国际气候法律新秩序的困境与出路:基于“德班-巴黎”进程的分析

发布时间：2018-07-13 09:25

【摘要】：从德班到巴黎的国际气候谈判进程,尤其是《巴黎协定》的达成,表明了国际气候法律秩序构建的新方向,即在缔约主体的广泛性、谈判轨道的统一性、减排义务分担的动态性方面进一步强化。但上述阶段性进步并不能掩盖新秩序构建在主体立场分化、谈判程序中的“民主失灵”以及减排目标和减排行动之间的背离等困境。为构建一个减排雄心与减排实效相匹配的新秩序,应从制度应对和路径转变两方面加以推进:一方面,在微观层面作出及时的制度应对,包括通过碳交易市场的完善等措施形成对相关主体的选择性激励;引入“最大多数同意”原则改善谈判程序低效的现象;通过明确的“过渡期”设置为发展中国家未来承担有约束力的减排义务提供缓冲;采取动态复合标准使减排义务分担方案更易为各国接受。另一方面,从宏观层面推动路径转变,包括推动共同但有区别责任原则的重心从“共同责任”向“区别责任”转移;推动减排模式向“自下而上”与“自上而下”相结合转变;推动国际气候法律秩序向“一体化”与“多元化”相结合转变。
[Abstract]:The process of international climate negotiations from Durban to Paris, especially the conclusion of the Paris Agreement, shows the new direction of the construction of the international climate legal order, that is, the universality of the contracting parties and the unity of the negotiating track. The dynamic aspect of the sharing of emission reduction obligations has been further strengthened. But the progress can not cover up the difficulties of the new order, such as the division of the main position, the "democratic failure" in the negotiation process, and the deviation between the emission reduction target and the emission reduction action. In order to build a new order that the ambition of emission reduction and the effectiveness of emission reduction should be matched, it should be pushed forward from two aspects of institutional response and path change: on the one hand, timely institutional response should be made at the micro level; Including the improvement of the carbon trading market and other measures to form a selective incentive to the relevant parties, the introduction of the "most agree" principle to improve the efficiency of the negotiation process; Through a clear "transition period" to provide a buffer for developing countries to undertake binding emission reduction obligations in the future; adopt dynamic composite standards to make emission reduction burden sharing more acceptable to all countries. On the other hand, we should push the path change from the macro level, including the shift of the principle of common but differentiated responsibility from "common responsibility" to "differentiated responsibility", and the combination of "bottom-up" and "top-down" to the model of emission reduction; Promote the international climate legal order to "integration" and "pluralism" combined transformation.
【作者单位】：中国法学杂志社;

【参考文献】