科技部補助專題研究計畫出席國際學術會議心得報告

日期：105 年 4 月 27 日

一、參加會議經過：

亞洲國際法學會每兩年舉辦一次國際研討會，2015 年係第五屆之雙年會，於泰國曼谷之 Plaza Athenee Bangkok 飯店舉行，為期兩天（2015/11/26-27）。於研討會中所發表之論文，均需事先提交摘要經審查方得於會中發表，計畫主持人於 2015/7/8 提交摘要至大會，經大會於 2015/9/1 通知摘要經過審查後獲選，通知涵中並提及本次會議共收到 285 份摘要，最終入選者共有 98 篇，錄取率不到 35%。於會議前不到一個月，計畫主持人收到大會秘書處之來函，邀請擔任其中一場國際環境法之 panel 的主持人，本次大會共有 32 場次之 panel session，計畫主持人過往並未參與亞洲國際法學會前四屆之雙年會，此次得獲邀擔任主持人，甚感榮幸。

計畫主持人於 2015/11/25 抵達曼谷，入住飯店休息。隔天（2015/11/26）早上至會場報到，本計畫編號 MOST102－2621－M －004 －002－MY2

計畫名稱氣候變遷的立法建制--氣候變遷立法的財務機制面向

出國人員

姓名施文真服務機構

及職稱國立政治大學專任教授會議時間

104 年 11 月 26 日至 104 年 11 月 27 日

會議地點泰國曼谷

會議名稱

(中文)亞洲國際法學會第五屆雙年會：亞洲國際法與變動中之經濟與政治現況

(英文)The Fifth Biennial Conference of the Asian Society of International Law: International Law and the Changing Economic & Political

Landscape in Asia

發表題目

(中文)由直接管制到經濟誘因？國際環境法以及亞太區域下轉變中之氣候變遷管制手段

(英文) From command-and-control to economic instruments? Changing regulatory approaches for climate change under international environmental law and in the Asian Pacific region

次大會邀請到泰國皇室成員（Bajrakitiyabha Mahidol 公主）主持開幕典禮，並邀請到國際法院之 Owada Hisashi 法官等多位國際法之著名學者進行開幕演講。於上午之開幕儀式以及開幕演講結束後，於下午正式舉行所有之研討會論文。計畫主持人所發表之文章被安排在第一天下午第一場的 Panel F1: legal responses to disaster & pollution，本場次的主持人為澳洲 Macquarie 大學法學院副教授暨代理院長、環境法中心主任 Shawkat Alam 教授，同一場次除了計畫主持人之文章外，亦另有三篇論文發表，包括由澳洲科技大學之 Gabrielle Anne Simm 博士所發表之 Disasters in ASEAN and Civil Society: the ASEAN Partnership Group、由英國 Dundee 大學之 Naporn Popattanachai 先生所發表之 ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution-the case study of Thailand、以及由印尼 Padjadjaran 大學之 Ida Nurlinda 教授所發表之 The Roles of Traditional Peoples in Controlling Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Indonesia in order to Overcome the Impacts of Global

Warming。本場次因為時間的關係，每位發表人約僅有不到 20 分鐘之時間進行論文發表，惟後續之 Q&A 還是有相當多熱絡的討論。

計畫主持人於發表論文後，接續擔任下一場次 F2：International environmental law 的主持人，

本場次原本安排三篇論文發表，惟其中一位發表人因故無法出席，因此本場次僅有兩篇論文發表，分別是由上一場次之主持人 Shawkat Alam 教授所發表之 Trade and the Environment:

Perspective form the Global South、以及由瑞士伯恩大學之世界貿易機構（World Trade Institute）的 Ilaria Espa 博士所發表之 Mineral Export Restrains, Green Industrial Policies and the WTO Subsidy Agreement: Implications of a New Trade and Climate Change Narrative。本場次所發表之議題均聚焦於貿易與環境議題，此亦為計畫主持人長期關注之研究課題，故於本場次中，亦與發表人以及在場之聽眾進行意見交流，收穫豐富。

於第一天之論文發表後，參加大會所安排之晚宴；第二天則選擇計畫主持人有興趣之 panel，

繼續參加會議。第三天返台。

二、與會心得

本次參加亞洲國際法學會之第五屆雙年會，觀察到亞太地區研究國際法學者的多樣性與素質，

本次雙年會所安排之議題，除了傳統之國際公法外，也包括了國際刑法、國際環境法、國際經貿法、國際投資法、國際人權與人道法、國際爭端解決等，內容相當豐富，此外，本次之年會亦安排一些場次專門討論東南亞國協（ASEAN）整合之相關議題，而許多與會者即便不是專門研究 ASEAN，也多半以 ASEAN 國家做為案例。亞洲國際法學會本身當然是以亞洲之觀點與特色為出發點，切入各類國際法議題之研究，本次年會或許有可能因主辦國為 ASEAN 之會員，因此特別將 ASEAN 整合拉出單獨自成數場場次，但由上述可得知，ASEAN 於亞洲地區的國際法研究社群中，

應逐漸有其重要性，值得我國從事國際法研究之學者注意。

三、發表論文全文或摘要 1. 論文摘要：

countries are more used to the traditional command-and-control type of regulatory tools under their domestic

environmental regulations.

For climate change mitigation, it seems that economic instruments have been gaining more popularity both internationally and nationally. The Kyoto Protocol is the first multilateral environment agreement that adopts emissions trading as one of its tools to assist Annex 1 parties to meet their emissions reduction obligations. Economic instruments are expected to be incorporated as well in the post-Kyoto international climate change regime. On the national front, considering the more extensive use of economic instruments, it is not surprising to see the use of emissions trading system by the EU to implement its emissions reduction obligations under the Kyoto Protocol. In the Asian Pacific region, most countries, apart from Japan, are not Annex I parties, or are not even parties to the Kyoto Protocol. Nevertheless, many Asian Pacific countries have announced national emissions reduction targets either under their domestic legislations or via their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) that are being submitted to the emerging international climate change legal regime. In these Asian Pacific countries, many have announced their willingness and readiness to use economic instruments, in particular emissions trading, as the main regulatory tool to mitigate climate change. This can be seen from the national legislations in Korea and Taiwan. Both these national climate change legislations use emissions trading as the main, if not only, regulatory tool to achieve their respective emissions reduction goals and targets. Although a formal national climate change law is still under consideration, China is already test-running emissions trading system via seven polite schemes in seven provinces and cities since 2012.

This article will try to identify whether there is a changing regulatory approach under international climate change legal regime as well as in the Asian Pacific region. To this end, the role of emissions trading will be analyzed in the Kyoto Protocol and the emerging international climate change regime. A comparative analysis, with a focus on the emissions trading system, on the existing national climate change legislations in the Asian Pacific region, namely Korea and Taiwan, will follow. It is anticipated that, via these investigations, a clearer picture on the changing patterns of climate change regulations under international environmental law and in the Asian Pacific region might be revealed.

2. 全文（草稿）

From command-and-control to economic instruments? Changing regulatory approaches for climate change under international environmental law and in the Asian Pacific region

Table of content 1. Introduction

2. Economic instruments under multilateral environmental agreements

3. National climate change legislations and their use of economic instruments: using Taiwan and Korea as examples

4. Comparison and analysis 5. Conclusion

1. Introduction

Economic instruments were rarely seen under international environmental law since its development after the 1970s. On the national front, economic instruments have been more widely used by the US and European countries as their environmental regulatory tools since the 1980s. Most of the Asian Pacific countries are more used to the traditional command-and-control type of regulatory tools under their domestic environmental regulations.

particular under the international climate change regime. Part 3 will present the current state of environmental policy tools, with a focus on climate change and emission trading, employed in Korea and Taiwan. Based on the analysis of Part 2 and 3, Part 4 will then present a preliminary analysis on the changing regulatory patterns internationally and in the Asian Pacific region.

2. Economic instruments under multilateral environmental agreements i. Economic instruments under international environmental law

Economic instruments can be considered for tackling international and global environmental problems,

such as acid rain, global warming and stratospheric ozone depletion, in the most cost-effective manner.¹ Various types of economic instruments on environmental policies have been identified in the OECD’s 1991 RECOMMENDATION OF THE COUNCIL ON THE USE OF ECONOMIC INSTUMENTS IN

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES. They include: charges and taxes, marketable permits, deposit-refund system, financial assistance.² They may also include enforcement incentives, fines, non-compliance fees, administrative charges, performance bonds, damage compensation.³ Sands also identify the following measures as economic instrument: subsidies, liability and compensation for damages, trade measures,

investment incentives, environmental agreements, and consumer information incentives.⁴ In the more recent references in the climate change arena, the term “carbon pricing” is used by the World Bank and the IMF to refer to two types of economic instruments: emissions trading system and carbon taxes.⁵

The development of international environmental law has involved a move from traditional rules of

“command and control” toward increasing usage of economic instruments.⁶ Sands also observed that: “The use of economic instruments at the international level to supplement, or supplant, regulatory approaches to environmental protection is supported, at least in principle, by a growing number of states. The practical application is nevertheless limited.” However, “explicit references in international acts at “economic instruments” are a relatively recent phenomenon.”⁷

Several important soft law instruments have identified economic instruments as crucial in the

implementation of their respective programme. For example, Chapter 8 of Agenda 21 entitled “Integrating Environment and Development in Decision-Making”. Paragraph 8.1 include “Making effective use of

economic instruments and market and other incentives” as one if its programme areas. Principle 15 of the Rio

Declaration states that: “National authorities should endeavour to promote the internalization of

environmental costs and the use of economic instruments, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution, with due regard to the public interest and without distorting

1 OECD, 31 January 1991, RECOMMENDATION OF THE COUNCIL ON THE USE OF ECONOMIC INSTUMENTS IN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES, C(90)177/FINAL, para. 51, Annex. available from:

http://acts.oecd.org/Instruments/ShowInstrumentView.aspx?InstrumentID=41&Lang=en&Book=False (last visited: 30 October 2015)

2 OECD, 31 January 1991, RECOMMENDATION OF THE COUNCIL ON THE USE OF ECONOMIC INSTUMENTS IN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES, C(90)177/FINAL, paras 1-7, Annex. available from:

http://acts.oecd.org/Instruments/ShowInstrumentView.aspx?InstrumentID=41&Lang=en&Book=False (last visited: 30 October 2015)

3 OECD, 31 January 1991, RECOMMENDATION OF THE COUNCIL ON THE USE OF ECONOMIC INSTUMENTS IN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES, C(90)177/FINAL, para 1, Annex. available from:

http://acts.oecd.org/Instruments/ShowInstrumentView.aspx?InstrumentID=41&Lang=en&Book=False (last visited: 30 October 2015)

4 Sand, P., 2003, PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW (2^nd ed.), Oxford University Press, pp 160-167.

5 See, for example: http://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/pricing-carbon.

6 Roch, P. & Perrez, F.X., winter 2005, “INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE: THE STRIVE TOWARDS A COMPREHENSIVE, COHERENT, EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REGIME” 16 Colo. J. Int'l Envtl. L. & Pol'y 1, p.5.

7 Sand, P., 2003, PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW (2^nd ed.), Oxford University Press, p.159.

international trade and investment.”

ii. Int’l climate change regime & its use of economic instruments

In the international climate change regime, no specific references of economic instruments are provided in the UNFCCC. Article 4.2 only provides that, “The developed country Parties and other Parties included in Annex I commit themselves specifically as provided for in the following: … (e) Each of these Parties shall: (i) Coordinate as appropriate with other such Parties, relevant economic and administrative instruments

developed to achieve the objective of the Convention.” In other words, Parties are encouraged to coordinate with other parties in the development of economic instruments to achieve the objective of the UNFCCC. No specific recommendations to use economic instruments are laid down.

In the Kyoto Protocol where specific emissions reductions targets are laid down for Annex I parties, three types of flexible mechanisms are provided so that Annex I parties can meet their emissions reduction commitments in a more cost-effective way. These flexible mechanisms are emissions trading under Article 17 of the Kyoto Protocol, in combination with the Clean Development Mechanisms (CDM) and Joint

Implementation (JI). Article 17 provides that: “The Conference of the Parties shall define the relevant principles, modalities, rules and guidelines, in particular for verification, reporting and accountability for emissions trading. The Parties included in Annex B may participate in emissions trading for the purposes of fulfilling their commitments under Article 3. Any such trading shall be supplemental to domestic actions for

在文檔中氣候變遷立法的財務機制面向 (頁 62-75)