专利法的“绿化”:风险预防原则的缘起、确立和适用

基于预防科学不确定性带来的环境风险,以及对科学技术乐观主义的反思,在环境法中率先引入了风险预防原则。虽然在风险预防原则的含义、性质与地位等问题上存在争议,但环境法的风险预防原则以其明确且统一的核心理念为规制环境风险发挥着重要的作用。通过对"铬鞣皮废料制备食用明胶专利"事件的分析,主张在专利法中确立并适用风险预防原则,并通过专利审查中风险评价制度的建立和实施,避免发明专利可能带来的人体健康风险、生态风险和社会风险,从而促使专利法在推动社会科技进步的同时,能够有效地控制科学技术潜在风险的发生。     

论国际环境法中的风险预防原则

风险预防原则是国际环境法中的一个基本原则。它的出现,为国际环境问题的解决提供了新思路和新方法。风险预防也在国际环境条约的实施机制中频频显现,使国际履约机构和程序充满活力,并促进了各国履行国际环境条约的积极性。     

浅析WTO框架内的风险预防原则——以《动植物卫生检疫措施协定》第5．7条为视角

作为国际环境法基本原则之一的风险预防原则,其精髓在于强调当有环境风险发生或发生之虞时,不应以缺乏科学确定性为由而限制必要措施的施行。在WTO框架内,风险预防原则主要体现在《SPS协定》第5．7条。实践中,第5．7条的适用需同时遵循程序及实质两方面的要件。从这些要件可以看出,《SPS协定》第5．7条不是单纯地反映了风险预防原则,而是对风险预防原则的具体化,其所规定的临时性措施是对风险预防原则具体适用的一项风险预防措施。WTO应以《SPS协定》第5．7条为基础,与国际环境法共同发展风险预防原则。这样既有利于贸易自由化对环境所造成的风险获得更有效的管理,又有利于WTO与国际环境法的协调。     

论可持续发展与环境法的更新

随着我国多年来经济的高速发展,国内环境与资源危机也突显出来,实施可持续发展战略作为我国环保工作中一项基本原则显得越来越重要,而相对来说,调整环境与资源的环境法却明显滞后,如何在环境法中更好地贯彻可持续发展原则,使这一原则能真正得以实施,是一个急需解决的问题。本文根据可持续发展原则,论述了环境法更新中的相关问题。     

风险预防原则在我国环境法领域的有限适用研究

根据风险预防原则的含义与判断标准,我国应在气候变化、生物多样性保护、转基因食品安全等三个环境法领域适用风险预防原则。这既是我国在上述领域环境问题特殊性的要求,又是我国应尽的国际义务。     

论风险预防原则的适用要件——以国际环境法为背景

作为国际环境法的基本原则之一,风险预防原则已经在许多国际环境协定中得到了直接的规定或间接的反映。在适用风险预防原则的过程中,需要遵循以下三个方面的要件:1.适用风险预防原则的前提条件,包括风险阀值和科学不确定性的确定;2.依据风险预防原则进行决策的过程中需遵循的要件,包括成本效益分析以及根据不同的风险水平采取适当的预防措施;3.执行风险预防措施的过程中需遵循的要件,包括对措施的后期审查及相关科学信息的收集。     

国际环境法基本原则初探——兼与潘抱存先生商榷

确定国际环境法的基本原则有两个标准,一是以国际法的基本原则为基础,二是体现国际环境法自身的特点。据此,国际环境法应包括以下基本原则:国际资源开发主权权利和不损害国外环境责任原则、可持续发展原则、共同但有区别的责任原则、损害预防原则、风险预防原则、国际合作原则。     

论中国环境法基本原则的立法发展与再发展

作为我国最主要环境立法的《环境保护法》应当明文规定环境法的基本原则。2014年修订该法时,新增了有关环境保护原则的专条,这是我国近35年环境立法史上首次以立法明文宣示环境法的基本原则。对于环境法学者而言,此过程虽漫长、艰难,但其进步意义明显、巨大。新法所确立的"保护优先"、"预防为主、综合治理"、"公众参与"和"损害担责"等四项环境法基本原则,依次应是学理上的"(环境)风险防范"、"预防(环境)损害"、"公众参与(环境保护)"、发展了的"污染者付费"原则之立法表述。就法律解释、法律执行、立法技术而言,环境法基本原则在未来中国仍有寻求新发展的必要和空间。     

论预先防范原则在国际环境法中的地位

预先防范原则是在20世纪80、90年代出现在国际环境法领域的一种新的处理缺少确切科学证据的环境风险的主张.迄今已有至少八个国际环境条约载入了与预先防范原则有关的内容,虽然具体用词不尽相同;与预先防范原则有关的案例也已经有数个.以这些为研究对象,探讨预先防范原则在国际环境法上的地位.现在预先防范原则还没有形成国际环境法领域的习惯法,但很多国家愿意在处理缺少确切科学证据的环境风险时,使用与其相关的方法或措施.     

从国际环境法看国际法及国际法学的新发展

在对全球化的法律回应和全球化引起的法律变迁问题上,国际环境法反应最明显而深刻。以前以处理偶发的跨界污染事件为主,调整方法以国家之间的外交谈判协商和仲裁为主的国际环境法,1992年里约会议以来,在全球、区域、跨国和国内法四个层面上保护环境。全球生态环境保护观念正在成为整个人类的普遍化,理性化的观念,是全球法秩序的重要基础。国际环境法采取了预防性保护环境的方法,而且在某些问题上采取风险预防(precautionary)方法。在国际环境法的推动和影响下,公众参与,环境影响评价,公益诉讼,重视非政府组织在环境保护中的作用,适当引进风险预防原则等,成为几乎每个国家环境法的基本原则和重要制度。     

Interpretation and Application of the Precautionary Principle: Australia's Contribution

Australia has been a leading jurisdiction in the adoption of the precautionary principle, with widespread policy and legislative incorporation. This has paved the way for the development of a substantial jurisprudence on the interpretation and application of the principle. The international derivation of the version of the precautionary principle adopted in Australia, together with the wide range of areas in which the principle has been applied, for example biodiversity protection, environmental impact assessment, climate change, public health, etc., means that judicial consideration of the principle in Australia has the potential to form a body of common law with national and international application. Accordingly, this article reviews the adoption, interpretation and application of the precautionary principle in Australian environmental law, with a view to drawing out the general lessons this experience offers for interpretation of the principle in other, international settings .     

GENERAL AND PARTICULAR APPLYING ELEMENTS OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE

In the context of WTO dispute settlement, the precautionary principle is a predominant concept, in the face of serious risks and scientific uncertainty, that is often characterized as “better safe than sorry.” Although the precautionary principle appears in various treaties, declarations, and even laws, it is often formulated in abstract terms, leading to the great ambiguity of its primary elements. The Panel and the Appellate Body always avoid discussing the precautionary principle in WTO cases due to its obscure definition. On March 13, 2012, the United States, the European Union, and Japan each requested consultations with China as China’s measures that made restrictions on the exportation of rare earths, tungsten, and molybdenum had been in conflict with their national interest. After examining the matter at issue, the Panel and the Appellate Body rejected China’s arguments regardless of its repeated claims about its consideration of environmental protection. With the case as the starting point, this article focuses on the precautionary principle and explores its status and elements, in order to establish a two-dimensional model of the precautionary principle that is applicable in international trade.     

The legal regime for application of the precautionary principle in India: future directions for the GM regulatory regime

The precautionary principle is one of the most contentious principles in contemporary international legal developments. The very fact that it is a principle of international environmental law has been questioned by many legal scholars. However, this does not take away the fact that the precautionary principle continues to be applied widely across sectors both internationally and nationally. The nature and scope of its application has varied widely according to the context and sector within which it has been applied. The central issue which this article seeks to address is the regulatory and the policy making space that is available to the Government of India in the context of the obligations as undertaken under the Cartagena Protocol and under various other international treaties. The regulatory space would also be affected by the domestic legal developments across sectors in which the principle has been applied. India’s recent decision on the large-scale commercialisation of Bt-Cotton has already created much debate regarding its appropriateness given the realities of Indian farm practices. More specifically, it has also led to a rethinking of the role and application of the precautionary principle in addressing these realities. Considering that the Indian policy on biotechnology is currently being drafted, it is important to look into the scope of applying the precautionary principle in taking any decision on genetically modified organisms (GMO) in terms of their distribution of risks, incorporating the social and equity impacts of such decisions.

Privacy and the precautionary principle

The precautionary principle – which implies that where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing protective measures – has been adopted as a standard of environmental and health protection in international and European legislation. This article offers an overview of the precautionary principle as a legal standard applicable to European privacy and data protection legislation. For this reason, it takes particularly into account the guidelines of this legislation as well as the privacy impact assessment framework, raised by the European Commission through the Recommendation on Radio-Frequency Identification applications. In brief, the article stresses the role of the precautionary principle in improving privacy protection through liability, prudence and transparency.     

CRITICAL THINKING ABOUT THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN CHINA’S FOOD SAFETY LAW

We are living in a risk society where people devised the Precautionary Principle in order to minimize the harm caused by risk ex ante. Compared to the previous Food Hygiene Law (FHL) and the 2009 Food Safety Law, the 2015 revised Chinese Food Safety Law (FSL) made a real breakthrough in the sense that it legitimates an important principle in food safety governance. Apart from laying down the fundamental importance of this principle in food safety regulations, the FSL 2015 also invented arrangements from different aspects in order to implement this principle. In other words, the FSL 2015’s incorporation of the Precautionary Principle in a very real sense marked a transition from a demonstrative preventive food safety management regime to a more effective precautionary regime. However, the Precautionary Principle needs to be adopted in a “precautionary” way since this principle has its own limitations and defects. Incautious application of the principle may create new risks. This article compares the European approach in implementing the Precautionary Principle, and examines China’s legal arrangements against negative impacts brought by the Precautionary Principle. Three perspectives are discussed: independence of scientific institutes; proportionality in risk management measures, and the shift of burden of proof for market authorization.     

The Precautionary Principle as a Device for Greater Environmental Protection: Lessons from EC Courts

Given that the precautionary principle has never been defined in the EC Treaty, the EC jurisdictions have been playing a key role in determining the status as well as the scope of that principle. Although scholars have hitherto been paying heed to the case law on food safety, the literature has become a little thinner when one considers environmental case law. This article attempts to set the scene to explain how the precautionary principle can be invoked in different judiciary procedures at the EU level.     

国际生态环境问题及其对我国环境立法的启示

当今一系列的生态环境问题 ,包括生物多样性锐减、森林面积减少、土地资源状况恶化、水环境恶化、气候变暖等已日趋国际化 ,严重危及到整个人类的生存。这些问题往往是在各国国内进行的国际法未加禁止行为造成的。在这样的情况下 ,本文指出了当今我国生态环境保护立法方面的缺陷 ,其中涉及到管理体制、立法意识、现行法律本身等问题。面对这些问题 ,文章指出我国生态环境立法要加快与国际接轨 ,树立风险防范原则的立法理念等一系列措施 ,以达到可持续发展的目的。     

政治系统与法律系统对于技术风险的决策观察

德国社会学家尼古拉斯·卢曼的社会系统论和二阶观察理论所提供的社会建构论框架,有助于我们从技术、时间、知识、决策等维度厘清技术风险形成的复杂社会机制,促进我们对政治系统和法律系统中的技术风险管制活动进行反思性观察。政治系统通过政策性决策活动规划和控制技术风险的努力,本身也会导致决策风险,政治系统因此发展出令规制失灵而被社会遗忘的应对能力;法律系统内部发展出来的风险预防原则,其功能不在于增加社会的安全水平,而是作为一种程序性反应机制,吸收因科学技术后果的不确定性所导致的环境复杂性。