国际碳交易法律问题研究
|
摘要
国际碳交易就是对碳排放权的交易,即为履行减排义务或投资或其他目的买方主体与为获得资金或技术的卖方主体进行的以碳配额或碳信用为交易标的买卖交易。自20世纪90年代以来,国际碳交易得到了迅猛发展,特别是在欧盟碳排放交易体系的建立和运行以及发展中国家积极参与到国际碳排放交易体系中以后。中国虽不是《京都议定书》第一期强制减排义务的国家,但作为最大的发展中国家,中国是发达国家CDM项目机制实施的主要卖方国。而且,在接下来的几十年里,中国虽需要反对对发展中国家实施强制减排义务,抵制美国和欧盟的碳排放交易税,但积极主动参与解决气候变化问题和实施碳排放交易是争夺国际气候领域主导话语权的关键。因此,对国际碳交易的研究,不但可以为研究当前国际碳交易存在的问题,系统化解难题取得突破和将碳交易写进我国的《大气污染防治法》或建立我国独立的碳交易法律规范并与国际碳交易规则接轨奠定一定的理论基础；而且在实践上,它也能为解决我国在如何迎接可能面临的强制减排义务和建立碳交易的法律规范体系方面的问题提供参考,并能为我国的企业实体全面参与国际碳交易提供有效指导。
依据目前国际碳交易理论和实践的经验,国际碳交易还存在碳排放权权属不明确、碳交易法律规范的软法性、碳认证标准的不统一、碳交易协议模板中设定的权利义务不对等、碳交易过程中的贸易限制措施与WTO规则存在法律冲突等方面的问题。以公平自由、正义的贸易环境为研究基础,以当国际碳交易面临的问题为研究对象,以国际碳交易的市场运行机制为研究进路,以构建碳交易公平体系为研究核心,运用历史与现实考察法、实证与规范分析法、比较分析法等方法研究后发现：一是碳排放权的法律属性是碳交易的基准和核心。对碳排放权的属性认定,无论是英美法系的财产属性,还是大陆法系的用益物权属性、准物权属性或是环境权属性,都存在局限性。在超越法系或是国内法基本理论和制度的基础上,从国际法层面作出法律、伦理和道德的回应,碳排放权应具有国际自然法属性、人权法属性以及人类环境权益法属性；二是国际碳交易法律体系从《联合国气候变化框架》、《京都议定书》到欧盟碳排放交易指令到各国的碳排放交易法律规范,表现出法律体系的非统一性、法律规范的非完整性、法律效力的软法性等特征,不利于国际强制减排义务的落实和国际碳交易的发展,需要国际社会共同努力在给予各缔约国时间和责任义务分配上的区别对待的前提下,可以逐步达成广泛一致的强制减排公约或协定；三是碳认证是进行碳交易项目的必然程序；碳项目的认证标准是确定最后获得核证的减排量的法定依据。当前,国际碳认证标准的多样性,导致碳交易项目的认证结果不统一,甚至导致整个碳交易市场的分割和产生国际碳交易市场的技术性壁垒。为此,在国际碳交易的发展中,需要从立法层面对国际碳认证的标准进行研究,建立一个或少数几个精准的科学的认证标准,以保障国际碳交易项目认证的公平与公正；四是国际碳交易行为是通过国际碳交易合同的有效约定达成的,但国际碳交易合同并没有形成统一的示范合同。基于不同碳交易主体,会选择不同碳交易合同模板。而这会导致碳交易主体在权利和义务上的不公平。参照一般的国际商事买卖合同,比较碳交易合同在主体和客体、权利和义务、履约程序和法律效力等内容的特殊性约定,找出其不足,并在合同适同中给予非违约主体以救济措施,将会有效促进碳交易的发展和公平性；五是国际社会一直努力在世界贸易组织规则与《联合国气候变化框架公约》体系下的制度规定之间形成了一个相互尊重对方管制领域的普遍共识。但国际碳交易的贸易限制措施与WTO法设定的自由贸易义务和削减市场准入壁垒的义务是背道而驰的。在对碳排放权交易制度是否属于WTO法的适用范围作出肯定判断后,我们有必要恰当地平衡环境保护目标与多边自由贸易体制价值取向之间的冲突关系,从而找到国际碳交易的贸易限制措施与WTO规则之间的一致性。
因此,国际碳交易是人类社会控制气候变化的一个制度创新,具有重要的理论和实践意义,但也存在不少问题。它需要国际社会对碳排放权的法律属性进行确认、强化法律规范的强行性、建立统一的碳项目认证标准,并平衡碳交易主体之间的权利和义务,寻求碳贸易限制措施的法律冲突解决,才能实现国际碳交易的有序和公正。
International trading in carbon emissions is on the right to emission, which is the implementation of emission reduction obligations or for investment or other purposes the buyer and seller for access to funds or technology subject to quotas of carbon or carbon credit transactions as the subject of the sale transaction. In the1990s of the20th century, the rapid development of international carbon trading has been in the way, particularly in the establishment and operation of the EU emissions trading system as well as the active participation of developing countries in the international carbon emissions trading system in the future. China is not the first undertaker of mandatory emission reduction obligations of the Kyoto Protocol, but, as the largest developing country, China is a major seller of CDM projects implementation mechanisms in developed countries. Also, in the next decade, China needed opposed to mandatory emission reduction obligations for developing countries, resist the United States and the European Union's tax on carbon emissions trading, but actively involved in climate change issues and the implementation of emissions trading is the key to compete for international climate leading voice in the field. Therefore, study of international carbon trading, not only to study the problems of the current international carbon trading, systems resolve challenges and carbon trading a breakthrough into the air pollution control Act, or the establishment of an independent legal norms and international carbon trading and carbon trading rules practice certain theories laid the Foundation; But in practice, it can be solved in China may face mandatory cuts in how to meet obligations and the establishment of rule of law system of carbon trading aspects of providing references, and can provide effective guidance for corporate entities to fully participate in the international carbon trading.
According to the theory and practice of international carbon trading experience, ownership unknown international carbon trading-carbon emissions, carbon trading law soft law, carbon certification standard of uniform set of rights and obligations in the agreement template, carbon trading is not reciprocal, carbon trade procedures, trade restrictions in legal aspects of issues such as conflict with WTO rules. In a fair trade environment research foundation of freedom, justice, when the problems for the study of international carbon trading, to approach to the study of international carbon trading market mechanism, To build a carbon trade fair system for core research, using historical and realistic perspective approach, empirical and Normative Analysis, comparative analysis and other methods of research he found that:Firstly, carbon emissions trading is the legal property of the base and core. Property determination of carbon emissions, are the property of the British and American legal systems properties, are also civil law of usufruct right to property, right to property or the environment properties, there are limitations. Beyond the basic theory and system of law or domestic law on the basis of, from legal, ethical and moral dimensions of international law made in response to carbon emissions should have international natural law, human rights law attributes and method of human environmental rights and property. Secondly, international carbon trading legal system from United Nations climate changes framework under, and Kyoto Protocol under to EU carbon emissions trading instruction to States of carbon row into trading legal rules, performance out legal system of non-Unity, and country legal specification of non-integrity, and legal effect of soft method sexual, features, does not conducive to international forced emissions obligations of implementation and international carbon trading of development, needs international social common efforts in give all party time and responsibility obligations distribution Shang of difference treat of premise Xia, Can be gradually reached a broad agreement of mandatory cuts conventions or agreements. Thirdly, carbon certification is a program for carbon trading project; Carbon project certification standard is finally obtained certified emission reductions statutory basis. At present, the diversity of international carbon standards, leading to carbon trading project certification results are not unified, or even the entire carbon trading market segmentation and technical barriers in international carbon trading markets.To do this, in the development of international carbon trading, from legislative level to study the certification of international carbon standards, establishing one or a few accurate scientific certification standards in order to safeguard the fairness and impartiality of international carbon trading program. Fourthly, the international carbon trading is an effective agreement reached through the international carbon trading contracts, but the international carbon trading contracts and does not form a unified model of contract. Based on the different carbon trading, will choose different carbon trading contract templates. And this will lead on the subject of carbon trading in the rights and obligations of unfair. Reference to General contracts for the international sale of goods, comparison of carbon trading in the subject and the object of the contract, the rights and obligations, compliance procedures and legal effects of special conventions, identify its shortcomings and subject to contract adapter with non-default remedies, will effectively contribute to the development of carbon trading and equity. Fifthly, has been working in the World Trade Organization rules of the international.community and the United Nations Framework Convention on climate change under control system form a mutual respect between each other areas of general consensus. But trade restrictions in the international carbon trading and setting free trade obligations of WTO law is contrary to the obligations and reduce market access barriers.Carbon emissions trading system is within the scope of WTO law certainly after judgment, it is necessary to appropriately balance the environmental protection objectives and value orientation of multilateral free trade regime between the conflicting relationship, international carbon trading can be found by consistency between the WTO rules and trade restrictions.
Accordingly, the international carbon trading is a system to control climate change innovation of human society, is of great theoretical and practical significance, but there are still many problems. It requires the international community to confirm the legal property of carbon emissions, strengthen the force of the rule of law, establish uniform certification standard for carbon projects, carbon trading and balance between rights and obligations, legal conflict resolution seeking carbon trade restrictions, international carbon trading order and justice can be achieved.
依据目前国际碳交易理论和实践的经验,国际碳交易还存在碳排放权权属不明确、碳交易法律规范的软法性、碳认证标准的不统一、碳交易协议模板中设定的权利义务不对等、碳交易过程中的贸易限制措施与WTO规则存在法律冲突等方面的问题。以公平自由、正义的贸易环境为研究基础,以当国际碳交易面临的问题为研究对象,以国际碳交易的市场运行机制为研究进路,以构建碳交易公平体系为研究核心,运用历史与现实考察法、实证与规范分析法、比较分析法等方法研究后发现：一是碳排放权的法律属性是碳交易的基准和核心。对碳排放权的属性认定,无论是英美法系的财产属性,还是大陆法系的用益物权属性、准物权属性或是环境权属性,都存在局限性。在超越法系或是国内法基本理论和制度的基础上,从国际法层面作出法律、伦理和道德的回应,碳排放权应具有国际自然法属性、人权法属性以及人类环境权益法属性；二是国际碳交易法律体系从《联合国气候变化框架》、《京都议定书》到欧盟碳排放交易指令到各国的碳排放交易法律规范,表现出法律体系的非统一性、法律规范的非完整性、法律效力的软法性等特征,不利于国际强制减排义务的落实和国际碳交易的发展,需要国际社会共同努力在给予各缔约国时间和责任义务分配上的区别对待的前提下,可以逐步达成广泛一致的强制减排公约或协定；三是碳认证是进行碳交易项目的必然程序；碳项目的认证标准是确定最后获得核证的减排量的法定依据。当前,国际碳认证标准的多样性,导致碳交易项目的认证结果不统一,甚至导致整个碳交易市场的分割和产生国际碳交易市场的技术性壁垒。为此,在国际碳交易的发展中,需要从立法层面对国际碳认证的标准进行研究,建立一个或少数几个精准的科学的认证标准,以保障国际碳交易项目认证的公平与公正；四是国际碳交易行为是通过国际碳交易合同的有效约定达成的,但国际碳交易合同并没有形成统一的示范合同。基于不同碳交易主体,会选择不同碳交易合同模板。而这会导致碳交易主体在权利和义务上的不公平。参照一般的国际商事买卖合同,比较碳交易合同在主体和客体、权利和义务、履约程序和法律效力等内容的特殊性约定,找出其不足,并在合同适同中给予非违约主体以救济措施,将会有效促进碳交易的发展和公平性；五是国际社会一直努力在世界贸易组织规则与《联合国气候变化框架公约》体系下的制度规定之间形成了一个相互尊重对方管制领域的普遍共识。但国际碳交易的贸易限制措施与WTO法设定的自由贸易义务和削减市场准入壁垒的义务是背道而驰的。在对碳排放权交易制度是否属于WTO法的适用范围作出肯定判断后,我们有必要恰当地平衡环境保护目标与多边自由贸易体制价值取向之间的冲突关系,从而找到国际碳交易的贸易限制措施与WTO规则之间的一致性。
因此,国际碳交易是人类社会控制气候变化的一个制度创新,具有重要的理论和实践意义,但也存在不少问题。它需要国际社会对碳排放权的法律属性进行确认、强化法律规范的强行性、建立统一的碳项目认证标准,并平衡碳交易主体之间的权利和义务,寻求碳贸易限制措施的法律冲突解决,才能实现国际碳交易的有序和公正。
International trading in carbon emissions is on the right to emission, which is the implementation of emission reduction obligations or for investment or other purposes the buyer and seller for access to funds or technology subject to quotas of carbon or carbon credit transactions as the subject of the sale transaction. In the1990s of the20th century, the rapid development of international carbon trading has been in the way, particularly in the establishment and operation of the EU emissions trading system as well as the active participation of developing countries in the international carbon emissions trading system in the future. China is not the first undertaker of mandatory emission reduction obligations of the Kyoto Protocol, but, as the largest developing country, China is a major seller of CDM projects implementation mechanisms in developed countries. Also, in the next decade, China needed opposed to mandatory emission reduction obligations for developing countries, resist the United States and the European Union's tax on carbon emissions trading, but actively involved in climate change issues and the implementation of emissions trading is the key to compete for international climate leading voice in the field. Therefore, study of international carbon trading, not only to study the problems of the current international carbon trading, systems resolve challenges and carbon trading a breakthrough into the air pollution control Act, or the establishment of an independent legal norms and international carbon trading and carbon trading rules practice certain theories laid the Foundation; But in practice, it can be solved in China may face mandatory cuts in how to meet obligations and the establishment of rule of law system of carbon trading aspects of providing references, and can provide effective guidance for corporate entities to fully participate in the international carbon trading.
According to the theory and practice of international carbon trading experience, ownership unknown international carbon trading-carbon emissions, carbon trading law soft law, carbon certification standard of uniform set of rights and obligations in the agreement template, carbon trading is not reciprocal, carbon trade procedures, trade restrictions in legal aspects of issues such as conflict with WTO rules. In a fair trade environment research foundation of freedom, justice, when the problems for the study of international carbon trading, to approach to the study of international carbon trading market mechanism, To build a carbon trade fair system for core research, using historical and realistic perspective approach, empirical and Normative Analysis, comparative analysis and other methods of research he found that:Firstly, carbon emissions trading is the legal property of the base and core. Property determination of carbon emissions, are the property of the British and American legal systems properties, are also civil law of usufruct right to property, right to property or the environment properties, there are limitations. Beyond the basic theory and system of law or domestic law on the basis of, from legal, ethical and moral dimensions of international law made in response to carbon emissions should have international natural law, human rights law attributes and method of human environmental rights and property. Secondly, international carbon trading legal system from United Nations climate changes framework under, and Kyoto Protocol under to EU carbon emissions trading instruction to States of carbon row into trading legal rules, performance out legal system of non-Unity, and country legal specification of non-integrity, and legal effect of soft method sexual, features, does not conducive to international forced emissions obligations of implementation and international carbon trading of development, needs international social common efforts in give all party time and responsibility obligations distribution Shang of difference treat of premise Xia, Can be gradually reached a broad agreement of mandatory cuts conventions or agreements. Thirdly, carbon certification is a program for carbon trading project; Carbon project certification standard is finally obtained certified emission reductions statutory basis. At present, the diversity of international carbon standards, leading to carbon trading project certification results are not unified, or even the entire carbon trading market segmentation and technical barriers in international carbon trading markets.To do this, in the development of international carbon trading, from legislative level to study the certification of international carbon standards, establishing one or a few accurate scientific certification standards in order to safeguard the fairness and impartiality of international carbon trading program. Fourthly, the international carbon trading is an effective agreement reached through the international carbon trading contracts, but the international carbon trading contracts and does not form a unified model of contract. Based on the different carbon trading, will choose different carbon trading contract templates. And this will lead on the subject of carbon trading in the rights and obligations of unfair. Reference to General contracts for the international sale of goods, comparison of carbon trading in the subject and the object of the contract, the rights and obligations, compliance procedures and legal effects of special conventions, identify its shortcomings and subject to contract adapter with non-default remedies, will effectively contribute to the development of carbon trading and equity. Fifthly, has been working in the World Trade Organization rules of the international.community and the United Nations Framework Convention on climate change under control system form a mutual respect between each other areas of general consensus. But trade restrictions in the international carbon trading and setting free trade obligations of WTO law is contrary to the obligations and reduce market access barriers.Carbon emissions trading system is within the scope of WTO law certainly after judgment, it is necessary to appropriately balance the environmental protection objectives and value orientation of multilateral free trade regime between the conflicting relationship, international carbon trading can be found by consistency between the WTO rules and trade restrictions.
Accordingly, the international carbon trading is a system to control climate change innovation of human society, is of great theoretical and practical significance, but there are still many problems. It requires the international community to confirm the legal property of carbon emissions, strengthen the force of the rule of law, establish uniform certification standard for carbon projects, carbon trading and balance between rights and obligations, legal conflict resolution seeking carbon trade restrictions, international carbon trading order and justice can be achieved.
引文
①朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.8-9.
②王文嫣.发改委：我国碳排放交易试点明年将正式启动[DB/OL],中证网,http://www.cs.com.cn/cqzk/201202/t20120203_3226589.html,最后访问日2012-2-3.
①中研网讯.我国碳交易市场现状分析[DB/OL].中国行业研究网,http://www.chinairn.com/,最后访问2010-05-02.
①See European Commission, Green paper on greenhouse gas emission trading within the European Union[J]. COM(00)87,8 March 2000, European Environment, NO.565, April4,2000, Document, p.3.
②David Pocklington, European Emission Trading:the Business Perspective E[J]. European Environmental Law Review, July 2002, pp 210-211.
③冷罗生.构建中国碳排放权交易机制的法律政策思考[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(2)：21.
①郭兆晖,李普,廉桂萍.欧盟对民航业碳排放收费问题的透视[J].内蒙古大学学报,2010,(3)：13.
②朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.1-2.
①Springer, U. The market for tradable GHG permits under the Kyoto Protocol a survey of model studies[J]。Energy Economics,2003,2(5):527-551.
②瞿伟.美国排污权交易的模式选择与效果分析[J].工程与建设,2006,20(3)：188-189.
③沈国明.国外环保概览[M].成都：四川人民出版社,2002.12-18,92-94；[美]AMyrick Freeman环境与资源价值评估一理论与方法[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2002.9-12；杨通进.走向深层的环保[M].成都：四川人民出版社,2002.176-178；[美]保罗.霍肯.商业生态学[M].上海：上海译文出版社,2001.92-93; OECD.发展中国家环境管理的经济手段[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,1996.15-28,92-94.
④ Robin Hanbury-Tenison, Ross Gelbspan. Carbon emissions trading[J]. The Ecologist. Sturminster Newton:Jun.2002,32:34-35.
⑤ Uwe Schubert, Andreas Zerlauth. Innovative regional Environmental Policy-the RECLAIM-Emission Trading Poliey[J]. Environmental Management and Health. Bradford: 1999,10:130-133.
⑥Barry D Solomon, Russell Lee. Emissions Trading Systems and Environmental Justice. Environment[J]. Washington:Oct.2000,42:32-46.
⑦ Richard Schmalansee, Paul L Joskow, A Denny Ellerman, Juan Pablo Montero, Elizabeth M Bailey. An Interim Evaluation of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Trading[J]. The Journal of Economic Perspectives. Nashville:Summer 1998,12(3):53-69.
⑧富集的英文名称为enrichment,指某些物质通过水、大气和生物作用而在土壤或生物体内显著积累的作用。
⑨John K Stranlund, Carlos A Chavez, Barry C Field. Enforcing Emissions Trading Program: Theory, Practice, and Performance[J]. Policy Studies Journal. Urbana:2002,30(3):343-362.
①ICC. Legal Developments in the Carbon Market[J]. Legal Paper Workshop. Bogota:April 21,2009,1-18.
②参见IETA. Greenhouse Gas Market 2003-Greenhouse Gas Market 2010[M].
①林云华.国际气候合作与排放权交易制度研究[M].北京；中国经济出版社,2007。该书以有关温室气体排放权交易的四个环节相关法律制度为主线,从民商法、国际法等多个法律学科的视角对国际温室气体排放权交易的制度性问题进行了较为系统的分析,指出了2007年以前国际温室气体排放权交易法律制度中存在的问题,并针对这些问题提出了相应的解决措施。同时,结合实际对中国温室气体排放权交易的法律制度提出了一些具体设计思路；朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009。该书是我国第一本专门从法律的角度研究环境金融的著作。其中第2篇第4-10章是介绍“排放权交易的法律制度”的内容,就排放权的一些法律规范作了介绍,并介绍了《京都议定书》框架下的排放权交易体系。但该书着重是介绍“碳金融”方面的知识；周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011。该书更多地从实务角度,对碳减排交易的程序性问题以及风险防范问题进行阐述。
②杨兴.《气候变化框架公约》研究——兼论气候变化问题与国际法[D].武汉.武汉大学,2005。该论文主要是以《联合国气候变化框架公约》为主线,详尽介绍了《气候变化框架公约》的背景、内容简要评析、《京都议定书》确立的几项法律机制、价值取向等；李明勋.解析京都议定书的作用与局限性[D].北京.中国政法大学,2009。该论文主要是以《京都议定书》产生的背景及其内容为主线,充分介绍了《京都议定书》三个交易机制的遵约机制及其内容的法律性、局限性。
③王宁.温室气体排放交易的法律问题研究[D].北京.中国地质大学,2009；张棉.论气候领域的国际合作机制——析《京都协议书》中的清洁发展机制[D].北京.中国政法大学,2005；孙良.论我国碳排放权交易制度的建构[D].北京.中国政法大学,2009；张安娟.碳排放权交易制度研究[D].南京.南京大学,2011；等等。这些硕士论文往往是介绍碳交易制度的相关背景,或有关国家的碳交易制度以及我的碳排放交易制度的构建。
④胡迟.《京都议定书》框架下的排放权交易[J].绿叶,2007,(6)：38-39；丁方旭.跨国排放权交易的若干思考[J].中南财经政法大学研究生学报,2007,(6)：146-149；冷罗生.构建中国碳排放权交易机制的法律政策思考[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2010,10(2)：20-25；等等。
①陈安国.美国排污权交易的实践及启示[J].经济论坛,2002,(16)：4344.
②See generally Anthony Scott, Property Rights and Property Wrongs[J]. (1983) 16 Canadian Journal of Economics 555 discussing the merits of statute and common law in the evolution of property interests.
③see Brendan Edgeworth, The Numerus Clausus Principle in Contemporary Australian Property Law [J]. (2006) 32 Monash University Law Review, pp387.
④Statutory land interests have been described as'entitlements of a new kind':Harper v Minister for Sea Fisheries (1989) 168 CLR 314 at 325 (Mason CJ, Deane and Gaudron JJ). This is discussed by Scott, id at 558.
⑤see Thomas Merrill and Henry Smith, Optimal Standardization in the Law of Property:The Numerus Clausus Principle[J]. (2000) 110 Yale Law Journal 1; Bernard Rudden,'Economic Theory v Property Law:The numerus clausus problem'in John Eekelaar and John Bell (eds), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence:Third series (1987) 239.
①See Scott, above n 16. See also Anthony Scott, Does Government Create Real Property Rights?: Private Interests in Natural Resources[J]. in University of British Columbia Department of Economics, Discussion Paper No 84-26 (Vancouver,1984).
②See for example, the categories outlined by Mathew Storey, Not of this Earth:The Extraterrestrial Nature of Statutory Property in the 21st Century[J]. (2006) 25 Australian Resources and Energy Law Journal 51 at 54. The author sets out four different categories:(1) Defeasible statutory replication of a common law title; (2) Statutory property bearing no common law parallel; (3) Statutory licence; and (4) A public right created by statute.
③The later category has been endorsed in New South Wales, Tasmania and Queensland which have all deemed carbon sequestration rights to constitute'profit a prendre'interests. See also Scott, Does Government Create Real Property Rights?, above n 19, where the author suggests that statutory property is generally a legislative response to social and economic development. For a discussion of the specific development of statutory rights see further, Anthony Scott, 'Conceptual Origins of Rights Based Fishing' in Philip Neher, Ragnar Arnason and Nina Mollett (eds), Rights Based Fishing (1988) 11.
④Western Australia and South Australia have endorsed the carbon sequestration right as a pure statutory form. See Forestry Property Act 2000 (SA) s 3A; Carbon Rights Act 2003 (WA) s 3.
⑤A clear example of this form of interest is an exploration permit under the former Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1967 (Cth) (repealed by Offshore Petroleum (Repeals and Consequential Amendments) Act 2006 (Cth)), which conferred a right to the grant of a petroleum licence but only a limited right to the petroleum itself. See the discussion on the vexed proprietary status of this'pure'statutory form by Guramow J in Commonwealth v WMC Resources Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 1 at [194] where his Honour noted that the statutory interest was property despite the fact that its'defeasance'did not equate with an acquisition of property in a constitutional sense.
①The carbon right has been described as a'novel'right with a complexity that has made it difficult to characterise. See Steven Kennett, Arlene Kwasniak and Alastair Lucas. Property Rights and the Legal Framework for Carbon Sequestration on Agricultural Land[J]. (2005-06) 37 Ottawa Law Review 171 at 179.
②It might be possible, or at least more accurate, to align the interest with the profit a rendre. The profit a prendre was described by Santow JA (Mason P and Beazley JA agreeing) in Clos Farming Estates v Easton (2002) 11 BPR 20,605 at [59] (referring to Peter Butt, Land Law (4th ed,2001)), as'a right or obligation to enter land to put there something of benefit'. See also Permanent Trustee Australia Ltd v Shand (1992) 27 NSWLR 426 ('Permanent Trustee'), at 431 (Young J), where a profit a rendre was described as an incorporeal hereditament being 'a right to go onto the land and to put on it something of benefit to it'. The character and scope of the profit a rendre was discussed by Brendan Edgeworth, Profits a Rendre:A Reincarnation?[J]. (2006) 12 Australian Property Law Journal 200.
③See Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) s 87A; Forests Rights Registration Act 1990 (Tas) s 5(4).
①郑少华,孟飞.论排放权的时空维度：低碳经济的立法基础[J].政治与法律,2010,(11)：87.
②朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.44-46.
③周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.83；邓海峰.排污权：一种基于私法语境下的解读[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.232.
①李霞,狄琼,楼晓.排污权用益物权性质的探讨[J].生态经济,2006,(6)：33.
①马俊驹,梅夏英.无形财产的理论和立法问题[J].中国法学,2011,(2)：103.
②王明远.论排放权的准物权和发展权属性[J].中国法学,2010,(6)：93.
①王明远.论排放权的准物权和发展权属性[J].中国法学,2010,(6)：95.
②邹鹏.金融法视野下的排放权性质之初探[J].济宁学院学报,2011,32(1)：100.
③朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.47.
①[美]罗伯特·考特,托马斯·尤伦.法和经济学[M].张军等译.上海：上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1994.125.
②马俊驹,梅夏英.财产权的历史评析和现实思考[DB/OL].百度文库,http://wenku.baidu.com/view/7b 1 e8b4ff7ec4afe04a1dfdb.html,最后访问时间2011-06-30.
①格老秀斯.战争与和平法[M].牛津：牛津出版社,1925.11-13.38-39.
②有学者认为,应当区分“与自然统一”和“与自然和谐”两个概念。与自然统一是人类初始的生存法则,这是人类基因、功能和本质的体现；与自然和谐并非是一种自然而然的状态,而是我们的一种理想,需要我们人类的共同努力来完成的神圣事业。参见：[俄]A.N.科斯京.生态政治学与全球学[M].胡谷明等译.武汉：武汉大学出版社,2008.58.
①邱阳平.试论环境权的本质属性[DB/OL].中国论文下载中心,http://www.studa.net/jingjifa/060930/11220032-2.html,最后访问时间2011-07-06.
②See, e.g., HUMAN RIGHTS APPROACHES TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (Alan E. Boyle & Michael R. Anderson eds.,1996); DINAH SHELTON, ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS IN PEOPLE RIGHTS 187-88 (Philip Alston ed.,2001) (discussing the interconnectedness of human and environmental rights laws); LINKING HUMAN RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENT (Romina Picolotti & Jorge Daniel Taillant eds.,2003) (discussing the relationships between human rights and the environment).
①Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, U.N. Human Rights Council,7th Sess., U.N. Doc. A/HRC/7/L.21/Rev.l (Mar.26,2008), available at http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/ HRC/resolutions/A HRC 7 L 21 Rev l.doc.
②SANDS, Principles of International Environmental Law,292ff (2003).
③See generally:FRANZ XAVER PERREZ, COOPERATIVE SOVEREIGNTY:FROM INDEPENDENCE TO INTERDEPENDENCE IN THE STRUCTURE OF INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 46-64 (2000), W. Michael Reisman, Sovereignty and Human Rights in Contemporary International Law,84 AJIL 866 (1990).
①PERREZ, COOPERATIVE SOVEREIGNTY, supra note 2, at 331-343.
②UNGA Resolution 2398 (ⅩⅫ) (1968).
③Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Preambular para.1 and Principle 1,reprinted in:11 I.L.M.1416 (1972).
④World Charter for Nature, paras 15-16,23, available at: http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/37/a37r007.htm.
⑤Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Principles 1 and 10, reprinted in:31 I.L.M. 876(1992).
①Concerning environmental discrimination, see e.g:GUNTHER BAECHLE, VIOLENCE THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DISCRIMINATION (1999); P. Mohai and B. Bryant, Environmental Injustice:Weighing Race and Class as Factors in the Distribution of Environmental Hazards,63 U. COLO. L. REV.921-32 (1992).
①Concerning different anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric environmental ethics, see generally:R. ELLIOT (ed.), ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS (1995); Jens Petersen, Anthropozentrik und Okozentrik im Umweltrecht,83 ARSP 361 (1997).
②金瑞林.环境法学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1990.194.
①汪劲.论现代西方环境权益理论中的若干新理念[DB/OL].法律教育网,http://www.chinalawedu.com/news/16900/177/2003/12/zh45767563415121300236993_77901 .htm,最后访问时间2011-07-03.
①朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京；法律出版社,2009.109-112.
① Background on the UNFCCC:The international response to climate change. United Nati ons Framework Convention on Climate Change, http://unfccc.int/essential_background/ items/6031.php,最后访问日2011-08-24.
②See UNFCCC Article 3(1) "common but differentiated responsibilities"
③See UNFCCC Article 3(2) "requiring full consideration of the specific needs and special circumstances of developing countries and countries most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change".
④See UNFCCC Article 3(3) "the precautionary principle calling for measures not to be postponed on the basis of scientific uncertainty"
⑤See UNFCCC Article 3(4) "the principle of sustainable development"
⑥See UNFCCC Article 3(5) "cooperation to promote a supportive and open international economic system".
⑦See UNFCCC Article 4(1).
①自1995年第一次德国柏林会议后,《联合国气候变化框架公约》缔约方会议相继分别在日内瓦、京都、布宜诺斯艾利斯、波恩、海牙、马拉喀什、新德里、米兰、布宜诺斯艾利斯、蒙特利尔市、内罗毕、内罗毕、波兹南、哥本哈根、坎昆等地举行。参见百科名片.联合国气候变化框架公约[DB/OL].百度百科,http：//baike.baidu.com/view/89815.htm,最后访问日2011-08-25.
②Michael Grubbatel, The Kyoto Protocol-A Guide and Assessment[M]. Royal Institute of International Affairs and Earth scan Publication Ltd.,1999, p.33.
①Marrakesh Accords-Decision 17/CP.7 Annex, Article 1-66.
②See Christopher Carr; Flavia Rosembuj, Flexible Mechanisms for Climate Change Compliance:Emisson Offset Purchases under the Clean Development Mechanism[J]. New York University Environmental Law JJournal, Vol.16, No.1,2008, p.52.
①之茁.欧盟排放交易体系未来政策[DB/OL]中国财经报网,http://roll.sohu.com/20110927 /n320658781.shtml,最后访问日2011-08-26.
②杨兴.《气候变化框架公约》研究——兼论气候变化问题与国际法[D].武汉.武汉大学,2005.232-238.
③之茁.欧盟排放交易体系未来政策[DB/OL]中国财经报网,http://roll.sohu.com/20110927 /n320658781.shtml,最后访问日2011-08-26.
①非京都议定书下的市场模式是非国家强制性的自愿减排模式。在美国,只有州和地区级的区域性碳排放权交易体系,目前这类交易体系主要有：西部气候倡议(WCI)、区域性温室气体倡议(RGGI)、气候储备行动(CAR)、中西部温室气候减排协定以及芝加哥气候交易所(CCX)。
②这些立法提案具体是：《美国气候安全法案》、《安全气候法案》、《低碳经济法案》、《气候责任法》、《减缓全球变暖法案》、《气候责任和创新法案》、《全球变暖污染控制法案》等.邓梁春.美国气候变化相关立法进展及其对中国的启示[J].世界环境,2008,(2)：82-85.
①在该判例中,美国最高法院裁决：根据《清洁空气法》,机动车辆所排放的4种温室气体为污染物。See Robert N. Stavins. A Meaningful U.S. Cap-and-trade System to address climate change. Harvard Environmental Law Review.2008,32 Harv. Envtl. L. Rev.295-298.
②2009年12月7日,美国环境保护署进一步裁定把二氧化碳列为污染物,将过去不被认为是污染物的温室气体纳入《清净空气法案》管制,这使美国政府即便在参议院无法通过《瓦克斯曼-马凯气候变化议案》时,仍旧有法源限制温室气体排放。
③该法案要求到2020年,加利福尼亚的碳排放量降到1990年的水平,2050年降到1990年的80%水平。主要从工业中限制温室气体排放,并对不履行者进行处罚。胡荣,徐岭.浅析美国碳排放权制度及其交易体系[J].内蒙古大学学报,2010,(3)：17-21.
④陈丹.加州通过碳市场交易法规[DB/OL]人民网,http://env.people.com.cn/GB/1603137 4.html,最后访问日2011-08-27.
①环境保护部环境保护对外合作中心.英国经济力争向低碳转型[DB/OL]中国环境网,http://www.cenews.com.cn/xwzx/hq/qt/200908/t20090818_621038.html,最后访问日2011-08-27.
①陈炳才,郑慧,陈安国.德国的碳排放交易制度[DB/OL]搜狐财经,http:/business.sohu.com/20110121/n279003517.shtml,最后访问日2011-08-27.
②马中,Dan Dudek,吴健等.论总量控制与排污权交易[J].中国环境科学,2002,22(1)：89-92.
①焦小平等.欧盟排放交易体系规则[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2010.2-15.
②王毅刚.中国碳排放权交易体系设计研究[M].北京：经济管理出版社,2011.48-49.
③朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.79.
①参见《京都议定书》第3条第1款。
②参见《欧洲议会和欧盟理事会指令》第3章第9条。
①具体内容参见《京都议定书》第5条、第7条和第8条的规定。
①王毅刚,葛兴安,邵诗洋等.碳排放交易制度的中国道路——国际实践与中国应用[M].北京：经济管理出版社,2011.92-93.
①具体内容参见《京都议定书》第2条的规定。
①窦希铭.论国际法的概念及其体系构成——兼论当前国际法领域的基本热点问题[DB/OL]法律图书馆论文资料库,http://www.law-lib.com/lw/lw_view.asp?no=9252,最后访问日2011-08-30.
②国际碳交易法律体系原本不是一个真正意义上的法学概念,但考虑到碳交易法律制度上的统一和完整性,本文采用此一概念。
①尚军,岳瑞芳.应对欧盟“碳管制”的竞争力[DB/OL]联合早报网,http://www.zaobao. com/wencui/2011/06/liaowang110608a29.shtml,最后访问日2011-09-02.
①2011年11月4日,在南非的德班会议上,中国、印度、巴西和南非组成的基础四国向大会提交了《公平获取可持续发展》的技术报告,强调发展中国家需要获得公平的碳预算额度。这一提议尽管受到众多国家,特别是发展中国家的支持,但发达国家对此并不认同。显而易见,发达国家与发展中国家在《京都议定书》第二期减排承诺和绿色发展基金这两个重大问题上分歧仍然严重。人类可持续的理想追求在气候变化以及碳减排法律规范方面受到了众多阻力。参见李泽民.德班会议谈判文本出炉,两大问题依旧无解[D B/OL]中国证券网,http://www.cnstock.com/index/zhuangti/2011 dbdh/2011 dbtt/201112/17 20501.htm,最后访问日2011-12-06.
②这五项条件分别是：一是必须有《京都议定书》和第二承诺期；二是,发达国家要兑现300亿美元“快速启动资金”,和2020年前每年1000亿美元的长期资金；三是落实适应、技术转让、森林、透明度问题等,建立相应的机制；四是加快对各国兑现承诺、落实行动情况的评估,确保2015年之前完成科学评估；五是坚持“共同但有区别的责任”、坚持公平、各自能力的原则,确保环境的整体性。
①如梁剑兵教授采用归纳法,将国内外学者对软法的分为12种,包括国际法、国际法中那些将要形成、但尚未形成的、不确定的规则和原则、法律的半成品法律意识与法律文化、道德规范、民间机构制定的法律等,但这些并非是完全准确的软法定义。莫丽燕.论软法的要素及其概念[J].唯实,2008(8-9)：107；又如在国际环境法领域研究中,王铁崖认为,软法是指在严格意义上不具有法律拘束力、但又具有一定法律效果的国际文件。国际组织和国际会议的决议、决定、宣言、建议和标准等绝大多数都属于这一范畴；王曦认为,软法是不具有法律约束力的文件,例如国际组织大会的宣言、决议、行动计划等,这类文件虽不具有法律约束力,却往往有助于国际习惯的形成和条约的产生,对各国的行为具有一定的影响力。王铁崖.国际法[M].北京：法律出版社,1995.456；王曦.国际环境法[M].北京：法律出版社,1998.70.
②Posper Weil, Toward Relative Normativity in International Law,77 AM. J. INT'L L.413, 414-417 n.7(1983).
③Rosalyn Higgins, PROBLEMS AND PROCESS:INTERNATIONAL LAW AND HOW WEUSE IT 25(1995).
①参见《联合国气候变化框架公约》第2条的规定。
②万霞.国际法中的“软法”现象探析[J].外交学院学报,2005,(1)：95.
③Kal Raustiala, Form and Substance in International Agreements,99 AM. J. INTL. L.581,586.
①Curtis A. Bradley, Unratified Treaties, Domestic Politics, and the U.S. Constitution,48 HARV. INT'L LJ.307,311 (2007).
②See W. Michael Reisman, The Concept and Functions of Soft Law in International Politics, in ESSAYS IN HONOUR OF JUDGE TASLIM OLA WALE ELIAS (Volume I Contemporary International Law and Human Rights) Emmanuel G. Bello and Prince Bola A. Ajibola, eds..135 (1992).
①See Kenneth W. Abbott & Duncan Snidal, Hard and Soft Law in International Legal Governance,54 INT'L ORG.421 (2000).
②Lyune Jurigielewicz. Global Environmental Change and International Lae[M]. University Press of American, Inc.46 (1996).
③[美]马克·w·贾尼斯.国际法概论(英文版)[M].北京：中信出版社,2003.52.
①Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson,& Duncan Snidal, Rational Design:Looking Back to Move Forward,55 INT'L ORG.1051 (2001).
②See Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson & Duncan Snidal, The Rational Design of International Institutions,55 INT'L ORG.761 (2001).
③Andrew T. Guzman & Timothy L. Meyer, International Common Law:The Soft Law of International Tribunals,9 CHI. J. INT'L L.515 (2009).
④Barbara Koremenos, Contracting Around International Uncertainty,99 AM. POL. SC. REV. 549 (2005).
⑤Kal Raustiala, Form and Substance in International Agreements,99 AM. J. INT'L L.581 (2005).
⑥Kal Raustiala, Police Patrols & Fire Alarms in the NAAEC,26 LOY. L.A. INT'L & COMP. L. REV.389 (2004).
⑦Andrew T. Guzman, Saving Customary International Law,27 MICH. J. INT'L L.115 (2005).
⑧Michael J. Gilligan, Is There a Broader-Deeper Trade-off in International Multilateral Agreements?,58 INT'L ORG.459 (2004)
⑨Timothy Meyer, Soft Law as Delegation,32 Ford. Int'l L.J.888 (2009)
①Andrew T. Guzman, The Cost of Credibility:Explaining Resistance to Interstate Dispute Resolution Mechanisms,31J. LEG. STUD.303 (2002).
②Alan O. Sykes, Protection as a "Safeguard:" A Positive Analysis of the GATT "Escape Clause" with Normative Speculations,58 CHI. L. REV.255 (1991).
③Andrew T. Guzman, The Design of International Agreements,16 EUR. J. INT'L L.579 (2005).
④Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicar v US),1986 ICJ 14 (June 27,1986).
①MEYERT. Soft law as delegation[J].Fordham International.Law Journal,2009,32:891.
②WEIL P. Towards relative normativity in international law[J]. American Journal of International Law,1983,77:413,423.
③吕江.《哥本哈根协议》：软法在国际气候制度中的作用[J].西部法学评论,2010,(4)：112-113.
④软法能在缓和硬法过分的“普遍性”可能导致的不公正、缓和硬法过分的“稳定性”可能导致的不公正、缓和硬法过分的强制性可能导致的对人的尊严的损害以更有效地保障和尊重人权三个方面发挥作用,但是否能做到此点,关键在于各国家充分地意识到对国际事项的共同的责任和义务并切实履行之。因此,有关碳排放分配和交易的法律规范,更应当力促“软法”的这一期望与效果。
⑤李威.责任转型与软法回归：《哥本哈根协议》与气候变化的国际法治理[J].太平洋学报,2011,(1)：36.
①至少到目前为止,在联合国气候变化大会上的“硬法”和各种软法的规定,都没有对《京都议定书》第二期承诺作出安排。尽管依据《哥本哈根协议》自愿申报减排机制,主要发达国家和新兴经济国家都在2010年主动申报了自愿减排的目标,但继之的坎昆会议和现在的德班会议,都无法消除发达国家与发展中国家的分歧。
②[美]杰克·戈德史密斯,埃里克·波斯纳.国际法的局限性[M].龚宇译.北京：法律出版社,2010.19：20.
①边永民.论共同但有区别的责任原则在国际环境法中的地位[J].暨南学报(哲学社会科学版),2007,(4)：9.
②“共同但有区别责任原则”本是发达国家与新兴国家在国际气候谈判过程中妥协的结果,发达国家注重“共同责任”,新兴国家关注“区别责任”。在国际气候变化缔约方大会17次的会议中,发达国家与新兴国家为该原则总是发生分歧,但总是在关键的最后达成妥协,围绕实施该原则的各种条款和协议(软法)形成,有力地推动了国际碳减排及其交易的发展。比如,在《哥本哈根协议》后,截止到2010年5月15日,有42个发达国家(15国加欧盟27国)正式通告了2020年的减排目标,包括中国、巴西、印度和南非在内的36个发展中国家也宣布了在获得资金和技术支持的前提下计划采取的减排行动。
①何志鹏,孙璐.国际软法何以可能：一个以环境为视角的展开[J].当代法学,2012,(1)；40-41.
①李威.论共同但有区别责任的转型[J].南通大学学报(社会科学版),2010,26(5)41-42.
①中国清洁发展机制基金管理中心,大连商品交易所.碳配额管理与交易[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2010.55-57.
①百科名片.认证[DB/OL].百度百科,http://baike.baidu.com/view/24399.htm,最后访问日2012-01-28.
②法律词典.国际认证制度[DB/OL].中国百科网,http://www.chinabaike.com/law/zhishi/ cd/1436303.html,最后访问日2012-01-28.
③关于这两个标准及其内容,本文将在本章第三节进行详尽分析。
①See Article 14 "Monitoring and Reporting of Emissions" of DIRECTIVE 2003/87/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 October 2003.
②See Article 15 "Verification and Accreditation" of DIRECTIVE 2003/87/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 October 2003.
①徐清军.碳关税、碳标签、碳认证的新趋势,对贸易投资影响及应对建议[J].国际贸易,2011,(7)：55.
②碳足迹,在英文中称为Carbon Footprint,是指企业机构、活动、产品或个人通过交通运输、食品生产和消费以及各类生产过程等引起的温室气体排放的集合。
③矫龙.国际认证制度已经成为一种市场行为——访中国商检总公司国际认证合作部孔祥月经理[J].实时访谈,2001,(2)：24-25.
①CDM Project Activities Request for Review, http;//cdm.unfccc.int/projects/review.html.
②Verify and Certify ERs of a CDM project activity, http://cdm.unfccc,int/projects/pac/how to/CDMProjectActivity/VerifyCertify/indec.html,最后访问日 2012-1-28.
③一个经营实体申请成为CDM项目指定的经营实体,应符合以下条件：(1)属于法律实体并向CDM执行理事会提供此种地位的证明材料；(2)雇用足够的能履行审定、核查与核证的人员；(3)具备开展活动所需要足够经费、保险和资源；(4)能处理其活动所引起的法律责任和债务；(5)已制定其行使职责的内部程序(职责划分和申诉程序),并予以公布；(6)具备或可以掌握清洁发展机制的模式和程序及COP/MOP有关决定中明确规定的职责所需的专门知识；(7)拥有一个能充分履行职责的管理机构；(8)没有任何关于渎职、欺诈和与其指定经营实体的职责不符的其他行为的未结司法诉讼。参见周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.57-58.
①See Article 14 "Monitoring and Reporting of Emissions" of DIRECTIVE 2003/87/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 October 2003.
①See Article 15 "Verification and Accreditation" of DIRECTIVE 2003/87/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 October 2003.
①杨斯.中国碳减排行业第一案在京开庭[DB/OL]正义网,http://news.jcrb.com/jxsw/20110 4/t20110414_529542.html,最后访问日期2011-11-27.
②李彤.“中国碳减排第一案”一审落槌[DB/OL].北方网,http://news.enorth.com.cn/system/20 11/08/14/007126573.shtml,最后访问日期2011-11-27.
①See Greenhouse gases-Part 1:Specification with guidance at the organization level for quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emission and removal.
②See Greenhouse gases-Part 2:Specification with guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements.
③See Greenhouse gases-Part 3:Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions
④See Greenhouse gases—Requirements for greenhouse gas validation and verification bodies for use in accreditation or other forms of recognition.
① Bloomberg全球2011自愿碳市场现状[DB/OL]新能源财经,http://www.ditanshijie.com. cn/NewsUltimate.action?newsId=6428,最后访问日2012-01-30.
②See Greenhouse gases-Part 3:Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions and Greenhouse gases—Requirements for greenhouse gas validation and verification bodies for use in accreditation or other forms of recognition.
①Bloomberg全球2011自愿碳市场现状[DB/OL]新能源财经,http://www.ditanshijie.com. cn/NewsUltimate.action?newsId=6428,最后访问日2012-01-30.
②徐清军.碳关税、碳标签、碳认证的新趋势,对贸易投资影响及应对建议[J].国际贸易,2011,(7)：55.
①See PAS2050:Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services.
②hattie.碳足迹计算国际评估标准将于明年推出[DB/OL]中华显示网,http://www.chinafpd.net/news.aspx?id=832,最后访问日2012-2-2。
①到目前为止,COP/MOP指定并由EB委任的经营实体有挪威船级社(DNV)、南德意志集团工业服务有限公司(TUV SUD)、德国莱茵TUV集团(TUV Rheinland)、日本品质保证机构(JQA)、英国SGS公司(SGS)、中国质量认证中心(CQC)、中环联合认证中心有限公司(CEC)等40家指定经营实体。参见国家发展改革委应对气候变化司.CDM执行理事会第六十五次会议情况简报2011-12-31[DB/OL]中国清洁发展机制网,http://cdm.ccchina.gov.cn/web/main.asp?ColuinnId=4,最后访问日2012-02-06.
①周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.86.
①周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.88-89.
②周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.89-92.
①[美]埃里克·波斯纳,戴维·韦斯巴赫.气候变化的正义[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011.2-3.
②如由一批国际律师和清洁发展机制(CDM)专家制定的“核证减排量买卖协议”(CERSPA)第14条第8款明确规定,“(a)《联合国国际销售货物合同公约(1980版)》不适用于本协议；(b)《合同法案(第三方权利)(1999)版》不适用于本协议——仅在英国法律为管辖法律时才适用。
①Eileen Claussen and lisa McNeilly, Equlity and Global Climate Change:The Complex Elements of Global Fairness, Pew Center on Global Climate Change (October 29,1998); Marina Cazorla and Michael Toman, "International Equity and Climate Change Policy:Resources for the Future", Climate Issue Brief 27 (December 2000); United Nations Environment Program, Vital Climate Change Graphics 14 (February 20050,在线可查 grida.no/publications/bf/climate2.
①[美]埃里克·波斯纳,戴维·韦斯巴赫.气候变化的正义[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011.31.
①参见《中华人民共和国合同法》第12条。
②“合理预期”是二十世纪美国最伟大的合同法学者科宾在其1950年出版的《科宾论合同》提出的一个合同法原则,是指法律并非致力于实现所有由允诺所产生的预期,其所要实现的,必须是合理的预期,也就是大多数人能够允诺并可得到强制执行的预期。参见秦韬.英美合同法领域的合理预期原则研究[DB/OL].上海国际贸易律师网,http://www.shlawyer.org/Article/ClassO2/SclassO2/Article_947.htm,最后访问日2011-08-10。
①目前大多数发达国家没有完成其在《京都议定书》中所设定的任务就是最好的例证。
②2011年12月12日,加拿大继美国之后第二国家宣布退出《京都议定书》,对国际社会共同努力减少温室气体排放的进程产生了严重打击。刘贺林.加拿大退出京都议定书继美国后第二个退出的国家[DB/OL]中原网,http://www.zynews.com/n/2011-12/14/content_1 682363.htm,最后访问日2011-12-20。
①如在德班会议上,原定要解决的两大难题：《京都议定书》第二期减排和绿色气候基金,虽然在最后加时阶段达成了一揽子决议,但部分内容不够具体,而且措辞留有巨大漏洞,可能让某些国家得以逃避应承担的减排责任,如就《议定书》第二承诺期期限,决议没有明确说明具体时间,是5年还是8年并无知晓；对于绿色气候基金,资金来源和管理机制仍是空白；就坎昆大会搁置的自愿减排努力,这次会议同样没有进展；没有确定将要制定的法律工具或法律成果的确切性质；没有提及惩罚措施。李良勇.德班气候大会没有达成协议?[DB/OL]解放牛网http://www.jfdaily.com/a/2454622.htm,最后访问日2011-12-20。
①Oran Young. Compliance and Public Authority[M]. Baltimore:Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1979, p,172.
②解决气侯变化问题需要全世界共同协作,即需要通过我们共同合作来解决人类共同面临的威胁。但是具体涉及到细节就涉及到了国家的利益,涉及到了各国的具体情况。这里面就产生所谓的为利益的政治博弈。比如联合国气候变化框架大会中各国家的种种表现：发展中国家和发展中国家之间的对立；发达国家和发达国家之间的对立,发达国家和发展中国家之间的对立等。
③如设立京都三机制的《京都议定书》在2008-2012年第一期承诺减排以后何去何从就一直成为国际社会关注的焦点。因为,它关系到大量的CDM项目的申报和合同的履行。
①李浩培.条约法概论[M].北京：法律出版社,2003.272-273.
①周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.93-97.
①如欧洲气候交易所的全面会员申请清算会员,最低净资产必须达到2000万英磅,交易会员申请成为清算会员最低净资产只需500万英磅,而且最低资产要求是清算会员和非清算会员的明显区别。参见中国清洁发展机制基金管理中心,大连商品交易所.碳配额管理与交易[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2010.101-102.
①参见我国《清洁发展机制项目运行管理办法》第6-12条的具体规定。
①参见2004年版《国际商事合同通则》第3.3条、第3.6条至第3.11条。
②对于碳排放权是否是商品或货物,目前没有一个权威的界定,因而碳交易不能适用《国际商事合同通则》,则该《通则》相关的法律生效的要件或致不生效的行为无法适用在国际碳交易合同行为中。
①该案始于2009年,浙江能源集团华光潭水电有限公司与上海太比雅环保公司签订协议,前者委托后者进行碳减排交易。按照联合国对《京都议定书》清洁发展机制项目的程序规定,太比雅公司必须提交材料给联合国指定的认证机构,由后者签发自愿减排额度,太比雅公司的委托任务才能顺利进行。于是,太比雅公司选定挪威船级社在北京的公司——北京挪华威认证有限公司(以下简称挪华威)为认证机构。2009年3月,项目正式启动。其间,华光潭水电公司和太比雅公司按照挪华威的要求,提供各种材料和证据文件。但挪华威却无限拖延了时间,以致华光潭项目错过了申请自愿减排项目的时限。2011年9月,太比雅公司一纸诉状将挪华威告上法庭。挪华威最初提出“管辖权异议”。2011年11月26日,北京朝阳区法院正式驳回了挪威船级社关于案件审查“管辖权异议”的申请,确定该案将在中国境内审理。目前,该案还在审理中。请参见倪晓铭.碳减排第一案暴露联合国碳交易机制不足[DB/OL]国际法学研究网,http://www.cuplfil.com/info_detail.asp?infoid=292,最后访问日2011-11-27.
①如Misrepresentation Act 1967(as amended).
②如基于“谨慎义务”(duty of care)的侵权之诉。参见Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & partnership Ltd(1964) AC 465.
①明示预期违约,是指合同有效成立后至合同约定的履行期限届满前,一方当事人明确肯定地向另一方当事人表示其将不履行合同义务,不履行义务一方构成根本违约,对方可以解除合同；默示预期违约,是指预期违约方并未将到期不履行合同义务的意思表示出来,另一方只是根据预期违约方的某些情况或行为,如履行义务的能力有缺陷、商业信用不佳、准备履行合同或履行合同过程中的行为表明有不能或不会履行的危险等来预见其将不履行合同义务,此时可以终止自己相应的履行并要求对方在合理的期限内提供其能够履行的保证,若对方未能在此合理期限内提供履行保证,即构成根本违约,预见方才可以解除合同。
①何生.“碳交易”大作战如何买卖CDM减排量?[DB/OL]证券之星,http://stock.stockstar.com/SS2009091430190762_1.shtml,最后访问日2011-11-27.
①Fercometal SARL v. Med. Terranean shipping Co.SA [1989] A. C.788转引自李先波.英美合同解除制度研究[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.277.
②李先波.英美合同解除制度研究[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.277.
③参见CERSPA第10.03"买方与违约事件有关的补救措施”、10.04"卖方与违约事件有关的补救措施”和10.05“市场价格的计算”条款。
④参见IETA2006年的Code of CDM Terms 3.0下的Section 6.0.
⑤参见CERSPA第10条。
①When parties are risk-averse, these objectives need to be balanced against the risk-allocation functions (Miceli,1998).
②The standard taxonomy of contract damages is generally based on the distinctions among expectation, reliance, and restitution interests (Fuller and Perdue,1936). Commonly adopted measures of damages in contract law are linked to one of these three'interests'of the promisee. See also Mahoney (2000).
③The issue of optimal remedies for breach of contracts has been investigated from a different perspective within the framework of incomplete contracts. Standard results show that the impossibility of entering into complete contracts that specify the efficient level of effort and reliance in each state contingency induces underinvestment in relationship-specific assets (Williamson,1985; Hart and Moore,1988,1990). However, even in the prospect of later holdups, the presence of adequate contractual protection can mitigate the problem of underinvestment. When renegotiation is available even incomplete contracts can induce the parties to invest at an efficient level when either specific performance or expectation damages are applied as breach remedies (Edlin and Reichelstein,1995).
①李先波.英美合同解除制度研究[M.北京：北京大学出版社,2008.378.
①例如IETA的ERPA3.0.
②See, e.g., France 4 June 2004 Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Paris (SARL NE... v. SAS AMI... et SA Les Comptoirs M...).
③See PECL Art.9:309.
④see JOHN HONNOLD, UNIFORM LAW FOR INTERNATIONAL SALES (Kluwer,1999). A vast, updated and masterly organized source of CISG-related materials is available on the Pace University website at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cisg.html.
⑤See OLE LANDO AND HUGH BEALE (EDS.), PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW:PARTS I AND II (Kluwer Law International (2000) (hereinafter "Lando and Beale").
⑥See CISG 26, PECL 9:303; See also UNIDROIT Art.7.3.2.
⑦See PECL Art.9:304(4).
①French, Belgian and Luxembourg Civil Code Art.1184(2) (although clauses allowing automatic termination-clauses resolutoire de plein droit-are also available), Italian Civil Code Art. 1453 and Spanish Civil Code Art.1124 (though in Spain a notice of termination may be effective if it is accepted by the defaulting party). See also LANDO AND BEALE at pp.410, 415nl.
①The World Bank国际贸易与气候变化——经济、法律和制度分析[M].廖玫译.北京：高等教育出版社,2010.34-38.
①2011年12月11日清晨,南非德班气候大会闭幕。会议最终取得五项成果：一是坚持了《联合国气候变化框架公约》、《京都议定书》和“巴厘路线图”授权,坚持了双轨谈判机制,坚持了“共同但有区别的责任”原则；二是就发展中国家最为关心的《京都议定书》第二承诺期问题作出了安排；三是在资金问题上取得了重要进展,启动了绿色气候基金；四是在坎昆协议基础上进一步明确和细化了适应、技术、能力建设和透明度的机制安排；五是深入讨论了2020年后进一步加强公约实施的安排,并明确了相关进程,向国际社会发出积极信号。但德班会议未能全部完成“巴厘路线图”谈判,落实坎昆协议和德班会议成果仍需时日。而会议后的第二天,加拿大就退出了《京都议定书》,说明了国际气候变化控制的进程道路曲折。
②如2001-2008年,美国国会经历了107-110届国会,参议院和众议院所提出的与气候变化相关的法案、决议与修正案分别是31件、96件和150件,其中以市场为基础的综合性气候法案多达15个。参见郭冬梅.应对气候变化法律制度研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2010.116.
①郭冬梅.应对气候变化法律制度研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2010.121-129.
①张荣芳.经济全球化与国际贸易法专题研究[M].北京：中国检察出版社,2008.183-188.
①程路连.WTO与多边环境协议[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2005.52.
①程路连.WTO与多边环境协议[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2005.56-57.
①董立阳.牛津大学副校长Ewan McKendrick教授作客“名家法学讲坛”辨析英国合同法及其国际化之惑[DB/OL].中国人民大学法学院网站,http://www.law.ruc.edu.cn/commu/Sho wArticle.asp?ArticleID=23409,最后访问日2011-12-01.
①Esty, Bridging the Trade-Environment Divide[J].Journal of Economic Perspective, Vol.15, 2001,p.121.
①Daniel C. Esty, Greening the GATT:Trade, Environment and the Future, Institute for International Economics,1994, p.10.
②目前,虽然在WTO框架内尚未出现有关应对气候变化的贸易措施的争端,但应对气候变化的贸易措施与WTO规则之间的潜在冲突却是真实存在的。因此,本文也将这种“冲突”界定为“潜在的冲突”。参见Steve Charnovitz, Trade and Climate:Potential Conflicts and Synergies, p.2, http://www.pewclimate.org/docUpoads/Trade%20and%20Climate.pdf.转引自宋俊荣.应对气候变化的贸易措施与WTO规则：冲突与协调[M].上海：上海社会科学院出版社,2011.35.
③梁嘉琳等.美国败诉欧盟征收航空碳税案专家建议贸易反制[DB/OL]凤凰网,http://finance.jfeng.com/news/hqcj/20111222/5310941.shtml,最后访问日2011-12-22.
①张海滨.环境与国际关系——全球环境问题的理性思考[M].上海：上海人民出版社,2008.185-217；黄辉.WTO与环保——自由贸易与环境保护的冲突与协调[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2010.148-153.
②Annie Petsonk, The Kyoto Protocol and The WTO:Integatig Greenhouse Gas Emissions Allowance Trading into the Global Marketplace[J]. Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum, Vol.10,1999, p.199; Jacob Wersman, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading and the WTO[J]. Review of European Community and the International Environmental Law, Vol.8, Issue 3,1999, p.255.
③Marisa Martin, Trade Law Implications of Restricting Participation in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme[J]. Georgetown Environmental Law Review, Vol.19,2007, p.446.
① Andrew Green, Trade Rules and Climate Change Subsidies[J]. World Trade Review, Vol.5, 2006, pp.381-386.
①David Harrison Jr., Per Klevnas, Albert L. Nichols, Daniel Radov, Using Emissions Trading to Combat Climate Change:Programs and Key Issues[J]. Environmental Law Reporter News & Analysis, Vol.38,2008, p.10378.
②涂露芳.欧盟将免费发放航空“碳配额”全年1.81亿吨[DB/OL]人民网,http://finance.pe ople.com.cn/caac/GB/17014067.html,最后访问日2012-02-03.
①WTO Appellate Body Report, United States-Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporation" Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the European Communities, WT/DS108/AB/RW,14 January 2002, para.88.
②碳泄漏是指,如果一个国家采取二氧化碳减排措施,该国国内一些产品生产(尤其是高耗能产品)可能转移到其他未采取二氧化碳减排措施的国家,从而导致本国就业机会的流失和减损本国开征此类税种所要达到的减排效果。
③The American Clean Energy and Security Act(2009), H.R.2454, Sec.768.
④2008年11月19日,欧盟通过法案决定将国际航空领域纳入欧盟碳排放交易体系并于2012年1月1日起实施。目前该法案已在实施当中。参见王宙洁.欧盟“强征”航空碳税惹众怒或引发贸易战[DB/OL].中国网络电视台经济台,http://jingji.cntv.cn/20111223/1045 29.shtml,最后访问日2011-12-25.
①陈立新.美国碳关税法案的法理透视[J].中国外交,2009,(11)：206.
①The American Clean Energy and Security Act(2009), H.R.2454, Sec.401.
②宋俊荣.应对气候变化的贸易措施与WTO规则：冲突与协调[M].上海：上海社会科学院出版社,2011.55-56.
③蔡高强,胡斌.论WTO体制下的碳关税贸易措施及其应对[J].湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,(3)：34-39；苑路佳.WTO框架下“碳关税”条款刍议[J].法学杂志,2010,(8)：139-141.
①陈立新.美国碳关税法案的法理透视[M].中国外交,2009,(11)：206-207.
②苑路佳.WTO框架下“碳关税”条款刍议[J].法学杂志,2010,(8)：140.
①宋俊荣.应对气候变化的贸易措施与WTO规则：冲突与协调[M].上海社会科学院出版社,2011.57-64.
②陈欢欢.美国航空业向欧洲法院联合起诉欧盟强制征收航空碳税[N].科学时报,2011-8-15(B3)
③王宙洁.欧盟“强征”航空碳税惹众怒 或引发贸易战[DB/OL].中国网络电视台经济台,http://jingji.cntv.cn/20111223/104529.shtml,最后访问日2011-12-25.
①张晓颖.欧盟对入境航空公司征碳排放费 美国起诉败诉[DB/OL].舜网,http://www.e23.cn,最后访问日2011-12-26.
②李卓.美拟立法反对欧盟航空碳税欧盟本周赴美讨论[DB/OL].腾讯财经,http://finance.qq.com/a/20120203/000012.htm,最后访问日2012-02-03.
①冯迪凡.欧盟征收航空碳排放税激进政策引发多国争论[DB/OL].新浪环保,http://news.sina.com.cn/green/2011-07-13/143122807134.shtml?,最后访问日2011-07-13.
①曾颂,吕楠芳.碳税庭辩美国缘何落败[DB/OL]中国资本证券网,http://roll.sohu.com/2 0120207/n334003797.shtml,最后访问日2012-02-07.
①黄小喜,郑远民.基于减排目标的贸易限制措施与WTO义务的一致性——基于多边贸易法的考察[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2011,(1)：69-70.
①黄小喜,郑远民.基于减排目标的贸易限制措施与WTO义务的一致性——基于多边贸易法的考察[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2011,(1)：70.
①See Pauwelyn, J. Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to Other Norms of International Law[M]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003:473,491.
②See Marceau, G. Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions:The Relationship between WTO Agreement and MEAs and Other Treaties[J]. Journal of World Trade,2001:1130.
③See Van den Bossche, P. The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization:Text, Cases and Materials[M]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,2008:128-129.
①黄小喜,郑远民.基于减排目标的贸易限制措施与WTO义务的一致性——基于多边贸易法的考察[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2011,(1)：70-71.
②The World Bank国际贸易与气候变化——经济、法律和制度分析[M].廖玫译.北京：高等教育出版社,2010.39.
③黄小喜,郑远民.基于减排目标的贸易限制措施与WTO义务的一致性——基于多边贸易法的考察[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2011,(1)：71-72.
①张荣芳.经济全球化与国际贸易法专题研究[M].北京：中国检察出版社,2008.189-190.
②孔凡立,罗月娥.全球化时代国际“碳政治”博弈与中国的战略选择[J].天水行政学院学报,2010,(4)：54.
①强世功.“碳政治”：新型国际政治与中国的战略抉择[DB/OL].社会学视野网,http://sociologyol.org/,最后访问日2011-12-02.
②柳下再会.以碳之名[M].北京：中国发展出版社,2010.142.
①如美国、沙特阿拉伯等国就对设立绿色气候基金持反对意见。参见刘小军.英报：美国反对设立“绿色气候基金”[DB/OL].新华网,http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2011-11/25/c_122333709.htm,最后访问日2011-12-02.
①曾梦琦.国际碳交易市场发展及其对我国的启示[J].金融市场,2011,(1)：62-64.
②陈晖.全球碳市场的现状：基于配额的交易和基于项目的交易[DB/OL]上海情报服务平台,http://www.istis.sh.cn/list/list.aspx?id=7250,最后访问日2012-01-10.
①亚里士多德.政治学[M].吴寿彭译.北京：商务印书馆,1965.148.
②强世功.“碳政治”：新型国际政治与中国的战略抉择[DB/OL].社会学视野网http://sociologyol.org/,最后访问日2011-12-02.
①The World Bank.国际贸易与气候变化——经济、法律和制度分析[M].廖玫译.北京：高等教育出版社,2010.38.
[1]程卫东.欧盟法律创新[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2008.
[2]李先波.英美合同解除制度研究[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.
[3]崔建远.合同法[M].北京：法律出版社,2000.
[4]李宏,赵晓晨.国际贸易理论与政策[M].北京：清华大学出版社·北京交通大学出版社,2009.
[5]李明良,吴弘.产权交易市场法律问题研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2008.
[6]曲如晓.贸易与环境：理论与政策研究[M].北京：人民出版社,2009.
[7]张荣芳.经济全球化与国际贸易法专题研究[M].北京：中国检察出版社,2008.
[8]田玉红.WTO框架下中国贸易政策与产业政策的协调[M].北京：人民出版社,2009.
[9]汪劲等.绿色正义—环境的法律保护[M].广州：广州出版社,2000.
[10]徐淑萍.贸易与环境的法律问题研究[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,2002.
[11]那力等.WTO与环境保护[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2002.
[12]王树义.俄罗斯生态法[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,2001.
[13]高家伟.欧洲环境法[M].北京：工商出版社,2000年.
[14]汪劲.环境正义：丧钟为谁而鸣(美国联邦法院环境诉讼经典判例选)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[15]王树义.可持续发展与中国环境法治——循环经济立法问题专题研究[M].北京：科学出版社,2007.
[16]谷德近.多边环境协定的资金机制[M].北京：法律出版社,2008.
[17]朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.
[18]李慎明.2003年全球政治与安全报告[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[19]秦亚青.理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究[M].北京：世界知识出版社,2008.
[20]盛洪.现代制度经济学(上下卷)[M].北京：北京大学出版社2003.
[21][美]保罗·萨缪尔森,威廉·诺德豪斯.经济学(第十六版)[M].北京：华夏出版社,1999.
[22][美]R.科斯,A.阿尔钦,D.诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁——产权学派与新制度学派译文集[M].上海：上海人民出版社,2004.
[23]王蓉.中国环境法律制度的经济学分析[M].北京：法律出版社,2003.
[24]杨姝影,蔡博峰,曹淑艳.国际碳税研究[M].北京：化学工业出版社,2011.
[25]郎咸平.郎咸平说新帝国主义在中国1[M].北京：东方出版社,2010.
[26]郎咸平.郎咸平说新帝国主义在中国2[M].北京：东方出版社,2010.
[27]余淼杰.国际贸易的政治经济学分析：理论模型与计量实证[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2009.
[28][美]杰克·戈德史密斯,埃里克·波斯纳.国际法的局限性[M].北京：法律出版社,2010.
[29]崔大鹏.国际气候合作的政治经济学分析[M].北京：商务印书馆,2003.
[30]周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.
[31][美]埃里克·波斯纳,戴维·韦斯巴赫.气候变化的正义[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社2011.
[32]张海滨.环境与国际关系——全球环境问题的理性思考[M].上海：上海人民出版社,2008.
[33]邓海峰.排污权——一种基于私法语境下的解读[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.
[34]王贵国.世界贸易组织法[M].北京：法律出版社,2003.
[35]鄂晓梅.单边PPM环境贸易措施与WTO规则：冲突与协调[M].北京：法律出版社,2007.
[36]唐颖侠.国际气候变化条约的遵守机制研究[M].北京：人民出版社,2009.
[37]黄辉.WTO与环保——自由贸易与环境保护的冲突与协调[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2010.
[38]柳下再会.以碳之名[M].北京：中国发展出版社,2010.
[39]王遥.碳金融——全球视野与中国布局[M].北京：中国经济出版社,2010.
[40]潘家华,陈迎,李晨曦.碳预算方案的国际机制研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2009.
[41]中国清洁发展机制基金管理中心,大连商品交易所.碳配额管理与交易[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2010.
[42]国家环境保护总局,WTO新一轮谈判环境与贸易问题研究系列丛书编委会.WTO新一轮谈判环境与贸易问题研究[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2005.
[43]夏光,冯东方,吴玉萍.加入WTO与国内环境政策调整[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2005.
[44]陈泮勤,曲建升.气候变化应对战略之国别研究[M].北京：气象出版社,2010.
[45]王毅刚,葛兴安,邵诗洋等.碳排放交易制度的中国道路——国际实践与中国应用[M].北京：经济管理出版社,2011.
[46]王毅刚.中国碳排放权交易体系设计研究[M].北京：经济管理出版社,2011.
[47]鄢德春.中国碳市场建设——融合碳期货和碳基金的行动体系[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2010.
[48]刘婧.我国节能与低碳的交易市场机制研究[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2010.
[49]郭冬梅.应对气候变化法律制度研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2010.
[1]吕忠梅.论环境使用权交易制度[J].政法论坛,2000,(4).
[2]杨兴.试论国际环境法的共同但有区别的责任原则[J].时代法学.2003,(1).
[3]刘兰翠,范英,吴刚等.温室气体减排政策问题研究综述[J].管理评论,2005,17(10).
[4]胡迟.《京都议定书》框架下的排放权交易[J].绿叶,2007,(6).
[5]冷罗生.构建中国碳排放权交易机制的法律政策思考[J].中国地质大学报》(社会科学版),2010,10(2).
[6]杨兴.气候变化的国际法之秩序价值初探[J].河北法学,2004,22(5).
[7]于天飞.碳排放权交易的产权分析[J].东北农业大学学报(社会科学版),2007,5(2).
[8]任捷,鲁炜.关于甲国温室气体排放权交易体系的构想[J].南京理工大学学报(社会科学版),2009,22(3).
[9]丁方旭.跨国排放权交易的若干思考[J].中南财经政法大学研究生学报,2007,(6).
[10]杨通进.全球正义：分配温室气体排放权的伦理原则[J].中国人民大学学报,2010(2).
[11]沈春女.契约自由与环境权益的冲突与平衡[J].北方论丛,2008,(1).
[12]黄孝华.国际碳基金运行机制研究[J].武汉理工大学学报,2010,32(4).
[13]何建坤,陈文颖,滕飞等.全球长期减排目标与碳排放权分配原则[J].气候变化研究进展,2009,5(6).
[14]王江,隋伟涛.碳排放权交易问题的博弈研究[J].中国市场,2010,(14).
[15]苏伟,吕学都,孙国顺.未来联合国气候变化谈判的核心内容及前景展望——‘巴厘路线图”解读[J].气候变化研究进展,2008,4(1).
[16]白洋.论我国碳排放权交易机制的法律构建.河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,37(1).
[17]杨志,陈军.应对气候变化：欧盟的实现机制碳交易和低碳经济[J].内蒙古大学学报,2010,(3)
[18]郭兆晖,李普,廉桂萍.欧盟对民航业碳排放收费问题的透视[J].内蒙古大学学报,2010,(3).
[1]罗尔斯.正义论[M].何怀红译.北京：中国社会科学出版社,2001.
[2][美]罗伯特·考特、托马斯·尤伦[M].法和经济学.张军译.上海：上海三联出版社,1994.
[3][德]沃尔夫冈·费肯杰.经济法(第一、二卷)[M].张世明等译.北京：中国民主法制出版社,2010.
[4][美]丹尼尔·A·科尔曼.生态政治：建设一个绿色社会[M].梅俊杰译.上海：上海译文出版社,2002.
[5][俄]C.H.坦基扬.新自由主义全球化——资本主义危机抑或全球美国化[M].王新俊,王炜译.北京：教育科学出版社,2008.
[6][俄]A.N.科斯京.生态政治学与全球学[M].胡谷明、徐邦俊等译.武汉：武汉大学出版社,2008.
[7][美]康威·汉得森.国际关系：世纪之交的冲突与合作[M].金帆译.海口：海南出版社,2004.
[8]经济合作与发展组织.环境管理中的经济手段[M].张世秋等译.北京：中国环境科学出版社,1996.
[9]经济合作与发展组织.国际经济手段和气候变化[M].曹东等译.北京：中国环境科学出版社,1996.
[10]The World Bank.国际贸易与气候变化——经济、法律和制度分析[M].廖玫译.北京：高等教育出版社,2010.
[11][日]加藤尚武.资源危机——留给我们解决的时间不多了[M].曹逸冰译.北京：石油工业出版社,2010.
[12][美]丹尼尔R.阿普尔亚德,小艾尔佛雷德J.菲尔德,史蒂芬L.柯布.国际经济学(国际贸易分册)[M].赵军译.北京：机械工业出版社,2010.
[13][英]奈杰尔·劳森.呼唤理性——全球变暖的冷思考[M].戴黍,李振亮译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011.
[14]环维易为低碳译丛.欧盟排放交易体系规则[M].焦小平等译.北京：中国财政经济出版社,2010.
[1]Robert Priddle. (2001) International Emission Trading From Concept to Reality[M].OECD/IEA.
[2]Bernstein, Janis D. (1993) Alternative Approaches to Pollution Control and Waste Management:Regulatory and Economic Instruments[M].The World Bank.
[3]Jota Ishikawa. (2008) Greenhouse-gas Emission Controls and International Carbon Leakage through Trade Liberalizaion[M]. Hitotsubashi University and RIETI.
[4]Tim Hayward. (2004) Constitutional Environmental Rights[M]. Oxford University Press.
[5]Graciela Chichilnisky & Geoffrey Heal eds., (2000) Environmental Markets:Equity and Efficiency[M]. Columbia University Press.
[6]Urich Bartsch et al., (2000) Fossil Fuels in a Changing Climate:Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol and Developing Country Participation[M]. Oxford University Press.
[7]US Department of Energy. (2001) International Energy Annual 1999 [US Department of Energy. Report DOE/EIA-0219(99)][M]. Washington. DC.
[8]Ellerman, A.D., and A. Decaux. (1998) Analysis of Post-Kyoto CO2 Emissions Trading Using Margingal Abatement Curves [M]. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No.40, Massachusetts Insitute of Technology.
[9]United Nations. (2002) Energy Statistics Yearbook[M]. (2000) New York.
[10]Van der Mensbrugghe, D. (1998). A(Preliminary) Analysis of the Kyoto Protocol:Using the OECD GREEN Model[M]. Presented at the OECD Workshop on the Economic Modelling of Climate Change,17-18 September, Paris.
[11]NATSOURSE. (2002) Review and Analysis of the Emerging International Greenhouse Gas Market[M]. PCF Report.
[12]IETA. (2003-2010) Greenhouse Gas Market[M].
[1]Jonathan E Sinton. (2000) What goes up:recent trends in China's energy consumption[J]. Energy Policy,28 (10):617-687.
[2]MacCracken, C.N., Edmonds, J.A., S. H. Kim, and R. D. Sands. (1999) The Economics of the Kyoto Protocol[J]. Energy Journal 20 (Special Issue on the Cost of the Kyoto Protocol):25-71.
[3]McKibbm, W.J., Ross, M.T., Shackleton, R., and P.J. Wilcoxen. (1999) Emissions Trading, Capital Flows and the Kyoto Protocol[J]. Energy Journal 20 (Special Issue on the Cost of the Kyoto Protocol):287-333.
[4]Weyant, J.P. ed.,(1999)The Cost of the Kyoto Protocol:A Multi-Model Evaluation[J]. Energy Journal 20 (Special Issue):1-398.
[5]Stefan Weishaar. (2000) CO2 Emission Allowance Allocation Mechanisms, Allocative Efficiency and the Environment:a Etatic and Dynamic Perspective[J]. Pattern Recognition, vol.33, pp.149-160.
[6]Frank Jotzo·John C. V. Pezzey. (2007)Optimal intensity targets for greenhouse gas emissions trading under uncertainty[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, vol.38, pp.259-284.
[7]Regina Betz·Todd Sanderson Tihomir Ancev. (2009) In or out:efficient inclusion of installations in an emissions trading scheme[J]. Regulatory Economics, vol.4, pp.50-53.
[8]John C. V. Pezzey. (2003) Emission Taxes and Tradeable Permits A Comparison of Views on Long-Run Efficiency [J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, pp.329-342.
[9]Karl-Martin Ehrhart Christian Hoppe. Ralf Loschel. (2008) Abuse of EU Emissions Trading for Tacit Collusion[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, vol.41, pp.347-361.
[10]Goetz, John C. (2009 development of carbon emissions trading in Canada. (Petroleum Law Edition)[J]. Alberta law review (0002-4821), vol.46(2), pp.377.
[11]Grimaud, A. (1999) Pollution Permits and Sustainable Growth in a Schumpeterian Model[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.38. pp.249-266.
[12]World Bank/IETA. (2007) State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2007[J]. World Bank.
[13]Li Yun. (2000) The costs of implementing the Kyoto Protocol and its Implications to China[J]. International Review for Environmental Strategies, vol.1, pp.159-174.
[14]Carle'n B. (2003) Market Power in International Carbon Emissions Trading:A Laboratory Test[J]. The Energy Journal, vol.24(3), pp.1-26.
[15]Richard B. Stewart, Jonathan B. Wiener and Philippe Sands. (1996) A pilot greenhouse gas trading system:the legal issues[J]. United Nations, Geneva, UNCTAD/GDS/GFSB/Misc.1.
[16]IIC. (2009) Legal Developments in the Carbon Market[J]. Legal Paper Workshop, pp.1-18.
[17]US General Accounting Office. (1995) Air Pollution:Allowance Trading Offers an Opportunity to Reduce Emissions at Less Cost[J]. GAO/RCED-95-30, Washington, D. C.
[18]Harris. Paul Ged. (2003) Global Warming and East Asia:The Domestic and International Politics of Climate Change[J]. (London:Routledge,2003).
[19]Boenmare C. Querion P. (2002) Implementing Greenhouse Gas Trading in Europe. Lessons from Economic Literature and International Experiences[J]. Ecological Economics, vol.43, pp.213-230.
[20]Rubin J. (1996) A model of Intertemporal Emission Trading, Banking and Borrowing[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, vol.31 (3), pp.269-286.
[21]Burtraw, Dallas. (1996)The SO2 Emission trading Program:Cost Savings without Allowance Trades Contemporary Economic Policy[J]. Huntington Beach, vol.14(2), pp.79-95.
[22]Cason, T. N. and L. (2003) Gandgadharan. Transactions Cost in Tradeable Permit Markets: an Experimental Study of Pollution Market Designs[J]. Journal of Regulation Economics, vol.23 (2), pp.145-165.
[23]Westskog H. (1996) Market Power in a System of Tradable CO2 Quotas[J]. Energy Journal, vol.17, pp.85-103.
[24]Sartzetakis E S. (2004) On the Efficiency of Competitive Markets for Emission Permit[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, vol.27 (10), pp.1-19.
[25]Fridel B, Getzner M. (2003) Determinants of CO2 emissions in a small open economy[J]. Ecological Economics, vol.45 (1), pp.133-148.
[26]Linden, N.H., J.P.M. Sijm(ECN, Petten); Dankers, A.P.H. (ADventures in ustanable NRG, Petten) (2002)De evenwichtsprijs voor emissiereductie-eenheden:een actualisatie aar aanleiding van recente ontwikkelingen[J]. ECN-C-01-127, February.
[27]H.C. de Coninck., N.H. van der Linden. (2003) An Overview of Carbon Transactions: General Characteristics and Specific Peculiarities[J]. ECN-C-03-022, March.
[28]Adam Rose, Dan Wei, Jeffrey Wennberg and Thomas Peterson. (2009) Climate Change Policy Formation in Michigan:The Case for Integrated Regional Policies[J]. International Regional Science Review, vol.32, pp.445-465.
[29]Patrick A. Messerlin. (2010) Climate Change and Trade Policy From Mutual Destruction to Mutual Support[J]. The World Bank, July.
[30]Heather Jarvis and Wei Xu. (2006) Comparative Analysis of Air Pollution Trading in the United States and China[J]. http://www.eli.org, March.
[31]Tessa Schwartz & William Sloan. (2009) Carbon Value in Transactions:A Legal PerspectivefJ]. Clean Tech Law & Business, vol.59, pp.59-68.
[32]Baker and McKenzie. (2005) Legal Opinion:Powers of the COP/MOP and Executive Board in respect of the CDM[J]. IETA (328710-v2\MW2\MW6)
[33]Jeremy Schreifels. (2009) Emissions Trading in Santiago, Chile:A Review of the Emission Offset Program of Supreme Decree NO 4[J]. U.S. EPA.
[34]Piritta Sorsa. (1992) The Environment:A New Challenge to GATT? [J]. Background paper for World Development Report.
[35]EPA. (2003) Tools of the Trade:A Guide To Designing and Operating a Cap and Trade Program For Pollution Control[J]. EPA430-B-03-002, www.epa.gov/airmarkets, June.
[1]欧盟排放权交易体系网站(EU Emission Trading Scheme, EU ETS, http://ec.Europa.eu/environment/climat/emission.htm)。
[2]美国国家环保局网站(Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/)。
[3]美国能源部政策和国际事务办公室网站 (http://www.pi.energy.gov/enhancingGHGregistry/index.html)。
[4]澳大利亚气候变化部(Department of Climate Change, www.greenhouse.gov.au)
[5]中国气候变化信息网(http://www.ccchina.gov.cn).
[6]联合国气候变化框架公约网站(UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCCC, www.unfccc.int)。
[7]政府间气候变化专业委员会网站(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, www.ipcc.ch)。
[8]联合国环境规划署的清洁发展机制能力开发网站(Capacity Development for the CDM, UNEP, http://cd4cdm.org).
[9]国际能源机构网站(International Energy Agency, IEA, www.iea.org).
[10]国际排放权交易协会网站(International Emission Trading Association, IETA, http://ieta.org/ieta/www/pages/index.php)。
[11]世界银行的碳金融中心网站(World Bank Carbon Finance Unit, WB CFU, http://carbonfinance.org)。
[12]碳交易网站(http://www.emissionstrading.com/)。
[13]中国排放权交易网站(http://www.cet.net.cn).
[14]芝加哥气候交易所网站(Chicago Climate Exchange, CCX, http://www.chicagoclimateexchange.com/)。
[15]芝加哥气候期货交易所网站(Chicago Climate Futures Exchange, CCFE, http://www.ccfe.com/)。
[16]欧洲气候交易所网站(European Climate Exchange, ECX, http://www.ecxeurope.com/)。
[17]欧洲能源交易所(European Energy Exchange, EEX, http://www.eex.com/)。
[18]Powemext交易所(http://www.powernext.fr)。
[19]北京环境交易所(http://www.cbeex.com.cn/)。
[20]上海环境能源交易所(http://www.cneeex.com/)。
[21]天津排放权交易所(http://www.tianjinclimateexchange.com/)。
②王文嫣.发改委：我国碳排放交易试点明年将正式启动[DB/OL],中证网,http://www.cs.com.cn/cqzk/201202/t20120203_3226589.html,最后访问日2012-2-3.
①中研网讯.我国碳交易市场现状分析[DB/OL].中国行业研究网,http://www.chinairn.com/,最后访问2010-05-02.
①See European Commission, Green paper on greenhouse gas emission trading within the European Union[J]. COM(00)87,8 March 2000, European Environment, NO.565, April4,2000, Document, p.3.
②David Pocklington, European Emission Trading:the Business Perspective E[J]. European Environmental Law Review, July 2002, pp 210-211.
③冷罗生.构建中国碳排放权交易机制的法律政策思考[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(2)：21.
①郭兆晖,李普,廉桂萍.欧盟对民航业碳排放收费问题的透视[J].内蒙古大学学报,2010,(3)：13.
②朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.1-2.
①Springer, U. The market for tradable GHG permits under the Kyoto Protocol a survey of model studies[J]。Energy Economics,2003,2(5):527-551.
②瞿伟.美国排污权交易的模式选择与效果分析[J].工程与建设,2006,20(3)：188-189.
③沈国明.国外环保概览[M].成都：四川人民出版社,2002.12-18,92-94；[美]AMyrick Freeman环境与资源价值评估一理论与方法[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2002.9-12；杨通进.走向深层的环保[M].成都：四川人民出版社,2002.176-178；[美]保罗.霍肯.商业生态学[M].上海：上海译文出版社,2001.92-93; OECD.发展中国家环境管理的经济手段[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,1996.15-28,92-94.
④ Robin Hanbury-Tenison, Ross Gelbspan. Carbon emissions trading[J]. The Ecologist. Sturminster Newton:Jun.2002,32:34-35.
⑤ Uwe Schubert, Andreas Zerlauth. Innovative regional Environmental Policy-the RECLAIM-Emission Trading Poliey[J]. Environmental Management and Health. Bradford: 1999,10:130-133.
⑥Barry D Solomon, Russell Lee. Emissions Trading Systems and Environmental Justice. Environment[J]. Washington:Oct.2000,42:32-46.
⑦ Richard Schmalansee, Paul L Joskow, A Denny Ellerman, Juan Pablo Montero, Elizabeth M Bailey. An Interim Evaluation of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Trading[J]. The Journal of Economic Perspectives. Nashville:Summer 1998,12(3):53-69.
⑧富集的英文名称为enrichment,指某些物质通过水、大气和生物作用而在土壤或生物体内显著积累的作用。
⑨John K Stranlund, Carlos A Chavez, Barry C Field. Enforcing Emissions Trading Program: Theory, Practice, and Performance[J]. Policy Studies Journal. Urbana:2002,30(3):343-362.
①ICC. Legal Developments in the Carbon Market[J]. Legal Paper Workshop. Bogota:April 21,2009,1-18.
②参见IETA. Greenhouse Gas Market 2003-Greenhouse Gas Market 2010[M].
①林云华.国际气候合作与排放权交易制度研究[M].北京；中国经济出版社,2007。该书以有关温室气体排放权交易的四个环节相关法律制度为主线,从民商法、国际法等多个法律学科的视角对国际温室气体排放权交易的制度性问题进行了较为系统的分析,指出了2007年以前国际温室气体排放权交易法律制度中存在的问题,并针对这些问题提出了相应的解决措施。同时,结合实际对中国温室气体排放权交易的法律制度提出了一些具体设计思路；朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009。该书是我国第一本专门从法律的角度研究环境金融的著作。其中第2篇第4-10章是介绍“排放权交易的法律制度”的内容,就排放权的一些法律规范作了介绍,并介绍了《京都议定书》框架下的排放权交易体系。但该书着重是介绍“碳金融”方面的知识；周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011。该书更多地从实务角度,对碳减排交易的程序性问题以及风险防范问题进行阐述。
②杨兴.《气候变化框架公约》研究——兼论气候变化问题与国际法[D].武汉.武汉大学,2005。该论文主要是以《联合国气候变化框架公约》为主线,详尽介绍了《气候变化框架公约》的背景、内容简要评析、《京都议定书》确立的几项法律机制、价值取向等；李明勋.解析京都议定书的作用与局限性[D].北京.中国政法大学,2009。该论文主要是以《京都议定书》产生的背景及其内容为主线,充分介绍了《京都议定书》三个交易机制的遵约机制及其内容的法律性、局限性。
③王宁.温室气体排放交易的法律问题研究[D].北京.中国地质大学,2009；张棉.论气候领域的国际合作机制——析《京都协议书》中的清洁发展机制[D].北京.中国政法大学,2005；孙良.论我国碳排放权交易制度的建构[D].北京.中国政法大学,2009；张安娟.碳排放权交易制度研究[D].南京.南京大学,2011；等等。这些硕士论文往往是介绍碳交易制度的相关背景,或有关国家的碳交易制度以及我的碳排放交易制度的构建。
④胡迟.《京都议定书》框架下的排放权交易[J].绿叶,2007,(6)：38-39；丁方旭.跨国排放权交易的若干思考[J].中南财经政法大学研究生学报,2007,(6)：146-149；冷罗生.构建中国碳排放权交易机制的法律政策思考[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2010,10(2)：20-25；等等。
①陈安国.美国排污权交易的实践及启示[J].经济论坛,2002,(16)：4344.
②See generally Anthony Scott, Property Rights and Property Wrongs[J]. (1983) 16 Canadian Journal of Economics 555 discussing the merits of statute and common law in the evolution of property interests.
③see Brendan Edgeworth, The Numerus Clausus Principle in Contemporary Australian Property Law [J]. (2006) 32 Monash University Law Review, pp387.
④Statutory land interests have been described as'entitlements of a new kind':Harper v Minister for Sea Fisheries (1989) 168 CLR 314 at 325 (Mason CJ, Deane and Gaudron JJ). This is discussed by Scott, id at 558.
⑤see Thomas Merrill and Henry Smith, Optimal Standardization in the Law of Property:The Numerus Clausus Principle[J]. (2000) 110 Yale Law Journal 1; Bernard Rudden,'Economic Theory v Property Law:The numerus clausus problem'in John Eekelaar and John Bell (eds), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence:Third series (1987) 239.
①See Scott, above n 16. See also Anthony Scott, Does Government Create Real Property Rights?: Private Interests in Natural Resources[J]. in University of British Columbia Department of Economics, Discussion Paper No 84-26 (Vancouver,1984).
②See for example, the categories outlined by Mathew Storey, Not of this Earth:The Extraterrestrial Nature of Statutory Property in the 21st Century[J]. (2006) 25 Australian Resources and Energy Law Journal 51 at 54. The author sets out four different categories:(1) Defeasible statutory replication of a common law title; (2) Statutory property bearing no common law parallel; (3) Statutory licence; and (4) A public right created by statute.
③The later category has been endorsed in New South Wales, Tasmania and Queensland which have all deemed carbon sequestration rights to constitute'profit a prendre'interests. See also Scott, Does Government Create Real Property Rights?, above n 19, where the author suggests that statutory property is generally a legislative response to social and economic development. For a discussion of the specific development of statutory rights see further, Anthony Scott, 'Conceptual Origins of Rights Based Fishing' in Philip Neher, Ragnar Arnason and Nina Mollett (eds), Rights Based Fishing (1988) 11.
④Western Australia and South Australia have endorsed the carbon sequestration right as a pure statutory form. See Forestry Property Act 2000 (SA) s 3A; Carbon Rights Act 2003 (WA) s 3.
⑤A clear example of this form of interest is an exploration permit under the former Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1967 (Cth) (repealed by Offshore Petroleum (Repeals and Consequential Amendments) Act 2006 (Cth)), which conferred a right to the grant of a petroleum licence but only a limited right to the petroleum itself. See the discussion on the vexed proprietary status of this'pure'statutory form by Guramow J in Commonwealth v WMC Resources Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 1 at [194] where his Honour noted that the statutory interest was property despite the fact that its'defeasance'did not equate with an acquisition of property in a constitutional sense.
①The carbon right has been described as a'novel'right with a complexity that has made it difficult to characterise. See Steven Kennett, Arlene Kwasniak and Alastair Lucas. Property Rights and the Legal Framework for Carbon Sequestration on Agricultural Land[J]. (2005-06) 37 Ottawa Law Review 171 at 179.
②It might be possible, or at least more accurate, to align the interest with the profit a rendre. The profit a prendre was described by Santow JA (Mason P and Beazley JA agreeing) in Clos Farming Estates v Easton (2002) 11 BPR 20,605 at [59] (referring to Peter Butt, Land Law (4th ed,2001)), as'a right or obligation to enter land to put there something of benefit'. See also Permanent Trustee Australia Ltd v Shand (1992) 27 NSWLR 426 ('Permanent Trustee'), at 431 (Young J), where a profit a rendre was described as an incorporeal hereditament being 'a right to go onto the land and to put on it something of benefit to it'. The character and scope of the profit a rendre was discussed by Brendan Edgeworth, Profits a Rendre:A Reincarnation?[J]. (2006) 12 Australian Property Law Journal 200.
③See Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) s 87A; Forests Rights Registration Act 1990 (Tas) s 5(4).
①郑少华,孟飞.论排放权的时空维度：低碳经济的立法基础[J].政治与法律,2010,(11)：87.
②朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.44-46.
③周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.83；邓海峰.排污权：一种基于私法语境下的解读[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.232.
①李霞,狄琼,楼晓.排污权用益物权性质的探讨[J].生态经济,2006,(6)：33.
①马俊驹,梅夏英.无形财产的理论和立法问题[J].中国法学,2011,(2)：103.
②王明远.论排放权的准物权和发展权属性[J].中国法学,2010,(6)：93.
①王明远.论排放权的准物权和发展权属性[J].中国法学,2010,(6)：95.
②邹鹏.金融法视野下的排放权性质之初探[J].济宁学院学报,2011,32(1)：100.
③朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.47.
①[美]罗伯特·考特,托马斯·尤伦.法和经济学[M].张军等译.上海：上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1994.125.
②马俊驹,梅夏英.财产权的历史评析和现实思考[DB/OL].百度文库,http://wenku.baidu.com/view/7b 1 e8b4ff7ec4afe04a1dfdb.html,最后访问时间2011-06-30.
①格老秀斯.战争与和平法[M].牛津：牛津出版社,1925.11-13.38-39.
②有学者认为,应当区分“与自然统一”和“与自然和谐”两个概念。与自然统一是人类初始的生存法则,这是人类基因、功能和本质的体现；与自然和谐并非是一种自然而然的状态,而是我们的一种理想,需要我们人类的共同努力来完成的神圣事业。参见：[俄]A.N.科斯京.生态政治学与全球学[M].胡谷明等译.武汉：武汉大学出版社,2008.58.
①邱阳平.试论环境权的本质属性[DB/OL].中国论文下载中心,http://www.studa.net/jingjifa/060930/11220032-2.html,最后访问时间2011-07-06.
②See, e.g., HUMAN RIGHTS APPROACHES TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (Alan E. Boyle & Michael R. Anderson eds.,1996); DINAH SHELTON, ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS IN PEOPLE RIGHTS 187-88 (Philip Alston ed.,2001) (discussing the interconnectedness of human and environmental rights laws); LINKING HUMAN RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENT (Romina Picolotti & Jorge Daniel Taillant eds.,2003) (discussing the relationships between human rights and the environment).
①Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, U.N. Human Rights Council,7th Sess., U.N. Doc. A/HRC/7/L.21/Rev.l (Mar.26,2008), available at http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/ HRC/resolutions/A HRC 7 L 21 Rev l.doc.
②SANDS, Principles of International Environmental Law,292ff (2003).
③See generally:FRANZ XAVER PERREZ, COOPERATIVE SOVEREIGNTY:FROM INDEPENDENCE TO INTERDEPENDENCE IN THE STRUCTURE OF INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 46-64 (2000), W. Michael Reisman, Sovereignty and Human Rights in Contemporary International Law,84 AJIL 866 (1990).
①PERREZ, COOPERATIVE SOVEREIGNTY, supra note 2, at 331-343.
②UNGA Resolution 2398 (ⅩⅫ) (1968).
③Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Preambular para.1 and Principle 1,reprinted in:11 I.L.M.1416 (1972).
④World Charter for Nature, paras 15-16,23, available at: http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/37/a37r007.htm.
⑤Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Principles 1 and 10, reprinted in:31 I.L.M. 876(1992).
①Concerning environmental discrimination, see e.g:GUNTHER BAECHLE, VIOLENCE THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DISCRIMINATION (1999); P. Mohai and B. Bryant, Environmental Injustice:Weighing Race and Class as Factors in the Distribution of Environmental Hazards,63 U. COLO. L. REV.921-32 (1992).
①Concerning different anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric environmental ethics, see generally:R. ELLIOT (ed.), ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS (1995); Jens Petersen, Anthropozentrik und Okozentrik im Umweltrecht,83 ARSP 361 (1997).
②金瑞林.环境法学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,1990.194.
①汪劲.论现代西方环境权益理论中的若干新理念[DB/OL].法律教育网,http://www.chinalawedu.com/news/16900/177/2003/12/zh45767563415121300236993_77901 .htm,最后访问时间2011-07-03.
①朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京；法律出版社,2009.109-112.
① Background on the UNFCCC:The international response to climate change. United Nati ons Framework Convention on Climate Change, http://unfccc.int/essential_background/ items/6031.php,最后访问日2011-08-24.
②See UNFCCC Article 3(1) "common but differentiated responsibilities"
③See UNFCCC Article 3(2) "requiring full consideration of the specific needs and special circumstances of developing countries and countries most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change".
④See UNFCCC Article 3(3) "the precautionary principle calling for measures not to be postponed on the basis of scientific uncertainty"
⑤See UNFCCC Article 3(4) "the principle of sustainable development"
⑥See UNFCCC Article 3(5) "cooperation to promote a supportive and open international economic system".
⑦See UNFCCC Article 4(1).
①自1995年第一次德国柏林会议后,《联合国气候变化框架公约》缔约方会议相继分别在日内瓦、京都、布宜诺斯艾利斯、波恩、海牙、马拉喀什、新德里、米兰、布宜诺斯艾利斯、蒙特利尔市、内罗毕、内罗毕、波兹南、哥本哈根、坎昆等地举行。参见百科名片.联合国气候变化框架公约[DB/OL].百度百科,http：//baike.baidu.com/view/89815.htm,最后访问日2011-08-25.
②Michael Grubbatel, The Kyoto Protocol-A Guide and Assessment[M]. Royal Institute of International Affairs and Earth scan Publication Ltd.,1999, p.33.
①Marrakesh Accords-Decision 17/CP.7 Annex, Article 1-66.
②See Christopher Carr; Flavia Rosembuj, Flexible Mechanisms for Climate Change Compliance:Emisson Offset Purchases under the Clean Development Mechanism[J]. New York University Environmental Law JJournal, Vol.16, No.1,2008, p.52.
①之茁.欧盟排放交易体系未来政策[DB/OL]中国财经报网,http://roll.sohu.com/20110927 /n320658781.shtml,最后访问日2011-08-26.
②杨兴.《气候变化框架公约》研究——兼论气候变化问题与国际法[D].武汉.武汉大学,2005.232-238.
③之茁.欧盟排放交易体系未来政策[DB/OL]中国财经报网,http://roll.sohu.com/20110927 /n320658781.shtml,最后访问日2011-08-26.
①非京都议定书下的市场模式是非国家强制性的自愿减排模式。在美国,只有州和地区级的区域性碳排放权交易体系,目前这类交易体系主要有：西部气候倡议(WCI)、区域性温室气体倡议(RGGI)、气候储备行动(CAR)、中西部温室气候减排协定以及芝加哥气候交易所(CCX)。
②这些立法提案具体是：《美国气候安全法案》、《安全气候法案》、《低碳经济法案》、《气候责任法》、《减缓全球变暖法案》、《气候责任和创新法案》、《全球变暖污染控制法案》等.邓梁春.美国气候变化相关立法进展及其对中国的启示[J].世界环境,2008,(2)：82-85.
①在该判例中,美国最高法院裁决：根据《清洁空气法》,机动车辆所排放的4种温室气体为污染物。See Robert N. Stavins. A Meaningful U.S. Cap-and-trade System to address climate change. Harvard Environmental Law Review.2008,32 Harv. Envtl. L. Rev.295-298.
②2009年12月7日,美国环境保护署进一步裁定把二氧化碳列为污染物,将过去不被认为是污染物的温室气体纳入《清净空气法案》管制,这使美国政府即便在参议院无法通过《瓦克斯曼-马凯气候变化议案》时,仍旧有法源限制温室气体排放。
③该法案要求到2020年,加利福尼亚的碳排放量降到1990年的水平,2050年降到1990年的80%水平。主要从工业中限制温室气体排放,并对不履行者进行处罚。胡荣,徐岭.浅析美国碳排放权制度及其交易体系[J].内蒙古大学学报,2010,(3)：17-21.
④陈丹.加州通过碳市场交易法规[DB/OL]人民网,http://env.people.com.cn/GB/1603137 4.html,最后访问日2011-08-27.
①环境保护部环境保护对外合作中心.英国经济力争向低碳转型[DB/OL]中国环境网,http://www.cenews.com.cn/xwzx/hq/qt/200908/t20090818_621038.html,最后访问日2011-08-27.
①陈炳才,郑慧,陈安国.德国的碳排放交易制度[DB/OL]搜狐财经,http:/business.sohu.com/20110121/n279003517.shtml,最后访问日2011-08-27.
②马中,Dan Dudek,吴健等.论总量控制与排污权交易[J].中国环境科学,2002,22(1)：89-92.
①焦小平等.欧盟排放交易体系规则[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2010.2-15.
②王毅刚.中国碳排放权交易体系设计研究[M].北京：经济管理出版社,2011.48-49.
③朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.79.
①参见《京都议定书》第3条第1款。
②参见《欧洲议会和欧盟理事会指令》第3章第9条。
①具体内容参见《京都议定书》第5条、第7条和第8条的规定。
①王毅刚,葛兴安,邵诗洋等.碳排放交易制度的中国道路——国际实践与中国应用[M].北京：经济管理出版社,2011.92-93.
①具体内容参见《京都议定书》第2条的规定。
①窦希铭.论国际法的概念及其体系构成——兼论当前国际法领域的基本热点问题[DB/OL]法律图书馆论文资料库,http://www.law-lib.com/lw/lw_view.asp?no=9252,最后访问日2011-08-30.
②国际碳交易法律体系原本不是一个真正意义上的法学概念,但考虑到碳交易法律制度上的统一和完整性,本文采用此一概念。
①尚军,岳瑞芳.应对欧盟“碳管制”的竞争力[DB/OL]联合早报网,http://www.zaobao. com/wencui/2011/06/liaowang110608a29.shtml,最后访问日2011-09-02.
①2011年11月4日,在南非的德班会议上,中国、印度、巴西和南非组成的基础四国向大会提交了《公平获取可持续发展》的技术报告,强调发展中国家需要获得公平的碳预算额度。这一提议尽管受到众多国家,特别是发展中国家的支持,但发达国家对此并不认同。显而易见,发达国家与发展中国家在《京都议定书》第二期减排承诺和绿色发展基金这两个重大问题上分歧仍然严重。人类可持续的理想追求在气候变化以及碳减排法律规范方面受到了众多阻力。参见李泽民.德班会议谈判文本出炉,两大问题依旧无解[D B/OL]中国证券网,http://www.cnstock.com/index/zhuangti/2011 dbdh/2011 dbtt/201112/17 20501.htm,最后访问日2011-12-06.
②这五项条件分别是：一是必须有《京都议定书》和第二承诺期；二是,发达国家要兑现300亿美元“快速启动资金”,和2020年前每年1000亿美元的长期资金；三是落实适应、技术转让、森林、透明度问题等,建立相应的机制；四是加快对各国兑现承诺、落实行动情况的评估,确保2015年之前完成科学评估；五是坚持“共同但有区别的责任”、坚持公平、各自能力的原则,确保环境的整体性。
①如梁剑兵教授采用归纳法,将国内外学者对软法的分为12种,包括国际法、国际法中那些将要形成、但尚未形成的、不确定的规则和原则、法律的半成品法律意识与法律文化、道德规范、民间机构制定的法律等,但这些并非是完全准确的软法定义。莫丽燕.论软法的要素及其概念[J].唯实,2008(8-9)：107；又如在国际环境法领域研究中,王铁崖认为,软法是指在严格意义上不具有法律拘束力、但又具有一定法律效果的国际文件。国际组织和国际会议的决议、决定、宣言、建议和标准等绝大多数都属于这一范畴；王曦认为,软法是不具有法律约束力的文件,例如国际组织大会的宣言、决议、行动计划等,这类文件虽不具有法律约束力,却往往有助于国际习惯的形成和条约的产生,对各国的行为具有一定的影响力。王铁崖.国际法[M].北京：法律出版社,1995.456；王曦.国际环境法[M].北京：法律出版社,1998.70.
②Posper Weil, Toward Relative Normativity in International Law,77 AM. J. INT'L L.413, 414-417 n.7(1983).
③Rosalyn Higgins, PROBLEMS AND PROCESS:INTERNATIONAL LAW AND HOW WEUSE IT 25(1995).
①参见《联合国气候变化框架公约》第2条的规定。
②万霞.国际法中的“软法”现象探析[J].外交学院学报,2005,(1)：95.
③Kal Raustiala, Form and Substance in International Agreements,99 AM. J. INTL. L.581,586.
①Curtis A. Bradley, Unratified Treaties, Domestic Politics, and the U.S. Constitution,48 HARV. INT'L LJ.307,311 (2007).
②See W. Michael Reisman, The Concept and Functions of Soft Law in International Politics, in ESSAYS IN HONOUR OF JUDGE TASLIM OLA WALE ELIAS (Volume I Contemporary International Law and Human Rights) Emmanuel G. Bello and Prince Bola A. Ajibola, eds..135 (1992).
①See Kenneth W. Abbott & Duncan Snidal, Hard and Soft Law in International Legal Governance,54 INT'L ORG.421 (2000).
②Lyune Jurigielewicz. Global Environmental Change and International Lae[M]. University Press of American, Inc.46 (1996).
③[美]马克·w·贾尼斯.国际法概论(英文版)[M].北京：中信出版社,2003.52.
①Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson,& Duncan Snidal, Rational Design:Looking Back to Move Forward,55 INT'L ORG.1051 (2001).
②See Barbara Koremenos, Charles Lipson & Duncan Snidal, The Rational Design of International Institutions,55 INT'L ORG.761 (2001).
③Andrew T. Guzman & Timothy L. Meyer, International Common Law:The Soft Law of International Tribunals,9 CHI. J. INT'L L.515 (2009).
④Barbara Koremenos, Contracting Around International Uncertainty,99 AM. POL. SC. REV. 549 (2005).
⑤Kal Raustiala, Form and Substance in International Agreements,99 AM. J. INT'L L.581 (2005).
⑥Kal Raustiala, Police Patrols & Fire Alarms in the NAAEC,26 LOY. L.A. INT'L & COMP. L. REV.389 (2004).
⑦Andrew T. Guzman, Saving Customary International Law,27 MICH. J. INT'L L.115 (2005).
⑧Michael J. Gilligan, Is There a Broader-Deeper Trade-off in International Multilateral Agreements?,58 INT'L ORG.459 (2004)
⑨Timothy Meyer, Soft Law as Delegation,32 Ford. Int'l L.J.888 (2009)
①Andrew T. Guzman, The Cost of Credibility:Explaining Resistance to Interstate Dispute Resolution Mechanisms,31J. LEG. STUD.303 (2002).
②Alan O. Sykes, Protection as a "Safeguard:" A Positive Analysis of the GATT "Escape Clause" with Normative Speculations,58 CHI. L. REV.255 (1991).
③Andrew T. Guzman, The Design of International Agreements,16 EUR. J. INT'L L.579 (2005).
④Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicar v US),1986 ICJ 14 (June 27,1986).
①MEYERT. Soft law as delegation[J].Fordham International.Law Journal,2009,32:891.
②WEIL P. Towards relative normativity in international law[J]. American Journal of International Law,1983,77:413,423.
③吕江.《哥本哈根协议》：软法在国际气候制度中的作用[J].西部法学评论,2010,(4)：112-113.
④软法能在缓和硬法过分的“普遍性”可能导致的不公正、缓和硬法过分的“稳定性”可能导致的不公正、缓和硬法过分的强制性可能导致的对人的尊严的损害以更有效地保障和尊重人权三个方面发挥作用,但是否能做到此点,关键在于各国家充分地意识到对国际事项的共同的责任和义务并切实履行之。因此,有关碳排放分配和交易的法律规范,更应当力促“软法”的这一期望与效果。
⑤李威.责任转型与软法回归：《哥本哈根协议》与气候变化的国际法治理[J].太平洋学报,2011,(1)：36.
①至少到目前为止,在联合国气候变化大会上的“硬法”和各种软法的规定,都没有对《京都议定书》第二期承诺作出安排。尽管依据《哥本哈根协议》自愿申报减排机制,主要发达国家和新兴经济国家都在2010年主动申报了自愿减排的目标,但继之的坎昆会议和现在的德班会议,都无法消除发达国家与发展中国家的分歧。
②[美]杰克·戈德史密斯,埃里克·波斯纳.国际法的局限性[M].龚宇译.北京：法律出版社,2010.19：20.
①边永民.论共同但有区别的责任原则在国际环境法中的地位[J].暨南学报(哲学社会科学版),2007,(4)：9.
②“共同但有区别责任原则”本是发达国家与新兴国家在国际气候谈判过程中妥协的结果,发达国家注重“共同责任”,新兴国家关注“区别责任”。在国际气候变化缔约方大会17次的会议中,发达国家与新兴国家为该原则总是发生分歧,但总是在关键的最后达成妥协,围绕实施该原则的各种条款和协议(软法)形成,有力地推动了国际碳减排及其交易的发展。比如,在《哥本哈根协议》后,截止到2010年5月15日,有42个发达国家(15国加欧盟27国)正式通告了2020年的减排目标,包括中国、巴西、印度和南非在内的36个发展中国家也宣布了在获得资金和技术支持的前提下计划采取的减排行动。
①何志鹏,孙璐.国际软法何以可能：一个以环境为视角的展开[J].当代法学,2012,(1)；40-41.
①李威.论共同但有区别责任的转型[J].南通大学学报(社会科学版),2010,26(5)41-42.
①中国清洁发展机制基金管理中心,大连商品交易所.碳配额管理与交易[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2010.55-57.
①百科名片.认证[DB/OL].百度百科,http://baike.baidu.com/view/24399.htm,最后访问日2012-01-28.
②法律词典.国际认证制度[DB/OL].中国百科网,http://www.chinabaike.com/law/zhishi/ cd/1436303.html,最后访问日2012-01-28.
③关于这两个标准及其内容,本文将在本章第三节进行详尽分析。
①See Article 14 "Monitoring and Reporting of Emissions" of DIRECTIVE 2003/87/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 October 2003.
②See Article 15 "Verification and Accreditation" of DIRECTIVE 2003/87/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 October 2003.
①徐清军.碳关税、碳标签、碳认证的新趋势,对贸易投资影响及应对建议[J].国际贸易,2011,(7)：55.
②碳足迹,在英文中称为Carbon Footprint,是指企业机构、活动、产品或个人通过交通运输、食品生产和消费以及各类生产过程等引起的温室气体排放的集合。
③矫龙.国际认证制度已经成为一种市场行为——访中国商检总公司国际认证合作部孔祥月经理[J].实时访谈,2001,(2)：24-25.
①CDM Project Activities Request for Review, http;//cdm.unfccc.int/projects/review.html.
②Verify and Certify ERs of a CDM project activity, http://cdm.unfccc,int/projects/pac/how to/CDMProjectActivity/VerifyCertify/indec.html,最后访问日 2012-1-28.
③一个经营实体申请成为CDM项目指定的经营实体,应符合以下条件：(1)属于法律实体并向CDM执行理事会提供此种地位的证明材料；(2)雇用足够的能履行审定、核查与核证的人员；(3)具备开展活动所需要足够经费、保险和资源；(4)能处理其活动所引起的法律责任和债务；(5)已制定其行使职责的内部程序(职责划分和申诉程序),并予以公布；(6)具备或可以掌握清洁发展机制的模式和程序及COP/MOP有关决定中明确规定的职责所需的专门知识；(7)拥有一个能充分履行职责的管理机构；(8)没有任何关于渎职、欺诈和与其指定经营实体的职责不符的其他行为的未结司法诉讼。参见周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.57-58.
①See Article 14 "Monitoring and Reporting of Emissions" of DIRECTIVE 2003/87/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 October 2003.
①See Article 15 "Verification and Accreditation" of DIRECTIVE 2003/87/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 October 2003.
①杨斯.中国碳减排行业第一案在京开庭[DB/OL]正义网,http://news.jcrb.com/jxsw/20110 4/t20110414_529542.html,最后访问日期2011-11-27.
②李彤.“中国碳减排第一案”一审落槌[DB/OL].北方网,http://news.enorth.com.cn/system/20 11/08/14/007126573.shtml,最后访问日期2011-11-27.
①See Greenhouse gases-Part 1:Specification with guidance at the organization level for quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emission and removal.
②See Greenhouse gases-Part 2:Specification with guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements.
③See Greenhouse gases-Part 3:Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions
④See Greenhouse gases—Requirements for greenhouse gas validation and verification bodies for use in accreditation or other forms of recognition.
① Bloomberg全球2011自愿碳市场现状[DB/OL]新能源财经,http://www.ditanshijie.com. cn/NewsUltimate.action?newsId=6428,最后访问日2012-01-30.
②See Greenhouse gases-Part 3:Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions and Greenhouse gases—Requirements for greenhouse gas validation and verification bodies for use in accreditation or other forms of recognition.
①Bloomberg全球2011自愿碳市场现状[DB/OL]新能源财经,http://www.ditanshijie.com. cn/NewsUltimate.action?newsId=6428,最后访问日2012-01-30.
②徐清军.碳关税、碳标签、碳认证的新趋势,对贸易投资影响及应对建议[J].国际贸易,2011,(7)：55.
①See PAS2050:Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services.
②hattie.碳足迹计算国际评估标准将于明年推出[DB/OL]中华显示网,http://www.chinafpd.net/news.aspx?id=832,最后访问日2012-2-2。
①到目前为止,COP/MOP指定并由EB委任的经营实体有挪威船级社(DNV)、南德意志集团工业服务有限公司(TUV SUD)、德国莱茵TUV集团(TUV Rheinland)、日本品质保证机构(JQA)、英国SGS公司(SGS)、中国质量认证中心(CQC)、中环联合认证中心有限公司(CEC)等40家指定经营实体。参见国家发展改革委应对气候变化司.CDM执行理事会第六十五次会议情况简报2011-12-31[DB/OL]中国清洁发展机制网,http://cdm.ccchina.gov.cn/web/main.asp?ColuinnId=4,最后访问日2012-02-06.
①周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.86.
①周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.88-89.
②周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.89-92.
①[美]埃里克·波斯纳,戴维·韦斯巴赫.气候变化的正义[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011.2-3.
②如由一批国际律师和清洁发展机制(CDM)专家制定的“核证减排量买卖协议”(CERSPA)第14条第8款明确规定,“(a)《联合国国际销售货物合同公约(1980版)》不适用于本协议；(b)《合同法案(第三方权利)(1999)版》不适用于本协议——仅在英国法律为管辖法律时才适用。
①Eileen Claussen and lisa McNeilly, Equlity and Global Climate Change:The Complex Elements of Global Fairness, Pew Center on Global Climate Change (October 29,1998); Marina Cazorla and Michael Toman, "International Equity and Climate Change Policy:Resources for the Future", Climate Issue Brief 27 (December 2000); United Nations Environment Program, Vital Climate Change Graphics 14 (February 20050,在线可查 grida.no/publications/bf/climate2.
①[美]埃里克·波斯纳,戴维·韦斯巴赫.气候变化的正义[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011.31.
①参见《中华人民共和国合同法》第12条。
②“合理预期”是二十世纪美国最伟大的合同法学者科宾在其1950年出版的《科宾论合同》提出的一个合同法原则,是指法律并非致力于实现所有由允诺所产生的预期,其所要实现的,必须是合理的预期,也就是大多数人能够允诺并可得到强制执行的预期。参见秦韬.英美合同法领域的合理预期原则研究[DB/OL].上海国际贸易律师网,http://www.shlawyer.org/Article/ClassO2/SclassO2/Article_947.htm,最后访问日2011-08-10。
①目前大多数发达国家没有完成其在《京都议定书》中所设定的任务就是最好的例证。
②2011年12月12日,加拿大继美国之后第二国家宣布退出《京都议定书》,对国际社会共同努力减少温室气体排放的进程产生了严重打击。刘贺林.加拿大退出京都议定书继美国后第二个退出的国家[DB/OL]中原网,http://www.zynews.com/n/2011-12/14/content_1 682363.htm,最后访问日2011-12-20。
①如在德班会议上,原定要解决的两大难题：《京都议定书》第二期减排和绿色气候基金,虽然在最后加时阶段达成了一揽子决议,但部分内容不够具体,而且措辞留有巨大漏洞,可能让某些国家得以逃避应承担的减排责任,如就《议定书》第二承诺期期限,决议没有明确说明具体时间,是5年还是8年并无知晓；对于绿色气候基金,资金来源和管理机制仍是空白；就坎昆大会搁置的自愿减排努力,这次会议同样没有进展；没有确定将要制定的法律工具或法律成果的确切性质；没有提及惩罚措施。李良勇.德班气候大会没有达成协议?[DB/OL]解放牛网http://www.jfdaily.com/a/2454622.htm,最后访问日2011-12-20。
①Oran Young. Compliance and Public Authority[M]. Baltimore:Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1979, p,172.
②解决气侯变化问题需要全世界共同协作,即需要通过我们共同合作来解决人类共同面临的威胁。但是具体涉及到细节就涉及到了国家的利益,涉及到了各国的具体情况。这里面就产生所谓的为利益的政治博弈。比如联合国气候变化框架大会中各国家的种种表现：发展中国家和发展中国家之间的对立；发达国家和发达国家之间的对立,发达国家和发展中国家之间的对立等。
③如设立京都三机制的《京都议定书》在2008-2012年第一期承诺减排以后何去何从就一直成为国际社会关注的焦点。因为,它关系到大量的CDM项目的申报和合同的履行。
①李浩培.条约法概论[M].北京：法律出版社,2003.272-273.
①周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.93-97.
①如欧洲气候交易所的全面会员申请清算会员,最低净资产必须达到2000万英磅,交易会员申请成为清算会员最低净资产只需500万英磅,而且最低资产要求是清算会员和非清算会员的明显区别。参见中国清洁发展机制基金管理中心,大连商品交易所.碳配额管理与交易[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2010.101-102.
①参见我国《清洁发展机制项目运行管理办法》第6-12条的具体规定。
①参见2004年版《国际商事合同通则》第3.3条、第3.6条至第3.11条。
②对于碳排放权是否是商品或货物,目前没有一个权威的界定,因而碳交易不能适用《国际商事合同通则》,则该《通则》相关的法律生效的要件或致不生效的行为无法适用在国际碳交易合同行为中。
①该案始于2009年,浙江能源集团华光潭水电有限公司与上海太比雅环保公司签订协议,前者委托后者进行碳减排交易。按照联合国对《京都议定书》清洁发展机制项目的程序规定,太比雅公司必须提交材料给联合国指定的认证机构,由后者签发自愿减排额度,太比雅公司的委托任务才能顺利进行。于是,太比雅公司选定挪威船级社在北京的公司——北京挪华威认证有限公司(以下简称挪华威)为认证机构。2009年3月,项目正式启动。其间,华光潭水电公司和太比雅公司按照挪华威的要求,提供各种材料和证据文件。但挪华威却无限拖延了时间,以致华光潭项目错过了申请自愿减排项目的时限。2011年9月,太比雅公司一纸诉状将挪华威告上法庭。挪华威最初提出“管辖权异议”。2011年11月26日,北京朝阳区法院正式驳回了挪威船级社关于案件审查“管辖权异议”的申请,确定该案将在中国境内审理。目前,该案还在审理中。请参见倪晓铭.碳减排第一案暴露联合国碳交易机制不足[DB/OL]国际法学研究网,http://www.cuplfil.com/info_detail.asp?infoid=292,最后访问日2011-11-27.
①如Misrepresentation Act 1967(as amended).
②如基于“谨慎义务”(duty of care)的侵权之诉。参见Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & partnership Ltd(1964) AC 465.
①明示预期违约,是指合同有效成立后至合同约定的履行期限届满前,一方当事人明确肯定地向另一方当事人表示其将不履行合同义务,不履行义务一方构成根本违约,对方可以解除合同；默示预期违约,是指预期违约方并未将到期不履行合同义务的意思表示出来,另一方只是根据预期违约方的某些情况或行为,如履行义务的能力有缺陷、商业信用不佳、准备履行合同或履行合同过程中的行为表明有不能或不会履行的危险等来预见其将不履行合同义务,此时可以终止自己相应的履行并要求对方在合理的期限内提供其能够履行的保证,若对方未能在此合理期限内提供履行保证,即构成根本违约,预见方才可以解除合同。
①何生.“碳交易”大作战如何买卖CDM减排量?[DB/OL]证券之星,http://stock.stockstar.com/SS2009091430190762_1.shtml,最后访问日2011-11-27.
①Fercometal SARL v. Med. Terranean shipping Co.SA [1989] A. C.788转引自李先波.英美合同解除制度研究[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.277.
②李先波.英美合同解除制度研究[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.277.
③参见CERSPA第10.03"买方与违约事件有关的补救措施”、10.04"卖方与违约事件有关的补救措施”和10.05“市场价格的计算”条款。
④参见IETA2006年的Code of CDM Terms 3.0下的Section 6.0.
⑤参见CERSPA第10条。
①When parties are risk-averse, these objectives need to be balanced against the risk-allocation functions (Miceli,1998).
②The standard taxonomy of contract damages is generally based on the distinctions among expectation, reliance, and restitution interests (Fuller and Perdue,1936). Commonly adopted measures of damages in contract law are linked to one of these three'interests'of the promisee. See also Mahoney (2000).
③The issue of optimal remedies for breach of contracts has been investigated from a different perspective within the framework of incomplete contracts. Standard results show that the impossibility of entering into complete contracts that specify the efficient level of effort and reliance in each state contingency induces underinvestment in relationship-specific assets (Williamson,1985; Hart and Moore,1988,1990). However, even in the prospect of later holdups, the presence of adequate contractual protection can mitigate the problem of underinvestment. When renegotiation is available even incomplete contracts can induce the parties to invest at an efficient level when either specific performance or expectation damages are applied as breach remedies (Edlin and Reichelstein,1995).
①李先波.英美合同解除制度研究[M.北京：北京大学出版社,2008.378.
①例如IETA的ERPA3.0.
②See, e.g., France 4 June 2004 Cour d'appel [Appellate Court] Paris (SARL NE... v. SAS AMI... et SA Les Comptoirs M...).
③See PECL Art.9:309.
④see JOHN HONNOLD, UNIFORM LAW FOR INTERNATIONAL SALES (Kluwer,1999). A vast, updated and masterly organized source of CISG-related materials is available on the Pace University website at http://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cisg.html.
⑤See OLE LANDO AND HUGH BEALE (EDS.), PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN CONTRACT LAW:PARTS I AND II (Kluwer Law International (2000) (hereinafter "Lando and Beale").
⑥See CISG 26, PECL 9:303; See also UNIDROIT Art.7.3.2.
⑦See PECL Art.9:304(4).
①French, Belgian and Luxembourg Civil Code Art.1184(2) (although clauses allowing automatic termination-clauses resolutoire de plein droit-are also available), Italian Civil Code Art. 1453 and Spanish Civil Code Art.1124 (though in Spain a notice of termination may be effective if it is accepted by the defaulting party). See also LANDO AND BEALE at pp.410, 415nl.
①The World Bank国际贸易与气候变化——经济、法律和制度分析[M].廖玫译.北京：高等教育出版社,2010.34-38.
①2011年12月11日清晨,南非德班气候大会闭幕。会议最终取得五项成果：一是坚持了《联合国气候变化框架公约》、《京都议定书》和“巴厘路线图”授权,坚持了双轨谈判机制,坚持了“共同但有区别的责任”原则；二是就发展中国家最为关心的《京都议定书》第二承诺期问题作出了安排；三是在资金问题上取得了重要进展,启动了绿色气候基金；四是在坎昆协议基础上进一步明确和细化了适应、技术、能力建设和透明度的机制安排；五是深入讨论了2020年后进一步加强公约实施的安排,并明确了相关进程,向国际社会发出积极信号。但德班会议未能全部完成“巴厘路线图”谈判,落实坎昆协议和德班会议成果仍需时日。而会议后的第二天,加拿大就退出了《京都议定书》,说明了国际气候变化控制的进程道路曲折。
②如2001-2008年,美国国会经历了107-110届国会,参议院和众议院所提出的与气候变化相关的法案、决议与修正案分别是31件、96件和150件,其中以市场为基础的综合性气候法案多达15个。参见郭冬梅.应对气候变化法律制度研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2010.116.
①郭冬梅.应对气候变化法律制度研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2010.121-129.
①张荣芳.经济全球化与国际贸易法专题研究[M].北京：中国检察出版社,2008.183-188.
①程路连.WTO与多边环境协议[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2005.52.
①程路连.WTO与多边环境协议[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2005.56-57.
①董立阳.牛津大学副校长Ewan McKendrick教授作客“名家法学讲坛”辨析英国合同法及其国际化之惑[DB/OL].中国人民大学法学院网站,http://www.law.ruc.edu.cn/commu/Sho wArticle.asp?ArticleID=23409,最后访问日2011-12-01.
①Esty, Bridging the Trade-Environment Divide[J].Journal of Economic Perspective, Vol.15, 2001,p.121.
①Daniel C. Esty, Greening the GATT:Trade, Environment and the Future, Institute for International Economics,1994, p.10.
②目前,虽然在WTO框架内尚未出现有关应对气候变化的贸易措施的争端,但应对气候变化的贸易措施与WTO规则之间的潜在冲突却是真实存在的。因此,本文也将这种“冲突”界定为“潜在的冲突”。参见Steve Charnovitz, Trade and Climate:Potential Conflicts and Synergies, p.2, http://www.pewclimate.org/docUpoads/Trade%20and%20Climate.pdf.转引自宋俊荣.应对气候变化的贸易措施与WTO规则：冲突与协调[M].上海：上海社会科学院出版社,2011.35.
③梁嘉琳等.美国败诉欧盟征收航空碳税案专家建议贸易反制[DB/OL]凤凰网,http://finance.jfeng.com/news/hqcj/20111222/5310941.shtml,最后访问日2011-12-22.
①张海滨.环境与国际关系——全球环境问题的理性思考[M].上海：上海人民出版社,2008.185-217；黄辉.WTO与环保——自由贸易与环境保护的冲突与协调[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2010.148-153.
②Annie Petsonk, The Kyoto Protocol and The WTO:Integatig Greenhouse Gas Emissions Allowance Trading into the Global Marketplace[J]. Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum, Vol.10,1999, p.199; Jacob Wersman, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading and the WTO[J]. Review of European Community and the International Environmental Law, Vol.8, Issue 3,1999, p.255.
③Marisa Martin, Trade Law Implications of Restricting Participation in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme[J]. Georgetown Environmental Law Review, Vol.19,2007, p.446.
① Andrew Green, Trade Rules and Climate Change Subsidies[J]. World Trade Review, Vol.5, 2006, pp.381-386.
①David Harrison Jr., Per Klevnas, Albert L. Nichols, Daniel Radov, Using Emissions Trading to Combat Climate Change:Programs and Key Issues[J]. Environmental Law Reporter News & Analysis, Vol.38,2008, p.10378.
②涂露芳.欧盟将免费发放航空“碳配额”全年1.81亿吨[DB/OL]人民网,http://finance.pe ople.com.cn/caac/GB/17014067.html,最后访问日2012-02-03.
①WTO Appellate Body Report, United States-Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporation" Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the European Communities, WT/DS108/AB/RW,14 January 2002, para.88.
②碳泄漏是指,如果一个国家采取二氧化碳减排措施,该国国内一些产品生产(尤其是高耗能产品)可能转移到其他未采取二氧化碳减排措施的国家,从而导致本国就业机会的流失和减损本国开征此类税种所要达到的减排效果。
③The American Clean Energy and Security Act(2009), H.R.2454, Sec.768.
④2008年11月19日,欧盟通过法案决定将国际航空领域纳入欧盟碳排放交易体系并于2012年1月1日起实施。目前该法案已在实施当中。参见王宙洁.欧盟“强征”航空碳税惹众怒或引发贸易战[DB/OL].中国网络电视台经济台,http://jingji.cntv.cn/20111223/1045 29.shtml,最后访问日2011-12-25.
①陈立新.美国碳关税法案的法理透视[J].中国外交,2009,(11)：206.
①The American Clean Energy and Security Act(2009), H.R.2454, Sec.401.
②宋俊荣.应对气候变化的贸易措施与WTO规则：冲突与协调[M].上海：上海社会科学院出版社,2011.55-56.
③蔡高强,胡斌.论WTO体制下的碳关税贸易措施及其应对[J].湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,(3)：34-39；苑路佳.WTO框架下“碳关税”条款刍议[J].法学杂志,2010,(8)：139-141.
①陈立新.美国碳关税法案的法理透视[M].中国外交,2009,(11)：206-207.
②苑路佳.WTO框架下“碳关税”条款刍议[J].法学杂志,2010,(8)：140.
①宋俊荣.应对气候变化的贸易措施与WTO规则：冲突与协调[M].上海社会科学院出版社,2011.57-64.
②陈欢欢.美国航空业向欧洲法院联合起诉欧盟强制征收航空碳税[N].科学时报,2011-8-15(B3)
③王宙洁.欧盟“强征”航空碳税惹众怒 或引发贸易战[DB/OL].中国网络电视台经济台,http://jingji.cntv.cn/20111223/104529.shtml,最后访问日2011-12-25.
①张晓颖.欧盟对入境航空公司征碳排放费 美国起诉败诉[DB/OL].舜网,http://www.e23.cn,最后访问日2011-12-26.
②李卓.美拟立法反对欧盟航空碳税欧盟本周赴美讨论[DB/OL].腾讯财经,http://finance.qq.com/a/20120203/000012.htm,最后访问日2012-02-03.
①冯迪凡.欧盟征收航空碳排放税激进政策引发多国争论[DB/OL].新浪环保,http://news.sina.com.cn/green/2011-07-13/143122807134.shtml?,最后访问日2011-07-13.
①曾颂,吕楠芳.碳税庭辩美国缘何落败[DB/OL]中国资本证券网,http://roll.sohu.com/2 0120207/n334003797.shtml,最后访问日2012-02-07.
①黄小喜,郑远民.基于减排目标的贸易限制措施与WTO义务的一致性——基于多边贸易法的考察[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2011,(1)：69-70.
①黄小喜,郑远民.基于减排目标的贸易限制措施与WTO义务的一致性——基于多边贸易法的考察[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2011,(1)：70.
①See Pauwelyn, J. Conflict of Norms in Public International Law:How WTO Law Relates to Other Norms of International Law[M]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003:473,491.
②See Marceau, G. Conflicts of Norms and Conflicts of Jurisdictions:The Relationship between WTO Agreement and MEAs and Other Treaties[J]. Journal of World Trade,2001:1130.
③See Van den Bossche, P. The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization:Text, Cases and Materials[M]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,2008:128-129.
①黄小喜,郑远民.基于减排目标的贸易限制措施与WTO义务的一致性——基于多边贸易法的考察[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2011,(1)：70-71.
②The World Bank国际贸易与气候变化——经济、法律和制度分析[M].廖玫译.北京：高等教育出版社,2010.39.
③黄小喜,郑远民.基于减排目标的贸易限制措施与WTO义务的一致性——基于多边贸易法的考察[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),2011,(1)：71-72.
①张荣芳.经济全球化与国际贸易法专题研究[M].北京：中国检察出版社,2008.189-190.
②孔凡立,罗月娥.全球化时代国际“碳政治”博弈与中国的战略选择[J].天水行政学院学报,2010,(4)：54.
①强世功.“碳政治”：新型国际政治与中国的战略抉择[DB/OL].社会学视野网,http://sociologyol.org/,最后访问日2011-12-02.
②柳下再会.以碳之名[M].北京：中国发展出版社,2010.142.
①如美国、沙特阿拉伯等国就对设立绿色气候基金持反对意见。参见刘小军.英报：美国反对设立“绿色气候基金”[DB/OL].新华网,http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2011-11/25/c_122333709.htm,最后访问日2011-12-02.
①曾梦琦.国际碳交易市场发展及其对我国的启示[J].金融市场,2011,(1)：62-64.
②陈晖.全球碳市场的现状：基于配额的交易和基于项目的交易[DB/OL]上海情报服务平台,http://www.istis.sh.cn/list/list.aspx?id=7250,最后访问日2012-01-10.
①亚里士多德.政治学[M].吴寿彭译.北京：商务印书馆,1965.148.
②强世功.“碳政治”：新型国际政治与中国的战略抉择[DB/OL].社会学视野网http://sociologyol.org/,最后访问日2011-12-02.
①The World Bank.国际贸易与气候变化——经济、法律和制度分析[M].廖玫译.北京：高等教育出版社,2010.38.
[1]程卫东.欧盟法律创新[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2008.
[2]李先波.英美合同解除制度研究[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.
[3]崔建远.合同法[M].北京：法律出版社,2000.
[4]李宏,赵晓晨.国际贸易理论与政策[M].北京：清华大学出版社·北京交通大学出版社,2009.
[5]李明良,吴弘.产权交易市场法律问题研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2008.
[6]曲如晓.贸易与环境：理论与政策研究[M].北京：人民出版社,2009.
[7]张荣芳.经济全球化与国际贸易法专题研究[M].北京：中国检察出版社,2008.
[8]田玉红.WTO框架下中国贸易政策与产业政策的协调[M].北京：人民出版社,2009.
[9]汪劲等.绿色正义—环境的法律保护[M].广州：广州出版社,2000.
[10]徐淑萍.贸易与环境的法律问题研究[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,2002.
[11]那力等.WTO与环境保护[M].长春：吉林人民出版社,2002.
[12]王树义.俄罗斯生态法[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社,2001.
[13]高家伟.欧洲环境法[M].北京：工商出版社,2000年.
[14]汪劲.环境正义：丧钟为谁而鸣(美国联邦法院环境诉讼经典判例选)[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[15]王树义.可持续发展与中国环境法治——循环经济立法问题专题研究[M].北京：科学出版社,2007.
[16]谷德近.多边环境协定的资金机制[M].北京：法律出版社,2008.
[17]朱家贤.环境金融法研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2009.
[18]李慎明.2003年全球政治与安全报告[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[19]秦亚青.理性与国际合作：自由主义国际关系理论研究[M].北京：世界知识出版社,2008.
[20]盛洪.现代制度经济学(上下卷)[M].北京：北京大学出版社2003.
[21][美]保罗·萨缪尔森,威廉·诺德豪斯.经济学(第十六版)[M].北京：华夏出版社,1999.
[22][美]R.科斯,A.阿尔钦,D.诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁——产权学派与新制度学派译文集[M].上海：上海人民出版社,2004.
[23]王蓉.中国环境法律制度的经济学分析[M].北京：法律出版社,2003.
[24]杨姝影,蔡博峰,曹淑艳.国际碳税研究[M].北京：化学工业出版社,2011.
[25]郎咸平.郎咸平说新帝国主义在中国1[M].北京：东方出版社,2010.
[26]郎咸平.郎咸平说新帝国主义在中国2[M].北京：东方出版社,2010.
[27]余淼杰.国际贸易的政治经济学分析：理论模型与计量实证[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2009.
[28][美]杰克·戈德史密斯,埃里克·波斯纳.国际法的局限性[M].北京：法律出版社,2010.
[29]崔大鹏.国际气候合作的政治经济学分析[M].北京：商务印书馆,2003.
[30]周亚成,周旋.碳减排交易法律问题和风险防范[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2011.
[31][美]埃里克·波斯纳,戴维·韦斯巴赫.气候变化的正义[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社2011.
[32]张海滨.环境与国际关系——全球环境问题的理性思考[M].上海：上海人民出版社,2008.
[33]邓海峰.排污权——一种基于私法语境下的解读[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.
[34]王贵国.世界贸易组织法[M].北京：法律出版社,2003.
[35]鄂晓梅.单边PPM环境贸易措施与WTO规则：冲突与协调[M].北京：法律出版社,2007.
[36]唐颖侠.国际气候变化条约的遵守机制研究[M].北京：人民出版社,2009.
[37]黄辉.WTO与环保——自由贸易与环境保护的冲突与协调[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2010.
[38]柳下再会.以碳之名[M].北京：中国发展出版社,2010.
[39]王遥.碳金融——全球视野与中国布局[M].北京：中国经济出版社,2010.
[40]潘家华,陈迎,李晨曦.碳预算方案的国际机制研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2009.
[41]中国清洁发展机制基金管理中心,大连商品交易所.碳配额管理与交易[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2010.
[42]国家环境保护总局,WTO新一轮谈判环境与贸易问题研究系列丛书编委会.WTO新一轮谈判环境与贸易问题研究[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2005.
[43]夏光,冯东方,吴玉萍.加入WTO与国内环境政策调整[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2005.
[44]陈泮勤,曲建升.气候变化应对战略之国别研究[M].北京：气象出版社,2010.
[45]王毅刚,葛兴安,邵诗洋等.碳排放交易制度的中国道路——国际实践与中国应用[M].北京：经济管理出版社,2011.
[46]王毅刚.中国碳排放权交易体系设计研究[M].北京：经济管理出版社,2011.
[47]鄢德春.中国碳市场建设——融合碳期货和碳基金的行动体系[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2010.
[48]刘婧.我国节能与低碳的交易市场机制研究[M].上海：复旦大学出版社,2010.
[49]郭冬梅.应对气候变化法律制度研究[M].北京：法律出版社,2010.
[1]吕忠梅.论环境使用权交易制度[J].政法论坛,2000,(4).
[2]杨兴.试论国际环境法的共同但有区别的责任原则[J].时代法学.2003,(1).
[3]刘兰翠,范英,吴刚等.温室气体减排政策问题研究综述[J].管理评论,2005,17(10).
[4]胡迟.《京都议定书》框架下的排放权交易[J].绿叶,2007,(6).
[5]冷罗生.构建中国碳排放权交易机制的法律政策思考[J].中国地质大学报》(社会科学版),2010,10(2).
[6]杨兴.气候变化的国际法之秩序价值初探[J].河北法学,2004,22(5).
[7]于天飞.碳排放权交易的产权分析[J].东北农业大学学报(社会科学版),2007,5(2).
[8]任捷,鲁炜.关于甲国温室气体排放权交易体系的构想[J].南京理工大学学报(社会科学版),2009,22(3).
[9]丁方旭.跨国排放权交易的若干思考[J].中南财经政法大学研究生学报,2007,(6).
[10]杨通进.全球正义：分配温室气体排放权的伦理原则[J].中国人民大学学报,2010(2).
[11]沈春女.契约自由与环境权益的冲突与平衡[J].北方论丛,2008,(1).
[12]黄孝华.国际碳基金运行机制研究[J].武汉理工大学学报,2010,32(4).
[13]何建坤,陈文颖,滕飞等.全球长期减排目标与碳排放权分配原则[J].气候变化研究进展,2009,5(6).
[14]王江,隋伟涛.碳排放权交易问题的博弈研究[J].中国市场,2010,(14).
[15]苏伟,吕学都,孙国顺.未来联合国气候变化谈判的核心内容及前景展望——‘巴厘路线图”解读[J].气候变化研究进展,2008,4(1).
[16]白洋.论我国碳排放权交易机制的法律构建.河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,37(1).
[17]杨志,陈军.应对气候变化：欧盟的实现机制碳交易和低碳经济[J].内蒙古大学学报,2010,(3)
[18]郭兆晖,李普,廉桂萍.欧盟对民航业碳排放收费问题的透视[J].内蒙古大学学报,2010,(3).
[1]罗尔斯.正义论[M].何怀红译.北京：中国社会科学出版社,2001.
[2][美]罗伯特·考特、托马斯·尤伦[M].法和经济学.张军译.上海：上海三联出版社,1994.
[3][德]沃尔夫冈·费肯杰.经济法(第一、二卷)[M].张世明等译.北京：中国民主法制出版社,2010.
[4][美]丹尼尔·A·科尔曼.生态政治：建设一个绿色社会[M].梅俊杰译.上海：上海译文出版社,2002.
[5][俄]C.H.坦基扬.新自由主义全球化——资本主义危机抑或全球美国化[M].王新俊,王炜译.北京：教育科学出版社,2008.
[6][俄]A.N.科斯京.生态政治学与全球学[M].胡谷明、徐邦俊等译.武汉：武汉大学出版社,2008.
[7][美]康威·汉得森.国际关系：世纪之交的冲突与合作[M].金帆译.海口：海南出版社,2004.
[8]经济合作与发展组织.环境管理中的经济手段[M].张世秋等译.北京：中国环境科学出版社,1996.
[9]经济合作与发展组织.国际经济手段和气候变化[M].曹东等译.北京：中国环境科学出版社,1996.
[10]The World Bank.国际贸易与气候变化——经济、法律和制度分析[M].廖玫译.北京：高等教育出版社,2010.
[11][日]加藤尚武.资源危机——留给我们解决的时间不多了[M].曹逸冰译.北京：石油工业出版社,2010.
[12][美]丹尼尔R.阿普尔亚德,小艾尔佛雷德J.菲尔德,史蒂芬L.柯布.国际经济学(国际贸易分册)[M].赵军译.北京：机械工业出版社,2010.
[13][英]奈杰尔·劳森.呼唤理性——全球变暖的冷思考[M].戴黍,李振亮译.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011.
[14]环维易为低碳译丛.欧盟排放交易体系规则[M].焦小平等译.北京：中国财政经济出版社,2010.
[1]Robert Priddle. (2001) International Emission Trading From Concept to Reality[M].OECD/IEA.
[2]Bernstein, Janis D. (1993) Alternative Approaches to Pollution Control and Waste Management:Regulatory and Economic Instruments[M].The World Bank.
[3]Jota Ishikawa. (2008) Greenhouse-gas Emission Controls and International Carbon Leakage through Trade Liberalizaion[M]. Hitotsubashi University and RIETI.
[4]Tim Hayward. (2004) Constitutional Environmental Rights[M]. Oxford University Press.
[5]Graciela Chichilnisky & Geoffrey Heal eds., (2000) Environmental Markets:Equity and Efficiency[M]. Columbia University Press.
[6]Urich Bartsch et al., (2000) Fossil Fuels in a Changing Climate:Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol and Developing Country Participation[M]. Oxford University Press.
[7]US Department of Energy. (2001) International Energy Annual 1999 [US Department of Energy. Report DOE/EIA-0219(99)][M]. Washington. DC.
[8]Ellerman, A.D., and A. Decaux. (1998) Analysis of Post-Kyoto CO2 Emissions Trading Using Margingal Abatement Curves [M]. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No.40, Massachusetts Insitute of Technology.
[9]United Nations. (2002) Energy Statistics Yearbook[M]. (2000) New York.
[10]Van der Mensbrugghe, D. (1998). A(Preliminary) Analysis of the Kyoto Protocol:Using the OECD GREEN Model[M]. Presented at the OECD Workshop on the Economic Modelling of Climate Change,17-18 September, Paris.
[11]NATSOURSE. (2002) Review and Analysis of the Emerging International Greenhouse Gas Market[M]. PCF Report.
[12]IETA. (2003-2010) Greenhouse Gas Market[M].
[1]Jonathan E Sinton. (2000) What goes up:recent trends in China's energy consumption[J]. Energy Policy,28 (10):617-687.
[2]MacCracken, C.N., Edmonds, J.A., S. H. Kim, and R. D. Sands. (1999) The Economics of the Kyoto Protocol[J]. Energy Journal 20 (Special Issue on the Cost of the Kyoto Protocol):25-71.
[3]McKibbm, W.J., Ross, M.T., Shackleton, R., and P.J. Wilcoxen. (1999) Emissions Trading, Capital Flows and the Kyoto Protocol[J]. Energy Journal 20 (Special Issue on the Cost of the Kyoto Protocol):287-333.
[4]Weyant, J.P. ed.,(1999)The Cost of the Kyoto Protocol:A Multi-Model Evaluation[J]. Energy Journal 20 (Special Issue):1-398.
[5]Stefan Weishaar. (2000) CO2 Emission Allowance Allocation Mechanisms, Allocative Efficiency and the Environment:a Etatic and Dynamic Perspective[J]. Pattern Recognition, vol.33, pp.149-160.
[6]Frank Jotzo·John C. V. Pezzey. (2007)Optimal intensity targets for greenhouse gas emissions trading under uncertainty[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, vol.38, pp.259-284.
[7]Regina Betz·Todd Sanderson Tihomir Ancev. (2009) In or out:efficient inclusion of installations in an emissions trading scheme[J]. Regulatory Economics, vol.4, pp.50-53.
[8]John C. V. Pezzey. (2003) Emission Taxes and Tradeable Permits A Comparison of Views on Long-Run Efficiency [J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, pp.329-342.
[9]Karl-Martin Ehrhart Christian Hoppe. Ralf Loschel. (2008) Abuse of EU Emissions Trading for Tacit Collusion[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, vol.41, pp.347-361.
[10]Goetz, John C. (2009 development of carbon emissions trading in Canada. (Petroleum Law Edition)[J]. Alberta law review (0002-4821), vol.46(2), pp.377.
[11]Grimaud, A. (1999) Pollution Permits and Sustainable Growth in a Schumpeterian Model[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.38. pp.249-266.
[12]World Bank/IETA. (2007) State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2007[J]. World Bank.
[13]Li Yun. (2000) The costs of implementing the Kyoto Protocol and its Implications to China[J]. International Review for Environmental Strategies, vol.1, pp.159-174.
[14]Carle'n B. (2003) Market Power in International Carbon Emissions Trading:A Laboratory Test[J]. The Energy Journal, vol.24(3), pp.1-26.
[15]Richard B. Stewart, Jonathan B. Wiener and Philippe Sands. (1996) A pilot greenhouse gas trading system:the legal issues[J]. United Nations, Geneva, UNCTAD/GDS/GFSB/Misc.1.
[16]IIC. (2009) Legal Developments in the Carbon Market[J]. Legal Paper Workshop, pp.1-18.
[17]US General Accounting Office. (1995) Air Pollution:Allowance Trading Offers an Opportunity to Reduce Emissions at Less Cost[J]. GAO/RCED-95-30, Washington, D. C.
[18]Harris. Paul Ged. (2003) Global Warming and East Asia:The Domestic and International Politics of Climate Change[J]. (London:Routledge,2003).
[19]Boenmare C. Querion P. (2002) Implementing Greenhouse Gas Trading in Europe. Lessons from Economic Literature and International Experiences[J]. Ecological Economics, vol.43, pp.213-230.
[20]Rubin J. (1996) A model of Intertemporal Emission Trading, Banking and Borrowing[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, vol.31 (3), pp.269-286.
[21]Burtraw, Dallas. (1996)The SO2 Emission trading Program:Cost Savings without Allowance Trades Contemporary Economic Policy[J]. Huntington Beach, vol.14(2), pp.79-95.
[22]Cason, T. N. and L. (2003) Gandgadharan. Transactions Cost in Tradeable Permit Markets: an Experimental Study of Pollution Market Designs[J]. Journal of Regulation Economics, vol.23 (2), pp.145-165.
[23]Westskog H. (1996) Market Power in a System of Tradable CO2 Quotas[J]. Energy Journal, vol.17, pp.85-103.
[24]Sartzetakis E S. (2004) On the Efficiency of Competitive Markets for Emission Permit[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, vol.27 (10), pp.1-19.
[25]Fridel B, Getzner M. (2003) Determinants of CO2 emissions in a small open economy[J]. Ecological Economics, vol.45 (1), pp.133-148.
[26]Linden, N.H., J.P.M. Sijm(ECN, Petten); Dankers, A.P.H. (ADventures in ustanable NRG, Petten) (2002)De evenwichtsprijs voor emissiereductie-eenheden:een actualisatie aar aanleiding van recente ontwikkelingen[J]. ECN-C-01-127, February.
[27]H.C. de Coninck., N.H. van der Linden. (2003) An Overview of Carbon Transactions: General Characteristics and Specific Peculiarities[J]. ECN-C-03-022, March.
[28]Adam Rose, Dan Wei, Jeffrey Wennberg and Thomas Peterson. (2009) Climate Change Policy Formation in Michigan:The Case for Integrated Regional Policies[J]. International Regional Science Review, vol.32, pp.445-465.
[29]Patrick A. Messerlin. (2010) Climate Change and Trade Policy From Mutual Destruction to Mutual Support[J]. The World Bank, July.
[30]Heather Jarvis and Wei Xu. (2006) Comparative Analysis of Air Pollution Trading in the United States and China[J]. http://www.eli.org, March.
[31]Tessa Schwartz & William Sloan. (2009) Carbon Value in Transactions:A Legal PerspectivefJ]. Clean Tech Law & Business, vol.59, pp.59-68.
[32]Baker and McKenzie. (2005) Legal Opinion:Powers of the COP/MOP and Executive Board in respect of the CDM[J]. IETA (328710-v2\MW2\MW6)
[33]Jeremy Schreifels. (2009) Emissions Trading in Santiago, Chile:A Review of the Emission Offset Program of Supreme Decree NO 4[J]. U.S. EPA.
[34]Piritta Sorsa. (1992) The Environment:A New Challenge to GATT? [J]. Background paper for World Development Report.
[35]EPA. (2003) Tools of the Trade:A Guide To Designing and Operating a Cap and Trade Program For Pollution Control[J]. EPA430-B-03-002, www.epa.gov/airmarkets, June.
[1]欧盟排放权交易体系网站(EU Emission Trading Scheme, EU ETS, http://ec.Europa.eu/environment/climat/emission.htm)。
[2]美国国家环保局网站(Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/)。
[3]美国能源部政策和国际事务办公室网站 (http://www.pi.energy.gov/enhancingGHGregistry/index.html)。
[4]澳大利亚气候变化部(Department of Climate Change, www.greenhouse.gov.au)
[5]中国气候变化信息网(http://www.ccchina.gov.cn).
[6]联合国气候变化框架公约网站(UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCCC, www.unfccc.int)。
[7]政府间气候变化专业委员会网站(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, www.ipcc.ch)。
[8]联合国环境规划署的清洁发展机制能力开发网站(Capacity Development for the CDM, UNEP, http://cd4cdm.org).
[9]国际能源机构网站(International Energy Agency, IEA, www.iea.org).
[10]国际排放权交易协会网站(International Emission Trading Association, IETA, http://ieta.org/ieta/www/pages/index.php)。
[11]世界银行的碳金融中心网站(World Bank Carbon Finance Unit, WB CFU, http://carbonfinance.org)。
[12]碳交易网站(http://www.emissionstrading.com/)。
[13]中国排放权交易网站(http://www.cet.net.cn).
[14]芝加哥气候交易所网站(Chicago Climate Exchange, CCX, http://www.chicagoclimateexchange.com/)。
[15]芝加哥气候期货交易所网站(Chicago Climate Futures Exchange, CCFE, http://www.ccfe.com/)。
[16]欧洲气候交易所网站(European Climate Exchange, ECX, http://www.ecxeurope.com/)。
[17]欧洲能源交易所(European Energy Exchange, EEX, http://www.eex.com/)。
[18]Powemext交易所(http://www.powernext.fr)。
[19]北京环境交易所(http://www.cbeex.com.cn/)。
[20]上海环境能源交易所(http://www.cneeex.com/)。
[21]天津排放权交易所(http://www.tianjinclimateexchange.com/)。
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |