“共同但有区别的责任”原则的解读——对哥本哈根气候变化会议的冷静观察

哥本哈根气候变化会议中最大的立场之争可能是关于"共同但有区别的责任"原则的政治辩论。"给不平等者以不平等"和"给平等者以平等"是"共同但有区别的责任"原则的哲学基础。历史责任、矫正正义和"与能力有关的责任"体现了"给不平等者以不平等"的理念。人均排放权和平等参与权则体现了"给平等者以平等"的理念。在"共同但有区别的责任"原则视域中,不是中国,而是丹麦和美国劫持了哥本哈根气候变化会议。从中国的立场看,国际社会在哥本哈根气候变化会议之后理应在"给不平等者以不平等"和"给平等者以平等"理念基础上坚守"共同但有区别的责任"原则。首先,国际社会应将历史累积排放量和人均GDP作为适应气候变化的参考标准。其次,鉴于发展中国家的发展律令和后代人的正当需要,国际社会应将人均累积排放量和人均排放量作为减缓气候变化的参考标准。最后,国际社会必须按照平等参与原则开展将来的国际谈判。     

气候变化损失与危害的内涵与应对机制

当前全球减缓与适应的努力无法有效应对气候变化的不利影响,巨大的气候变化损失与危害需要直接的解决方案。2012年《联合国气候变化框架公约》(简称《公约》)多哈会议期间,应对气候变化不利影响的损失与危害问题突然升温,成为影响大会能否成功的关键议题之一。本文通过对气候变化损失与危害的定义和内涵的探讨,将损失与危害归纳为人类通过减缓或适应未能避免的气候变化的不利影响,并与影响、脆弱性和风险等相关概念进行辨析,提出较完整的损失与危害的概念模型,认识到应对气候变化损失与危害是对减缓与适应的有效补充。系统阐述国际上基于政治、法律和市场的损失与危害的应对机制,初步展示了损失与危害机制的可能形式,包括:小岛国联盟在《公约》下提出的"应对损失与危害的多窗口机制",主要包括保险、恢复与赔偿、风险管理,由发达国家根据国民生产总值(GNP)和温室气的排放量提供资金支持;慕尼黑保险公司提出的"慕尼黑气候保险计划",主要包括预防和保险,实施慕尼黑气候保险计划预计需要每年投入约100亿美元购买保险服务;遭受气候变化损失与危害的国家通过国际诉讼向气候变化的责任方提出赔偿要求也是一种潜在的应对机制,其原理基础是国际惯例法的重要通行原则——"无害原则",但具体实施受国际法院强制管辖权的有限性和国际诉讼高风险的制约。最后,提出损失与危害可能的学术研究方向,为构建气候变化损失与危害国际与国内应对机制及开展相关研究提供参考。     

气候风险视域下气候移民的迁移机理、现状与对策

在全球气候变化的总体背景下,全球变暖、冰川融化等渐变缓发性气候风险与干旱、洪涝等极端突变灾害性气候风险发生的概率进一步增大,其不利影响所导致的现实或潜在的大量气候移民已成为21世纪人类社会面临的严峻挑战。结合已有的研究文献对历史时期、工业革命以来,气候变化导致气候风险加剧、气候灾害频发突发与环境变迁相互作用,导致的人口迁移、人口分布变化和政治、文化、经济中心变更的机理逻辑展开分析。以把握现阶段气候移民数量不断攀升、波及区域持续扩大、临时性迁移向永久性移民持续演变、多种因素叠加交织下气候移民问题日趋复杂化的演变发展态势。并针对气候移民现状及其发展趋势,提出了需制定国际气候移民法、加强国际合作、致力减缓与主动适应并举、在国际社会建立应对政策与治理机制和管理机构、降低气候移民的社会脆弱性等对策建议。以期为有效破解气候移民难题,化解气候移民面临的各种社会风险,促进社会的良性运行与协调发展做出初步探索。     

气候变化影响下的气候移民人力资本损失与重构——以宁夏中南部干旱地区为例

在全球气候变化加速发展的背景下,极端气候和气候灾害频发,对人类生命财产安全的威胁日益加剧,并深刻影响着人类的生存和发展。中国是受气候变化负面影响最为严重的国家之一,近年来气候灾害的频率和强度不断增加,致灾原因交错而复杂,引致的受灾人口规模和经济损失不断扩大,伴随的经济与社会问题突出。为应对气候变化的不利影响,中国近些年来开始实施宏大的生态和气候移民规划。在气候移民搬迁安置过程中,气候移民的生计发展是面临的重点和难点问题。但目前针对极端气候影响下的人口迁移安置问题无论是理论研究还是实践经验都仍然十分欠缺。人力资本在可持续生计资本要素中处于核心地位,是影响气候移民生计方式和生活水平的最关键因素。根据对宁夏中南部干旱地区的田野调查与分析,本文深入研究气候变化对移民人力资本的影响机制及其带来的生计损失,发现气候移民原本羸弱的人力资本在持续干旱气候影响下加速贬损,原有农业生产经验的失灵、务工技能的短缺、营养不良以及传染性疾病的威胁等因素阻碍了气候移民的生计恢复和可持续发展。研究表明,人力资本的提升是实现气候移民生计可持续发展最根本最有效的手段,因此政府部门、移民家庭、社会组织等利益相关主体应当通力协作,重视通过加强疾病防治和提升健康水平、保证基础教育和鼓励职业教育、重视技能培训和提升技能水平、普及公共服务和促进社会融合等多种途径重构气候移民的人力资本,以促进气候移民生计可持续发展。     

应对气候变化损失与危害国际机制对中国相关工作的启示

气候变化造成的损失与危害已经威胁到人类的可持续发展,国际多边框架下减缓与适应工作进展缓慢,应对气候变化损失与危害国际机制作为潜在的直接解决方案日益引起科学界和决策者的重视。本文回顾了气候变化损失与危害国际机制的由来,深入分析了气候变化损失与危害国际机制的内涵,梳理出国内应对气候变化损失与危害相关工作的现状,主要包括国家财政转移支付、社会捐助制度和自然灾害保险。总结出其对我国应对气候变化损失与危害工作的启示,并提出国内应对气候变化损失与危害工作的对策与建议:构建我国应对气候变化损失与损害框架系统,建立国内应对气候变化损失与危害相关的政府财政转移支付、救灾捐赠体系和农业灾害保险等的整合机制;充分利用气候变化损失与危害机制中的保险工具,重点发展巨灾类保险产品的研究与开发,适度增加政府的引导和财政支持力度,不断扩大气候灾害保险的覆盖度和受益度;加强国内重点区域和领域的气候变化风险管理,通过建立完善的风险预估、灾前预警、灾中救助和灾后恢复等机制,有效降低重点区域和领域的气候灾害风险;开展气候变化损失与危害机制的科学基础研究,加强损失与危害评估理论、方法和数据获取等方面的研究;警惕气候变化损失与危害机制带来的出资压力,明确我国是发展中国家的定位,不能承担与发达国家"具有同等能力"的责任,并制定损失与危害机制谈判中"污染者付费"责任的应对策略。     

利用高分辨率气候模式对湖北未来气候变化的模拟与预估

利用高分辨率区域气候模式CCLM对湖北省降水和气温的模拟数据,对比分析了基准期(1961~2005年)的模拟结果和同期CN05.1的观测数据,并对RCP4.5情景下的未来(2006~2050年)气候进行了年尺度和季节尺度的预估。结果表明:(1)CCLM区域气候模式较好地模拟了湖北气温的演变趋势及其空间分布格局,对降水的时空波动模拟与同期CN05.1在降水时空变化上的匹配度较弱;(2)RCP4.5情景下,2006~2050年湖北T、T_(min)、T_(max)呈上升趋势。四季气温呈一致上升的趋势,冬季的上升速度最快,对年尺度上T、T_(min)、T_(max)上升的趋势贡献最大。(3)RCP4.5情景下,2006~2050年湖北T、T_(min)、T_(max)呈全区一致上升的格局。其中增幅最大的区域均集中于汉江湖北段北部。春季T、T_(min)、T_(max)增温大值区位于西北山地区;夏季中部平原区T、T_(min)、T_(max)相较于其他区域增幅较大;秋季西南山地区T和T_(max)较其他区域增温较高,T_(min)的增温大值区位于汉江湖北段北部;冬季鄂东南丘陵T相较于其他区域增幅较大,汉江湖北段北部T_(min)增温较大,西南山地T_(max)增温较大。     

碳中和背景下金砖国家气候政策、能源结构与碳排放的比较

作为新兴发展中国家的代表,金砖五国在碳中和背景下提出了各自的气候变化政策与碳减排目标。该研究系统梳理金砖国家近半个世纪内的应对气候变化战略的政策演变,并分析金砖国家在气候变化领域具有代表性的政策。该研究对金砖国家各自能源结构和分能源分行业部门的碳排放情况进行了分析,研究发现金砖国家能源结构各有特点但存在共性,随着时间的推移,金砖国家的能源结构逐渐多样化,非化石能源种类增多,但除巴西外的金砖国家化石能源占比仍较大,减排压力较大。基于目前各国能源结构和碳排放特点,该研究采用GAINS模型预测了金砖国家在各自背景下实现碳中和目标的路径和未来预期并对金砖国家经济社会发展现状和未来需求提出了建议,主要包括加强法律法规建设,能源和碳管理领域的科技合作,碳减排核心技术的合作,以及完善金砖合作机制,拓展全方位合作等方式助力金砖国家碳中和目标实现。     

Remedies for loss and damage caused by climate change from the dimension of climate justice

Adverse consequences to the ecological system and human health caused by impacts potentially attributable to climate change have already drawn great and widespread concern of many scientists and international organizations. However, we still have a hard time determining exactly the impact of climate change on the environment or the damage that climate change inflicts on countries comprising small islands or low-lying lands in light of today’s science and technology. The progress for dealing with the issue of loss and damage has been struggling for a long time from the beginning to the present. In this paper, the author begins by summarizing talks on the concept and the positions of commentators. The author is proposing that the development of future climate negotiations and rule-making process be based on global climate justice as a standard for measuring value. Also, the author proposes that a holistic view of climate justice be established. Generally, three aspects of climate justice can be derived. First, the dimension of human rights protection shows that protection of fundamental human rights is a logical precondition if small-island and low-lying countries are able to achieve climate justice. Second, the definite and traditional concepts of distributive justice and corrective justice hold the view that the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities should be upheld as a basic standard of allocating rights and duties associated with climate change. Third, climate justice requires that any state follow the “no-harm principle,” which is regarded as an international customary rule. According to the principle, the obligation of states to prevent the use of their territory for causing trans-boundary harm to the environment shall be a violation of state responsibility, which incurs international punishment. Then we put forward three remedial approaches in light of climate justice, including the approach of State Responsibility (SR) based on the principles and rules of international human rights law and international environmental law. Based on clear rules, the judge can determine whether the damaging behavior or the damage perpetrated by a state party constitutes a state responsibility. The International Environmental Regulation (IEB), which means solving the problems within the framework established by the Conventions on Climate Change, takes advantage of the market mechanisms and incentives such as fund and insurance support system to relieve or compensate the loss and damage. International Environmental Dispute Settlement Mechanism (IEDSM), which includes the means such as consultations, negotiations, nonmandatory ways and international arbitration, international judicial ways to solve these disputes, functions as a procedural safeguard. As an active promoter of global climate governance, China should no doubt stand by the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR) and take it as a basis for negotiations, actively strengthen the work of South-South cooperation, fulfill her international climate commitments without reservation, vigorously develop a low-carbon economy, and actively promote international negotiations on the subject of loss and damage.     

International mechanism for loss and damage from climate change: recommendations for related work in China

Loss and damage (L&D) from climate change has threatened the sustainable development of humankind, while the progress of mitigative and adaptive measures carried out under the international multilateral framework has been slow. The scientific community and policymakers have placed increasing emphasis on the international L&D response mechanism as a potential direct solution. This paper reviewed the origins of such a mechanism, with an in-depth analysis of the related connotations. A review of the existing situation in China on work related to L&D arising from climate change was conducted, followed by a summary of the findings. Finally, measures and recommendations to improve China’s efforts were proposed in this issue.     

Loss and damage related to climate change: connotations and response mechanism

Global mitigative and adaptive efforts have not been able to effectively address the adverse impacts caused by climate change. Therefore, a direct solution is needed to address the significant resulting loss and damage (L&D). During the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change held in Doha in 2012, the issue of responding to L&D arising from climate change gained sudden traction and became one of the key issues that affected the outcome of the convention. In this paper, a study on the definition and connotations of L&D arising from climate change was conducted, together with an analysis of its relationship with related concepts, namely impacts, vulnerability, and risks. This led to the proposal of an L&D conceptual model that is more comprehensive, with the recognition of the need to address the issue through effective supplementation of existing mitigative and adaptive efforts. A systematic elaboration of an L&D response mechanism was made based on politics, law, and the market, leading to a preliminary presentation of a possible format for an L&D mechanism. Potential academic research directions for L&D were also proposed that could serve as references for the establishment of international and national L&D response mechanisms and related research.     

Low-carbon technology innovation responding to climate change from the perspective of spatial spillover effects

China’s technological efforts to tackle climate change have lasted for many years. It is necessary to test the effect of these efforts with quantitative method. To be exact, whether and how China’s low-carbon technology innovation responds to climate change should be tested. Based on the 2004–2015 panel data of 30 provinces in China, we use the method of ESDA analyzing the spatial correlation of China’s low-carbon innovation technology. Furthermore, we use the spatial Durbin model empirically analyzing the spatial spillover effects. The results obtained are as follows: first, supply and demand of Chinese low-carbon innovation has some deviation in the spatial distribution. The low-carbon technology innovation as the supply factor shows the characteristics of expanding from the east to the west. Innovation in eastern China has always been the most active, but innovative activities in the middle and western China are gradually decreased. However, carbon emissions have the characteristics of moving westward, implying the change of technology demand different from technology supply. Second, China’s low-carbon innovation actively responds to the trend of climate change, indicating China’s technological efforts have paid off. However, the spatial spillover effects are not significant, showing that the efforts in each region of China still work for himself. Third, environmental regulation and market pull are important factors for low-carbon technology innovation. Among them, both supporting policy and inhibitory policy have significant impact on the local low-carbon technology innovation, but no significant spatial spillover effects. It shows that environmental policies in different regions are competitive and lack of demonstration effects. Economic growth and export as market pull have higher level of effect on low-carbon technology innovation for both local and adjacent areas. Some policy implications are proposed based on these results finally.     

生态环境损害责任确立的理论基础研究——以马克思主义生态文明观为视角

中共中央办公厅和国务院办公厅印发的《生态环境损害赔偿制度改革试点方案》已经明确提出了生态环境损害的赔偿问题,对生态环境本身造成损害需要承担责任将成为中国法治时代又一个崭新的命题,对生态环境造成损害担责因何而生、又因何而立?生态环境损害责任确立的理论根据到底是什么?笔者认为只有明确生态环境损害责任确立的理论基础,才能促进生态损害赔偿制度的有效构建与救济机制的健康运行,才能为"美丽中国"建设提供法治保障。本文以马克思主义生态文明观为研究视角,探讨了生态文明观作为中国生态环境损害责任确立的理论基础之科学性与合理性。本文研究发现,马克思主义生态文明观不仅扫清了环境损害责任确立的思想和认识障碍,而且回应了个别学者对环境损害责任成立的质疑,为环境损害责任的确立奠定了思想和理论基础;不仅如此,生态文明观还为环境损害责任的实施提供了政治、经济、文化、技术和法治保障,是生态文明观孕育了环境损害责任。本文进一步分析了生态文明观之所以能够孕育环境损害责任制度的原因,是因为生态文明观与环境损害责任有诸多内在的共同性:生态文明观与环境损害责任之间同根同源,都起源于生态环境危机的时代背景,直接目的就是为了实现环境保护,共同的手段就是环境法治,最深层次的共同价值追求是实现人与自然的和谐共生。中国未来生态环境损害责任制度的建立与运行,应当自觉坚持以马克思主义生态文明观为指导,自觉将马克思主义生态文明观作为思想指南和理论渊源。     

Global climate change and the politics of disaster

The paper explores the potential political impact of global climate change and, more generally, of natural disaster. Because the affluent West has largely tamed the natural and the social domains, popular clamor for government to anticipate, prevent, and redress disaster increases. I delineate several consequences of the new politics of disaster.     

基于央地分权视角的环境规制策略演化博弈分析

当前,我国环境的根本问题是由粗放式的经济发展模式所引起的,而这一发展模式的根源在于"中国式央地分权"下的政府行为。这种具有中国特色的分权模式的独特之处在于中央政府对地方经济放权的同时,仍然保持政治上的集权控制,上级政府根据绩效考核提拔地方官员,即"经济分权、政治集权"特性。中国式分权下,我国的环境治理体制依据行政区域的划分来设置管理权限,按照政府层级的构成进行垂直式领导,即中央政府统一制定环境政策,地方政府负责各辖区内环境政策的执行。在全国范围内,央地两级政府的关系表现为动态的重复博弈。针对我国现行环境规制执行策略,借助演化经济学研究工具,基于央地分权的视角,将地方政府与中央政府两大主体同时纳入分析框架。根据复制动态方程探讨参与主体的行为演化特征和行为演化稳定策略,在模型求解的基础上,利用MATLAB仿真工具,分析不同情形下参与主体演化稳定策略的走向及其收敛趋势。研究发现,央地两级政府在环境规制策略执行过程中的动态演化,很大程度上取决于地方政府环境规制执行力度、成本、收益和损失以及中央政府监管力度、成本和处罚力度等因素的大小。因此,针对地方政府环境策略激励设计,应重点改革政绩考核机制,引入市场机制,并通过环保补贴、财政转移支付等手段降低地方政府环境规制执行成本;中央政府应通过调节政绩考核体系中的经济发展指标和环境指标的权重系数来加强对地方政府环境规制执行情况的监管力度,建立第三方监管机制以降低中央政府监管成本,制定合理的奖惩机制以提高监管效率;以期推动我国环境规制策略的高效执行,促进环境绩效向经济绩效的良性转换,实现双重帕累托改进。     

环境规制相对力度变化对FDI的影响分析

本文利用1995-2007年间41个投资来源国和地区的数据,把41个投资来源国和地区分为25个发达国家与16个发展中国家(地区)两类,重点研究中国环境规制相对力度的变化对FDI的影响,并考察了借贷成本、双边贸易关系、经济发展水平的相似性等影响因素,运用面板数据进行中国环境规制相对力度的变化对FDI的影响的实证检验,为中国选择FDI的类型提供理论依据.本文的研究结论表明;中国——相对于投资来源国——环境规制相对力度越严格,来自发展中国家(地区)的FDI将减少;而来自发达国家的FDI并不受影响.产生这一结果的原因在于,不同外商直接投资来源国企业环保技术水平的差异导致其对环境规制的敏感程度不同.在上述结论的基础上,论文对中国选择FDI的类型从外资的来源结构、产业结构、环境技术三个方面提出了相应的政策建议.     

The gap report of global climate change mitigation,finance, and governance after the United States declared its withdrawal from the Paris Agreement

On 1 June 2017, the US President Donald Trump officially announced the withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, thus the study on the reasons of withdrawal, the potential impacts, and coping strategies has become a focus among policy circles and of the international community. Based on the self-developed US Policy Assessment Model, this paper systematically evaluates the three potential “major deficits” in terms of mitigation, climate finance, and global climate governance, as a result of the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and puts forward policy suggestions for coping with such transformations accordingly. The study shows that the United States ’withdrawal from the Paris Agreement will affect the existence and implementation of successive climate policies and result in an additional 8.8–13.4% increase in the global emissions reduction deficit. The United States’ withdrawal will also deteriorate the existing climate finance mechanism. The Green Climate Fund (GCF)’s funding gap will increase by US$2 billion, while the gap of long-term climate finance will increase by about US$5 billion a year. Either the China–EU or the “BASIC plus” mechanism could fill the governance deficit caused by the United States and the lack of political momentum may continue for a while in the future.     

西安市大气和水污染对人群健康损害的经济价值损失研究

环境污染对人群健康造成损害的经济价值评价一直是学术界讨论的热点．采用不同的价值评估方法-VPLL潜在寿命损失年法、VSL统计生命价值法、WTP支付意愿法对西安市1996—2003年的大气和水污染对人群健康造成的经济损失进行评价。结果表明：1996—2003年。西安市大气和水污染健康损失年平均为228792万-434237万元，占GDP的3．69％-7％。对居民健康有显着影响。