气候变化诉讼中因果关系的认定标准

Determination of Causation in Climate Change Litigation

因果关系难以确立是气候变化诉讼中最为常见的驳回理由,事实因果关系的认定标准更是气候变化诉讼的核心问题。针对气候变化诉讼中事实因果关系的不确定性,侵权法中出现了市场份额理论和概率因果关系,但此类方法无法与气候变化的特殊背景相契合。通过考察气候变化诉讼发现,以必要因果关系为基础而发展起来的实质贡献说正在成为司法中的新兴实践,然而由于目前缺乏对实质性要素的统一认识和界定标准,因果关系认定中出现标准弱化、要素模糊化以及导向策略化等趋势。因此,实质贡献说虽然带来了个别气候变化诉讼的胜诉结果,但最终可能损害因果关系法律论证的严密性,难以确立规范价值。为了兼具规范性和可诉性,气候变化诉讼应当建立以气候归因科学为事实前提,以“充分集的必要元素”为法律基础的因果关系路径。一方面,气候归因科学的最新进展可以为气候变化诉讼中因果关系的认定提供新的依据,在构建具体因果关系中承担桥梁作用;另一方面,应引入适应气候变化特殊性的“充分集的必要元素”作为气候变化侵权诉讼中因果关系的认定方法。

Difficulty in establishing causation is the most common ground for dismissal in climate change litigation,and the standard for determining factual causation has become a central issue in climate change litigation.The traditional theory of causation is unable to provide a reasonable explanation for establishing a causal link between specific carbon emissions and specific damages,as it fails to fit the special context of climate change.The application of the substantive contribution theory to climate change litigation has become an emerging practice in the judiciary,but there is a lack of uniformity in the understanding of the substantive elements,which has led to overly broad standards that,while achieving successful outcomes in climate change litigation in individual cases,may undermine the rigour of the legal argument for causation and make it difficult to establish normative value.Climate change litigation should establish a causation pathway based on climate attribution as the factual premise and the “necessary element of a sufficient set”(NESS) as the legal foundation.On the one hand,recent advances in climate attribution science can provide a new basis for causation in climate change litigation and assume a bridging role in the construction of specific causation.On the other hand,the NESS test,which is adapted to the specificity of climate change,is introduced as a method for determining causation in climate change tort litigation.