本文選題：全球氣候治理 + 國際氣候制度�。� 參考：《復(fù)旦大學(xué)》2011年博士論文

【摘要】：全球氣候危機(jī)的日益加劇催生了國際氣候談判的開啟。由于進(jìn)行溫室氣體減排涉及到各國的歷史和代際間的公平、發(fā)展權(quán)益的保護(hù)、新能源和環(huán)保節(jié)能技術(shù)的開發(fā)以及資金的轉(zhuǎn)移等問題,這導(dǎo)致了氣候變化問題經(jīng)歷了一個從“科學(xué)”到“政治”的“政治化”進(jìn)程。本文認(rèn)為,應(yīng)當(dāng)以辯證的態(tài)度來看待全球公共問題的“政治化”現(xiàn)象。全球氣候變化問題的“政治化”既會產(chǎn)生消極的影響,也有其積極的一面,不應(yīng)予以全面否定。 作為世界上最大的兩個溫室氣體排放國,中國和美國在全球氣候治理中扮演著至關(guān)重要的角色。本文借鑒現(xiàn)有研究成果,將國家參與國際制度劃分為兩種情形——正向參與和反向參與。前者反映了國家與國際制度之間的一種積極關(guān)系；后者反映的是國家與國際制度之間的消極關(guān)系。通過對中、美兩國參與國際氣候制度的實踐梳理和國際氣候制度在兩國的影響評判,本文研究發(fā)現(xiàn)：總體上而言,中國正向參與了國際氣候制度,并且國際氣候制度在中國國內(nèi)發(fā)揮了積極的影響,產(chǎn)生了內(nèi)化效應(yīng)。美國反向參與了國際氣候制度,后者在美國雖然也產(chǎn)生了一定影響,但美國國內(nèi)的回應(yīng)多半是消極被動的。換言之,國際氣候制度在美國并沒有產(chǎn)生明顯的內(nèi)化效應(yīng)。 而對相似的氣候變化挑戰(zhàn)和溫室氣體減排壓力,中、美兩國除了基于國家利益的不同考量之外,作為一種干預(yù)變量的國內(nèi)結(jié)構(gòu)在國際氣候制度產(chǎn)生差異性影響的過程中發(fā)揮著不可忽視的作用。本文將國家的國內(nèi)結(jié)構(gòu)類型劃分為國家主導(dǎo)型和社會主導(dǎo)型兩類,前者以中國為代表,后者以美國為典型。本文研究認(rèn)為,在中國的國主導(dǎo)型國內(nèi)結(jié)構(gòu)中,國家權(quán)相對集中,國家領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層一旦接受某項國際制度,會很容易在國內(nèi)自上而下的實施制度。而在美國的社會主導(dǎo)型國內(nèi)結(jié)構(gòu)中,有效的政策制定總是需要不同部門和機(jī)構(gòu)“權(quán)力妥協(xié)”和“利益紛爭”,這是一個艱難而復(fù)雜的博弈過程,無疑會降低國際制度進(jìn)入國內(nèi)幾率或者令前者產(chǎn)生積極效應(yīng)的可能性大打折扣。上述解釋是構(gòu)成國際氣候制度在中國產(chǎn)生積極影響和內(nèi)化效應(yīng),而在美國則受到某種程度的抵制,未產(chǎn)生內(nèi)化效應(yīng)的重要原因之一。需要特別強(qiáng)調(diào)的是,本項研究中所涉及的國內(nèi)結(jié)構(gòu)類型并無任何褒貶色彩,也不能根據(jù)本文的研究結(jié)論就此斷定國家主導(dǎo)型國內(nèi)結(jié)構(gòu)比社會主導(dǎo)型國內(nèi)結(jié)構(gòu)具有所謂的“優(yōu)越性”。最后,論文就本項研究對中國的政策啟示作了粗淺的分析,并指出了未來有待進(jìn)一步探討的問題。
[Abstract]:The worsening of the global climate crisis has spawned the opening of international climate negotiations. Since reducing greenhouse gas emissions involves the historical and intergenerational equity of countries, the protection of development rights and interests, the development of new energy, environmental protection and energy saving technologies, and the transfer of funds, etc. This has led to a process of politicization of climate change from science to politics. This paper argues that the politicization of global public problems should be viewed dialectically. The politicization of global climate change has both negative and positive effects and should not be completely denied. As the world's two largest emitters of greenhouse gases, China and the United States play a vital role in global climate governance. Based on the existing research results, this paper divides the international system of state participation into two situations: positive participation and reverse participation. The former reflects a positive relationship between the state and the international system, while the latter reflects the negative relationship between the state and the international system. By reviewing the practice of China and the United States in participating in the international climate system and judging the impact of the international climate system on the two countries, this paper finds that, in general, China is positively participating in the international climate system. And the international climate system has played a positive role in China. The United States has participated in the international climate regime in reverse. Although the latter has had some influence in the United States, the domestic response is mostly passive. In other words, the international climate regime does not have a significant internalization effect in the United States. With regard to similar climate change challenges and greenhouse gas abatement pressures, China and the United States, apart from different considerations based on national interests, As an intervention variable, the domestic structure plays an important role in the process of the international climate system. In this paper, the domestic structure of a country is divided into two types: the state-dominated type and the social-dominated type. The former is represented by China and the latter is typical of the United States. In China's state-dominated domestic structure, the power of the state is relatively concentrated. Once the national leadership accepts an international system, it will be easy to implement the system from the top to the bottom in China. In the social dominant domestic structure of the United States, effective policy making always requires "power compromise" and "conflict of interests" between different departments and institutions, which is a difficult and complex game process. There is no doubt that the international system will reduce the probability of entering the country or make the former have a positive effect. The above explanation is one of the important reasons why the international climate system has positive influence and internalization effect in China, while in the United States, it has been resisted to some extent and has not produced the internalization effect. It is particularly important to stress that the types of domestic structures covered in this study do not have any positive or negative implications, Nor can we conclude that the state-dominated domestic structure is superior to the social-dominated domestic structure. Finally, the paper makes a brief analysis of the policy implications of this study, and points out the problems to be further explored in the future.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：復(fù)旦大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D820;D871.2;X-01

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 杜群;;氣候變化的國際法發(fā)展:《<聯(lián)合國氣候變化框架公約>京都議定書》述評[J];環(huán)境資源法論叢;2003年00期

2 楊興;劉最躍;;我國氣候變化立法的缺陷及其對策分析[J];時代法學(xué);2006年02期

3 馬建英;;奧巴馬政府的氣候政策分析[J];和平與發(fā)展;2009年05期

4 左書華;李蓓;;近20年中國海洋災(zāi)害特征、危害及防治對策[J];氣象與減災(zāi)研究;2008年04期

5 于宏源;;權(quán)力轉(zhuǎn)移中的能源鏈及其挑戰(zhàn)[J];世界經(jīng)濟(jì)研究;2008年02期

6 于宏源;湯偉;;美國環(huán)境外交:發(fā)展、動因和手段研究[J];教學(xué)與研究;2009年09期

7 蘇長和;;國內(nèi)—國際互動與中國對外關(guān)系展開[J];教學(xué)與研究;2009年10期

8 張磊;;國際氣候政治的中國困境——一種微觀層次的梳理[J];教學(xué)與研究;2010年02期

9 楊令俠;加拿大與美國關(guān)于酸雨的環(huán)境外交[J];南開學(xué)報;2002年03期

10 黃文旭;;碳關(guān)稅相關(guān)概念辨析[J];嶺南學(xué)刊;2011年01期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前1條

1 ;[N];人民日報;2009年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 晉繼勇;全球公共衛(wèi)生治理中的國際機(jī)制分析[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號：1896247