.

[9] Asveld L., R. van Est & D. Stemerding (Eds), Getting to the core of the bio-economy: A perspective on the sustainable promise of biomass. Te Hague: Rathenau Instituut, 2011.

[10] National Bioeconomy Profile the Netherlands. [2017-03-05] https://biobs.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sites/ default/files/generated/files/country/National%20 Bioeconomy%20Profile%202014%20The%20 Netherlands_0.pdf .

Bioeconomy in the Netherlands: A Review on Urban Policy and Pilot Projects

The Netherlands is one of the countries that aims to innovate its economy from a resource-depleting, high-emission linear economy to a low-emission, resourceneutral circular model. This desire for change is largely driven by a need for resource and climate protection, in order to avoid irreversible damage to global ecosystems and related economic risks. Biobased policy development in the Netherlands started relatively early compared to peer countries, as the Dutch government compiled a national Bioeconomy strategy to stimulate this transition in 2007, and further defined it in 2012 and 2013. A national agency, the RVO (the Netherlands Enterprise Agency), has been tasked with implementing national Bioeconomy policies, and several research centres have taken on this topic, including the Dutch Research Institute for Transitions, and the Netherlands' Centre of Expertise Biobased Economy, established specifically for this purpose. In addition, several key sectors, seven priority 'top locations', and respective pilot projects have been identified or initiated. Te key objectives in the National Bioeconomy Strategy are sustainable biomass valorization, the production of biobased materials, and the use of residues for biofuels, electricity, and heat. Tis paper focuses on the implementation of bio economic strategy in the Netherlands, considers how government policies accommodated this process, and introduces several relevant (pilot) projects on the urban and architectural scale.

bioeconomy, the Netherlands, policy, pilot projects

清華大學(xué)

2017-03-09