美国促进低碳发展的法律演进

一、自下而上：地方气候创新行动 长期以来，作为世界上人均温室气体排放量最大的国家，美国在应对气候变化问题上一直消极对待国际气候变化谈判、设法逃避自己的历史责任。从1997年《京都议定书》达成到2007年《联合国气候变化框架公约》第14次缔约国大会，美国政府始终拒绝承担任何强制性温室气体减排义务，导致美国成为迄今唯一没有签署《京都议定书》的发达国家。相对于联邦政府的消极作为，     

论市场机制在温室气体减排中的作用——基于GHG和TGC交易市场的考察

市场机制已成为国家、区域和国际社会应对气候变化议题时的一个重要手段.<京都议定书>所开创的GHG交易市场就是以市场原理为基础,这一交易市场在减少温室气体排放时发挥了重要的作用.此外,新型的TGC交易市场也成为温室气体减排的主要机制,TGC交易市场是按照与GHG交易市场一样的市场机制机理加以设计的.     

“共同但有区别责任”原则下海运减排路径探析

保护气候环境是人类共同关切之事项。海运业作为温室气体排放的主要行业之一,有必要对其进行规制,构建海运减排法律制度。"共同但有区别责任"原则体现了分配正义且为《气候变化框架公约》及其《京都议定书》所确认,应为构建海运减排法律制度的基石。国际海事组织依据《京都议定书》授权制定海运减排机制,但在其最新通过的"新船能效设计指数"和"船舶能效管理计划"两个强制性能效标准中背离了"共同但有区别责任"原则,发展中国家力图在市场机制构建中重回此原则。中国应在海运减排谈判中坚持"共同但有区别责任"原则,在适应强制性能效标准的过程中增强自身海运减排能力建设。     

国际海运温室气体减排法律政策刍议

国际海运温室气体排放正日益引起国际社会的关注。随着全球经济复苏、世界船队规模的扩大,国际海运温室气体排放量已和一些负有减排义务的国家温室气体排放量相当。但由于国际海运未被包括在《京都议定书》中进行温室气体减排的统一管理,目前,国际海运温室气体减排仍仅停留在纸面上。本文从对船舶温室气体减排的形势分析入手,论述了船舶温室气体减排可采取的政策与措施并最终对可实施的减排原则和模式进行了论证。     

日本温室气体排放权交易制度及启示

1998年日本颁布了第一部专门应对全球气候变暖问题的法律——《地球变暖对策推进法》。为实现《京都议定书》所规定的减排目标,让日本国内企业积累温室气体排放权交易的相关知识与经验,日本政府提供补贴,鼓励企业自愿参与国内温室气体排放权交易。这种不采取命令控制模式(command-and-control),而是以自主参加与补贴为主的温室气体排放权交易制度,有效地降低了减排温室气体所需的管制成本。目前,我国虽然不承担减排义务,但我国政府提出了自主减排的目标。为了实现这一目标,有必要借鉴日本这种柔性立法范例。     

气候变化控制法律政策——以《京都议定书》为视角

全球变暖这种气候变化的影响是全方面、多层次的,急需我们的特别关注。《京都议定书》是第一个国际性限制排放温室气体的法规,它标志着国际社会在应对日益严重的全球气候变化问题上,迈出了自救的第一步。纵使《京都议定书》的意义非凡,但是气候变化问题所牵涉领域的广泛性、利益的复杂性以及议定书自身的局限性为＂后京都时代＂的发展带来了重重困境,只有国际社会共同参与,承担起共同但有区别责任,才能为地球筑起生命的防线。     

环境义务与经济权利——解读《京都议定书》

《联合国气候变化框架公约:京都议定书》于2005年2月16日生效。它体现了国际社会通过多边磋商和行为来解决温室效应,保护全球生态环境的一种努力。作为联合国历史上第一个具有法律约束力的温室气体减排     

碳交易犯罪十宗罪

背景介绍:为了人类免受气候变暖的威胁,1997年12月,联合国气候变化框架公约参加国在日本京都召开会议,制定发布了《京都议定书》。其目标是“将大气中的温室气体含量稳定在一个适当的水平,进而防止剧烈的气候改变对人类造成伤害”。为了促进各国完成温室气体减排目标,议定书允许两个发达国家之间可以进行“碳排放权交易”。     

清洁发展机制项目法律风险防范

清洁发展机制（Clean Development Mechanism，CDM），是《京都议定书》规定的发达国家通过与发展中国家进行项目合作以完成其量化的温室气体减排义务的灵活履约机制。CDM允许发达国家与不负有量化减排义务的发展中国家进行项目级的合作．以提供资金和技术的方式。在发展中国家实施具有减少温室气体减排效果的项目，从而获得由该项目活动所产生的“核证的温室气体减排量”（Certified Emission Reductions—CERs）．这     

京都议定书的商机

2月16日,《京都议定书》正式生效,这项旨在减少全球温室气体排放的国际协议将给中国企业带来新的融资手段"《京都议定书》的生效对于不少企业来说的确是个利好的消息."国家发展与改革委员会中国CDM能力建设项目协调员宋彦勤在接受记者采访时说.三个月前,俄罗斯总统普京终于在《京都议定书》上签了字,此举也使这项历经波折的国际协议具备了生效的条     

FROM COPENHAGEN TO DURBAN: ON INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE NEGOTIATIONS

Copenhagen Climate Change Conference began with high expectation but ended in despair. It reached the so-called Copenhagen Accord with some dissenters. The Copenhagen Accord calls for deep cuts in global emissions, but it has not reached a binding goal of greenhouse gas emission reduction commitment and is not a legal effective agreement. EU played a limited role in Copenhagen Climate Change Conference, while the US and China were crucial to achieve the Copenhagen Accord. The subsequent Cancun negotiation reached the Cancun Agreements, but many substantial issues remained unsolved, such as the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and other core issues. Durban Climate Summit successfully managed to include the main polluters of the globe, especially the US and the main emerging economies (including India and China), to commit their obligations for the first time to reduce greenhouse gas emission reduction under the international framework, and all the parties of the conference agreed that they would negotiate new mechanisms of greenhouse gas reduction which will be implemented by 2020 before 2015. Durban Climate Summit has also reached a package of agreements on climate change. Among them, an important one is about the Global Climate Fund. But some key issues including quantified GHGs emission reduction goals among countries have not been solved.     

Towards global green shipping: the development of international regulations on reduction of GHG emissions from ships

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) promotes global “green shipping” through rule-making in accordance with its mandate under the Kyoto Protocol. The IMO rules related to reduction in greenhouse gas emissions can be divided into two types: technical and operational measures; and market-based measures. As to the former, important regulations have been adopted that are mandatory for ships irrespective of their flag. The latter are still in the drafting process, and in view of deep divisions between member states, it will be difficult to reach early agreement. In the development of rules for emissions reduction in IMO, the common but differentiated responsibility principle (CBDR) conflicts severely with the non-discrimination principle which has long been a traditional and basic principle of IMO regulation. Considering the peculiarities of the shipping industry, a fuller understanding of CBDR will be necessary in order to find a reasonable and feasible way to reconcile these two principles.     

论《京都议定书》对国际政治和国际经济的潜在影响

《京都议定书》是国际社会在防止全球气候变暖的国际合作方面取得的一份具有里程碑意义的国际法文件。《京都议定书》对国际政治将产生如下影响:发展中国家,尤其是中国、印度等发展中大国承受着越来越大的减排压力;推动欧盟一体化的进程,并进一步提升欧盟的国际政治地位;发展中国家阵营内部呈现出进一步分化的趋势。《京都议定书》对国际经济的影响主要表现在:对各国总体的经济福利产生影响;《京都议定书》产生的“碳泄漏”问题可能使得缔约国在竞争力和产业结构调整等方面发生一系列变化;对国际资本流动产生影响;《京都议定书》将推动能源技术的进步,尤其是推动低碳技术和高能效技术的创新与扩散。     

Allocation and architecture in climate governance beyond Kyoto: lessons from interdisciplinary research on target setting

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change envisions that all countries will follow the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibility’ in terms of their responsibility to protect the earth’s climate system. However, its concrete application has always been controversial. The Kyoto Protocol framed this allocation issue in terms of quantified emission reduction and limitation objectives (QERLOs) in its Annex B, but this also triggered the refusal of the United States to ratify the Protocol. This article identifies some of the problems associated with allocation, and its problems inter-linked with governance architecture, by examining the case of the allocation of reduction commitments for greenhouse gas emissions in the context of climate governance beyond 2012. Three broad criteria are used in the discussion, namely, responsibility, capability, and efficiency. Target numbers for individual countries differ with the criteria used, but they also differ even within the same criteria category, due to different ways these conceptual criteria are translated into quantitative calculation formulas. Sometimes this makes a large difference for individual targets. Our calculations using different criteria and formula to come up with medium-term targets for selected developed countries show that differences in results are caused by the choice of allocation principle, differences in allocation formula under a given allocation principle, and different calculation criteria used under a given allocation formula. Assumptions in modeling and the choice of data also affect results. Importantly, interests are often embedded explicitly or implicitly behind these different ideas. Although allocation and architecture seems to be different problems of governance at first glance, there is also a link between limited data availability for allocation calculations and the form of governance architecture proposed. This is an area where further scientific research is required.     

碳交易市场中国构建的几点法律思考

《京都议定书》所列出的三种灵活机制,使温室气体减排量成为可以交易的无形商品,为碳交易市场的发展奠定了基础。由于国际法上的不确定性因素以及各国利益诉求的差异,统一的国际碳交易市场尚未形成。中国因“清洁发展机制”项目（CDM）的开发,不可避免地卷入国际碳交易市场中。从发展低碳经济的目标出发,为增强中国在国际碳交易中的竞争能力,笔者建议要适应中国承担的国际义务以及应对气候变化的立场与承诺构建以自愿性减排为主的中国碳交易市场,构建符合中国国情的碳交易法律机制。     

The role of the Asia Pacific Partnership in discursive contestation of the international climate regime

After withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol, the US Bush Administration and the Australian Howard Government pursued an international climate change policy focussed on voluntary international agreements outside the UN climate negotiations. This strategy included the formation of several climate agreements directed at technology development, including the 2005 Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (APP). The APP provides a model for international climate change policy directed at voluntary national greenhouse gas intensity targets, technology development through sectoral public–private partnerships and technology diffusion through trade. This article situates the APP within these US and Australian inspired climate agreements formed outside the UN negotiations. Bäckstrand and Lövbrand’s (in M. Pettenger (ed.) The social construction of climate change: power knowledge norms discourses, 2007) discourse analysis in relation to the international climate negotiations is used to explore differences between the APP and UN climate treaties. We find the APP embodies a discourse of what we call ‘deregulatory ecological modernisation’ that promotes limited public funding to ease informational failures in markets for cleaner technologies and management practices. The deregulatory ecological modernisation discourse is a deeply intensive market liberal approach to international climate change policy, which contests binding emission reduction targets and the development of a global carbon market. The USA, Australia, Japan and Canada represented a core group of countries that used the APP to promote the deregulatory ecological modernisation discourse and thereby contest any deepening of developed nations' emission reduction targets for the post-2012 period. However, with changes of leadership and new parties in power in the USA and Australia, it appears that the deregulatory ecological modernisation discourse has lost ground compared to a reengagement with discourses supportive of developed country emission reduction targets and equity-based adaptation and technology transfer assistance for developing nations.     

Copenhagen Accord: Outcomes,Next Steps,and Business Implications

Although the United Nations Climate Change Conference, held recently in Copenhagen, fell short of expectations by failing to achieve a legally binding agreement to fill the gap when the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012, there were some positive outcomes. A negotiating gridlock limited the resulting Copenhagen Accord to a nonlegally binding treaty drafted in part by the United States. The Accord was not adopted.

This article discusses key elements of the Accord, identifies those countries that have committed to greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, and offers insights into the positive outcomes, shortcomings, and business implications of the Accord.     

The Scope for Joint Implementation in the EU Candidate Countries

Central and Eastern European Candidate countries are involved in negotiations with the EU on the implementation of the Acquis Communautaire in their domestic law. These countries are also preparing themselves for international co-operation in the framework of the Kyoto Protocol. Through this co-operation the Candidate countries will most likely transfer GHG emission reduction credits to other industrialised countries listed in Annex B of the Protocol. This can take place through JI project co-operation and/or International Emissions Trading. This paper argues that the Acquis environmental requirements will in general lead to GHG emission reduction in the Candidate countries, which will reduce the scope for JI in these countries. The extent to which the JI scope will be reduced depends, among others, on the timing of entering the EU and the transitional arrangements between the EU and the Candidates.