【摘要】：碳關(guān)稅是伴隨著國(guó)際氣候環(huán)境危機(jī)而被提出的，其理論機(jī)制是通過(guò)施加貿(mào)易限制而督促各國(guó)減排二氧化碳等溫室氣體。最初，碳關(guān)稅是由法國(guó)提出用以警告美國(guó)退出《京都議定書》的行為。如今，《京都議定書》的一期減排在2012年即將結(jié)束，二期減排計(jì)劃在千呼萬(wàn)喚中進(jìn)入談判議程。但是被賦予眾望的2009年哥本哈根世界氣候大會(huì)和2010年的坎昆氣候會(huì)議均未能達(dá)成有效的減排約束，由此，碳關(guān)稅再次被某些國(guó)家重提并試圖單方面將其引入國(guó)際減排機(jī)制中。 碳關(guān)稅這一概念的產(chǎn)生對(duì)世界經(jīng)濟(jì)和政治都產(chǎn)生了復(fù)雜的影響，各國(guó)因?yàn)樽陨砝娴目紤]，對(duì)其持有不同的態(tài)度。如今，美國(guó)和歐盟均出臺(tái)了有關(guān)碳的貿(mào)易政策，試圖在金融危機(jī)余勢(shì)與氣候危機(jī)并存的今天，挽回其自身經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展頹勢(shì)，搶占未來(lái)國(guó)際低碳經(jīng)濟(jì)的制高點(diǎn)。而我國(guó)和印度等發(fā)展中國(guó)家是美歐政策的主要受損方，對(duì)美歐的行為表示堅(jiān)決的反對(duì)。 但是，無(wú)論是美國(guó)的“國(guó)際儲(chǔ)備配額計(jì)劃”，還是歐盟將航空業(yè)納入到ETS體系下的行為，都是帶有利益傾向的政策，非但不能發(fā)展成為減排的國(guó)際機(jī)制，還會(huì)限制和扭曲國(guó)際貿(mào)易，甚至有可能造成國(guó)際貿(mào)易的退步，阻礙全球氣候保護(hù)進(jìn)程。從國(guó)際貿(mào)易發(fā)展的角度來(lái)看，美歐的單邊政策均是對(duì)國(guó)際合作和交流的阻礙，其倒行逆施的行為必然寸步難行。而氣候環(huán)境危機(jī)的深化最終必然喚回國(guó)際減排的多邊合作，屆時(shí)碳關(guān)稅將有很大的發(fā)揮空間。在本文中，筆者將碳關(guān)稅制度僅僅作為一項(xiàng)減排機(jī)制來(lái)分析和研究，提煉其內(nèi)在的減排理論，將其獨(dú)立于美歐的碳貿(mào)易壁壘政策，并對(duì)其冠以各國(guó)達(dá)成減排計(jì)劃的前提，賦予了碳關(guān)稅中立、獨(dú)立的概念；進(jìn)而通過(guò)逐一分析碳關(guān)稅與《WTO協(xié)定》、GATT的各種規(guī)則、《技術(shù)壁壘協(xié)議》以及多邊環(huán)境公約的關(guān)系，，論證了碳關(guān)稅在WTO框架下的合法性。而后對(duì)美國(guó)和歐盟的“國(guó)際儲(chǔ)備配額計(jì)劃”和“EU-ETS”覆蓋航空業(yè)政策進(jìn)行了類似分析，驗(yàn)證了其非法性和不合理性。最后，為我國(guó)應(yīng)對(duì)碳關(guān)稅制度提出了包括加征碳稅、建立健全排放交易體系、合理開(kāi)發(fā)利用CDM資源以及發(fā)展國(guó)內(nèi)低碳技術(shù)和產(chǎn)品的幾點(diǎn)建議。
[Abstract]:Carbon tariff is proposed along with the international climate and environment crisis. Its theoretical mechanism is to urge countries to reduce greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide by imposing trade restrictions. Initially, the carbon tariff was proposed by France to warn the United States of withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol. Now that the Kyoto Protocol's first phase of emissions cuts is coming to an end in 2012, the second phase is on the negotiating agenda. However, the Copenhagen World Climate Conference in 2009 and the Cancun Climate Conference in 2010 failed to achieve effective emission reduction constraints, so carbon tariffs were again raised by some countries and tried to unilaterally introduce them into the international emission reduction mechanism. The concept of carbon tariff has a complex impact on the world economy and politics, and countries have different attitudes towards it because of their own interests. Today, both the United States and the European Union have issued trade policies on carbon, trying to salvage their own economic decline and seize the commanding heights of the future international low-carbon economy at a time when the balance of the financial crisis and the climate crisis coexist. Developing countries, such as China and India, are the main losers to US and European policies, and strongly oppose the actions of the US and Europe. However, whether it is the "international reserve quota plan" of the United States or the European Union's action of bringing the aviation industry into the ETS system, it is a policy with an interest tendency, and not only cannot it develop into an international mechanism for reducing emissions. It also limits and distorts international trade, and may even cause a setback in international trade, hindering the global climate protection process. From the perspective of the development of international trade, the unilateral policies of the United States and Europe are obstacles to international cooperation and exchange. And the deepening of climate and environment crisis will eventually call back the multilateral cooperation of international emission reduction, when carbon tariffs will have a lot of room to play. In this paper, the author analyzes and studies carbon tariff system as a mechanism of emission reduction, refines its internal emission reduction theory, makes it independent of the carbon trade barrier policy of the United States and Europe, and presupposes it as a precondition for countries to reach emission reduction plans. The concept of carbon tariff neutrality and independence is given; By analyzing the relationship between carbon tariff and WTO Agreement, various rules of GATT, Technical Barrier Agreement and multilateral environmental conventions, the legitimacy of carbon tariff under the framework of WTO is demonstrated. Then a similar analysis of the "International Reserve quota Plan" and "EU-ETS" coverage policy of the United States and the European Union is carried out, which verifies its illegality and irrationality. Finally, some suggestions are put forward for China to deal with the carbon tariff system, including the imposition of carbon tax, the establishment of a sound emissions trading system, the rational development and utilization of CDM resources, and the development of domestic low-carbon technologies and products.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D996.9

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 佟占軍;;WTO規(guī)則視野下的“碳關(guān)稅”解析[J];北京農(nóng)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年01期

2 肖志明;;歐盟排放交易機(jī)制實(shí)施的成效與啟示[J];武陵學(xué)刊;2011年01期

3 劉華;李亞;;歐盟碳交易機(jī)制的實(shí)踐[J];銀行家;2007年09期

4 李布;;歐盟碳排放交易體系的特征、績(jī)效與啟示[J];重慶理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué));2010年03期

5 陸蘊(yùn);董炳和;;辯證看待碳關(guān)稅在WTO體制中的合法性[J];重慶科技學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年02期

6 賀小勇;;論世貿(mào)組織體制下的環(huán)境邊境稅調(diào)整[J];國(guó)際商務(wù).對(duì)外經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);1997年05期

7 王慧;;美國(guó)氣候安全法中的碳關(guān)稅條款及其對(duì)我國(guó)的影響——兼論我國(guó)的訴訟對(duì)策[J];法商研究;2010年05期

8 苑路佳;;WTO框架下“碳關(guān)稅”條款芻議[J];法學(xué)雜志;2010年08期

9 左海聰;;GATT環(huán)境保護(hù)例外條款判例法的發(fā)展[J];法學(xué);2008年03期

10 李艷君;;世界低碳經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展趨勢(shì)和影響[J];國(guó)際經(jīng)濟(jì)合作;2010年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王瑞彬;美國(guó)氣候政策之辯（2001-2008）：支持聯(lián)盟框架視角[D];外交學(xué)院;2009年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 楊薇;WTO框架下美國(guó)《清潔能源與安全法案》中國(guó)際儲(chǔ)備配額計(jì)劃的合規(guī)性分析[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2010年

2 高靜;“碳關(guān)稅”法律制度研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2010年

本文編號(hào)：2314772