【作者】 肖峰；

【导师】 曾文革；

【作者基本信息】 重庆大学 ， 环境与资源保护法学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 西方国家在工业革命后以大量消耗自然资源的方式取得了长足发展，并通过武力掠夺后发国家的经济资源，既造成它们极度贫困也挤压了其发展空间。殖民地独立后面临着无法满足本国人民基本需求、全球环境已被透支的局面，不仅土地、水等环境因子被破坏，还出现了不产生即时损害，但积聚到一定浓度则破坏地球与太阳能量交换规律，降低地球宜居性的全球性问题——气候变化。气候变化对人类的破坏首先冲击后发国家，既使其国家命运在气候效应下岌岌可危，又阻却其发展本国经济满足国民基本需求的能力。于此，国际社会创立了《联合国气候变化框架公约》及其《京都议定书》为主干的法律体系，作为全球行动的规范，规定发达国家向发展中国家提供资金，以弥补它们结成气候利益共同体的能力不足。这些制度成果在南北国家间建立了获资权与供资义务的关系，但是实施机制的开放性阻碍了其功能实现。国家气候资金法律制度建立在人权、全球治理和气候正义的理论基础上，“气候资金”的根本目的在于以正义的方式，通过国家与非国家实体的参与，保障发展中国家在气候变化时代的发展权。这种追求贯穿于资金链诸环节，指导公约体系和其他国际法体系的立法与实施活动。它是将“气候资金”现实需要价值化、制度化为国际法关系的基础，也是决定气候资金含义、法律性质及实施机制设计的本源。但是，现行制度在出资和运营环节并未忠实于这样的基础性规定。在出资环节，发达国家利用公约体系对供资渠道的“授权条款”，主要以双边援助和国际金融机构为供资渠道，将气候供资与ODA合并进行，对私营性气候资金与国际投资不加区分。这一行为罔顾气候资金在凝结全球行动的公益性追求，在源头上无视公约体系划定的“新的，额外的”等法定标准，滥用了供资渠道的选择权。在运营环节中，发达国家发挥其在国际性运营实体中的主导权，利用国际组织的内部治理规则，为发展中国家申请使用资金划定用途范围、受资对象合格条件，制定繁复的申报程序、划拨限制条件。利用国际组织的指导意见、建议等“软法”性运营制度，意图在直接、间接供资关系中保持主导地位，按照于己有利的原则对公约体系的规则内容进行“过滤”，将发展中国家从获资权利主体消减为请求人。出资和运营环节所发生实际法律效果的法律制度，都脱离了公约体系规则的效力范围与监督机制，造成出资与获资环节脱节的现象。上述情况的发生，既是公约体系规则抽象所致，也是公约监督机制缺位使然。公私主体以“碎片化”渠道供资，大部分资金通过公约体系外渠道提供。使国际社会对供资的监督既缺乏信息支撑，也对合格供资标准——“新的，额外的”解读自说自话。发达国家坚持时序推进、项目递增为标准，发展中国家则坚持气候资金应在性质、渠道上独立于普通投资、官方发展援助。可见，“气候资金”的法律性质与认定标准没有形成全球共识，不同运营主体的内部治理规则中的监督程序和标准缺乏国际公允性。总体说来，公约体系创造性地建立了弥补南北国家应对气候变化能力差距的基本法律关系，形成一定规模的资金流和供资经验。但它并未纾解人类与大气系统之间的紧张。未来要同时达成扩大资金量与寻求资金性质的目标，完善实施制度与公约体系相契合的制度协调模式，增强供资、用资信息透明度，建立合理的责任机制。我国经济体量与排放规模在这个过程中作用特殊，在国际气候资金关系中也处于敏感的地位，改善与发达国家的互动方式，增置与发展中国家的资金关系是一个新的法律命题。需要调整国内气候法律法律制度和参与公约体系的模式，探索既符合我国大国地位又适应我国国情的战略和措施。更多还原

【Abstract】 After industrial revolution, Western countries made significant development bymeans of huge consumption of natural resources. They take over the economicalresources from poor countries by force, leaving more serious poverty and lessdeveloping spacing. Even after independence, these colonized areas still have manyproblems, including dissatisfaction of fundamental needs, overuse of globalenvironment, damage of environment factors like water and earth. Moreover, globalwarming has become the global problem jeopardizing the livability of mother earth,even if there seems to be no instant damage so far, but its accumulative effect will breakup to destroy the balance of energy exchanging between the sun and earth. It would firstshow damages to developing countries, putting the national destiny of these countries indanger, also hampering the tasks of development and needs satisfaction. Meanwhile,international world has already established the legal system with main frame of UnitedNations Framework Convention on Climate Change,(UNFCCC) and Kyoto Protocol,which is the guideline for international action, stating that developed countries shouldprovide funds for developing countries, to compensate their ability deficiency to formthe climate stakeholder community. Rights&obligation about fund were establishedbetween southern and northern countries, whose function fulfillment was hindered bythe openness of implementing mechanism.Legal system of International Climate Fund is based on theories of human rights,global treatment and climate justices. The ultimate goal of Climate Fund is to guaranteethe development right of developing countries at the times of climate change by meansof justices and participation of nations as well as non-nation bodies. This kind of goal isintegrated into each process of fund chain, guiding the legislation and implementationof international legal system within the convention body as well as other internationalrules. This is the foundation to upgrade the Climate Fund from needs to regulation. Italso determines the connotation, legal nature as well as action design of climate fund..However, the extant system abides by the fundamental regulations aboutfund-raising and fund running. At the process of fund donation, developed countriesintegrate climate finance and ODA, in accordance with the Terms of Rights underconvention system about fund using panels (mainly by bilateral assistance andinternational financial organizations), which mix private climate fund and international investment. This neglects the public welfare for global action of climate fund,regardless of the legal standards of being “New and Extra”, abusing the choosingrights of fund-providing panels. At the processes of running, developed countries takeadvantage of the dominating rights and internal managing rules of internationaloperating bodies, to set up restrictions and complicated applying procedures todeveloping countries about fund-using domain, and applicant qualification. At the end,the running norms of international organization’s recommendation and resolutionreplace the core principles of the Convention, with the usage of unilateral dominationand the Organization’s independence. As a result, the legal status of developingcountries is diminished to be beggar. The effecting rule in fund-raising and runningprocess go beyond Convention’s scope and supervision, making the dispart betweenpractical and desired law.This is the result of both the abstraction of convention system itself as well as theabsence of its supervision mechanism. Public-private entities provide financialresource in fragmented channels, most of them go beyond the Convention.International society is not clear about the supervision of fund-providing, and there isno consensus about the interpretation of the valid fund-providing standards of beingNew and Extra. Developed countries insist that the fund only should be accumulatingas the time gone and the account of projects, while developing countries believe thatthe characteristics and panels of climate fund should be independent on normalinvestment and official developing aid. Hence, there is no consensus about the legalcharacteristics and criterions for climate fund. Different running bodies use differentinternal procedures to supervise and evaluate the fund-using, which could not berecognized by international society.In general, convention system has innovatively established a fundamental legalstandard to cope with the ability difference between southern and northern countries,having formed fund current and fund-raising experiences in a certain level. But this hasnot solved the tension between human beings and climate. Consensus should be reachedbetween fund-expanding and fund collection, the implementation system andcompliance of convention system should be consummated, and the rationalaccountability system should be established to improve the fund-collecting andfund-using transparency. The economy body and emission scale of our country haveunique importance to the corresponding action of global warming, which is sensitive inthe international climate fund relationship. How to improve the interaction with development countries and to increase the fund relationship with developing countrieswould be a new legal topic. We need to adjust the model of domestic climate rules andregulations as well as the participation of convention system, to develop a strategy andmeasure which suits both the status as big country and the extant situation of ourcountry.更多还原