發(fā)布時間：2018-04-29 16:33

  本文選題：國際航空排放 + 全球治理��； 參考：《吉林大學》2014年博士論文

【摘要】：隨著全球氣候變化的加速突變和國際航空運輸?shù)目焖侔l(fā)展，國際社會越來越關(guān)注國際航空排放問題。歐盟航空排放指令更是將國際航空排放問題卷入了風口浪尖，全球航空氣候談判變得波譎云詭。國際航空排放的全球性、負外部性特征印證了國際航空排放全球問題的屬性。 國際航空排放不只是一個國際問題，更是一個多維問題。全球治理理論為解決這一全球問題撥開了迷霧。應(yīng)對國際航空排放問題需要建立一種有效的全球治理機制。這種治理機制的基礎(chǔ)不是自上而下的政府權(quán)威，而是多元主體的廣泛參與，以及在國際社會確立協(xié)調(diào)與合作機制并充分地實施。其實質(zhì)是使相互沖突的或不同的利益得以調(diào)和，并采取持續(xù)的聯(lián)合行動。這既包括正式制度和規(guī)則，也包括各種被認為符合共同利益的非正式制度安排。這種治理機制強調(diào)治理主體的多元化。主權(quán)國家、政府間國際組織、非政府國際組織、市民社會、跨國公司將共同構(gòu)成國際航空排放治理的主體和力量，從而形成國際航空排放治理的多維進路。 國際航空排放全球治理的國際進路尤其強調(diào)充分發(fā)揮國際民航組織的領(lǐng)導作用。事實證明，國際民航組織通過大會制定了關(guān)涉國際航空排放的系列決議，專門成立了航空環(huán)境保護委員會，提出了環(huán)境保護的戰(zhàn)略目標，毋庸置疑推動了國際航空排放的穩(wěn)步推進。國際民航組織因其諸多的內(nèi)在限制又使國際航空排放問題變得步履維艱，這些內(nèi)在限制包括國際民航組織立法缺乏強制力、立法缺失“共同但有區(qū)別的責任”原則、立法程序存在缺陷、目的和目標有待修訂等等。國際民航組織未來在主導國際航空談判、引領(lǐng)技術(shù)升級、促進國際合作方面會發(fā)揮不可替代的作用，從而彰顯這一全球治理國際進路的價值。 歐盟將航空業(yè)納入碳排放交易體系引發(fā)了全球關(guān)注。國際航空排放全球治理的區(qū)域進路認可歐盟可以成為國際航空排放的合法治理主體。但是，歐盟單方面處理國際航空排放問題缺乏法律根基。歐盟航空排放指令不僅違反了《芝加哥公約》關(guān)于國家領(lǐng)空主權(quán)的習慣國際法，而且與《芝加哥公約》關(guān)于禁止征收航空排放稅的規(guī)定相悖。在與國際環(huán)境法規(guī)范的兼容性考量層面，歐盟航空排放指令對歐盟成員國和非歐盟成員國的航空器運營人實行同樣的免費配額計算公式，并沒有給發(fā)展中國家航空公司的發(fā)展需要必要的關(guān)注，明顯有悖于“共同但有區(qū)別的責任”原則。通過考察《京都議定書》的相關(guān)文本，歐盟這種單邊的行動，恰恰與議定書要求各國合作解決氣候問題的多邊行動相左。然而，在美國航空運輸協(xié)會等訴英國能源及氣候變化國務(wù)大臣案中，歐洲法院的裁決又在一定程度上凸顯了在歐洲訴訟的尷尬局面。作為一個由成員驅(qū)動的國際組織，WTO為解決國際航空排放提供了一個新的路徑。國際航空運輸既是一種服務(wù)貿(mào)易行為，同時又是貨物貿(mào)易行為。從《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》之《關(guān)于空運服務(wù)的附件》分析，歐盟航空排放指令并不是一項影響業(yè)務(wù)權(quán)或與業(yè)務(wù)權(quán)的行使直接有關(guān)的服務(wù)措施，并不能從《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》所涵蓋的事項得以排除。歐盟航空排放指令與GATT最惠國待遇和國民待遇存在沖突，該指令對來自未規(guī)制航空二氧化碳排放國家的產(chǎn)品與來自規(guī)制航空二氧化碳排放國家的產(chǎn)品區(qū)別對待，違反了最惠國待遇；而該指令導致增加貨物運費，給進口產(chǎn)品造成了額外的成本負擔，違反了國民待遇。 美國《清潔空氣法》第二篇B部專門規(guī)制航空排放，而NextGen行動進一步推動了航空排放的縮減。相較于美國，我國缺乏規(guī)制航空排放的專門立法，更多停留在政策層面，在航空減排監(jiān)管等方面仍有待于進一步完善。同時，中美在國際航空談判中不同的立場折射出發(fā)展中國家和發(fā)達國家關(guān)于航空排放的利益博弈。在國際航空排放全球治理的國家層面，應(yīng)進一步健全并完善各國國內(nèi)航空減排立法，強化并充實國內(nèi)航空減排行動。 作為一個航空企業(yè)的行業(yè)聯(lián)盟，國際航空運輸協(xié)會提出了解決航空環(huán)境問題的四大支柱戰(zhàn)略，，即改進技術(shù)、更加有效的飛行、改進基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施及以市場為基礎(chǔ)的措施。在南非召開的第69屆年會上，國際航空運輸協(xié)會表決通過了CNG2020決議。但遺憾的是，該決議不僅明顯違背發(fā)展中國家應(yīng)對氣候變化談判的立場，同時也明顯違背《芝加哥公約》確定的“非歧視”和“各國公平獲得發(fā)展機會”的原則。國際航空運輸協(xié)會作為全球治理的多元主體之一，應(yīng)積極參與國際航空排放談判，更好地發(fā)揮其協(xié)調(diào)作用。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of global climate change and the rapid development of international air transport, the international community is paying more and more attention to the international aviation emission problem. The EU aviation emission directive has been involved in the international aviation emission problem, and the global air climate negotiations have become deceitful. The global and negative externality of international aviation emissions The attributes of international aviation emissions are confirmed.
International air emissions are not only an international problem, but also a multidimensional problem. The global governance theory has opened the fog to solve the global problem. It is necessary to establish an effective global governance mechanism to deal with international aviation emissions. The basis of this governance mechanism is not the top-down government authority, but the extensive participation of multiple subjects. And, as well as the establishment and implementation of coordination and cooperation mechanisms in the international community, the essence of which is to reconcile conflicting or different interests and to take sustained joint action. This includes both formal institutions and rules, as well as a variety of non positive institutional arrangements, which are considered to be in the common interest. This governance mechanism emphasizes the governance owners. Sovereign states, intergovernmental international organizations, non-governmental international organizations, civil society, and multinational corporations will jointly form the main body and strength of international air emission governance, thus forming a multidimensional approach to international air emission governance.
The international approach to international aviation emissions is particularly stressed by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). In fact, the International Civil Aviation Organization has established a series of resolutions concerning international aviation emissions through the general assembly. It has set up a special aviation Environmental Protection Committee, put forward the strategic objective of environmental protection, and undoubtedly promoted the country. International aviation emissions are steadily advancing. The internal restrictions of ICAO have made the problem of international aviation emissions difficult. These inherent limitations include the lack of coercion in the legislation of the international civil aviation organization, the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities", the shortcomings of the legislative procedure, and the need to be revised, and so on. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) will play an irreplaceable role in leading international aviation negotiations, leading technology upgrading and promoting international cooperation, thus demonstrating the value of the international approach to global governance.
The EU's integration of the aviation industry into the carbon emissions trading system has caused global attention. The regional approach to international aviation emissions global governance recognised that the EU can become the legitimate governance body of international aviation emissions. However, the EU has a lack of legal foundation to deal with international aviation emissions unilaterally. The EU aviation emissions directive is not only a violation of the "Chicago public". The customary international law on sovereignty of national airspace, and contrary to the provisions of the Chicago Convention on the prohibition of the expropriation of air discharge taxes. The EU aviation emission directive has the same free quota formula for aircraft operators in EU and non EU member states in compatibility with the norms of international environmental law, There is no necessary attention to the development of the developing country airlines, which is obviously contrary to the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities". By examining the relevant texts of the Kyoto Protocol, the unilateral action of the EU is exactly the same as the multilateral action that the protocol requires countries to cooperate to solve climate questions. As a member driven international organization, WTO provides a new way to solve international aviation emissions. International air transport is a service trade act, as a member driven international organization. It is also an act of trade in goods. From the analysis of the general agreement on trade in services, the annex to the air service, the EU aviation emission directive is not a direct related service that affects the business rights or the exercise of the business rights, and can not be excluded from the matters covered by the general agreement on trade in services. EU aviation emissions directive and GATT most favoured There is a conflict between national treatment and national treatment, which is a violation of MFN treatment for products from unregulated carbon dioxide emitting countries and products from countries that regulate air carbon dioxide emissions. The directive causes an increase in freight charges and an additional cost burden to the imported products, which violates the nationals. Encounter.
The United States, the clean air law, second B departments specializes in the regulation of air emissions, and the NextGen action further promotes the reduction of air emissions. Compared with the United States, our country lacks special legislation to regulate air emissions, which is more at the policy level and remains to be further improved in the air emission reduction supervision. Different positions reflect the interests game of developing countries and developed countries on air emissions. At the national level of international aviation emissions global governance, we should further improve and improve domestic air emission reduction legislation, strengthen and enrich the action of domestic aviation emission reduction.
As an industry alliance of an airline, the international air transport association has proposed four pillars of the aviation environment problem, namely, improving technology, more effective flight, improving infrastructure and market based measures. At the sixty-ninth annual meeting held in South Africa, the International Air Transport Association voted through the CNG2020 resolution. Unfortunately, the resolution is not only clearly contrary to the stance of developing countries on climate change negotiations, but also clearly violates the principle of "non discrimination" and "fair access to development" in the Chicago convention. The International Air Transport Association, as one of the pluralistic subjects of global governance, should actively participate in International aviation emissions. Negotiation, better play its coordination role.

【學位授予單位】：吉林大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D993.4;D996.9

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 覃華平;;歐盟航空減排交易體制(EU ETS)探析——兼論國際航空減排路徑[J];比較法研究;2011年06期

2 李剛;;論戴維·赫爾德的全球治理思想[J];東北大學學報(社會科學版);2008年03期

3 易承志;;跨國公民社會參與全球治理的角色分析[J];東南學術(shù);2011年02期

4 史玉;;國際航空排放全球共同治理機制構(gòu)建[J];國際論壇;2012年03期

5 蘇長和;;中國與全球治理——進程、行為、結(jié)構(gòu)與知識[J];國際政治研究;2011年01期

6 許光縣;;論歐盟ETS法案對我國航空產(chǎn)業(yè)的啟示[J];西北工業(yè)大學學報(社會科學版);2012年01期

7 傅前明;;氣候變化立法動向分析及中國對策——以國際民航業(yè)減排為視角[J];北京航空航天大學學報(社會科學版);2012年05期

8 劉萍;;論航空排放的國際法律規(guī)制[J];法學雜志;2011年09期

9 張勝軍;;全球治理的最新發(fā)展和理論動態(tài)[J];國外理論動態(tài);2012年10期

10 蘭花;;歐盟航空減排貿(mào)易指令的國際法分析——兼評中歐航空減排爭議[J];北京理工大學學報(社會科學版);2012年03期

本文編號：1820711