气候风险视阈下上市公司高管合规义务新探

A New Exploration of Compliance Obligations of Senior Executives of Listed Companie from the Perspective of Climate Risk

ESG运动背景下气候变化的复杂性及不确定性带来前所未有的风险和挑战,气候诉讼使得气候侵权责任救济及上市公司信披合规与监管问题愈加凸显。为此,通过聚焦气候变化引发的治理风险及高管气候合规义务扩展的困局分析,提出如下解决之道:(1)基于私法分配正义理论,合理切分“牺牲责任的边界”,将公司法信义义务一般条款适当延伸,形成“忠实+勤勉+ESG合规”义务三元化的制度框架。(2)气候信息披露规范化方面不宜“一刀切”,披露主体方面可根据不同行业不同市值规模企业予以差异化配置,即针对碳排放达到一定域值和达到一定市值的上市公司予以强制性规范配置,为高管合规经营提供刚性标尺;针对中小型上市企业气候信披仍以倡导性、自愿性规范配置为主;披露内容上应从注重企业对环境产生的影响转向对企业可持续发展影响,可借鉴财务披露的重大性标准完善非财务性信息披露规则,完善双重重要性原则;披露实施机制方面注重发挥软法“遵守与解释”模式的优势(完善市场声誉惩戒机制)。(3)为加强“漂绿”行为监管,应完善“漂绿”行为的定义和问责标准,现阶段仍以配置适度的行政责任和高管职业保险机制为应对气候风险之上策。(4)为激励公司治理绿色转型,应在公司法绿色条款的硬法体系建设基础上加强ESG合规之规的软法供给,譬如可设立本土化的“安全港规则”,以为司法豁免/减免高管责任裁判提供参佐。

The complexity and uncertainty of climate change has brought unprecedented risks and challenges under the background of ESG movement.Climate litigation makes the issues of relief of climate tort liability and compliance and supervision of listed companies more and more prominent.Therefore,by focusing on the dilemma of climate-induced governance risks and the expansion of executives'climate compliance obligations,this paper puts forward the following solutions:(1)based on the theory of distributive justice in private law,reasonably dividing the"Boundary of Sacrifice Responsibility",the general provisions of corporate fiduciary obligations should be appropriately extended to form a three-tier institutional framework of Loyalty+Diligence+ESG compliance"obligations;(2)it is not appropriate to standardize climate information disclosure("One site fits all"),disclosers can be allocated differently according to the size of the market capitalization of companies in different industries,that is,to listed companies with a certain range of carbon emissions and a certain market Peremptory norm,for the small and medium-sized listed enterprises climate disclosure is still the main advocacy,voluntary soft regulation;the disclosure content should be changed from the impact of enterprises on the environment to the impact of sustainable development of enterprises,and the significance of financial disclosure standards can be used for reference;in the aspect of disclosure and accountability,we should take the advantage of soft law regulation(improve the mechanism of market reputation punishment);(3)in order to strengthen the supervision of greenwashing,the definition and accountability standards of greenwashing should be improved.At present,the best way to deal with climate risks is to allocate appropriate administrative liability and professional insurance mechanism for executives;(4)we can set up local"Safe harbor rules"in soft law supply mode to provide reference for judicial adjudication.