国际航空排放全球治理的多维进路

发布时间：2018-04-29 16:33

本文选题：国际航空排放 + 全球治理　；参考：《吉林大学》2014年博士论文

【摘要】：随着全球气候变化的加速突变和国际航空运输的快速发展，国际社会越来越关注国际航空排放问题。欧盟航空排放指令更是将国际航空排放问题卷入了风口浪尖，全球航空气候谈判变得波谲云诡。国际航空排放的全球性、负外部性特征印证了国际航空排放全球问题的属性。国际航空排放不只是一个国际问题，更是一个多维问题。全球治理理论为解决这一全球问题拨开了迷雾。应对国际航空排放问题需要建立一种有效的全球治理机制。这种治理机制的基础不是自上而下的政府权威，而是多元主体的广泛参与，以及在国际社会确立协调与合作机制并充分地实施。其实质是使相互冲突的或不同的利益得以调和，并采取持续的联合行动。这既包括正式制度和规则，也包括各种被认为符合共同利益的非正式制度安排。这种治理机制强调治理主体的多元化。主权国家、政府间国际组织、非政府国际组织、市民社会、跨国公司将共同构成国际航空排放治理的主体和力量，从而形成国际航空排放治理的多维进路。国际航空排放全球治理的国际进路尤其强调充分发挥国际民航组织的领导作用。事实证明，国际民航组织通过大会制定了关涉国际航空排放的系列决议，专门成立了航空环境保护委员会，提出了环境保护的战略目标，毋庸置疑推动了国际航空排放的稳步推进。国际民航组织因其诸多的内在限制又使国际航空排放问题变得步履维艰，这些内在限制包括国际民航组织立法缺乏强制力、立法缺失“共同但有区别的责任”原则、立法程序存在缺陷、目的和目标有待修订等等。国际民航组织未来在主导国际航空谈判、引领技术升级、促进国际合作方面会发挥不可替代的作用，从而彰显这一全球治理国际进路的价值。欧盟将航空业纳入碳排放交易体系引发了全球关注。国际航空排放全球治理的区域进路认可欧盟可以成为国际航空排放的合法治理主体。但是，欧盟单方面处理国际航空排放问题缺乏法律根基。欧盟航空排放指令不仅违反了《芝加哥公约》关于国家领空主权的习惯国际法，而且与《芝加哥公约》关于禁止征收航空排放税的规定相悖。在与国际环境法规范的兼容性考量层面，欧盟航空排放指令对欧盟成员国和非欧盟成员国的航空器运营人实行同样的免费配额计算公式，并没有给发展中国家航空公司的发展需要必要的关注，明显有悖于“共同但有区别的责任”原则。通过考察《京都议定书》的相关文本，欧盟这种单边的行动，恰恰与议定书要求各国合作解决气候问题的多边行动相左。然而，在美国航空运输协会等诉英国能源及气候变化国务大臣案中，欧洲法院的裁决又在一定程度上凸显了在欧洲诉讼的尴尬局面。作为一个由成员驱动的国际组织，WTO为解决国际航空排放提供了一个新的路径。国际航空运输既是一种服务贸易行为，同时又是货物贸易行为。从《服务贸易总协定》之《关于空运服务的附件》分析，欧盟航空排放指令并不是一项影响业务权或与业务权的行使直接有关的服务措施，并不能从《服务贸易总协定》所涵盖的事项得以排除。欧盟航空排放指令与GATT最惠国待遇和国民待遇存在冲突，该指令对来自未规制航空二氧化碳排放国家的产品与来自规制航空二氧化碳排放国家的产品区别对待，违反了最惠国待遇；而该指令导致增加货物运费，给进口产品造成了额外的成本负担，违反了国民待遇。美国《清洁空气法》第二篇B部专门规制航空排放，而NextGen行动进一步推动了航空排放的缩减。相较于美国，我国缺乏规制航空排放的专门立法，更多停留在政策层面，在航空减排监管等方面仍有待于进一步完善。同时，中美在国际航空谈判中不同的立场折射出发展中国家和发达国家关于航空排放的利益博弈。在国际航空排放全球治理的国家层面，应进一步健全并完善各国国内航空减排立法，强化并充实国内航空减排行动。作为一个航空企业的行业联盟，国际航空运输协会提出了解决航空环境问题的四大支柱战略，，即改进技术、更加有效的飞行、改进基础设施及以市场为基础的措施。在南非召开的第69届年会上，国际航空运输协会表决通过了CNG2020决议。但遗憾的是，该决议不仅明显违背发展中国家应对气候变化谈判的立场，同时也明显违背《芝加哥公约》确定的“非歧视”和“各国公平获得发展机会”的原则。国际航空运输协会作为全球治理的多元主体之一，应积极参与国际航空排放谈判，更好地发挥其协调作用。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of global climate change and the rapid development of international air transport, the international community is paying more and more attention to the international aviation emission problem. The EU aviation emission directive has been involved in the international aviation emission problem, and the global air climate negotiations have become deceitful. The global and negative externality of international aviation emissions The attributes of international aviation emissions are confirmed.
International air emissions are not only an international problem, but also a multidimensional problem. The global governance theory has opened the fog to solve the global problem. It is necessary to establish an effective global governance mechanism to deal with international aviation emissions. The basis of this governance mechanism is not the top-down government authority, but the extensive participation of multiple subjects. And, as well as the establishment and implementation of coordination and cooperation mechanisms in the international community, the essence of which is to reconcile conflicting or different interests and to take sustained joint action. This includes both formal institutions and rules, as well as a variety of non positive institutional arrangements, which are considered to be in the common interest. This governance mechanism emphasizes the governance owners. Sovereign states, intergovernmental international organizations, non-governmental international organizations, civil society, and multinational corporations will jointly form the main body and strength of international air emission governance, thus forming a multidimensional approach to international air emission governance.
The international approach to international aviation emissions is particularly stressed by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). In fact, the International Civil Aviation Organization has established a series of resolutions concerning international aviation emissions through the general assembly. It has set up a special aviation Environmental Protection Committee, put forward the strategic objective of environmental protection, and undoubtedly promoted the country. International aviation emissions are steadily advancing. The internal restrictions of ICAO have made the problem of international aviation emissions difficult. These inherent limitations include the lack of coercion in the legislation of the international civil aviation organization, the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities", the shortcomings of the legislative procedure, and the need to be revised, and so on. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) will play an irreplaceable role in leading international aviation negotiations, leading technology upgrading and promoting international cooperation, thus demonstrating the value of the international approach to global governance.
The EU's integration of the aviation industry into the carbon emissions trading system has caused global attention. The regional approach to international aviation emissions global governance recognised that the EU can become the legitimate governance body of international aviation emissions. However, the EU has a lack of legal foundation to deal with international aviation emissions unilaterally. The EU aviation emissions directive is not only a violation of the "Chicago public". The customary international law on sovereignty of national airspace, and contrary to the provisions of the Chicago Convention on the prohibition of the expropriation of air discharge taxes. The EU aviation emission directive has the same free quota formula for aircraft operators in EU and non EU member states in compatibility with the norms of international environmental law, There is no necessary attention to the development of the developing country airlines, which is obviously contrary to the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities". By examining the relevant texts of the Kyoto Protocol, the unilateral action of the EU is exactly the same as the multilateral action that the protocol requires countries to cooperate to solve climate questions. As a member driven international organization, WTO provides a new way to solve international aviation emissions. International air transport is a service trade act, as a member driven international organization. It is also an act of trade in goods. From the analysis of the general agreement on trade in services, the annex to the air service, the EU aviation emission directive is not a direct related service that affects the business rights or the exercise of the business rights, and can not be excluded from the matters covered by the general agreement on trade in services. EU aviation emissions directive and GATT most favoured There is a conflict between national treatment and national treatment, which is a violation of MFN treatment for products from unregulated carbon dioxide emitting countries and products from countries that regulate air carbon dioxide emissions. The directive causes an increase in freight charges and an additional cost burden to the imported products, which violates the nationals. Encounter.
The United States, the clean air law, second B departments specializes in the regulation of air emissions, and the NextGen action further promotes the reduction of air emissions. Compared with the United States, our country lacks special legislation to regulate air emissions, which is more at the policy level and remains to be further improved in the air emission reduction supervision. Different positions reflect the interests game of developing countries and developed countries on air emissions. At the national level of international aviation emissions global governance, we should further improve and improve domestic air emission reduction legislation, strengthen and enrich the action of domestic aviation emission reduction.
As an industry alliance of an airline, the international air transport association has proposed four pillars of the aviation environment problem, namely, improving technology, more effective flight, improving infrastructure and market based measures. At the sixty-ninth annual meeting held in South Africa, the International Air Transport Association voted through the CNG2020 resolution. Unfortunately, the resolution is not only clearly contrary to the stance of developing countries on climate change negotiations, but also clearly violates the principle of "non discrimination" and "fair access to development" in the Chicago convention. The International Air Transport Association, as one of the pluralistic subjects of global governance, should actively participate in International aviation emissions. Negotiation, better play its coordination role.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D993.4;D996.9

【参考文献】