摘要
气候变化立法的制度变迁在国际上是由科学议题转向政治问题,再由政治问题转向制度安排;而在中国,则是由环境问题转向发展议题,再由发展议题转向制度安排。毫无疑问,二者在制度变迁方面存在着不同。对此,历史制度主义认为,这种不同的存在是客观的、合理的,是历史情境和制度沿袭的必然结果。基于此,未来的气候变化立法应尊重这种差异性,在防止立法中出现不良路径依赖的同时,还应加强对气候变化立法关键节点的掌控。
Internationally,the institutional changes of climate change legislation are from the scientific issues to political issues,and then from political to institutional arrangement.However,in China,they are from environmental issues to development issues,and then from development issues to institutional planning.The different institutional changes no doubt follow different paths.The historical institutionalism sees the existence of different paths as objective,reasonable,and attributes them to historical context and institutional legacy.Therefore,climate change legislation should respect the differences,prevent adverse path dependence,and strengthen the control for the critical junctures in the future.
出处
《江苏大学学报（社会科学版）》
2014年第4期41-49,共9页
Journal of Jiangsu University(Social Science Edition)
基金
中国法学会部级课题(CLS2013D225)
中国清洁发展机制基金赠款项目(2012057)
关键词
气候变化
气候变化法
制度变迁
climate change
climate change law
institutional change
