政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/126749
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 97989/128661 (76%)
造訪人次 : 34646781      線上人數 : 512
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧:
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號",以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋,建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位,可獲得較完整資料
  • 進階搜尋
    政大機構典藏 > 國際事務學院 > 期刊論文 >  Item 140.119/126749
    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/126749


    題名: 民主程度和發展程度對各國二氧化碳排放治理的影響
    The Effects of Democracy and Development on the Governance of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions
    作者: 薛健吾
    Hsueh, Chien-wu Alex
    貢獻者: 國際事務學院
    關鍵詞: 民主; 經濟發展; 二氧化碳; 氣候變遷; 全球治理  
    democracy ; development; Carbon Dioxide (CO_2) ; climate change; global governance
    日期: 2019-06
    上傳時間: 2019-10-08 09:07:28 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 近年來,各種氣候變遷的重大災害頻傳,不分國界地威脅到整個人類社會,使得如何有效地對氣候變遷進行全球治理成為刻不容緩的問題。在氣候變遷治理的文獻中,有一個普遍的觀點是,當一個國家的「民主程度」或是「經濟發展程度」增加,將有利於減低該國二氧化碳的排放量;然而,若仔細深究其中的因果關係,則「民主政治」與「經濟發展」事實上對於二氧化碳的排放同時具有正面和負面的影響,這個事實也解釋了為何過去的研究並未在「民主」與「經濟發展」對「二氧化碳排放治理」的影響上達成共識。本文的目的,即在於透過既有文獻的建議,在邏輯上釐清「民主程度」、「發展程度」與「二氧化碳排放治理」三者之間的關係。本文論點的建立有四個階段:首先,本文將論證,由於經濟發展程度的本身就涉及到對環境資源的汲取能力,所以二氧化碳的「環境顧志耐曲線」應該是以一個二階的效果,也就是說,二氧化碳的「環境顧志耐曲線」的效果應該是在考量到各國經濟發展程度之後的殘差值上呈現。其次,由於二氧化碳汙染的性質特殊,所以必須倚靠由「跨國倡議」所引進的規範與觀念來改變人民的價值觀,才能夠使人民注意到這個問題的嚴重性。第三,由於某些穩定的威權國家有維護環境的誘因,而轉型中的民主國家普遍極度缺乏維護環境的誘因,所以民主程度與人均二氧化碳排放量之間應該是呈現「倒U型」的關係。最後,民主政治至少包含了「制度民主」(競爭和參與)和「實質民主」(政治權利和公民自由)這兩種不同的面向,在「制度民主」程度高的國家中,由於競爭性和參與性皆高,政治人物面對著必須透過刺激經濟發展來爭取選票的強大壓力,因此難以採行可能減緩經濟發展的政策來控制二氧化碳的排放量;而在「實質民主」程度高的國家中,人民更可能具足夠的政治權利和公民自由來讓減少二氧化碳排放的跨國倡議和普世價值得以在社會中成功傳播,進而使國家推動相關的立法來規範排放標準,因此「實質民主」的程度就成為國家是否能夠有效控制二氧化碳排放的關鍵。來自全球150個國家涵蓋1972~2013年的追蹤資料證實了本文的論點。
    The frequent occurrence of severe natural disasters in recent years highlights the importance of global climate change governance, and especially the management of carbon dioxide (CO_2) emissions. The literature on environmental governance presents the argument that the levels of democracy and development of a state are positively correlated with the state's performance in terms of environmental governance. However, if we analyze the causal relationships between democracy, development, and environmental governance, we find that democracy and development actually exert both, positive and negative effects on the environment. This also explains why previous literature failed to reach a consensus regarding the influence of these factors on environmental governance. The goal of this article is to put forward an argument clarifying the relationship between democracy, development, and states' CO_2 emission governance. I establish this argument in four steps. Firstly, I argue that since the amount of CO_2 emissions per capita can serve as a proxy for the degree of development, the CO_2 environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) effect will be present in the residuals of the CO_2 EKC equation. Secondly, because of the special characteristics of CO_2 emissions, the main impulse urging states to regulate their CO_2 emissions is from transnational advocacy groups that affect people's perceptions, values, and ideas. Thirdly, based on the suggestions of literature on the logic of political survival, both, democracies and stable autocracies may have incentives to protect the environment, while new democracies have the least incentive to do so. Therefore, the relationship between democracy and environmental governance should be U-shaped. Lastly, "democracy" has at least two different dimensions: (1) the procedural dimension emphasizes the degree of political competition and participation, while (2) the substantive dimension emphasizes the degree of people's political rights and civil liberties. These two different dimensions should exert different effects on environmental governance. In states with a high degree of procedural democracy and a low degree of substantive democracy, political leaders have to compete for votes in order to remain in power; thus, it is more difficult for them to adopt emission regulation policies, as they may compromise their commitments to economic development made to the supporters. Instead, in states that have a high degree of substantive democracy, people are more likely to enjoy more liberties and rights, which are positively associated with the spread of emission-regulation transnational advocacy. Thus, it is more likely for them to realize the emission-regulation policy outputs. Empirical evidence from 150 countries over the 1972-2013 period confirms my argument.
    關聯: 台灣民主季刊, Vol.16, No.2, pp.65-117
    資料類型: article
    顯示於類別:[國際事務學院] 期刊論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    190.pdf1038KbAdobe PDF99檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋