| 關 鍵 詞： |
正義；環境；氣候變遷；多元主義；發展 |
| 中文摘要： |
在法理學領域，有兩種關於正義之概念，其一為普遍主義者之冀望，其二為多元化之真實。根據此分類，本文首先將討論普遍環境正義可能產生之眾多爭論，例如：植基於諾齊克（Robert Nozick）自由主義之權利理論、經濟假設建構的功利主義、Waker 提出之社群主義、羅爾斯（John Rawls）主張之差異原則、康德道德無上命令觀點，以及反對普遍正義理論但以普遍人性為基礎之德性理論等。
隨後，本文作者將試圖闡明普遍主義之虛幻不實，並提出環境正義概念應以多元主義之觀點，結合分配、肯認、參與及能力之概念而為建立。關於分配，本文認為，於個人及國際層次，國際環境正義之主要爭議為資源分配。此外，從每個人的平等權與尊重國家主權原則，亦能得出一暫時性之衡平狀態。再者，除了實質正義部分，保證參與任何決策程序之要求亦不應偏廢，以使其合法。最後，我們認為每個人與每個國家，均應具有參與及執行決定之相關能力。
於本文第二部分，則將檢視如何於真實國際場域發展中，討論國際環境正義之多元觀點。幾乎所有全球環境問題，例如氣候變遷造成之影響，絕對需要某種大規模之合作，本文嘗試使用「發展理論」，來分析「西方與第三世界」及「已開發與開發中國家」間主權國家之對立，並論證多元化觀點於所有國家相互依賴的領域裡，將較能要適說明實現全球環境正義可能之合作。本文復由發展理論之子理論觀之，例如：現代化理論、依賴理論、制度發展理論、馬克思發展理論、全球主義、新自由主義、工業資本主義，及關於發展的一般性論述（其提倡動態的複雜變化與多元現代性）等等，以得到本文結論:如同我們於哥本哈根會議所見，以上這些模式個別本身，並無法單獨解釋國際環境正義之困境，也無法為已開發及開發中國家之衝突提供一個普遍適用的解決方案。相反地，如果我們接受國際環境正義的多元化觀點，則其發展可能性較高，並將把國際社會帶向和諧的共通性，於其中所有國家實際上與精神上的需求，將因此被滿足。
|
| 英文關鍵詞： |
Justice；Environment；Climate Change；Pluralism；Development |
| 英文摘要： |
In the field of legal philosophy, there are two trends of the conception of Justice. One is universalist aspirations, and the other is pluralistic realities. According to this division, this article will at first describes the numerous possible arguments of universal environmental justice, such as Entitlement Theory based on the libertarianism of Nozick, Utilitarianism constructed on the economic presumptions, Communitarianism proposed by Walzer, Difference Principle advocated by Rawls, Kantian Approaches for moral categorical imperatives, Virtue Theory on denying a universal theory of justice but based on the common humanity, and so on.
Subsequently, the author will try to illuminate the unreality of this universal trend, and propose a pluralistic approach for the conception of environmental justice, especially from the synthesis of perspectives of distribution, recognition, participation and capacities. In terms of distribution, it is recognized that a major dispute in international environmental justice is the distribution of resources, both in individual level and international level. Further, the equal rights of everybody and the respect of sovereignty lead to a temporary conclusion in that equity remains. Besides, in addition to the substantial part of justice, the procedural requirements seem to be indispensable that the guarantee of participation for any decision-making allows its legitimacy. In the end, we will also announce that everyone and every state should be well-equipped of relevant capacities for the participation and the implementation of decisions.
In the second part of this article, its major concern is a testing of this pluralistic approach in concrete international arena for the development of international environmental justice. As for almost all of the global environmental problems, such as the impacts of the Climate Change, needs absolutely some kind of immense international cooperation, the author will try to use the Development Theory to analyze the "West/Third World" and the "Developed/Developing Countries" oppositions among sovereign states, and demonstrate that a pluralistic interpretation for all fields of interdependency among all the states will be suitable to explain the possible cooperation in achieving the global environmental justice.
In the light of the sub-theories of Development Theory, such as Modernization Theory, Dependency Theory, Institutional Development Theories, Marxist Development Theory, Globalism, Neoliberalism, Industrial-Capitalism, and the new general approaches to Development (which proposed a dynamics of complex change and a plural modernity, for example, the Neo-Modernization Theory), I conclude temporarily that none of these paradigms could solely explain the dilemmas in international environmental justice and could propose a universal solution for the conflicts between the developed and developing countries, such as we have seen in the Copenhagen Conference. In contrast, while accepting the pluralistic view of international environmental justice, a complex of development possibilities would bring the international society to a harmonized commensurability, in which all the substantial and spiritual needs of every state will be satisfied.
|
| 目 次： |
一、引言
二、多元正義之研究
三、由發展理論看環境正義
四、結論
|
| 相關法條： |
 |
| 相關判解： |
|
| 相關函釋： |
|
| 相關論著： |
|