摘要
共同但有区别的责任原则不是一个连贯、统一和清晰的原则,由于共同但有区别的责任在内涵上未能达到内部结构的均衡,在使用上无法获得统一的解释,在实践中受到了诸多因素的干扰,最终导致国际社会应对气候变化的谈判陷入僵局。在不同的语境和场合下,共同但有区别的责任原则事实上被赋予了不同的功能,它有时被作为法律原则,有时被作为伦理准则,有时还被作为谈判策略。针对国际社会对这一原则的不同理解和运用,我国在争取承担气候变化责任空间上需要特别强调作为法律原则的共同但有区别的责任原则,发展宽容与包容的伦理准则,并且在策略选择上随时根据我国的根本利益要求和国际关系格局的变化作出相应的调整。
CBDR is not a consistent, unified and clear legal principle： First, there exists an asymmetry inside CBDR. Second, all contracting parties are trying to affect the legal interpretation in order to pro-tect their interests. Third, there are many factors interfering the development of CBDR. Because of the above problems, CBDR has different implications. There exist three kinds of CBDR： the ＂Legal Principle＂ CBDR, the ＂Ethical Guideline＂ CBDR and the ＂Negotiating Strategy＂ CBDR. They interact in a complex way and lead to chaos. After recognizing this situation, China should carry out corre- sponding measures to protect her interests. First, stick to the ＂Legal Principle＂ CBDR. Second, change the ＂Ethical Guideline＂ CBDR to a more comprehensive and tolerant one to face the future. Third, adopt flexible strategies in negotiation according to the needs of protecting national interests and the transformation of international political situation.
出处
《中国人民大学学报》
CSSCI
北大核心
2013年第2期91-101,共11页
Journal of Renmin University of China
基金
国家社会科学基金重点项目"<气候变化应对法>立法研究"(10AFX012)
关键词
共同但有区别的责任原则
气候变化
减排责任
common but differentiated responsibilities
climate change
carbon emission reduction obligation
