CPTPP环境规则研究

Research on Environmental Rules in the CPTPP

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属院系:

国际法学院

作者:

邹竞颖

摘要:

2020年11月,习近平主席在亚太经合组织(APEC)第二十七次领导人非正式会议上宣布,中方将积极考虑加入CPTPP。2021年9月,中国商务部部长王文涛提交了中国正式申请加入CPTPP的书面信函。2023年11月,商务部新闻发言人何亚东回应称,将在有条件的自贸试验区和海南自贸港主动对照CPTPP先行先试。2024年3月19日,国务院办公厅印发《扎实推进高水平对外开放更大力度吸引和利用外资行动方案》,强调“积极推动加入CPTPP,主动对照相关规则、规制、管理、标准推进国内相关领域改革”。作为“面向21世纪的高标准贸易协定”,CPTPP对环境议题作出了强势回应,对缔约方国内环境法律政策提出了统一适用的高标准。我国是全球生态文明建设的重要参与者、贡献者和引领者,不能以牺牲环境为代价发展经济已成为共识,对接CPTPP环境规则有助于改革完善我国环境保护法律体系,有助于我国以更高水平的对外开放推进高质量发展。目前,国内外学界针对CPTPP环境规则的研究缺乏系统性、比照性以及未能回应中国加入CPTPP环境规则将面临的潜在风险与应对之策。在此背景下,本文将围绕CPTPP环境规则展开深入研究,在比较分析的基础上总结创新与不足,并为理解、对接和适用CPTPP环境规则提供学理支撑。本文除引言外共分为六章。第一章是CPTPP环境规则概述。CPTPP环境规则是CPTPP缔约方之间达成的,体现它们之间由其经济社会结构决定的在利用、保护和改善环境方面的协调意志的,调整区域环境法律关系的法律规范的总体。单就法律文本看,CPTPP环境规则体现了诸多美国色彩。但真正促成CPTPP纳入环境规则的深层原因却并非美国,而是为了协调缔约方间环境保护的水平差异、破解全球环境治理体系的现实困境、顺应自由贸易协定发展的潮流趋势。CPTPP环境规则的底层逻辑是贸易与环境的关系。迄今,关于贸易与环境的关系主要有三大理论,分别是“环境库兹涅茨曲线(EKC)”“环境成本内在化”和“可持续发展”。CPTPP环境规则在体例结构上的创新主要体现在环境专章(第24章)具体条款的立法技术和机制安排上。虽然CPTPP环境规则内容繁多,但梳理后发现,附加了具体的义务和强制性做法的规则主要为四类,分别是:与环境贸易措施相关的一系列条款、与渔业补贴相关的一系列条款、与环境公众参与相关的一系列条款、与环境争端解决相关的一系列条款。前述四类规则的存在也成为CPTPP区别于以往经贸协定环境规则的主要特征,即促进环境贸易措施的实效性、开创渔业补贴领域的规范性、强化环境公众参与的纵深度、提升环境争端解决的先进性。第二章是CPTPP环境贸易措施的规制。环境贸易措施是指为实现环境目标而采取的贸易限制措施。WTO体系下与环境贸易措施有关的争议主要集中于两方面,一是多边环境协定中的环境贸易措施与WTO的潜在冲突问题,二是单边PPM环境贸易措施与WTO的非兼容性问题。针对WTO体系下环境贸易措施存在的两大问题,CPTPP规定了“确认履行多边环境协定”条款和“要求采取环境贸易措施”条款予以回应。在与其他FTAs比较分析后发现,CPTPP缺失了一条重要的“冲突解决”条款。“冲突解决”条款的缺失将导致CPTPP框架下如若出现环境贸易措施的行使与本协定其他章节项下的义务条款发生冲突时,仍需根据CPTPP第29章的环境例外条款判定环境贸易措施的合规性。CPTPP第29章中的环境例外条款与WTO环境例外条款基本一致。这就意味着,判定一项环境贸易措施是否合规,在WTO规则体系下和CPTPP框架下遵循相似的标准,即“措施的多边性”“目的的正当性”“程度的必要性”“实施的非歧视性”。但应注意的是,CPTPP环境专章还在WTO基础上提出了一更高标准,那就是环境贸易措施的行使应以“环境法的有效性”为前提。第三章是CPTPP渔业补贴规则。作为全球首个针对渔业补贴进行专门性规定的自由贸易协定,CPTPP在改善鱼类种群资源及海洋生态环境治理方面的重要作用不容小觑。其实,早在CPTPP渔业补贴规则制定之前,世界贸易组织就已关注渔业补贴并将其纳入讨论议程。只是因为各方在禁止性渔业补贴的类型和认定、特殊与差别待遇、补贴透明度义务等方面立场分歧较大,导致《渔业补贴协定》的最终法律文本直至2022年才达成。在比较CPTPP和WTO《渔业补贴协定》后发现,WTO《渔业补贴协定》在立法技术上要更先进,主要体现在禁止性补贴类型范围更广泛、认定方法和操作细节更完善、对发展中国家的特殊关切考虑更深入、补贴信息通报义务要求更严格等。尽管存在一定程度的缺失与不足,但CPTPP确实填补了国际法律制度渔业补贴规则的空白,为今后经贸协定环境规则的制定开创了引领性示范,且对缔约方国内渔业补贴政策提出了强制统一适用的高标准。也因发达国家、发展中国家和最不发达国家在补贴水平上的巨大差异。未来,取消CPTPP项下的禁止性渔业补贴对以渔业产业为支柱的发展中国家来说,影响将是巨大的。第四章是CPTPP环境公众参与规则。自由贸易协定环境公众参与规则旨在促进国家环境治理民主化、保障公民环境权实现、提高公众环境意识从而实现可持续发展目标。纵观自由贸易协定环境公众参与规则的历史演进,主要生发出以欧盟自由贸易协定中的“民间社会”机制为代表和以美国自由贸易协定中的“公民呈文”机制为代表的两大制度化程度较高的环境公众参与机制。虽然两大机制的运行方式差异较大,但都暴露出一定现实问题。目前欧盟和美国已积极推行改革措施。作为高标准经贸协定的代表作,CPTPP创设的“书面意见”机制回应了“参与式”治理的现实需要。相较于美国、欧盟FTAs,CPTPP书面意见机制在适用范围、参与主体、机构设置、运行流程等方面的规定稍显粗略。但这并不妨碍美国、欧盟分别在“公民呈文”机制和“民间社会”机制运行过程中积累的立法和实践经验成为CPTPP缔约方国内落地实施书面意见机制时的参考借鉴。CPTPP书面意见机制的特点体现在公开性、多元性和问责性。就影响力来看,CPTPP书面意见机制不仅会对国家法治、企业经营、市民生活产生影响,也会带来国际投资、国际贸易和国际舆论等方面的全球效应。第五章是CPTPP环境争端解决规则。纵观全球自由贸易协定环境争端解决机制的历史演进,美国和欧盟自由贸易协定中的环境争端解决机制最具代表性。美式自贸协定环境争端解决机制经历了三个发展时期。欧式自贸协定环境争端解决机制则在10余年经验总结后于近期有重大突破。就机制设计的核心理念看,两大模式表现出相互融合的发展趋势。CPTPP作为高标准自贸协定的典型,自然少不了对环境争端解决机制的关注。CPTPP环境争端解决机制既有对之前自贸协定环境争端解决机制的借鉴创新,例如独具特色的多级磋商制度,也有对WTO争端解决机制的改进和超越,主要表现为缩短了争端解决的时限、增强争端解决的透明度、更加注重裁决的执行力。但遗憾的是,CPTPP环境争端解决机制依旧存在一定程度的制度设计缺陷。主要问题包括一裁终局可能会导致结果不公正、程序设计未考虑发展中国家特殊关切、纯粹环境义务难获有效执行。就影响来看,CPTPP环境争端解决机制可能会增加发展中国家缔约方的被诉风险。但与此同时,也会倒逼国内环境法治不完善的缔约方积极推行改革举措以满足CPTPP环境章加载的义务要求。第六章是我国对接CPTPP环境规则的挑战与应对。我国对接CPTPP环境规则并非无本之木。党的十八大以来,我国生态环境法治建设取得了全方位、开创性、历史性成就,这是对接工作最重要保障和基石。我国已率先在有条件的自贸区和自贸港主动对照高标准国际经贸规则开展先行先试,这为对接工作积累可复制全国的经验。我国FTA环境规则经历了从无到有不断丰富的发展过程,其中部分FTA已设置环境专章,尽管与CPTPP在透明度、强制性、执行力三个方面尚存差距,但不妨碍为对接工作提供初步的实践支撑。现阶段,我国对接CPTPP环境规则面临的挑战主要来自于以下四个方面。一是我国全面履行多边环境协定存在薄弱项。二是我国海洋生态环境治理有较大提升空间。三是我国环境公众参与的广度深度有待拓展。四是CPTPP环境争端解决机制潜在多维度风险。综上,本文提出我国对接CPTPP环境规则的四大行动举措。一是加强多边环境协定履约能力建设。二是健全渔业补贴法律政策体系。三是完善公众参与国内配套制度。四是做好应对环境争端解决机制准备。

语种:

中文

学科:

国际法学

提交日期

2024-06-14

引用参考

邹竞颖. CPTPP环境规则研究[D]. 西南政法大学,2024.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • CPTPP环境规则研究
  • dc.title
  • Research on Environmental Rules in the CPTPP
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • B2020030109101
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 邹竞颖
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 国际法学院
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 博士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法学博士学位
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2024
  • dc.contributor.direction
  • 国际经济法
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 张晓君,刘颖
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 国际法学院,暨南大学法学院
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • CPTPP,环境规则,环境贸易措施,渔业补贴,环境公众参与
  • dc.subject
  • CPTPP; environmental rules; environmental trade measures; fisheries subsidies; environmental public participation; environmental dispute settlement
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 2020年11月,习近平主席在亚太经合组织(APEC)第二十七次领导人非正式会议上宣布,中方将积极考虑加入CPTPP。2021年9月,中国商务部部长王文涛提交了中国正式申请加入CPTPP的书面信函。2023年11月,商务部新闻发言人何亚东回应称,将在有条件的自贸试验区和海南自贸港主动对照CPTPP先行先试。2024年3月19日,国务院办公厅印发《扎实推进高水平对外开放更大力度吸引和利用外资行动方案》,强调“积极推动加入CPTPP,主动对照相关规则、规制、管理、标准推进国内相关领域改革”。作为“面向21世纪的高标准贸易协定”,CPTPP对环境议题作出了强势回应,对缔约方国内环境法律政策提出了统一适用的高标准。我国是全球生态文明建设的重要参与者、贡献者和引领者,不能以牺牲环境为代价发展经济已成为共识,对接CPTPP环境规则有助于改革完善我国环境保护法律体系,有助于我国以更高水平的对外开放推进高质量发展。目前,国内外学界针对CPTPP环境规则的研究缺乏系统性、比照性以及未能回应中国加入CPTPP环境规则将面临的潜在风险与应对之策。在此背景下,本文将围绕CPTPP环境规则展开深入研究,在比较分析的基础上总结创新与不足,并为理解、对接和适用CPTPP环境规则提供学理支撑。本文除引言外共分为六章。第一章是CPTPP环境规则概述。CPTPP环境规则是CPTPP缔约方之间达成的,体现它们之间由其经济社会结构决定的在利用、保护和改善环境方面的协调意志的,调整区域环境法律关系的法律规范的总体。单就法律文本看,CPTPP环境规则体现了诸多美国色彩。但真正促成CPTPP纳入环境规则的深层原因却并非美国,而是为了协调缔约方间环境保护的水平差异、破解全球环境治理体系的现实困境、顺应自由贸易协定发展的潮流趋势。CPTPP环境规则的底层逻辑是贸易与环境的关系。迄今,关于贸易与环境的关系主要有三大理论,分别是“环境库兹涅茨曲线(EKC)”“环境成本内在化”和“可持续发展”。CPTPP环境规则在体例结构上的创新主要体现在环境专章(第24章)具体条款的立法技术和机制安排上。虽然CPTPP环境规则内容繁多,但梳理后发现,附加了具体的义务和强制性做法的规则主要为四类,分别是:与环境贸易措施相关的一系列条款、与渔业补贴相关的一系列条款、与环境公众参与相关的一系列条款、与环境争端解决相关的一系列条款。前述四类规则的存在也成为CPTPP区别于以往经贸协定环境规则的主要特征,即促进环境贸易措施的实效性、开创渔业补贴领域的规范性、强化环境公众参与的纵深度、提升环境争端解决的先进性。第二章是CPTPP环境贸易措施的规制。环境贸易措施是指为实现环境目标而采取的贸易限制措施。WTO体系下与环境贸易措施有关的争议主要集中于两方面,一是多边环境协定中的环境贸易措施与WTO的潜在冲突问题,二是单边PPM环境贸易措施与WTO的非兼容性问题。针对WTO体系下环境贸易措施存在的两大问题,CPTPP规定了“确认履行多边环境协定”条款和“要求采取环境贸易措施”条款予以回应。在与其他FTAs比较分析后发现,CPTPP缺失了一条重要的“冲突解决”条款。“冲突解决”条款的缺失将导致CPTPP框架下如若出现环境贸易措施的行使与本协定其他章节项下的义务条款发生冲突时,仍需根据CPTPP第29章的环境例外条款判定环境贸易措施的合规性。CPTPP第29章中的环境例外条款与WTO环境例外条款基本一致。这就意味着,判定一项环境贸易措施是否合规,在WTO规则体系下和CPTPP框架下遵循相似的标准,即“措施的多边性”“目的的正当性”“程度的必要性”“实施的非歧视性”。但应注意的是,CPTPP环境专章还在WTO基础上提出了一更高标准,那就是环境贸易措施的行使应以“环境法的有效性”为前提。第三章是CPTPP渔业补贴规则。作为全球首个针对渔业补贴进行专门性规定的自由贸易协定,CPTPP在改善鱼类种群资源及海洋生态环境治理方面的重要作用不容小觑。其实,早在CPTPP渔业补贴规则制定之前,世界贸易组织就已关注渔业补贴并将其纳入讨论议程。只是因为各方在禁止性渔业补贴的类型和认定、特殊与差别待遇、补贴透明度义务等方面立场分歧较大,导致《渔业补贴协定》的最终法律文本直至2022年才达成。在比较CPTPP和WTO《渔业补贴协定》后发现,WTO《渔业补贴协定》在立法技术上要更先进,主要体现在禁止性补贴类型范围更广泛、认定方法和操作细节更完善、对发展中国家的特殊关切考虑更深入、补贴信息通报义务要求更严格等。尽管存在一定程度的缺失与不足,但CPTPP确实填补了国际法律制度渔业补贴规则的空白,为今后经贸协定环境规则的制定开创了引领性示范,且对缔约方国内渔业补贴政策提出了强制统一适用的高标准。也因发达国家、发展中国家和最不发达国家在补贴水平上的巨大差异。未来,取消CPTPP项下的禁止性渔业补贴对以渔业产业为支柱的发展中国家来说,影响将是巨大的。第四章是CPTPP环境公众参与规则。自由贸易协定环境公众参与规则旨在促进国家环境治理民主化、保障公民环境权实现、提高公众环境意识从而实现可持续发展目标。纵观自由贸易协定环境公众参与规则的历史演进,主要生发出以欧盟自由贸易协定中的“民间社会”机制为代表和以美国自由贸易协定中的“公民呈文”机制为代表的两大制度化程度较高的环境公众参与机制。虽然两大机制的运行方式差异较大,但都暴露出一定现实问题。目前欧盟和美国已积极推行改革措施。作为高标准经贸协定的代表作,CPTPP创设的“书面意见”机制回应了“参与式”治理的现实需要。相较于美国、欧盟FTAs,CPTPP书面意见机制在适用范围、参与主体、机构设置、运行流程等方面的规定稍显粗略。但这并不妨碍美国、欧盟分别在“公民呈文”机制和“民间社会”机制运行过程中积累的立法和实践经验成为CPTPP缔约方国内落地实施书面意见机制时的参考借鉴。CPTPP书面意见机制的特点体现在公开性、多元性和问责性。就影响力来看,CPTPP书面意见机制不仅会对国家法治、企业经营、市民生活产生影响,也会带来国际投资、国际贸易和国际舆论等方面的全球效应。第五章是CPTPP环境争端解决规则。纵观全球自由贸易协定环境争端解决机制的历史演进,美国和欧盟自由贸易协定中的环境争端解决机制最具代表性。美式自贸协定环境争端解决机制经历了三个发展时期。欧式自贸协定环境争端解决机制则在10余年经验总结后于近期有重大突破。就机制设计的核心理念看,两大模式表现出相互融合的发展趋势。CPTPP作为高标准自贸协定的典型,自然少不了对环境争端解决机制的关注。CPTPP环境争端解决机制既有对之前自贸协定环境争端解决机制的借鉴创新,例如独具特色的多级磋商制度,也有对WTO争端解决机制的改进和超越,主要表现为缩短了争端解决的时限、增强争端解决的透明度、更加注重裁决的执行力。但遗憾的是,CPTPP环境争端解决机制依旧存在一定程度的制度设计缺陷。主要问题包括一裁终局可能会导致结果不公正、程序设计未考虑发展中国家特殊关切、纯粹环境义务难获有效执行。就影响来看,CPTPP环境争端解决机制可能会增加发展中国家缔约方的被诉风险。但与此同时,也会倒逼国内环境法治不完善的缔约方积极推行改革举措以满足CPTPP环境章加载的义务要求。第六章是我国对接CPTPP环境规则的挑战与应对。我国对接CPTPP环境规则并非无本之木。党的十八大以来,我国生态环境法治建设取得了全方位、开创性、历史性成就,这是对接工作最重要保障和基石。我国已率先在有条件的自贸区和自贸港主动对照高标准国际经贸规则开展先行先试,这为对接工作积累可复制全国的经验。我国FTA环境规则经历了从无到有不断丰富的发展过程,其中部分FTA已设置环境专章,尽管与CPTPP在透明度、强制性、执行力三个方面尚存差距,但不妨碍为对接工作提供初步的实践支撑。现阶段,我国对接CPTPP环境规则面临的挑战主要来自于以下四个方面。一是我国全面履行多边环境协定存在薄弱项。二是我国海洋生态环境治理有较大提升空间。三是我国环境公众参与的广度深度有待拓展。四是CPTPP环境争端解决机制潜在多维度风险。综上,本文提出我国对接CPTPP环境规则的四大行动举措。一是加强多边环境协定履约能力建设。二是健全渔业补贴法律政策体系。三是完善公众参与国内配套制度。四是做好应对环境争端解决机制准备。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • In November 2020, President Xi Jinping announced at the 27th APEC Informal Leaders' Meeting that China would actively consider joining the CPTPP. In September 2021, Minister of Commerce Wang Wentao submitted a formal letter of application from China to join the CPTPP. In November 2023, Ministry of Commerce spokesperson He Yadong responded, stating that China would actively benchmark the CPTPP in qualified pilot free trade zones and the Hainan Free Trade Port. On March 19, 2024, the General Office of the State Council issued the Action Plan for Solidly Promoting High Level Opening up to the Outside World and Strengthening Attraction and Utilization of Foreign Investment, emphasizing "actively promoting accession to the CPTPP, and actively comparing relevant rules, regulations, management, and standards to promote reforms in relevant domestic fields". As a "high standard trade agreement for the 21st century", CPTPP has made a strong response to environmental issues, proposing unified and applicable high standards for domestic environmental laws and policies of contracting parties. China is an important participant, contributor, and leader in the construction of global ecological civilization. It has become a consensus that economic development cannot be achieved at the expense of the environment. Aligning with the CPTPP environmental rules will help reform and improve China's environmental protection legal system, and promote high-quality development with a higher level of opening up to the outside world. Currently, there is a lack of systematic and comparative research on the CPTPP environmental rules both domestically and internationally, and insufficient response to the potential risks and countermeasures China may face upon joining the CPTPP environmental rules. In this context, this article will conduct an in-depth study on the CPTPP environmental rules, summarize innovations and shortcomings based on comparative analysis, and provide theoretical support for understanding, aligning with, and applying the CPTPP environmental rules.This article is divided into six chapters, excluding the introduction.The first chapter provides an overview of the CPTPP environmental rules. The environmental rules of the CPTPP are agreements reached among its contracting parties, reflecting their coordinated will in utilizing, protecting, and improving the environment, determined by their economic and social structures, and adjusting the overall legal norms of regional environmental legal relationships. Just by looking at the legal text, the environmental rules of the CPTPP reflect many American characteristics. However, the deeper reason for the inclusion of environmental rules in the CPTPP is not the United States, but rather to coordinate the differences in environmental protection levels among the contracting parties, to solve the realistic dilemma of global environmental governance system, and to follow the trend of development in free trade agreements. The underlying logic of the environmental rules of the CPTPP lies in the relationship between trade and the environment. So far, there have been three main theories regarding the relationship between trade and the environment, namely the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC), Internalization of Environmental Costs, and Sustainable Development. The innovation of the CPTPP environmental rules in terms of institutional structure is mainly reflected in the legislative techniques and mechanism arrangements of specific provisions in the environmental chapter (Chapter 24). Although the content of the environmental rules of the CPTPP is extensive, upon examination, it is found that rules with specific obligations and mandatory practices mainly fall into four categories, namely: a series of provisions related to environmental trade measures, a series of provisions related to fisheries subsidies, a series of provisions related to public participation in the environment, and a series of provisions related to environmental dispute settlement. The existence of the aforementioned four categories of rules has also become the main feature that distinguishes the CPTPP from previous economic and trade agreements regarding environmental rules, namely promoting the effectiveness of environmental trade measures, establishing norms in the field of fisheries subsidies, strengthening the depth of public participation in the environment, and enhancing the advancement of environmental dispute resolution.The second chapter is the research on CPTPP's regulation of environmental trade measures. Environmental trade measures refer to trade restriction measures taken to achieve environmental goals. Disputes related to environmental trade measures under the WTO system mainly focus on two aspects, one is the potential conflict between environmental trade measures in multilateral environmental agreements and WTO, and the other is the incompatibility between unilateral PPM environmental trade measures and WTO. In view of the two major problems existing in environmental trade measures under the WTO system, CPTPP stipulates the terms of "confirming the implementation of multilateral environmental agreements" and "requiring environmental trade measures". After comparing with other FTAs, it is found that CPTPP is missing an important "conflict resolution" clause. The absence of the "conflict resolution" clause will lead to the need to judge the compliance of environmental trade measures according to the environmental exception clause in Chapter 29 of CPTPP if the exercise of environmental trade measures conflicts with the obligations under other chapters of this Agreement. The environmental exception clauses in Chapter 29 of CPTPP are basically the same as those in WTO. This means that to judge whether an environmental trade measure is in compliance, similar standards should be followed under the WTO rules system and the CPTPP framework, namely, the multilateralism of the measure, the legitimacy of the purpose, the necessity of the degree and the non-discrimination of implementation. However, it should be noted that CPTPP environmental chapter also puts forward a higher standard on the basis of WTO, that is, the exercise of environmental trade measures should be based on the "effectiveness of environmental law".The third chapter is the study of CPTPP fishery subsidy rules. As the world's first free trade agreement with specific provisions for fisheries subsidies, the CPTPP plays a crucial role in improving fish population resources and the governance of the marine ecological environment. In fact, long before the formulation of the fisheries subsidy rules under the CPTPP, the World Trade Organization (WTO) had already been addressing fisheries subsidies and incorporating them into the discussion agenda. However, due to significant differences in positions on the types and identification of prohibitive fisheries subsidies, special and differential treatment, subsidy transparency obligations, etc., the final legal text of WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies was not reached until 2022. A comparative analysis between the CPTPP and the WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies reveals that the WTO agreement is more advanced in legislative techniques. This is mainly reflected in a broader range of prohibitive subsidy types, more comprehensive and refined methods of identification and operational details, a deeper consideration of special concerns for developing countries, and stricter obligations for subsidy information reporting. Despite certain shortcomings, the CPTPP does fill a gap in the international legal system for fisheries subsidy rules. It sets a leading example for the future formulation of environmental rules in economic and trade agreements and establishes a high standard for mandatory uniform application of fisheries subsidy policies for contracting parties domestically. This is particularly significant due to the considerable differences in subsidy levels among developed countries, developing countries, and the least developed countries. In the future, the elimination of prohibitive fisheries subsidies under the CPTPP will have a significant impact on developing countries whose economies rely on the fisheries industry.The fourth chapter is the study of CPTPP environmental public participation rules. The rules of public participation in environmental matters under free trade agreements are aimed at promoting the democratization of national environmental governance, ensuring the realization of citizens' environmental rights, raising public environmental awareness, and thus achieving sustainable development goals. Looking back at the historical evolution of public participation rules in free trade agreements, two highly institutionalized mechanisms stand out: the "Civil Society" mechanism in the EU free trade agreements and the "Submissions on Enforcement Matters" mechanism in the US free trade agreements. Although the operational methods of these two mechanisms are quite different, they both expose certain practical issues. Currently, both the EU and the US have actively pursued reform measures. As a representative work of high-standard economic and trade agreements, the CPTPP's establishment of the "Public Submissions" mechanism responds to the practical needs of "participatory" governance. Compared to the FTAs of the US and the EU, the provisions of the CPTPP Public Submissions mechanism in terms of scope of application, participants, institutional arrangements, and operational procedures are somewhat rudimentary. However, this does not prevent the legislative and practical experience accumulated by the US and the EU in the operation of the "Submissions on Enforcement Matters" mechanism and the "Civil Society" mechanism from serving as reference for the domestic implementation of the Public Submissions mechanism by CPTPP contracting parties. The characteristics of the CPTPP Public Submissions mechanism are reflected in openness, diversity, and accountability. In terms of influence, the CPTPP Public Submissions mechanism will not only impact national rule of law, business operations, and citizen livelihoods but also bring about global effects in international investment, international trade, and international public opinion.The fifth chapter is the study of CPTPP environmental dispute settlement rules. Throughout the historical evolution of environmental dispute resolution mechanisms in global free trade agreements, the environmental dispute resolution mechanisms in the United States and European Union free trade agreements are the most representative. The American-style free trade agreement environmental dispute resolution mechanism has gone through three development stages. The European-style free trade agreement environmental dispute resolution mechanism has made significant breakthroughs recently after more than ten years of experience. In terms of the core concept of mechanism design, the two major models demonstrate a trend of mutual integration in development. As a typical high-standard free trade agreement, the CPTPP naturally pays attention to environmental dispute resolution mechanisms. The CPTPP environmental dispute resolution mechanism not only draws on and innovates previous free trade agreement environmental dispute resolution mechanisms, such as the unique multi-level consultation system but also improves and surpasses the WTO dispute resolution mechanism, mainly manifested in shortening the time limit for dispute resolution, enhancing the transparency of dispute resolution, and placing more emphasis on the enforceability of rulings. Unfortunately, the CPTPP environmental dispute resolution mechanism still suffers from certain institutional design flaws. The main issues include the possibility of unfair outcomes from a single arbitration, procedural designs that do not consider the special concerns of developing countries, and difficulties in effectively enforcing purely environmental obligations. In terms of impact, the CPTPP environmental dispute resolution mechanism may increase the risk of being sued for developing country contracting parties. However, at the same time, it will also pressure contracting parties with imperfect domestic environmental rule of law to actively implement reform measures to meet the obligations of the CPTPP environmental chapter.The sixth chapter focuses on the challenges and responses of China in aligning with the environmental rules of the CPTPP. Our country's alignment with CPTPP environmental rules is not without foundation. Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, our country's construction of ecological and environmental rule of law has achieved comprehensive, pioneering, and historical accomplishments, which are the most important safeguards and cornerstones for alignment efforts. China has taken the initiative to compare high-standard international economic and trade rules in free trade ports and conditionally free trade zones, which can accumulate replicable experiences for alignment efforts nationwide. China's FTA environmental rules have undergone a process of continuous enrichment from nonexistence to existence, with some FTAs having established environmental chapters. Although there are still gaps with CPTPP in terms of transparency, enforceability, and implementation, this does not prevent them from providing initial practical support for alignment efforts. At present, China's alignment with CPTPP environmental rules mainly faces the following challenges. Firstly, there are weaknesses in China's comprehensive implementation of multilateral environmental agreements. Secondly, there is considerable room for improvement in China's governance of marine ecological environments. Thirdly, the breadth and depth of public participation in China's environmental affairs need to be expanded. Fourthly, the potential multi-dimensional risk of CPTPP environmental dispute settlement mechanism. In conclusion, this article proposes four key measures for China's alignment with CPTPP environmental rules. Firstly, strengthening the construction of the capacity to fulfill multilateral environmental agreements. Secondly, improving the legal and policy system for fisheries subsidies. Thirdly, enhancing the domestic supporting system for public participation. Fourthly, preparing for the settlement mechanism of environmental disputes.
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2024-06-05
  • dc.date.oralDefense
  • 2024-05-31
回到顶部