全球气候变化问题的认知比较研究
|
摘要
1968年哈丁提出了“公地的悲剧”(Tragedy of the Commons)的重要观点。该观点一经问世,就得到了人们的普遍关注,并成为人们认识诸多具有稀缺性特征的环境和资源问题的理论依据。当时间推进到上世纪八九十年代,全球气候变化问题的出现也被当作是“公地的悲剧”来看待,人们以此为基础展开了对如何缓解全球气候变化的讨论。然而,本文认为“全球气候变化是‘公地的悲剧’”是一种没有经过充分验证就被默认为事实并在集体无意识的状态下被广泛认同的错误观点,这可以上升为一种现象,即为“冥王星现象”。正是在对问题本质的认知上出现了错误才导致了目前在缓解全球气候变化上的政策措施的低效性。
作为唯一一部旨在减缓全球气候变化的国际协议,《京都议定书》从1997年得到缔约国的一致通过到如今已经经历了十个年头,但仍然没有取得预期的效果,即便是其中态度积极的欧盟成员国,也感到实现议定书规定的减排目标的困难性,更不用说中途退出的美国了。本文分析认为,国际协议的失效当然有其机制设计上或者说是操作层面上的缺陷,例如实施成本过高、约束力较差、参与国过多且过于复杂等,但归根到底造成协议出现种种缺陷的原因是它建立在有失正确的认识之上,即认为全球气候变化是“公地的悲剧”。因此,对全球气候变化问题的这种认识进行重新检验、修正与完善是认清该问题的本质和找到更加有效的解决办法的根本途径。这就需要对全球气候变化与“公地的悲剧”同时进行解构,并在解构后的认知比较框架中对两者的差异进行分析探讨。
本文认为,全球气候变化和“公地的悲剧”在问题的基本假定、预期影响和解决方案的认识上都表现出了明显的差异,它们在这三方面组成的认知框架下具有八个不同的特点。
在对问题的基本假定的认识上看,全球气候变化完全不同于“公地的悲剧”,它探讨的是一种典型的根本不确定性问题;影响气候变化的因素也不是单一的,而包括人为和自然的多种因素在内,且它们彼此还具有相互作用的特点,这造成了影响因素的复杂性;但应该承认科学技术对减缓全球气候变化的积极作用,尤其是清洁技术具有的巨大的发展潜力,使得技术解决方案存在可能。
在对预期影响的认识上,全球气候变化也与“公地的悲剧”有明显差异。它造成的全球毁灭性悲剧并非是注定的,对于每一个个体来说短期利益无法均摊、风险并非共担,长期即便有负面影响,其危害程度和适应能力也各不相同。本文通过分析发现这种差异性的影响造成了国际上六大利益群体的形成,即石油业为主导的国家、小岛屿发展中国家、前苏联加盟共和国、美国等个别发达国家、欧盟为主的发达国家,以及中国、印度为主的大部分发展中国家。依据分析建立的“六大群体利益比较分析框架”中,本文指出全球气候变化对各群体的影响各有差异、并非共同承担悲剧的主要原因是每个群体中的决定性特征存在较大差异,这也就直接影响了个利益群体对待减缓气候变化的立场与态度。
在对解决方案的认识上,缓解全球气候变化无法依靠单独的主权国家或个别利益群体的力量,而必须以国际社会为主导。但在目前以国家利益优先的国际政治格局中,缺乏法律强制力的国际社会不适合采用具有强制性的政策对温室气体排放权进行分配,也难以进行公平、合理的分配和相关奖惩制度的监督实施,而应该加强在道德与良知的呼吁方面的努力,从而加强公众的环境意识,由下而上的推进有利于缓解全球气候变化的社会制度的建立与完善,提高政府、非政府组织及个体在科学技术方面研发的积极性。
总之,本文并非否认“公地的悲剧”的存在,也不否认全球气候变化可能存在的危害,但认为全球气候变化并非“公地的悲剧”。通过对认知比较框架进行深入分析和论证,本文有助于人们理解当前以《京都议定书》为主的解决方案为何效率较低,更有利于人们进一步认识全球气候变化问题,为寻找有效的解决方案提供了更为完善的认识基础。虽然全球气候变化问题具有不确定性,该问题的特性也可能在未来发生改变,但本文提供的认知比较框架所具备的思维范式可以灵活的适应现实的变化。
The widely accepted theory“tragedy of the commons”has been one of the most fundamental theories in explaining various kinds of natural resources and environmental problems since its birth in 1968 by Garrett Hardin. It should not be strange at all when people applied it to global climate change problem instantly as it was becoming one of the major environmental challenges during 1980s-1990s. Based on this assumption that global climate change is undoubtedly the“tragedy of the commons”, intensive discussions have been raised in the hope of alleviating the problem to a less-threatening level. Nevertheless, the assumption has never been carefully considered or even questioned from either a scientific or a philosophic perspective, and sadly speaking, this assumption no longer holds. This is just like“Pluto Phenomenon”that for once it has been widely accepted and spread for several years, the first instinct of people tends rather to apply it as a general law than to question it when new problems are raised. It is because of the cognitive error that the subsequent resolutions and policies based on the wrong assumption are doomed to be purposeless and inefficient.
As the only international agreement aimed at alleviating global climate change, Kyoto Protocol has been ratified since 1997. Although some efforts has been made and some mechanisms has been implemented, it seems the expected target could not be achieved at all, even the most active EU participants are expressing the concrete difficulties in meeting the combating targets set in the first term, not to mention the unilateral and complete withdraw of the U.S. With little doubt, there are limitations and unrealistic propositions in the Protocol, but the fundamental flaw should be traced into the fact that the whole resolution is based on the wrong assumption that the global climate change is a case of“tragedy of the commons”, in which case, it is not. Therefore, to thoroughly analyze the nature of the global climate change is vital to reveal its true characteristics and to buildup a cognitive system based on the existing findings is by far the sole way to search for the effective solutions. It requires the decomposition of both“tragedy of the commons”and global climate change.
This dissertation compared these two issues under the cognition comparative framework, which includes three perspectives as the basic assumptions, the expected impacts and the solutions. These perspectives reveal eight significant different aspects that could not possible reconcile.
Unlike“tragedy of the commons”, global climate change is typically a radical uncertainty problem, and the countless contributing factors are extremely complicated and interrelated, any attempt to solve it based on limited contributing factors implied by“tragedy of the commons”is doomed to failure. It can only be counted on the technological advance and proliferation that a technique solution could be found in the future.
From the perspective of the expected impacts, the tragedy of global climate change seems uncertain, at least not universal. Not every region shares the same risks and shoulders the same responsibilities as the“tragedy of the commons”implies. The six distinctive groups of interests make this point loud and clear. It is found that the six groups include the oil-driven countries, small island developed countries, former Soviet Union countries, United States of America and Australia, Europe Union and most developed countries, and China, India and most developing countries. Based on the analysis, this dissertation concluded a comparative framework on the six groups’interests, and found out that the distinctive characteristics of each group differentiate the effect of global climate change and determine their unique positions and attitudes in the actions of slowing down the climate change.
With respect to solutions, it is evident that the international community, namely the United Nations, should play the major role. However, with its less-stringent policies and unenforceable agreements, there is hardly anything to achieve. Meanwhile, the role of other nongovernmental organizations and ethical propaganda may be undervalued. Both the top-down and bottom-up approaches should be equally emphasized in the future to alleviate global climate change.
To sum up, this dissertation neither deny the existence of“tragedy of the commons”, nor deny the negative effect of global climate change. But it is found that global climate change is too distinct to be considered as one of the kind“tragedy of the commons”. The newly buildup cognitive comparative framework should enable people to better comprehend the reason why the old-school thoughts inherited from the wrong assumption would not work. The fresh new philosophic paradigm is in place to enable dynamic analysis to search for a new set of solutions for the ever-changing global climate change.
作为唯一一部旨在减缓全球气候变化的国际协议,《京都议定书》从1997年得到缔约国的一致通过到如今已经经历了十个年头,但仍然没有取得预期的效果,即便是其中态度积极的欧盟成员国,也感到实现议定书规定的减排目标的困难性,更不用说中途退出的美国了。本文分析认为,国际协议的失效当然有其机制设计上或者说是操作层面上的缺陷,例如实施成本过高、约束力较差、参与国过多且过于复杂等,但归根到底造成协议出现种种缺陷的原因是它建立在有失正确的认识之上,即认为全球气候变化是“公地的悲剧”。因此,对全球气候变化问题的这种认识进行重新检验、修正与完善是认清该问题的本质和找到更加有效的解决办法的根本途径。这就需要对全球气候变化与“公地的悲剧”同时进行解构,并在解构后的认知比较框架中对两者的差异进行分析探讨。
本文认为,全球气候变化和“公地的悲剧”在问题的基本假定、预期影响和解决方案的认识上都表现出了明显的差异,它们在这三方面组成的认知框架下具有八个不同的特点。
在对问题的基本假定的认识上看,全球气候变化完全不同于“公地的悲剧”,它探讨的是一种典型的根本不确定性问题;影响气候变化的因素也不是单一的,而包括人为和自然的多种因素在内,且它们彼此还具有相互作用的特点,这造成了影响因素的复杂性;但应该承认科学技术对减缓全球气候变化的积极作用,尤其是清洁技术具有的巨大的发展潜力,使得技术解决方案存在可能。
在对预期影响的认识上,全球气候变化也与“公地的悲剧”有明显差异。它造成的全球毁灭性悲剧并非是注定的,对于每一个个体来说短期利益无法均摊、风险并非共担,长期即便有负面影响,其危害程度和适应能力也各不相同。本文通过分析发现这种差异性的影响造成了国际上六大利益群体的形成,即石油业为主导的国家、小岛屿发展中国家、前苏联加盟共和国、美国等个别发达国家、欧盟为主的发达国家,以及中国、印度为主的大部分发展中国家。依据分析建立的“六大群体利益比较分析框架”中,本文指出全球气候变化对各群体的影响各有差异、并非共同承担悲剧的主要原因是每个群体中的决定性特征存在较大差异,这也就直接影响了个利益群体对待减缓气候变化的立场与态度。
在对解决方案的认识上,缓解全球气候变化无法依靠单独的主权国家或个别利益群体的力量,而必须以国际社会为主导。但在目前以国家利益优先的国际政治格局中,缺乏法律强制力的国际社会不适合采用具有强制性的政策对温室气体排放权进行分配,也难以进行公平、合理的分配和相关奖惩制度的监督实施,而应该加强在道德与良知的呼吁方面的努力,从而加强公众的环境意识,由下而上的推进有利于缓解全球气候变化的社会制度的建立与完善,提高政府、非政府组织及个体在科学技术方面研发的积极性。
总之,本文并非否认“公地的悲剧”的存在,也不否认全球气候变化可能存在的危害,但认为全球气候变化并非“公地的悲剧”。通过对认知比较框架进行深入分析和论证,本文有助于人们理解当前以《京都议定书》为主的解决方案为何效率较低,更有利于人们进一步认识全球气候变化问题,为寻找有效的解决方案提供了更为完善的认识基础。虽然全球气候变化问题具有不确定性,该问题的特性也可能在未来发生改变,但本文提供的认知比较框架所具备的思维范式可以灵活的适应现实的变化。
The widely accepted theory“tragedy of the commons”has been one of the most fundamental theories in explaining various kinds of natural resources and environmental problems since its birth in 1968 by Garrett Hardin. It should not be strange at all when people applied it to global climate change problem instantly as it was becoming one of the major environmental challenges during 1980s-1990s. Based on this assumption that global climate change is undoubtedly the“tragedy of the commons”, intensive discussions have been raised in the hope of alleviating the problem to a less-threatening level. Nevertheless, the assumption has never been carefully considered or even questioned from either a scientific or a philosophic perspective, and sadly speaking, this assumption no longer holds. This is just like“Pluto Phenomenon”that for once it has been widely accepted and spread for several years, the first instinct of people tends rather to apply it as a general law than to question it when new problems are raised. It is because of the cognitive error that the subsequent resolutions and policies based on the wrong assumption are doomed to be purposeless and inefficient.
As the only international agreement aimed at alleviating global climate change, Kyoto Protocol has been ratified since 1997. Although some efforts has been made and some mechanisms has been implemented, it seems the expected target could not be achieved at all, even the most active EU participants are expressing the concrete difficulties in meeting the combating targets set in the first term, not to mention the unilateral and complete withdraw of the U.S. With little doubt, there are limitations and unrealistic propositions in the Protocol, but the fundamental flaw should be traced into the fact that the whole resolution is based on the wrong assumption that the global climate change is a case of“tragedy of the commons”, in which case, it is not. Therefore, to thoroughly analyze the nature of the global climate change is vital to reveal its true characteristics and to buildup a cognitive system based on the existing findings is by far the sole way to search for the effective solutions. It requires the decomposition of both“tragedy of the commons”and global climate change.
This dissertation compared these two issues under the cognition comparative framework, which includes three perspectives as the basic assumptions, the expected impacts and the solutions. These perspectives reveal eight significant different aspects that could not possible reconcile.
Unlike“tragedy of the commons”, global climate change is typically a radical uncertainty problem, and the countless contributing factors are extremely complicated and interrelated, any attempt to solve it based on limited contributing factors implied by“tragedy of the commons”is doomed to failure. It can only be counted on the technological advance and proliferation that a technique solution could be found in the future.
From the perspective of the expected impacts, the tragedy of global climate change seems uncertain, at least not universal. Not every region shares the same risks and shoulders the same responsibilities as the“tragedy of the commons”implies. The six distinctive groups of interests make this point loud and clear. It is found that the six groups include the oil-driven countries, small island developed countries, former Soviet Union countries, United States of America and Australia, Europe Union and most developed countries, and China, India and most developing countries. Based on the analysis, this dissertation concluded a comparative framework on the six groups’interests, and found out that the distinctive characteristics of each group differentiate the effect of global climate change and determine their unique positions and attitudes in the actions of slowing down the climate change.
With respect to solutions, it is evident that the international community, namely the United Nations, should play the major role. However, with its less-stringent policies and unenforceable agreements, there is hardly anything to achieve. Meanwhile, the role of other nongovernmental organizations and ethical propaganda may be undervalued. Both the top-down and bottom-up approaches should be equally emphasized in the future to alleviate global climate change.
To sum up, this dissertation neither deny the existence of“tragedy of the commons”, nor deny the negative effect of global climate change. But it is found that global climate change is too distinct to be considered as one of the kind“tragedy of the commons”. The newly buildup cognitive comparative framework should enable people to better comprehend the reason why the old-school thoughts inherited from the wrong assumption would not work. The fresh new philosophic paradigm is in place to enable dynamic analysis to search for a new set of solutions for the ever-changing global climate change.
引文
3引自:PM's comments at launch of Stern Review, http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page10300.asp (2007.02.20登陆查询)
4引自:王曦.国际环境法.北京:法律出版社, 1998. p160
11引自[美]赫尔曼·E·戴利,肯尼思·N·汤森主编.珍惜地球:经济学、生态学、伦理学之第六章“公地的悲剧”,加勒特·哈丁著.北京:商务印书馆, 2001. p152
12引自:李虎军.继WTO之后最重要的一场国际谈判.南方周末, 2007.2.15, A2版.
13中东地区包括哪些国家一直存在争议,因为“中东”并非一个正式的地理术语。但一般泛指西亚和北非地区,大约22个国家。其中,西亚国家包括沙特、伊朗、科威特、伊拉克、阿联酋、阿曼、卡塔尔、巴林、土耳其、以色列、巴勒斯坦、叙利亚、黎巴嫩、约旦、也门和塞浦路斯;北非包括苏丹、埃及、利比亚、突尼斯、阿尔及利亚、摩洛哥。也有共24个国家或27个国家等不同说法。此处特指盛产石油并且对石油业发展具有严重依赖的国家。
14此处石油(Oil)包括原油(Crude Oil),还包括油气冷凝物(Gas Condensate)和液化天然气(Natural Gas Liquid)。
[1]IPCC. Climate Change 2001, the Scientific Basis. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2001. p8-11
[2]殷永元,王桂新.全球气候变化评估方法及其应用.北京:高等教育出版社, 2004. p3
[3]潘家华,庄贵阳,陈迎.减缓气候变化的经济分析.北京:气象出版社, 2003.序言
[4]王玉庆.环境经济学.北京:中国环境科学出版社, 2002. p268, 270, 271
[5]曹洪军.环境经济学.第九章空气污染.待出版.
[6]IPCC. Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. p36
[7]Green, Kenneth Philip. Exploring the Science of Climate Change, Plain English Guide No. 3. Los Angeles: Reason Foundation, 2000. p7
[8]National Academy Press. Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions. Washington, D.C.: NAS, 2001.
[9]Oreskes, Naomi. The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change. Science, 2004, (306):1686
[10]Nordhaus, William D. Reflections on the Economics of Climate Change. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1993, 7 (4): 11-25
[11]Jacoby, Henry D., Ronald G. Prinn, and Richard Schmalesee. Kyoto’s Unfinished Business. Foreign Affairs, 1998, 77 (4): 54-66
[12]Sir Nicholas Stern. The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. Britain: HM Treasury, 2006. pvi
[13]王曦.国际环境法.北京:法律出版社, 1998. p159
[14]Taylor, Jerry. Global Warming: The Anatomy of a Debate. CATO Speeches, 1998. [Online]: http://www.boisestate.edu/biology/BIOL191/global%204.PDF
[15]McKibbin, Warwick J., and Peter J. Wilcoxen. The Role of Economics in Climate Change Policy. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2002, 16 (2): 107-129
[16]Wigley, Thomas M. L., Richard Richels, and James A. Edmonds. Economic and Environmental Choices in the Stabilization of Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations. Nature, 1996, 379 (6562): 240-243
[17]Manne, Alan S., and Richard Richels. On Stabilizing CO2 Concentrations-Cost-Effective Emission Reduction Strategies. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 1997, 2 (4): 251-265
[18]Nordhaus, William D., and Joseph G. Boyer. Requiem for Kyoto: An Economic Analysis of the Kyoto Protocol. Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers of Yale University, No.1201, 1999
[19]Tol, Richard S. J. Kyoto, Efficiency, and Cost-Effectiveness: Applications of FUND. Energy Journal, 1999, 20 (Special Issue): 131-156
[20]Perman, Roger and Yue Ma, James McGilvray, Michael Common. Natural Resource and Environmental Economics, 3rd Ed., Pearson Education Limited, 2003. p299, 445, 350
[21]Lairson, Thomas D., and David Skidmore. International Political Economy: The Struggle for Power and Wealth, Peking University Press, 3rd Ed., 2004. p443
[22]Baumert, Kevin and Jothasan Pershing. Climate Date: Insights and Observations, Pew Centre for Global Climate Change, Washington D.C. ,2004
[23]Barrett, Scott. Creating Incentives for Cooperation: Strategic Choices. Providing Global Public Goods: Managing Globalization, edited by I. Kaul, P. Concei??o, K.LeGoulven,and R.U. Mendoza, New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. p308-328
[24]The Economist. The environment: Winds of change. Economist.com, 2007.03.09. [Online]: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8835705&top_story=1
[25]Kennedy, Donald. Sustainability and the Commons. Science, 2003, 302 (5652): 1861
[26]Watson, Robert T. Climate Change: The Political Situation. Science, 2003, 302 (5652): 1925-1926
[27]齐晔.气候变化、公用地悲剧与中国的对策.公共管理评论(第二卷).北京:清华大学出版社, 2004. p149-157
[28]Lacy, Mark J. Security and Climate Change: International Relations and The Limits of Realism. Research in Environmental Politics, edited by M. Paterson and G. Smith. London: Routledge, 2005. p73
[29]Philibert, Cédric, Jonathan Pershing, and Kathleen Gray. Beyond Kyoto: Energy Dynamics and Climate Stabilisation. Paris: OECD/IEA, 2002. p1
[30]Anand, Ruchi. International Environmental Justice: A North-South Dimension. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2004. p57
[31]B?hringer, Christoph, and Michael Finus. The Kyoto Protocol: Success or Failure? Climate-Change Policy, edited by D. Helm. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. p258
[32]United States Congress House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs Subcommittee on Water and Power Resources. Implications of global warming for natural resources: oversight hearings before the Subcommittee on Water and Power Resources of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. Washington D.C.: U.S.G.P.O., 1989. p561
[33]House of Lords, Britain. The Economics of Climate Change, 2nd Report of Session 2005-2006, Vollume II: Evidence. London: TSO Shop, 2005. p128
[34]K?gi, Wolfram. Economics of Climate Change: The Contribution of Forestry Projects. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000. p19
[35]Rowland, Ian H. Classical Theories of International Relations. International Relations and Global Climate Change, edited by U. Luterbacher and D. F. Sprinz. Boston: MIT Press, 2001. p56
[36]Carraro, Carlo and Marzio Galeotti. The future evolution of the Kyoto Protocol: costs, benefits and incentives to ratification and new international regimes. Firms, Governments, and Climate Policy: Incentive-based Policies for Long-term Climate Change, edited by C. Carraro and C. Egenhofer. Chetenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2003. p276
[37]程实.悬在不确定性的半空.上海证券报, 2006.10.20.
[38][美]哈丁?加勒特.公地的悲剧. 1968.珍惜地球--经济学、生态学、伦理学, [美]赫尔曼?E?戴利,肯尼思?N?汤森主编.北京:商务印书馆, 2001. p152
[39]BBC. Global Dimming. TV Programme, 2005.
[40]Wild, Martin, Hans Gilgen, Andreas Roesch, Atsumu Ohmura, Charles N. Long, Ellsworth G. Dutton, Bruce Forgan, Ain Kallis, Viivi Russak, and Anatoly Tsvetkov. From Dimming to Brightening: Decadal Changes in Solar Radiation at Earth's Surface. Science, 2005, 308 (5723): 847-850
[41]Pinker, R. T., B. Zhang, and E. G. Dutton. Do Satellites Detect Trends in Surface Solar Radiation? Science, 2005, 308 (5723): 850-854
[42]高登义.全球变暖一定是“温室效应”吗?北京青年报, 2004.04.29
[43]董映璧.俄罗斯科学家:全球变暖并非二氧化碳增多之过.科技日报, 2004.07.18
[44]李崇银,翁衡毅,高晓清,钟敏.全球增暖的另一可能原因初探.大气科学, 2003, 27 (5): 789-797
[45]Stott, Peter A., Gareth S. Jones, and John F.B. Mitchell. Do Models Underestimate the Solar Contribution to Recent Climate Change? J ournal of Climate, 2003, (16): 4079-4093
[46]Marsh, Nigel, and Henrik Svensmark. Cosmic Rays, Clouds, and Climate. Space Science Reviews, 2000, (00): 1-16
[47]Basgall, Monte. Sun's Direct Role in Global Warming May Be Underestimated, Duke Physicists Report, 2007. [Online]: http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2005/09/sunwarm.html
[48]Solanki, S. K., I. G. Usoskin, B. Kromer, M. & Schüssler, and J. Beer. Unusual activity of the Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years. Nature, 2004, (431): 1084-1087
[49]IPCC. Climate Change 2001:Working Group I: The Scientific Basis. 2001. [Online]: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/456.htm
[50]Meehl, G.A., W.M. Washington, C.A. Ammann, J.M. Arblaster, T.M.L. Wigleym, and C. Tebaldi. Combinations of Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings in Twentieth-Century Climate. Journal of Climate, 2004, (17): 3721-3727
[51]UNEP.全球环境展望年鉴2006.北京:中国环境科学出版社, 2006. p51,52
[52]?gerup, Martin et al. 2004. Climate change and sustainable development: A blueprint from the Sustainable Development Network. London: International Policy Network. p4, p16.
[53]Wright, L.J., R.A. Hoblyn, P.W. Atkinson, W.J. Sutherland, and P.M. Dolman. A Threatened Specied Benefits from Climate Change? 2002. [Online]: www.britishecologicalsociety.org/articles/meetings/judging/woodlarkposter.pdf
[54]Krauss, Clifford, Steven Lee Myers, Andrew C. Revkin, and Simon Romero. As Polar Ice Turns to Water, Dreams of Treasure Abound. The New York Times, 2005, October 10
[55]Lomborg, Bj?rn. Global warming– are we doing the right thing? 2001. [Online]: http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2001/08/14/warming.pdf
[56]IPN. Climate change and sustainable development: A blueprint from the Sustainable Development Network.. London: International Policy Network, 2004
[57]BP. Quantifying Energy - BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2006. BP, 2006, p6-10
[58]Lardner, Peter. Britain Slams OPEC Bid for Climate Compensation. Reuters, 1998.12.13
[59]Persian Journal. Iran joins Kyoto protocol, 2005. [Online]: http://www.iranian.ws/cgi-bin/iran_news/exec/view.cgi/3/7660.
[60]UN. The Current List of Least Developed Countries,2004. [Online]: http://www.un.org/esa/policy/devplan/ldc03list.pdf
[61]IPCC. Kyoto Protocol Status and Ratification. 2006. [Online]: http://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/kyoto_protocol/application/pdf/kpstats.pdf
[62]IPCC. Heating up: A gloomy UN-backed report is published. 2007. [Online]: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8649748.
[63]Reuters. Indonesia may lose 2,000 islands to climate change. Reuters, 2007.01.29
[64]杨教,丁峰.图瓦卢灭顶之灾“讣告”.科技文萃, 2002, (2): 26-28
[65]Minura, Nobuo. Vulnerability of island countries in the South Pacific to sea level rise and climate change. Climate Research, 1999, (12): 137-143
[66]Economist.com. The Environment: Green Sums. The Economist, 2007.2.22. [Online]: http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8746382
[67]刘小丽.美国新能源政策及对我国的启示.国家发展和改革委员会能源研究所, 2006. [Online]: http://www.eri.org.cn/manage/englishfile/50-2005-9-13-503686.pdf
[68]汪静.布什政府的石油“基因”.新华网, 2003.2.24. [Online]: http://news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2003-02/24/content_742722.htm
[69]新华网.美国能源部长:将反对针对公用事业的可再生能源立法. 2007.02.12. [Online]: http://www.ah.xinhuanet.com/swcl2006/2007-02/12/content_9287556.htm
[70]The Associated Press. White House says U.N. report to show humans "substantial factor" in global warming. 2007.1.25. [Online]: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/01/25/america/NA-GEN-US-Global-Warming.php
[71]李虎军,傅剑锋. 2007,罕见暖冬.南方周末, 2007.02.15
[72]European Commission. Energy for the Future: Renewable Sources of Energy. White Paper for a Community Strategy and Action Plan, 1997. [Online]: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/library/599fi_en.pdf
[73]European Commission. New EU energy plan - more security, less pollution, 2007.01.10. [Online]: http://ec.europa.eu/news/energy/070110_1_en.htm
[74]陈光金.反贫困:促进社会公平的一个视角——改革开放以来中国农村反贫困的理论、政策与实践回顾.统筹城乡发展,景天魁,王颉主编.哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社, 2005.
[75]Kasper, Wolfgang.解决全球气候变暖可以很人性化.华尔街日报中文版, 2006.1.11
[76]科菲?安南.大自由:实现人人共享的发展、安全与人权,第212条.联合国, 2005. [Online]: http://www.un.org/chinese/largerfreedom/part5.htm
[77]邵峰.联合国改革:任重而道远.中国社会科学院世界经济与政治研究所, 2005. [Online]: http://www.iwep.org.cn/pdf/2006/lhggg_shaofeng.pdf
[78]新华网.联合国的会费如何交. 2003.09.25. [Online]: http://news.xinhuanet.com/ziliao/2003-09/25/content_1099161.htm
[79]Salamon, Lester M. The Rise of the Nonprofit Sector. Foreign Affairs, 1994, 73 (4): 109-122
[80]马彩华,游奎,李凤岐.诌议环境非政府组织(NGO)在环境管理中的必要性.中国人口?资源与环境, 2006, 16 (4): 62-65
[81]林燕凌.试论非政府组织的特点及勃兴动因.兰州学刊, 2004, (5): 188-190
[82]Greenpeace.美国政府向北极熊妥协:美国政府正式提出将北极熊列为濒危物种.2006.12.29 [Online]: http://www.greenpeace.org/china/zh/news/polar-bear
[83]WorldBank. Categorizing NGOs. 2001. [Online]: http://docs.lib.duke.edu/igo/guides/ngo/define.htm
[84]张毅.我国私家车保有量超两千万辆.镇江日报, 2007.2.25
[85]韩慧,栗成良.浅析八国集团的转型对全球政治的影响.山东农业大学学报:社会科学版, 2004, 6 (4): 99-102
[86]曹令军.浅析美国的"小型超级联合国"战略.探求, 2003, (2): 42-45
[87]孙茹,张运成.八国集团缘何正成为“超级联合国”?中国网, 2004.06.10. [Online]: http://www.china.com.cn/zhuanti2005/txt/2004-06/10/content_5583715.htm
[88]Thakur, Ramesh, and Colin Bradford. Climate change and global leadership. The Hindu, 2007.02.10.[Online]: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/02/10/stories/2007021002451000.htm
[89]吕学都,刘德顺.清洁发展机制在中国.北京:清华大学出版社, 2006. p37
[90]宋彦勤.清洁发展机制在中国的市场潜力.中国清洁发展机制网, 2006. [Online]:http://cdm.ccchina.gov.cn/UpFile/File601.PDF
[91]Economist.com. The EU unveils bold plans to tackle global warming. The Economist, 2007.03.09.[Online]: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8835705&top_story=1
[92]新华网.国际能源机构认为目前欧盟温室气体减排成本高. 2007.03.01. [Online]: http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2007-03/01/content_5788965.htm
[93]Guggenheim, D. An Inconvenient Truth (DVD). Lawrence Bender Productions, 2006.08.31.
[94]哥伦比亚大学出版社. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia. 6 ed. Columbia: Columbia University Press, 2003.
[95]亚当?斯密.道德情操论.北京:商务印书局, 1998. p101-102
[96]周翎.后京都时代的大国博弈. Green Leaf, 2005, (6):44-47
[97]The Economist. Climate Change: A hot topic gets hotter. Economist.com, 2007.03.15. [Online]: http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8867858
[98]魏东.贸易的环境影响:新型环境库兹涅茨曲线模型研究.博士论文,未出版, 2007
4引自:王曦.国际环境法.北京:法律出版社, 1998. p160
11引自[美]赫尔曼·E·戴利,肯尼思·N·汤森主编.珍惜地球:经济学、生态学、伦理学之第六章“公地的悲剧”,加勒特·哈丁著.北京:商务印书馆, 2001. p152
12引自:李虎军.继WTO之后最重要的一场国际谈判.南方周末, 2007.2.15, A2版.
13中东地区包括哪些国家一直存在争议,因为“中东”并非一个正式的地理术语。但一般泛指西亚和北非地区,大约22个国家。其中,西亚国家包括沙特、伊朗、科威特、伊拉克、阿联酋、阿曼、卡塔尔、巴林、土耳其、以色列、巴勒斯坦、叙利亚、黎巴嫩、约旦、也门和塞浦路斯;北非包括苏丹、埃及、利比亚、突尼斯、阿尔及利亚、摩洛哥。也有共24个国家或27个国家等不同说法。此处特指盛产石油并且对石油业发展具有严重依赖的国家。
14此处石油(Oil)包括原油(Crude Oil),还包括油气冷凝物(Gas Condensate)和液化天然气(Natural Gas Liquid)。
[1]IPCC. Climate Change 2001, the Scientific Basis. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2001. p8-11
[2]殷永元,王桂新.全球气候变化评估方法及其应用.北京:高等教育出版社, 2004. p3
[3]潘家华,庄贵阳,陈迎.减缓气候变化的经济分析.北京:气象出版社, 2003.序言
[4]王玉庆.环境经济学.北京:中国环境科学出版社, 2002. p268, 270, 271
[5]曹洪军.环境经济学.第九章空气污染.待出版.
[6]IPCC. Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. p36
[7]Green, Kenneth Philip. Exploring the Science of Climate Change, Plain English Guide No. 3. Los Angeles: Reason Foundation, 2000. p7
[8]National Academy Press. Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions. Washington, D.C.: NAS, 2001.
[9]Oreskes, Naomi. The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change. Science, 2004, (306):1686
[10]Nordhaus, William D. Reflections on the Economics of Climate Change. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1993, 7 (4): 11-25
[11]Jacoby, Henry D., Ronald G. Prinn, and Richard Schmalesee. Kyoto’s Unfinished Business. Foreign Affairs, 1998, 77 (4): 54-66
[12]Sir Nicholas Stern. The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. Britain: HM Treasury, 2006. pvi
[13]王曦.国际环境法.北京:法律出版社, 1998. p159
[14]Taylor, Jerry. Global Warming: The Anatomy of a Debate. CATO Speeches, 1998. [Online]: http://www.boisestate.edu/biology/BIOL191/global%204.PDF
[15]McKibbin, Warwick J., and Peter J. Wilcoxen. The Role of Economics in Climate Change Policy. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2002, 16 (2): 107-129
[16]Wigley, Thomas M. L., Richard Richels, and James A. Edmonds. Economic and Environmental Choices in the Stabilization of Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations. Nature, 1996, 379 (6562): 240-243
[17]Manne, Alan S., and Richard Richels. On Stabilizing CO2 Concentrations-Cost-Effective Emission Reduction Strategies. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 1997, 2 (4): 251-265
[18]Nordhaus, William D., and Joseph G. Boyer. Requiem for Kyoto: An Economic Analysis of the Kyoto Protocol. Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers of Yale University, No.1201, 1999
[19]Tol, Richard S. J. Kyoto, Efficiency, and Cost-Effectiveness: Applications of FUND. Energy Journal, 1999, 20 (Special Issue): 131-156
[20]Perman, Roger and Yue Ma, James McGilvray, Michael Common. Natural Resource and Environmental Economics, 3rd Ed., Pearson Education Limited, 2003. p299, 445, 350
[21]Lairson, Thomas D., and David Skidmore. International Political Economy: The Struggle for Power and Wealth, Peking University Press, 3rd Ed., 2004. p443
[22]Baumert, Kevin and Jothasan Pershing. Climate Date: Insights and Observations, Pew Centre for Global Climate Change, Washington D.C. ,2004
[23]Barrett, Scott. Creating Incentives for Cooperation: Strategic Choices. Providing Global Public Goods: Managing Globalization, edited by I. Kaul, P. Concei??o, K.LeGoulven,and R.U. Mendoza, New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. p308-328
[24]The Economist. The environment: Winds of change. Economist.com, 2007.03.09. [Online]: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8835705&top_story=1
[25]Kennedy, Donald. Sustainability and the Commons. Science, 2003, 302 (5652): 1861
[26]Watson, Robert T. Climate Change: The Political Situation. Science, 2003, 302 (5652): 1925-1926
[27]齐晔.气候变化、公用地悲剧与中国的对策.公共管理评论(第二卷).北京:清华大学出版社, 2004. p149-157
[28]Lacy, Mark J. Security and Climate Change: International Relations and The Limits of Realism. Research in Environmental Politics, edited by M. Paterson and G. Smith. London: Routledge, 2005. p73
[29]Philibert, Cédric, Jonathan Pershing, and Kathleen Gray. Beyond Kyoto: Energy Dynamics and Climate Stabilisation. Paris: OECD/IEA, 2002. p1
[30]Anand, Ruchi. International Environmental Justice: A North-South Dimension. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2004. p57
[31]B?hringer, Christoph, and Michael Finus. The Kyoto Protocol: Success or Failure? Climate-Change Policy, edited by D. Helm. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. p258
[32]United States Congress House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs Subcommittee on Water and Power Resources. Implications of global warming for natural resources: oversight hearings before the Subcommittee on Water and Power Resources of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. Washington D.C.: U.S.G.P.O., 1989. p561
[33]House of Lords, Britain. The Economics of Climate Change, 2nd Report of Session 2005-2006, Vollume II: Evidence. London: TSO Shop, 2005. p128
[34]K?gi, Wolfram. Economics of Climate Change: The Contribution of Forestry Projects. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000. p19
[35]Rowland, Ian H. Classical Theories of International Relations. International Relations and Global Climate Change, edited by U. Luterbacher and D. F. Sprinz. Boston: MIT Press, 2001. p56
[36]Carraro, Carlo and Marzio Galeotti. The future evolution of the Kyoto Protocol: costs, benefits and incentives to ratification and new international regimes. Firms, Governments, and Climate Policy: Incentive-based Policies for Long-term Climate Change, edited by C. Carraro and C. Egenhofer. Chetenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2003. p276
[37]程实.悬在不确定性的半空.上海证券报, 2006.10.20.
[38][美]哈丁?加勒特.公地的悲剧. 1968.珍惜地球--经济学、生态学、伦理学, [美]赫尔曼?E?戴利,肯尼思?N?汤森主编.北京:商务印书馆, 2001. p152
[39]BBC. Global Dimming. TV Programme, 2005.
[40]Wild, Martin, Hans Gilgen, Andreas Roesch, Atsumu Ohmura, Charles N. Long, Ellsworth G. Dutton, Bruce Forgan, Ain Kallis, Viivi Russak, and Anatoly Tsvetkov. From Dimming to Brightening: Decadal Changes in Solar Radiation at Earth's Surface. Science, 2005, 308 (5723): 847-850
[41]Pinker, R. T., B. Zhang, and E. G. Dutton. Do Satellites Detect Trends in Surface Solar Radiation? Science, 2005, 308 (5723): 850-854
[42]高登义.全球变暖一定是“温室效应”吗?北京青年报, 2004.04.29
[43]董映璧.俄罗斯科学家:全球变暖并非二氧化碳增多之过.科技日报, 2004.07.18
[44]李崇银,翁衡毅,高晓清,钟敏.全球增暖的另一可能原因初探.大气科学, 2003, 27 (5): 789-797
[45]Stott, Peter A., Gareth S. Jones, and John F.B. Mitchell. Do Models Underestimate the Solar Contribution to Recent Climate Change? J ournal of Climate, 2003, (16): 4079-4093
[46]Marsh, Nigel, and Henrik Svensmark. Cosmic Rays, Clouds, and Climate. Space Science Reviews, 2000, (00): 1-16
[47]Basgall, Monte. Sun's Direct Role in Global Warming May Be Underestimated, Duke Physicists Report, 2007. [Online]: http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2005/09/sunwarm.html
[48]Solanki, S. K., I. G. Usoskin, B. Kromer, M. & Schüssler, and J. Beer. Unusual activity of the Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years. Nature, 2004, (431): 1084-1087
[49]IPCC. Climate Change 2001:Working Group I: The Scientific Basis. 2001. [Online]: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/456.htm
[50]Meehl, G.A., W.M. Washington, C.A. Ammann, J.M. Arblaster, T.M.L. Wigleym, and C. Tebaldi. Combinations of Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings in Twentieth-Century Climate. Journal of Climate, 2004, (17): 3721-3727
[51]UNEP.全球环境展望年鉴2006.北京:中国环境科学出版社, 2006. p51,52
[52]?gerup, Martin et al. 2004. Climate change and sustainable development: A blueprint from the Sustainable Development Network. London: International Policy Network. p4, p16.
[53]Wright, L.J., R.A. Hoblyn, P.W. Atkinson, W.J. Sutherland, and P.M. Dolman. A Threatened Specied Benefits from Climate Change? 2002. [Online]: www.britishecologicalsociety.org/articles/meetings/judging/woodlarkposter.pdf
[54]Krauss, Clifford, Steven Lee Myers, Andrew C. Revkin, and Simon Romero. As Polar Ice Turns to Water, Dreams of Treasure Abound. The New York Times, 2005, October 10
[55]Lomborg, Bj?rn. Global warming– are we doing the right thing? 2001. [Online]: http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2001/08/14/warming.pdf
[56]IPN. Climate change and sustainable development: A blueprint from the Sustainable Development Network.. London: International Policy Network, 2004
[57]BP. Quantifying Energy - BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2006. BP, 2006, p6-10
[58]Lardner, Peter. Britain Slams OPEC Bid for Climate Compensation. Reuters, 1998.12.13
[59]Persian Journal. Iran joins Kyoto protocol, 2005. [Online]: http://www.iranian.ws/cgi-bin/iran_news/exec/view.cgi/3/7660.
[60]UN. The Current List of Least Developed Countries,2004. [Online]: http://www.un.org/esa/policy/devplan/ldc03list.pdf
[61]IPCC. Kyoto Protocol Status and Ratification. 2006. [Online]: http://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/kyoto_protocol/application/pdf/kpstats.pdf
[62]IPCC. Heating up: A gloomy UN-backed report is published. 2007. [Online]: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8649748.
[63]Reuters. Indonesia may lose 2,000 islands to climate change. Reuters, 2007.01.29
[64]杨教,丁峰.图瓦卢灭顶之灾“讣告”.科技文萃, 2002, (2): 26-28
[65]Minura, Nobuo. Vulnerability of island countries in the South Pacific to sea level rise and climate change. Climate Research, 1999, (12): 137-143
[66]Economist.com. The Environment: Green Sums. The Economist, 2007.2.22. [Online]: http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8746382
[67]刘小丽.美国新能源政策及对我国的启示.国家发展和改革委员会能源研究所, 2006. [Online]: http://www.eri.org.cn/manage/englishfile/50-2005-9-13-503686.pdf
[68]汪静.布什政府的石油“基因”.新华网, 2003.2.24. [Online]: http://news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2003-02/24/content_742722.htm
[69]新华网.美国能源部长:将反对针对公用事业的可再生能源立法. 2007.02.12. [Online]: http://www.ah.xinhuanet.com/swcl2006/2007-02/12/content_9287556.htm
[70]The Associated Press. White House says U.N. report to show humans "substantial factor" in global warming. 2007.1.25. [Online]: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/01/25/america/NA-GEN-US-Global-Warming.php
[71]李虎军,傅剑锋. 2007,罕见暖冬.南方周末, 2007.02.15
[72]European Commission. Energy for the Future: Renewable Sources of Energy. White Paper for a Community Strategy and Action Plan, 1997. [Online]: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/library/599fi_en.pdf
[73]European Commission. New EU energy plan - more security, less pollution, 2007.01.10. [Online]: http://ec.europa.eu/news/energy/070110_1_en.htm
[74]陈光金.反贫困:促进社会公平的一个视角——改革开放以来中国农村反贫困的理论、政策与实践回顾.统筹城乡发展,景天魁,王颉主编.哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社, 2005.
[75]Kasper, Wolfgang.解决全球气候变暖可以很人性化.华尔街日报中文版, 2006.1.11
[76]科菲?安南.大自由:实现人人共享的发展、安全与人权,第212条.联合国, 2005. [Online]: http://www.un.org/chinese/largerfreedom/part5.htm
[77]邵峰.联合国改革:任重而道远.中国社会科学院世界经济与政治研究所, 2005. [Online]: http://www.iwep.org.cn/pdf/2006/lhggg_shaofeng.pdf
[78]新华网.联合国的会费如何交. 2003.09.25. [Online]: http://news.xinhuanet.com/ziliao/2003-09/25/content_1099161.htm
[79]Salamon, Lester M. The Rise of the Nonprofit Sector. Foreign Affairs, 1994, 73 (4): 109-122
[80]马彩华,游奎,李凤岐.诌议环境非政府组织(NGO)在环境管理中的必要性.中国人口?资源与环境, 2006, 16 (4): 62-65
[81]林燕凌.试论非政府组织的特点及勃兴动因.兰州学刊, 2004, (5): 188-190
[82]Greenpeace.美国政府向北极熊妥协:美国政府正式提出将北极熊列为濒危物种.2006.12.29 [Online]: http://www.greenpeace.org/china/zh/news/polar-bear
[83]WorldBank. Categorizing NGOs. 2001. [Online]: http://docs.lib.duke.edu/igo/guides/ngo/define.htm
[84]张毅.我国私家车保有量超两千万辆.镇江日报, 2007.2.25
[85]韩慧,栗成良.浅析八国集团的转型对全球政治的影响.山东农业大学学报:社会科学版, 2004, 6 (4): 99-102
[86]曹令军.浅析美国的"小型超级联合国"战略.探求, 2003, (2): 42-45
[87]孙茹,张运成.八国集团缘何正成为“超级联合国”?中国网, 2004.06.10. [Online]: http://www.china.com.cn/zhuanti2005/txt/2004-06/10/content_5583715.htm
[88]Thakur, Ramesh, and Colin Bradford. Climate change and global leadership. The Hindu, 2007.02.10.[Online]: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/02/10/stories/2007021002451000.htm
[89]吕学都,刘德顺.清洁发展机制在中国.北京:清华大学出版社, 2006. p37
[90]宋彦勤.清洁发展机制在中国的市场潜力.中国清洁发展机制网, 2006. [Online]:http://cdm.ccchina.gov.cn/UpFile/File601.PDF
[91]Economist.com. The EU unveils bold plans to tackle global warming. The Economist, 2007.03.09.[Online]: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8835705&top_story=1
[92]新华网.国际能源机构认为目前欧盟温室气体减排成本高. 2007.03.01. [Online]: http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2007-03/01/content_5788965.htm
[93]Guggenheim, D. An Inconvenient Truth (DVD). Lawrence Bender Productions, 2006.08.31.
[94]哥伦比亚大学出版社. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia. 6 ed. Columbia: Columbia University Press, 2003.
[95]亚当?斯密.道德情操论.北京:商务印书局, 1998. p101-102
[96]周翎.后京都时代的大国博弈. Green Leaf, 2005, (6):44-47
[97]The Economist. Climate Change: A hot topic gets hotter. Economist.com, 2007.03.15. [Online]: http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8867858
[98]魏东.贸易的环境影响:新型环境库兹涅茨曲线模型研究.博士论文,未出版, 2007
© 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 |