国际法视野下的碳市场链接协议研究
Research on Carbon Market Linkage Agreements from the Perspective of International Law
DOI: 10.12677/OJLS.2024.122193, PDF,   
作者: 刘秋悦:武汉大学中国边界与海洋研究院,湖北 武汉
关键词: 气候变化碳市场链接链接协议国际法Climate Change Carbon Market Linkage Linkage Agreement International Law
摘要: 以降低减排成本激励减排主体减排为基础的碳市场在全球范围内迅猛发展。减排中的“搭便车”现象引起国际社会关注,许多国家和地区开始关注碳市场链接。早期开展的欧盟与其他碳市场链接、美国加州与加拿大魁北克碳市场链接等实践为链接协议设计提供了经验。随着《巴黎协定》实施细则达成共识,碳市场链接协议的国际法框架愈加清晰。然而,碳市场链接的实践仍然囿于欧美地区小范围内,不同国家减排和碳市场建设进程的差异性以及链接的劣势使得多数国家对于链接仍处于观望状态,何况谈及链接协议。此外,现有研究较多集中在经济和政治分析链接的效益和参与者优劣势方面,鲜有文献从国际法和规范的角度链接协议进行研究。而在关于已有链接协议研究中,多数尚未考虑到现已达成的实施细则中的实施要求。另外,现有链接协议设计要素是否为切实可行,是否是发挥实际效能的最优解,是否普遍适用于各个国家仍然存疑。在此背景下,本文从国际法角度联系碳市场协议设计现状,探究碳市场链接协议的必要性问题、合法性问题和可行性问题,从中提出完善现有协议设计的建议,更好地推进不同碳市场的合作。
Abstract: The carbon market, which is based on reducing the cost of emission reduction and encouraging emission reduction subjects to reduce emissions, has developed rapidly globally. The phenomenon of “free rider” in emission reduction has attracted the attention of the international community, and many countries and regions have begun to pay attention to carbon market linkage. The early practice of linkage between EU and other carbon markets, California and Quebec, provided experience for the design of the linkage agreements. With the consensus on the rule book of the Paris Agreement, the international legal framework of the carbon market linkage agreements has become clearer. However, the practice of carbon market linkage is still confined to a small area in Europe and the United States. The differences in the process of emission reduction and carbon market construction in different countries and the disadvantages of linkage make most countries still wait and see for linkage, not to mention link agreements. In addition, the existing research focuses more on the benefits of economic and political analysis linkage and the advantages and disadvantages of participants, and there is little literature to study linkage agreements from the perspective of international law and norms. In the research on the existing link agreement, most of them have not yet taken into account the implementation requirements in the implementation rules that have been reached. In addition, it is still doubtful whether the design elements of the existing linkage agreements are feasible, whether it is the optimal solution to exert actual effectiveness, and whether it is generally applicable to various countries. In this context, this paper explores the necessity, legitimacy and feasibility of the carbon market linkage agreements from the perspective of international law, and puts forward suggestions for improving the existing agreement design, so as to better promote the cooperation of different carbon markets.
文章引用:刘秋悦. 国际法视野下的碳市场链接协议研究[J]. 法学, 2024, 12(2): 1330-1339. https://doi.org/10.12677/OJLS.2024.122193

参考文献

[1] Borghesi, S. and Zhu, T. (2018) Getting Married (and Divorced): A Critical Review of the Literature on (De) Linking Emissions Trading Schemes. Strategic Behavior and the Environment, 8, 219-267.
[2] International Carbon Action Partnership (ICAP) (2018) A Guide to Linking Emission Trading Systems. Berlin.
[3] Mehling, M.A. (2010) Bridging the Transatlantic Divide: Legal Aspects of a Link between Regional Carbon Markets in Europe and the United States. Sustainable Development Law and Policy, 7, 46-51.
[4] Bruvoll, A. and Dalen, H.M. (2009) Pricing of CO2 Emissions in Norway. Statistics Norway/Climate and Energy Economics.
[5] Mace, M.J. and Anderson, J. (2009) Legal and De-sign Issues Arising in Linking the EU ETS with Existing and Emerging Emissions Trading Schemes. Journal for Euro-pean Environmental & Planning Law, 6, 226-228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[6] International Carbon Action Partnership (ICAP) (2020) Emissions Trading Worldwide, Status Report 2020. Berlin.
[7] German Emissions Trading Authority (2015) Design-ing Institutions, Structures and Mechanisms to Facilitate the Linking of Emissions Trading. Berlin, 7-12.
[8] Flachsland, C., Marschinski, R. and Edenhofer, O. (2009) To Link or Not to Link: Benefits and Disadvantages of Linking Cap-and-Trade Systems. Climate Policy, 9, 358-372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[9] Fell, H., Moore, E. and Morgenstern, R.D. (2011) Cost Containment under Cap and Trade: A Review of the Literature. International Re-view of Environmental and Resource Economics, 5, 285-307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[10] Pezzey, J. and Jotzo, F. (2012) Tax-versus-Trading and Efficient Revenue Recycling as Issues for Greenhouse Gas Abatement. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2, 230-236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[11] International Carbon Action Partnership (ICAP) (2022) Emissions Trading Worldwide: Status Report 2022. Berlin.
[12] Füssler, J. and Herren, M. (2015) Design Options for an Interna-tional Carbon Asset Reserve for the World. World Bank Group. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[13] Morehouse, E. (2017) Western Climate Initiative Expands: Ontario to Join California-Québec Carbon Market. EDF Talks Global Cli-mate.
[14] Vöhringer, F. (2012) Linking the Swiss Emissions Trading System with the EU ETS: Economic Effects of Regulatory Design Alternatives. Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, 148, 167-196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[15] 孙静. 海南国际碳排放权交易中心成立[EB/OL]. https://www.cpnn.com.cn/news/dfny/202207/t20220729_1538422_wap.html, 2023-02-15.
[16] Bohringer, C., Dijkstra, B. and Rosendahl, K.E. (2014) Sectoral and Regional Expansion of Emissions Trading. Resource and Energy Economics, 37, 201-225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[17] Li, M.Y., Weng, Y.Y. and Duan, M.S. (2019) Emissions, Energy and Economic Impacts of Linking China’s National ETS with the EU ETS. Applied Energy, 235, 1235-1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[18] Gilde, L., Victoria, G.A. and Greiner, S. (2022) Article 6 Transaction Structures. World Bank. Climate Focus, 4-5.
[19] Lazarus, M., Schneider, L., Lee, C. and van As-selt, H. (2015) Options and Issues for Restricted Linking of Emissions Trading Systems. International Carbon Action Partnership.
[20] Quemin, S. and de Perthuis, C. (2019) Transitional Restricted Linkage between Emissions Trading Schemes. Environmental and Resource Economics, 74, 1-32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[21] Schneider, L., Lazarus, M., Lee, C. and van Asselt, H. (2017) Restricted Linking of Emissions Trading Systems: Options, Benefits, and Challenges. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 17, 883-898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[22] 魏庆坡. 碳交易市场跨国合作法律问题研究[D]: [博士学位论文]. 北京: 对外经济贸易大学, 2016.
[23] Pizer, W.A. and Yates, A.J. (2015) Terminating Links between Emission Trading Programs. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 71, 142-159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef