美国国内围绕《京都议定书》的争论分析（1997-1998）

  本文关键词：美国国内围绕《京都议定书》的争论分析（1997-1998），由笔耕文化传播整理发布。

        20世纪末，日益频繁的极端气候现象引发的洪水、干旱、高温等灾害引发了世界各国的普遍关注。多数研究表明，造成这种现象的原因在于人类活动排放的温室气体导致的全球变暖。鉴于气候问题的全球性特点，各国很难仅在本国范围内展开治理，于是，在知识界与社会舆论积极呼吁下，开展国际合作应对气候变化成为摆在世界各国面前的关键选择。1992年5月，联合国通过了《联合国气候变化框架公约》，该条约旨在应对全球变暖给世界各国带来的不利影响。同年六月，联合国环境与发展大会在巴西里约热内卢召开，共有154个国家签署了《公约》。此后，经历柏林、日内瓦两届缔约方会议，与会各国认识到，必须尽快制定一项明确如何采取行动的议定书。在1997年日本京都举行的《联合国气候变化框架公约》缔约方会议上，参会各国经过激烈谈判，最终制定了《京都议定书》。该条约围绕“共同而有区别的责任”原则建立了“清洁发展机制”，为实现节能减排的目标进行了创造性的制度设计，得到了国际社会多数成员的认可。美国的政治结构要求条约须经参议院审议通过方能生效，，在《京都议定书》谈判开始之前，参议院即对这一条约表现出强烈的反对意见，声称签署该条约将对美国的经济发展造成严重的损害。1997年6月25日美国参议院通过了“伯德·哈格尔决议”，要求美国政府不得签署作出强制减排承诺的条约，从而杜绝了《京都议定书》获得批准的可能。环保议题在美国国内一直具有较好的民意基础，克林顿政府也将环保作为争取国内支持和外交主导地位的重要领域。在《京都议定书》谈判中，美国副总统戈尔为协议的最终达成做出积极努力。但是，鉴于美国参议院对于该条约的态度，美国政府仅仅象征性对《京都议定书》签了字，而未提交参议院讨论。美国的这种消极态度对实现该条约设定的目标构成了重大打击；为美国日后最终退出《京都议定书》埋下了伏笔；并在国际社会制造了一个消极对待《京都议定书》的范例。美国国内对于《京都议定书》的争论来自于不同群体代表的不同立场和观点。美国的环保理念起源于19世纪的城市卫生清洁运动，经过一个多世纪的普及与发展，美国社会树立起普遍的环保意识，并形成了许多全国规模的环保团体，构成了《京都议定书》的坚定支持者。由于独特的历史和文化传统，美国形成了独具特色的理想价值观念。源自独立斗争中形成的自由主义和早期移民的新教精神共同构成了美国价值的基石，在其影响下，美国价值观中的一些意识形态成为影响其外交政策的重要因素，使美国的外交政策在伍德罗·威尔逊后表现出鲜明的理想主义特征。同时，出于保持美国在环境外交领域主导权的考虑，美国政府在《京都议定书》的谈判中表现出积极的态度。与此相对，在美国价值观中的实用主义观念的影响下，美国社会也出现了一些反环保团体。他们从经济角度出发，认为《京都议定书》的强制减排承诺可能对美国经济造成严重影响。《京都议定书》的目标设定也与美国石油化工等制造业集团的利益发生了冲突，在反对者将置于《京都议定书》与美国经济利益对立面的情况下，我们从美国参议院“伯德·哈格尔决议”出台前后的讨论可以看出，《京都议定书》的反对者正是通过双重心理暗示这样的策略，引导多数参议员的意见走向了反面。从美国国内对《京都议定书》的争论可以看出，在其分权制政治体制下，外交政策的制定实际是一个多方利益碰撞的过程。尽管有环保主义者的支持和理想主义外交的传统，美国最终将经济利益作为制定环境外交政策的首要考虑因素。由此可以看出这一时期美国环境外交经济至上的特征，为我们更好的理解美国外交政策特征提供参考。

    At the end of20th century， the increasingly frequent extreme weatherphenomena such as floods, drought, high temperature disaster attracted the attentionof all the countries in the world. Most studies show that this phenomenon was due tothe global warming caused by greenhouse gases from human activity emissions. Inview of the global characteristics of the climate problem, it’s hard to manage onlywithin the scope of each nation. As a result, under the appeal of intellectual circlesand public opinion. international cooperation on climate change became the keyselection to the world.In may1992, the UN published the ‘United Nations Framework Convention onClimate Change’. This treaty aims to manage the adverse consequences brought byglobal warming for all countries. In June, the United Nations Conference onEnvironment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro Brazil. There are154countriessigned the treaty. Since then, after two sessions of the conference of the Parties inBerlin and Geneva, the participating states recognized the need to develop a protocolto make clear how to take action as soon as possible.In the meeting of the parties to ‘United Nations Framework Convention onClimate Change’ held in Kyoto Japan1997, the ‘Kyoto Protocol’ was drawn up afterintense negotiations. This treaty built the ‘clean development mechanism’ based onthe regulation of ‘common but differentiated responsibility’. It makes creative designfor the goal of energy conservation and emission reduction so that the treaty endorsedby most members of the international community.According to the political structure of the United States, diplomatic treaties mustgo through the Senate to take effect. Before the negotiations on the Kyoto Protocol,The US Senate has shown strong opposition to this treaty. The senators declared thatsigning the treaty would cause serious harm to the economic growth of the UnitedStates On June25,1997the Senate adopted the ‘Byrd-Hagel Resolution’, which required the US government not to sign the treaties making mandatory promise onemission reduction. Therefore, there is no probability of the approval of the KyotoProtocol.The environmental issues always have good public opinion in the United States.Meanwhile, the Clinton administration takes the environmental protection asimportant areas to endeavor the domestic support and dominance of diplomatic.During the negotiations on the Kyoto Protocol, the Vice President Al Gore madepositive efforts to reach an agreement. However, In view of the attitude of the UnitedStates Senate to the treaty, the United States government didn’t submit it to the Senatefor discussion but just signed the Kyoto Protocol symbolically. The negative attitudeof the United States constitutes a damaging blow to the target set by the treaty. It alsolaid the groundwork for the United States withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol in thefuture. In addition, it created a negative example of negative to the Kyoto Protocol inthe international community.The argument about the Kyoto Protocol came from different positions and viewsof the representatives of different groups in the United States. The environmentalprotection concept of U.S. originated in the19th century urban sanitation and hygienecampaigns. After more than a century of popularization and development, Americansociety have established a common environmental awareness and many national scaleenvironmental groups. They are firm supporters of the Kyoto Protocol.Due to its unique historical and cultural traditions, the United States have formeda unique concept of value. Liberalism originate from the struggle for theindependence and protestant spirit of the early settlers together constitute thecornerstone of American values. Under its influence, some ideology in the Americanvalues become important factors affecting its foreign policy, It makes United Statesforeign policy show a distinct characteristics of idealism after the administration ofWoodrow Wilson. Meanwhile, in order to keep the leading position ofenvironmental diplomacy, the United States government was positive during thenegotiation of the Kyoto Protocol.In contrast, under the influence of pragmatism concept in American values, there were some anti-environmental groups in American society. They believed thatcommitments under the Kyoto Protocol’s mandatory cuts could have a serious impacton the US economy from an economic point of view. The goals of the Kyoto Protocolalso clashed with interest of the American manufacturing industries such aspetrochemical group. In the situation that the opponent put the Kyoto Protocol to theopposite of the US economic interests. As we can see from the discussion before andafter ‘Byrd-Hagel Resolution’ in the United States Senate. It is the opponents of theKyoto Protocol leads the views of the majority of the senators to the other sidethrough the strategy of double psychological implications.From the debate on the Kyoto Protocol in the U.S, we can see in its decentralizedpolitical system, foreign policy is the result of the collision of multi-stakeholder. Inspite of support from environmentalists and idealistic tradition of foreign affairs,eventually the United States selected economic interests as paramount considerationin the development of environmental foreign policy. This shows that characteristics ofthe economic supremacy in the US environmental foreign policy during this period.This could provide us a better understanding of the characteristics of Americanforeign policy.

美国国内围绕《京都议定书》的争论分析（1997-1998）

内容摘要4-6Abstract6-8绪论10-15第1章 《京都议定书》产生的背景及其制度安排15-21    1.1 气候变化引发的全球环境治理需求15-17    1.2 《联合国气候变化框架公约》缔约方会议谈判历程17-19    1.3 《京都议定书》治理环境问题之道：共同而有区别的责任19-21第2章 美国国内对《京都议定书》的争论及其影响21-27    2.1 克林顿政府对《京都议定书》的态度21-22    2.2 美国参议院对《京都议定书》的争论22-24    2.3 美国社会关于《京都议定书》的争论24-25    2.4 美国对待《京都议定书》态度造成的影响25-27第3章 美国国内对《京都议定书》争论的深层原因27-39    3.1 环保理念的因素27-30        3.1.1 美国社会环保观念的起源27-28        3.1.2 美国社会的环保组织与环保运动28-29        3.1.3 美国的环境保护立法与机构29-30    3.2 理想主义文化传统与环境外交主导权的因素30-35        3.2.1 美国理想主义传统的历史文化根源30-33        3.2.2 理想主义传统对美国外交政策的影响33-34        3.2.3 环境外交主导权的争夺34-35    3.3 经济至上理念的因素35-39        3.3.1 美国价值中的实用主义35-36        3.3.2 美国社会的反环保运动36-37        3.3.3 利益集团与两党政治的影响37-38        3.3.4 美国对《京都议定书》条约公平性的质疑38-39第4章 结论39-41参考文献41-50附录50-55作者简介及科研成果55-56致谢56

  本文关键词：美国国内围绕《京都议定书》的争论分析（1997-1998），由笔耕文化传播整理发布。