竞争法视野下转基因产品标识法律规制研究

发布时间：2018-06-25 18:34

本文选题：竞争法 + 转基因产品标识　；参考：《华中农业大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：转基因产品标识与非转基因产品标识作为来源证明、贸易管理的手段,构成劣势或优势竞争资源,不仅关乎消费者的知情权和选择权,也影响市场竞争秩序、经营者利益及公共利益。已有的研究仅仅着眼于实证研究、规范分析的视角,局限于制度本身的完善,无法有效解决产品的转基因和非转基因标识的规制完善问题。从竞争法的视野研究转基因产品和非转基因产品标识的法律规制则能够结合标识的市场竞争功能及影响,权衡消费者、经营者和公共利益,探讨适合我国的转基因产品标识规制路径。结合此思路,本研究主要围绕以下几方面进行:第一部分分析了本文的基本概念、内涵及理论。主要分析了转基因产品标识的概念及内涵,转基因产品标识与一般产品标识、原产地标识、商标的区别,转基因产品标识的主要功能,以及竞争法的基本理论、竞争法与转基因产品标识的关系。第二部分从竞争法的视角对我国转基因产品标识现状及规制进行审视。首先介绍了我国转基因产品标识现状,包括使用转基因/非转基因标识的产品范围、转基因/非转基因标识的使用方式及特点。接着从竞争法视野对我国转基因产品标识相关的法律规范进行了分析,厘清我国转基因产品标识法律规制的依据、具体内容及特点。最后,对其所存在的问题进行分析。包括标识范围偏颇对经营者造成不平等限制、“零容忍”要求减少了消费者选择、认证缺失使消费者知情权易被侵犯、不合理的主体设置对竞争秩序造成负面影响。第三部分仍然是以竞争法的视角对域外转基因产品标识法律制度进行解析,总结归纳美国、欧盟、日本、加拿大、阿根廷的转基因产品标识规制现状。美国为统一市场标识制度而制定了妥协性的信息披露法案,法案重视标识的真实性,并坚持实质等同原则,阈值等细节则有待确定。欧盟强调对消费者、有机产品相关利益者的保护,并将统一欧盟市场标识规则作为重要的考量因素,其阈值为政治决策而非科学标准。日本的转基因产品标识制度在产品范围和阈值选择上都独具特色。加拿大的自愿标识标准对认证和标识声明的准确性的严格要求使其标识规制独树一帜,而阈值的选择也以行业证据为基础。第四部分集中对不同标识选择对竞争秩序的影响进行了分析,包括强制标识与自愿标识、阳性标识/阴性标识、阈值等基本规则对消费者、经营者和市场竞争秩序的影响。第五部分分析了竞争法视野下我国转基因标识规制的完善,主要在规制制度和规制机制两个方面提出了完善建议。结论认为我国现阶段可以继续已有的强制标识,但应当设置2%的阈值,细化标识产品范围,并且明确非转基因标识的认证要求。农业部、食品药品监督管理局和国家工商总局依法分别对转基因生物、食品和其他产品的转基因相关标识行使规制职权。
[Abstract]:The identification of genetically modified products and non-genetically modified products as a source proves that the means of trade management constitute inferior or superior competitive resources, which not only relate to consumers' right to know and choose, but also affect the order of market competition. The interests of the operator and the public interest. The existing research only focuses on empirical research, normative analysis perspective, limited to the perfection of the system itself, can not effectively solve the problem of the regulation of GMO and non-GMO labeling of products. From the perspective of competition law, the legal regulation of the labeling of GM products and non-GM products can balance the interests of consumers, operators and the public by combining the market competitive function and impact of the labels. To explore the appropriate regulatory path for the identification of genetically modified products in China. Combined with this idea, this research mainly focuses on the following aspects: the first part analyzes the basic concept, connotation and theory of this paper. This paper mainly analyzes the concept and connotation of GM product marking, the difference between GM product label and general product label, origin mark, trademark, the main function of GM product label, and the basic theory of competition law. The relationship between competition law and labeling of genetically modified products. The second part examines the status quo and regulation of GM products in China from the perspective of competition law. Firstly, the status quo of transgenic product identification in China is introduced, including the product scope of using transgenic / non-transgenic label, the usage mode and characteristics of transgenic / non-transgenic label. Then from the perspective of competition law, this paper analyzes the legal norms related to the identification of genetically modified products in China, and clarifies the basis, content and characteristics of the legal regulation of labeling of transgenic products in China. Finally, the existing problems are analyzed. It includes the unfair restriction of the scope of identification, the requirement of "zero tolerance" reduces the choice of consumers, the lack of certification makes consumers' right to know easy to be infringed, and the unreasonable subject setting has a negative impact on the competition order. The third part is still from the perspective of competition law to analyze the legal system of the identification of foreign GM products, and summarize the status quo of the labeling of GM products in the United States, the European Union, Japan, Canada and Argentina. The United States has formulated a compromise information disclosure bill for the purpose of unifying the market marking system. The bill attaches importance to the authenticity of the mark and adheres to the principle of substantive equivalence, while the details such as threshold are yet to be determined. The EU emphasizes the protection of consumers and relevant stakeholders of organic products, and takes the unified EU market labeling rules as an important consideration, the threshold of which is political decision-making rather than scientific criteria. The identification system of genetically modified products in Japan has its own characteristics in terms of product scope and threshold selection. Canada's voluntary marking standards require the accuracy of certification and identification statements to be unique, and the choice of thresholds is based on industry evidence. The fourth part focuses on the impact of different marking selection on the competitive order, including mandatory marking and voluntary marking, positive / negative marking, threshold and other basic rules on consumers, operators and market competition order. In the fifth part, the author analyzes the perfection of the regulation of GMO labeling in the view of competition law, and puts forward some suggestions on how to improve the regulation system and regulation mechanism. The conclusion is that our country can continue the existing mandatory marking at the present stage, but we should set a threshold of 2%, refine the range of marking products, and clarify the certification requirements of non-transgenic marking. The Ministry of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration and the State Administration of Industry and Commerce respectively exercise the authority to regulate genetically modified organisms, foods and other products in accordance with the law.
【学位授予单位】：华中农业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.294

【参考文献】