「双炭」目標下における気候政策に対する生態環境法体系の応答
Responses of the Ecological and Environmental Legal System to Climate Policy under the "Dual Carbon" Goals (原題)
Yi Zhang
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
中国の「双炭」戦略を背景に、気候政策が柔軟な指針から強制的制約へ移行する中で、環境法体系が受ける構造的影響を分析する。気候政策と環境法の間には同源的目標・補完的機能・異質な論理という三重関係があり、正当性・権利保護・体系的一貫性の次元で緊張が生じる。著者は「全体的体系観」を方法論的指針とし、炭素総量規制・気候リスク予防・公正な移行を規範的核心として、断片的対応から体系的統合への飛躍を主張する。2026年3月採択の生態環境法典は「グリーン・低炭素発展」編を設け、炭素評価や排出量取引を基本環境法に組み込んだ。
English
Against China's "Dual Carbon" strategy, this paper examines how climate policy's shift from flexible guidance to rigid constraints structurally impacts environmental law. It identifies a threefold relationship—homologous goals, complementary functions, heterogeneous logic—creating tensions in legitimacy, rights protection, and systemic coherence. The author argues for a "holistic systemic view," establishing total carbon control, climate risk prevention, and just transition as normative cores, and notes the March 2026 Ecological and Environmental Code's dedicated "Green and Low-Carbon Development" part as a step toward systemic integration, while calling for a specialized Climate Change Response Law.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
中国の法体系整備の動きは、日本のSSBJ基準や有報での気候関連開示、カーボンプライシング制度設計を検討する際の比較参照材料となる。特に「基本法＋専門法」の協働枠組みは、日本における気候変動対策法の議論に示唆を与える。
In the global GX context
This paper contributes to global disclosure scholarship by illustrating how a major emitter integrates climate policy into its basic environmental law—relevant to ISSB/TCFD implementation debates where legal mandates for carbon accounting and trading intersect with disclosure infrastructure. It offers a comparative model for jurisdictions designing climate legislation.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:気候政策と環境法の体系統合に関する法理論的枠組みを、中国の事例を通じて比較法研究に活用できる。
🏢実務担当者:中国事業を展開する企業は、炭素総量規制や炭素評価、排出量取引制度の法的位置づけの変化を把握し、コンプライアンス対応を検討する必要がある。
🏛政策担当者:気候変動対策法の制定や基本法への炭素規制組み込みを検討する際、中国の「基本法＋専門法」モデルが参考になる。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Against the backdrop of the in-depth transformation of global climate governance and the full advancement of China's "Dual Carbon" strategy, climate policy is accelerating its shift from flexible guidance to rigid constraints, exerting sustained structural impacts on the ecological and environmental legal system. There exists a threefold relationship between climate policy and environmental law: homologous goals, complementary functions, and heterogeneous logic, which gives rise to inherent tensions in three dimensions: legitimacy, rights protection, and systemic coherence. This paper argues that the response of environmental law to climate policy should not remain at the one-way transplantation of policy legalization. Instead, it should take the "holistic systemic view" as the methodological guidance, establish total carbon emission control, climate risk prevention, and just transition as the normative core, and realize the leap from fragmented responses to systemic integration. The Ecological and Environmental Code , adopted in March 2026, dedicates a specific part to "Green and Low-Carbon Development", incorporating core systems such as total carbon emission control, carbon assessment, and carbon emission trading into the basic environmental law, marking a critical step toward systemic integration. On this basis, it is still necessary to formulate a specialized Climate Change Response Law to form a collaborative framework of "basic law + specialized law", so as to provide a logically consistent normative scheme for the full legalization of the carbon neutrality goal.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/2026.37078first seen 2026-09-23 05:09:58
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。