环境规制会影响产业集中度吗?:一个经验研究

作为刻画产业结构的重要指标之一——产业集中度,一直受到国内外学者的广泛重视,但鲜见有学者研究环境规制会对产业集中度带来何种影响。为了对此进行研究,本文以我国工业部门1996-2006年的数据为样本,首先计算出产业集中度(CR4和CR8)水平,并运用面板数据分析方法,在控制相关变量的基础上,研究了环境规制对产业集中度带来的影响,得到以下结论:(1)在不考虑其他控制变量时,环境规制变量对产业集中度产生不显著的正向促进作用,但随着控制变量的逐步引入,环境规制变量的显著性水平逐步提高,模型总体拟合效果趋于优化;(2)同时,进入退出壁垒、利润率水平、经济干预政策和规模经济程度四个控制变量也会对产业集中度产生显著的正向推动作用。因此,适度强化环境规制水平,不仅有利于保护环境,优化资源配置,淘汰落后产能,解决结构性产能过剩,而且有利于提升产业集中度,增强我国企业在国际上的竞争力。     

长江三角洲地区海洋产业竞争力评价

作为全国海洋经济发展高地,长三角已初步形成比较完备的海洋产业体系。构建区域海洋产业竞争力评价的单要素对比分析与全要素综合量化评价的方法及指标体系,以2008～2010年度海洋统计数据从竞争力要素层和省域综合评判了江浙沪海洋产业竞争力,从不同侧面揭示江浙沪海洋产业竞争力优、劣势与空间差异性。研究表明：要素层面,上海除海洋产业发展条件外均位于江浙沪首位,而江浙两省的4要素差异较小;省域层面综合测度呈现上海处于长三角龙头地位,江浙两省虽有梯度但初现两翼格局。单要素竞争力格局与综合竞争力区域分异,既表明长三角海洋产业竞争力在要素层存在同构,又隐喻了区域一体化背景下长三角海洋产业的区域合作与整体竞争力提升的强烈要求     

基于“可持续性”要素的比较优势理论拓展

比较优势是不同国家生产同种产品的机会成本差异。传统理论认为,形成比较优势的机会成本主要为生产成本,而"可持续性"是一种代际公共品,耗费"可持续性"要素的机会成本是代际成本,即现在使用某(些)要素所放弃的未来使用之可能带来的纯收益。因此,不同国家的可持续性差异体现为代际成本差异,"可持续性"是塑造一国比较优势的新要素。若中国对外贸易过度依靠当代所具有的劳动力价格低廉和环境规制政策宽松所塑造的劳动力比较优势和环境比较优势,从长期看是不可持续的。通过代际成本内在化,可逐步实现对外贸易发展的短期理性与长期理性的统一。进而言之,中国需要妥善处理贸易增长与各种稀缺要素消耗之间的关系,平衡贸易增长与可持续发展的关系,当今的贸易与未来的贸易需寻求某种总量和结构上的均衡。     

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.     

环境规制是否抑制了国际R&D溢出效应——以长江经济带为例

环境规制与技术进步转变方向的非一致性近年来受到较多关注,但学者们普遍忽视了开放经济条件下二者的关系。本文以1999~2013年长江经济带11个省市为研究样本,实证检验了环境规制对国际RD溢出效应的影响效果。研究表明:(1)环境规制强度和国际RD溢出水平呈现U型关系,即在长江经济带各省市,初始比较弱的环境规制强度抑制了国际技术溢出,但是随着环境规制强度的增加,国际RD溢出水平不断上升;(2)采用不同的环境规制方式会影响国际RD溢出和环境规制的U型关系,改变环境规制水平的拐点;(3)目前长江经济带各省市环境规制水平比较低,大多处于U型左侧。最后本文依据上述结论提出了相应的政策建议。     

关于国际河流生态环境安全的思考

生态环境安全是当今国际社会关注的热点,而国际河流流域的水资源保护与生态环境安全又是这一热点中的敏感点.本文结合中国与有关国家的国际河流的实际,分析了国际河流流域水资源保护与生态环境安全的有关问题、产生的原因与后果及其相互关系,指出维护生态环境安全存在的特殊问题,并提出了对策与建议.     

试论共同但有区别责任原则在实践中的发展与完善

共同但有区别原则作为国际环境法的基本原则之一规定在《京都议定书》、《联合国气候变化框架公约》等重要的国际条约中。但在实践中各国是否坚持及如何坚持“共同但有区别责任原则”面临前所未有的挑战。共同但有区别责任原则作为国际环境法所公认的一项基本原则,在实践中责任分担方面却面临很多难题,导致该原则不能真正的落实与实施。本文在分析共同但有区别责任原则基础理论的基础上,根据实践中存在的问题提出几点完善意见,以期能够推动该原则的发展。     

企业环境管理中政府和企业作用分析

我国的经济发展伴随着日益严重的环境问题。在引起环境问题的诸多因素中,来自企业方面的因素对环境的影响最为深远,因此改善环境首先就需要加强企业的环境管理。在推动企业进行环境管理的各种因素中,既有如政府的管制等外部因素,也有如减少成本、产品差异化等企业自身内部因素。外部因素和内部因素对推动企业环境管理都具有重要作用,但也有其局限性。本文通过政府管制及企业自身因素对驱动企业进行环境管理的作用机制的研究,分析各个驱动因素优缺点,寻求各驱动因素的最佳的组合,促使企业更好地加强环境管理。     

经济发展中人口城市化与经济增长相关分析比较研究

本文利用OECD国家和世界其他主要国家的人口城市化与经济增长的数据，对人口城市化与经济增长进行了相关分析，以揭示人口城市化与经济增长的关系模式。判断得到我国人口城市化仍处于低增长水平的线性阶段，城市化水平，大大滞后于经济发展水平；大大落后于发达国家同等经济水平时的城市化水平，经济发展与人口城市化的相互促进作用还没有得到充分发挥。为此，文章提出了要加快我国城市化发展，超前于经济的增长是一个理性选择。     

MARPOL 73/78现况及实施问题

综述了近 3年来MARPOL 73/ 78的一系列的修正情况及有关实施问题