论海洋生物资源养护中的预警原则
|
摘要
本文主要考察了海洋生物资源养护中的预警原则的基本内涵、法律渊源及具体适用问题,探讨了预警原则在中国海洋生物资源养护领域中的实施构想。本文除前言和结论部分外,共计五章:
第一章主要论述了预警原则的发展过程和基本内涵。首先历数了在预警原则产生发展过程中的重要国际公约、国际组织宣言或决议,以及国际司法判例;其次,通过对比分析不同版本的预警原则概念,指出预警原则的本质是当面对科学不确定时,人类应对环境和资源的开发利用保持一种谨慎态度;最后,辩证分析了预警原则的模糊性和专断性的不足,并指出预警原则与预防原则、预警方法之间的区别和联系。
第二章阐明了海洋生物资源养护中的预警原则的理论基础。从科学角度而言,预警原则的基础在于海洋生态系统的科学不确定性,旨在弥补人类因盲目和无知对海洋生物资源所造成的危害;从经济角度而言,预警原则的基础在于成本收益分析,促进预警原则的合理适用,增强管理者的责任感;从法律角度而言,预警原则的基础在于可持续发展原则和人类共同利益原则,预警原则与这两项原则是一脉相承的,并能够促成它们的实现。
第三章详细考察了海洋生物资源养护中的预警原则的国际法渊源和国内法渊源。在国际法渊源方面,对比分析了《联合国海洋法公约》和《联合国鱼类种群协定》等国际文件,并系统研究了欧盟法中的预警原则;在国内法渊源方面,列举了一些渔业大国具有代表性的海洋生物资源立法,如2000年美国《麦格纳森渔业养护和管理法》、1996年加拿大《海洋法》等。
第四章论述了海洋生物资源养护中的预警原则的实施条件和实施措施。预警原则的实施应满足一定的风险要件,依据成本收益分析、比例原则、一致性与非歧视原则加以适用,并且举证责任由造成危险的一方承担。预警原则的实施措施则包括预警参考点、禁止或限制捕捞活动和海洋自然保护区等。
第五章阐述了预警原则在我国的实施构想。目前我国海洋生物资源养护和管理工作取得了一定的成绩,但是无论是养护实践还是相关法规都暴露出一些不足。对此,我国应制定一部综合性海洋生物资源养护和管理法,并明确规定预警原则。同时,在海洋生物资源养护和管理实践中也应因地制宜的采取各种预警措施,以改善我国海洋生物资源养护不利的局面。
This dissertation is mainly about the concept, the legal sources and the implementation of the precautionary principle in the conservation of living marine resources, and the plan about that China applies the precautionary principle in the conservation of living marine resources.
Chapter 1 focuses on the development and the meaning of the precautionary principle. Firstly, this chapter examines some important international conventions, declarations and decisions of international organizations, and cases of international judicial bodies; Secondly, this chapter educes that the essence of the precautionary principle is that people should be cautious of the exploitation and utilization of environment and resources in face of scientific uncertainty by contrasting different definitions of the precautionary principle; Lastly, this chapter analyzes the defects of the precautionary principle: illegibility and arbitrariness, and points out the difference and relation between the precautionary principle and the preventive principle or the precautionary approach.
Chapter 2 is mainly about the theoretical basis of the precautionary principle in the conservation of living marine resources. From the point of science, the basis of the precautionary principle lies in scientific uncertainty of marine ecosystem, with the aim of making up damages resulted in by people's blindness and innocence about living marine resources; from the point of economy, the basis of the precautionary principle is cost-benefit analysis which will promote the implementation of the precautionary principle more reasonable, strengthen the responsibility of supervisors; from the point of law, the basis of the precautionary principle is the principle of sustainable development and the principle of common interests of human being, and the precautionary principle is in accordance with the two principles, and will promote them to come true.
Chapter 3 focuses on the international sources and the domestic sources of the precautionary principle in the conservation of living marine resources. About the international sources, this chapter contrasts the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS), the United Nations Fish Stock Agreement(UNFSA) and other international documents, and systematically analyzes the precautionary principle in the European Union(EU); about the domestic sources, this chapter specializes the representative living marine resources rules of some countries famous in fishery, such as American Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 2000, Canadian Ocean Act of 1996 and so on.
Chapter 4 explains the conditions and measures about the implementation of the precautionary principle. The precautionary principle's implementation should satisfy the danger condition, and should be applied according as cost-benefit analysis, principle of proportionality, consistency and nondiscrimination. Under the precautionary principle, onus probandi lies on the part that makes danger. Moreover, the implementary measures of the precautionary principle include the precautionary reference points, the forbiddance and limit of fishery, the marine natural protection area and so on.
Chapter 5 indicates the plan about the application of the precautionary principle in our country. Presently our conservation and management of living marine resources has got some achievement, but both the conservation practice and related rules have some deficiency. Then our country should make a comprehensive act about the conservation and management of living marine resources which should definitely stipulate the precautionary principle. At the same time, the precautionary measures should be taken in accordance of the conditions of different areas, which is beneficial to change the bad complexion of the conservation of living marine resources in our country.
第一章主要论述了预警原则的发展过程和基本内涵。首先历数了在预警原则产生发展过程中的重要国际公约、国际组织宣言或决议,以及国际司法判例;其次,通过对比分析不同版本的预警原则概念,指出预警原则的本质是当面对科学不确定时,人类应对环境和资源的开发利用保持一种谨慎态度;最后,辩证分析了预警原则的模糊性和专断性的不足,并指出预警原则与预防原则、预警方法之间的区别和联系。
第二章阐明了海洋生物资源养护中的预警原则的理论基础。从科学角度而言,预警原则的基础在于海洋生态系统的科学不确定性,旨在弥补人类因盲目和无知对海洋生物资源所造成的危害;从经济角度而言,预警原则的基础在于成本收益分析,促进预警原则的合理适用,增强管理者的责任感;从法律角度而言,预警原则的基础在于可持续发展原则和人类共同利益原则,预警原则与这两项原则是一脉相承的,并能够促成它们的实现。
第三章详细考察了海洋生物资源养护中的预警原则的国际法渊源和国内法渊源。在国际法渊源方面,对比分析了《联合国海洋法公约》和《联合国鱼类种群协定》等国际文件,并系统研究了欧盟法中的预警原则;在国内法渊源方面,列举了一些渔业大国具有代表性的海洋生物资源立法,如2000年美国《麦格纳森渔业养护和管理法》、1996年加拿大《海洋法》等。
第四章论述了海洋生物资源养护中的预警原则的实施条件和实施措施。预警原则的实施应满足一定的风险要件,依据成本收益分析、比例原则、一致性与非歧视原则加以适用,并且举证责任由造成危险的一方承担。预警原则的实施措施则包括预警参考点、禁止或限制捕捞活动和海洋自然保护区等。
第五章阐述了预警原则在我国的实施构想。目前我国海洋生物资源养护和管理工作取得了一定的成绩,但是无论是养护实践还是相关法规都暴露出一些不足。对此,我国应制定一部综合性海洋生物资源养护和管理法,并明确规定预警原则。同时,在海洋生物资源养护和管理实践中也应因地制宜的采取各种预警措施,以改善我国海洋生物资源养护不利的局面。
This dissertation is mainly about the concept, the legal sources and the implementation of the precautionary principle in the conservation of living marine resources, and the plan about that China applies the precautionary principle in the conservation of living marine resources.
Chapter 1 focuses on the development and the meaning of the precautionary principle. Firstly, this chapter examines some important international conventions, declarations and decisions of international organizations, and cases of international judicial bodies; Secondly, this chapter educes that the essence of the precautionary principle is that people should be cautious of the exploitation and utilization of environment and resources in face of scientific uncertainty by contrasting different definitions of the precautionary principle; Lastly, this chapter analyzes the defects of the precautionary principle: illegibility and arbitrariness, and points out the difference and relation between the precautionary principle and the preventive principle or the precautionary approach.
Chapter 2 is mainly about the theoretical basis of the precautionary principle in the conservation of living marine resources. From the point of science, the basis of the precautionary principle lies in scientific uncertainty of marine ecosystem, with the aim of making up damages resulted in by people's blindness and innocence about living marine resources; from the point of economy, the basis of the precautionary principle is cost-benefit analysis which will promote the implementation of the precautionary principle more reasonable, strengthen the responsibility of supervisors; from the point of law, the basis of the precautionary principle is the principle of sustainable development and the principle of common interests of human being, and the precautionary principle is in accordance with the two principles, and will promote them to come true.
Chapter 3 focuses on the international sources and the domestic sources of the precautionary principle in the conservation of living marine resources. About the international sources, this chapter contrasts the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS), the United Nations Fish Stock Agreement(UNFSA) and other international documents, and systematically analyzes the precautionary principle in the European Union(EU); about the domestic sources, this chapter specializes the representative living marine resources rules of some countries famous in fishery, such as American Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 2000, Canadian Ocean Act of 1996 and so on.
Chapter 4 explains the conditions and measures about the implementation of the precautionary principle. The precautionary principle's implementation should satisfy the danger condition, and should be applied according as cost-benefit analysis, principle of proportionality, consistency and nondiscrimination. Under the precautionary principle, onus probandi lies on the part that makes danger. Moreover, the implementary measures of the precautionary principle include the precautionary reference points, the forbiddance and limit of fishery, the marine natural protection area and so on.
Chapter 5 indicates the plan about the application of the precautionary principle in our country. Presently our conservation and management of living marine resources has got some achievement, but both the conservation practice and related rules have some deficiency. Then our country should make a comprehensive act about the conservation and management of living marine resources which should definitely stipulate the precautionary principle. At the same time, the precautionary measures should be taken in accordance of the conditions of different areas, which is beneficial to change the bad complexion of the conservation of living marine resources in our country.
引文
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.59.
[2]MARCHANT,GARY E.& MOSSMAN,KENNETH L.Arbitrary and Capricious—The Precautionary Principle in the European Union Courts[M].Washington D.C.:The AEI Press,2004.1.
[3]TEOUWBORST,ARIE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.1.
[1]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):4-5.
[2]TEOUWBORST,ANE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.10-11.
[3]Id.,p.11.
[4]Id.,p.8.
[1][美]爱蒂丝·布朗·魏伊丝.公平地对待未来人类:国际法、共同遗产与世代间衡平[M].汪劲等译,北京:法律出版社,2000.1-2.
[2]德国是最早利用预警思想处理“森林死亡”及空气污染问题的国家。参见CAMERON,FRASER K.The Greenhouse Effect:Proposed Reforms for the Australian Environmental Regulatory Regime[J].Columbia Journal of Environmental Law,2000,(25):359.
[3]同本页注①,第17页。
[4]TEOUWBORST,ANE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.18.
[1]TEOUWBORST,ANE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.18.
[2]在“特雷尔冶炼厂仲裁案”中,位于美国和加拿大边境的加拿大锌矿厂所释放的二氧化硫气体飘到美国境内,并对美国的环境构成危害。仲裁庭认为加拿大有责任限制其境内的二氧化硫对美国所造成的损害.参见HAUSRATH,KATHERINE.Crossing Borders:the Extraterritorial Application of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation and Liability Act[J].University of Baltimore Journal of Environmental Law,2005,(Fall):22.
[1]HARREMOES,POUL,ed.The Precautionary Principle in 20th Century:Late Lessons from Early Warnings[M].London:Earthscan Publications Ltd,2002.4
[2]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle(M].London:Cameron May International Law & Policy,2001.163.
[3]Id.
[4]Id.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.166.
[1]1987年《蒙特利尔协定书》主要是关于处理氯氟化碳化合物等破坏臭氧层的各种物质的公约。参见PALMER,GEOFFREY.New Ways to Make international Environmental Law[J].American Journal of International Law,1992,(April):275.
[2]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.109.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.109.
[2]SOHN,LOUIS B.& NOYES,JOHN E.Cases and Materials on the Law of the Sea[M].New York:Transnational Publishers,Inc.,2004.756.
[1]陈荔彤.海洋法论[M].台北:元照出版公司,2002.145
[2]胡斌.试论国际环境法中的预警原则[J].法制与管理,2002,(6):18.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.131.
[1]Dissenting Opinion of Judge Weeramantry.New Zealand v.France.Nuclear Tests Ⅱ.1995[EB/OL].http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pl=3&p2=3&k=78&case=58&code=af&p3=4,2007-04-21.
[2]Dissenting Opinion of Judge Koroma.New Zealand v.France.Nuclear Tests Ⅱ.1995[EB/OL].http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pl=3&p2=3&k=6b&case=59&code=nzf&p3=5,2007-04-21.
[3]Dissenting Opinion of Judge ad hoc Sir Geoffery Palmer.New Zealand v.France.Nuclear Tests Ⅱ.1995[EB/OL].http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pl=3&p2=3&k=6b&case=59&code=nzf&p3=5,2007-04-21.
[4]Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Pmiect(Hungary-Slovakia),ICJ Report 1997,1-241.转引自:牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):29.
[5]1993年1月1日捷克斯洛伐克共和国分立为两个独立的主体国家——捷克共和国和斯洛伐克共和国。国际法院判定斯洛伐克作为捷克斯洛伐克的继承国成为1977年捷克斯洛伐克和匈牙利所签署的有关建造并运营水力发电厂条约的一方当事人。参见国际法院判决书、咨询意见和命令摘要(1997-2002)[EB/OL].http://www.icj-cij.org/homepage/ch/summary.php,2007-03-14.
[1]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):35.
[2]New Zealand v.Japan;Australia v.Japan.Southern Bluefin Tuna Case.Order 1999/2 of 3 August 1999[EB/OL].http://www.itlos.org/start2_en.html,2007-05-12.
[3]根据《南方黑鲔保育公约》,日本、澳大利亚和新西兰三国将总渔获量从38,650吨减少至11,750吨,而日本的渔获配额从23,150吨削减至6,065吨。因此,日本渔民为维持经营不得不转换渔场。迫于国内压力,日本从1995年开始正式向南方黑鲔保育委员会(Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna,CCSBT)提出增加渔获配额的要求,但是澳大利亚和新西兰认为哪怕只多捕一尾。都存在很大可能使得南方黑鲔资源绝迹,所以一直不同意日本的要求。双方见解的差异主要在于资源评估方面.对此,日本向CCSBT提议为达成双方的共识而共同进行渔获实验调查作业以搜集科学资料,并在1995年初提出议案,于1996年正式向科学委员会要求审议,但是澳大利亚和新西兰两国连续两年拒绝该项提案。至1998年日本终不顾澳大利亚和新西兰两国的反对单独进行渔获实验。参见SONG,YANNHUEI.The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Possibility of Judicial Settlement of Disputes Involving the Fishing Entity of Taiwan—Taking CCSBT as an Example[J].San Diego International Law Journal,2006,(Fall):63.
[1]学者J.Cameron将ITLOS在南方黑鲔案中作出的临时性裁定视为“a particularly illuminating example of the established status of the precautionary principle under international law”。参见RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law & Policy,2001.142.
[2]吴慧.国际海洋法法庭研究[M].北京:海洋出版社,2001.248
[3]同上,第250-251页。
[4]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):36-37.
[1]Ireland v.United Kingdom.MOX Plant Case.Order of 3 December 2001[EB/OL].http://www.itlos.org/cgi-bin/cases/case_detail,2007-04-02.
[2]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):39.
[1]WT/DS26/AB/R,WT/DS48/AB/R,Appellate Body Report,EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones),adopted 16 January 1998,para.60,120,253[EB/OL].http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtoab/ec-hormones(ab).pdf,2007-05-17.
[2]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea-Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.2.
[1]CAMERON,J.& ABOUCHAR,J.The Precautionary Principle:A Fundamental Principle of Law and Policy for the Protection of the Global Environment[J].Boston College International and Comparative Law Review,1991.(2).
[1]HOHMANN,H.Precautionary Legal Duties and Principles of Modern International Environmental Law—The Precautionary Principle:International Environmental Law Between Exploitation and Protection[M].London:Graham & Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff,1994.10.
[2]KAYE,STUART M.International Fisheries Management[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2001.170.
[3]CARON,DAVID D.& SCHEIBER,HANY N.Bringing New Law to Ocean Waters[M].The Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2004.358.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O & CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law & Policy,2002.20
[1][英]蒂莫西·希利尔.国际公法原理[M],曲波译,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.17.
[2]丘宏达.现代国际法[M].台湾:三民书局出版社,2000.64.
[3]CAMERON,JAMES & ABOUCHAR,JULI.The Status of the Precautionary Principle[A].FREESTONE,DAVID & HEY,ELLEN.the Precautionary Principle and International Law:the Challenge of Implementation[C].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,1996.51.
[1]KAYE,STUART M.International Fisheries Management[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2001.183.
[2]Id.
[3]BIRNIE,PATRICIA W.& BOYLE,ALAN E.International Law and the Environment[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2002.98.
[1]BIRNIE,PATRICIA W.& BOYLE,ALAN E.International Law and the Environment[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2002.98.
[2]曾令良,饶戈平.国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.65.
[3]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.204.
[4][英]蒂莫西·希利尔.国际公法原理[M],曲波译,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.25.
[5]1967年北海大陆架案是第一个通过国际司法程序解决大陆架划界争端的案例。在这个案子中国际法院就大陆架划界的原则和方法发表了重要意见:一、等距离法是一种简便的划界方法,但所谓的“等距离原则”并非大陆架概念中所固有的原则,因而等距离的划界方法并不是必须遵守的。不应在任何情况下均适用单一的划界方法,在划界时还应考虑其它相关情况。换言之,等距离原则并不是火陆架划界的一项习惯国际法规则;二、应根据公平原则进行大陆架划界。参见BLAY,SAM & PIOTROWICZ,RYSZARD & TSAMENYI,B.MARTIN.Public International Law[M].New York:Oxford University Press,1997.341.
[1]BIRNIE,PATRICIA W.& BOYLE,ALAN E.International Law and the Environment[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2002.98.
[2]周忠海.国际法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.101.
[3]辅助原则并非新概念。在西方哲学界中很早就出现了辅助原则的概念,其最早可以追溯到中世纪阿奎那斯(Saint Thomas Aquinas),甚至更早的亚里士多德的政治哲学,近则可溯至19世纪蒲鲁东(Pierre Joseph Proudhon)。而且,由于国家权利日益腐蚀教会,罗马教廷在20世纪上半叶提出将辅助原则作为重建社会秩序的基本原则。二战后,欧洲国家逐渐将此社会哲学转化为法律概念,如德国和瑞士将该原则纳入其宪政体制中,以解决联邦和地方政府的分权问题。辅助原则是规范社会组织的基本原则。简言之,即在社会中直接影响人民生活的决定,原则上应由最接近个人的小单位来制定,只有当他们无能力作好时,才可由较大单位加以协助。欧共体《马斯特里赫特条约》以明确的宪法性条文形式将辅助原则的要旨引入《欧共体条约》,增强了法律的确定性和可预见性,限制了欧共体权能的过分扩张。参见:武汉大学国际法研究所.欧盟法中的辅助原则和相称性原则[EB/OL].http://translaw.whu.edu.cn/cn/gjfbaseknow/20050613/143543.php,2007-11-10。
[4]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.34.
[1]傅崐成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅岷成.海洋法专题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.107.
[2]柳炳华.国际法[M].朴玉哲,朴玉姬译,北京:中国政法大学出版社,1997.207-208.
[3]TEOUWBORST,ARIE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law Intonational,2002.17.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O & CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.163.
[2]1972年美国制定了《海洋哺乳动物保护法》,目的是保护包括海豚在内的海洋哺乳动物。参见COY,JONATHAN.Defending Against the Fourth Horse:The Endangered Species Act and the Throat of Communicable Discase[J].Penn Stare Environmental Law Review,2004,(Winter):291-292.
[3]美国《濒危物种法》于1973年颁布实施.该法一向被视为美国已通过的环境法中最有效率且最有争议的法律。参见COY,JONATHAN.Defending Against the Fourth Horse:The Endangered Species Act and the Threat of Communicable Disease[J].Penn State Environmental Law Review,2004,(Winter):292-293.
[4]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.151.
[1]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.153.
[2]1998年《温氏毕声明》除了对预警原则的概念作了界定之外,还规定:“应用预警原则的过程应是开放、民主的。同时,还应允许可能受影响的各方参与进来。而且应谨慎审查所有的选择,不作为的选择也包括在内。”参见COLEMAN,LINDA O'NEIL.The European Union:An Appropriate Model for a Precautionary Approach?[J].Seattle University Law Roview,2002,(Winter):635.
[1]MARCHANT,GARY E.From General Policy to Legal Rule:Aspirations and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle[J].Environmental Health Perspectives,2003,(34):1800.
[1]MARCHANT,GARY E.& MOSSMAN,KENNETH L.Arbitrary and Capricious:The Precautionary Principle in the European Union Courts[M].Washington D.C.:the AEI Press,2004.7.
[2]MARCHANT,GARY E.From General Policy to Legal Rule:Aspirations and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle[J].Environmental Health Perspectives,2003,(34):1800.
[1]MARCHANT,GARY E.& MOSSMAN,KENNETH L.Arbitrary and Capricious:The Precautionary Principle in the European Union Courts[M].Washington D.C.:the AEI Press,2004.15.
[2]MARCHANT,GARY E.From General Policy to Legal Rule:Aspirations and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle[J].Environmental Health Perspectives,2003,(34):1801.
[1]MARCHANT,GARY E.From General Policy to Legal Rule:Aspirations and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle[J].Environmental Health Perspectives,2003,(34):1801.
[2]Id.
[3]秦天宝.国际环境法基本原则出探[J].法学,2001,(10):30.
[4]该案仲裁庭于1938年和1941年两次作出裁决。在1938年的第一次裁决中,仲裁庭判定冶炼厂的烟雾对华盛顿州造成了损害,并裁决加拿大应赔偿特雷尔冶炼厂对美国土地造成的损害。在1941年第二次裁决中,仲裁庭提出了预防原则。参见GELFAND,MARTIN D.Practical Application of International Environmental Law:Does It Work Atoll?[J].Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law,1997.(Winter):77-78.
[5]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.20.
[1]实际情况表明,全球性协定较多采用“预警方法”这一术语,而欧洲条约和欧共体法则较多采用“预警原则”这一提法,例如欧共体的《阿姆斯特丹条约》、《都柏林宣言》等。参见CONKO,GREGORY.Safety,risk and the precautionary principle:rethinking precautionary approaches to the regulation of regulation of transgenic plants[J].Transgenic Research,2003,(12):642.
[2]CONKO,GREGORY.Safety,risk and the precautionary principle:rethinking precautionary approaches to the regulation of regulation of transgenic plants[J].Transgenic Research,2003,(12):642-643.
[1]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):44.
[2]同上,第45页。
[3]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.18.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.18.
[2]CONKO,GREGORY.Safety,risk and the precautionary principle:rethinking precautionary approaches to the regulation of regulation of transgenic plants[J].Transgenic Research,2003,(12):642.
[3]傅崐成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅岷成.海洋法专题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.103.
[4]同本页注①。
[1]JAMIESON,BY DALE.Uncertainty and Risk Assessment:Scientific Uncertainty and the Political Process[J].The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science,1996,(5):37-38.
[1]李耀芳.国际环境法缘起[M].中山大学出版社,2002.160.
[2]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.23.
[3]GEE,P.H.DAVID & MACGARVIN,MALCOLM.The Precautionary Principle in the 20th Century—Late Lessons from Early Warnings[J].European Environment Agency.2002.(8).
[1]WT/DS26/AB/R,WT/DS48/AB/R,Appellate Body Report,EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormone),adopted 16 January 1998,para.124[EB/OL].http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtoab/ec-hormones(ab).pdf,2007-06-10.
[2]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.38.
[3]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.24.
[4]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.23.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.24.
[2]联合国秘书长.秘书长报告:海洋与海洋法[EB/OL].http://www.un.org/chinese/ga/56/pv/a56pv65.pdf,2007-06-08.
[1]联合国秘书长.秘书长报告:海洋与海洋法[EB/OL].http://www.un.org/chinese/ga/56/pv/a56pv65.pdf,2007-06-08.
[1]联合国秘书长.秘书长报告:海洋与海洋法[EB/OL].http://www.un.org/chinese/ga/56/pv/a56pv65.pdf,2007-03-04.
[1]JUDA,LAWRENCE.Changing Perspectives on the Oceans:Implications for International Fisheries and Oceans Governance[A].LOWE,VAUGHAN.Bringring New Law to Ocean Waters[C].Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2004.22.
[2]1989年联合国大会为禁止在公海进行大型流网作业,作出了第44/225号决议。我国对该决议投了赞成票,并且我国农业部于1990年发布了“关于印发联合国大会通过禁止在公海使用大型流网决议的通知”(1990农(渔政)字第18号)。参见中国水产杂志社.《中国水产》:聚焦中国渔政北太平洋巡航检查[EB/OL].http://www.cnfm.gov.cn/info/display.asp?id=3467,2007-9-14.
[3]邓子基.现代西方财政学[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,1994.183.
[1]邓子基.现代西方财政学[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,1994.187.
[2]在理想状态下,边际成本是每变动一个单位的生产量而使成本变动的数量。边际效益是每变动一个单位的生产量而使收益变动的数量。参见陈友龙,缪代文.现代四方经济学[J].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002.128.
[3]同本页注①。
[1]史忠良,肖四如.资源经济学[M].北京:北京出版社,1993.268.
[1]MARTIN,GAUTHIER-ST.The Case Against Cost-Benefit Analysis[J].Ecology Law Quarterly,2005,(32):349.
[2]Id.,p.350.
[1]MARTIN,GAUTHIER-ST.The Case Against Cost-Benefit Analysis[J].Ecology Law Quarterly,2005,(32):349.
[2]SUNSTEIN,CASS R.Law of Fear:Beyond the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cambridge University Press,2005.129.
[1]MANDEL,GREGORY N.& GATHII,JAMES THUO.Cost-Benefit Analysis versus the Precautionary Principle:Beyond Cass Sunstein's Laws of Fear[J].University of Illinois Law Review,2006,(2006):1048.
[2]RAO,P.K.International Environmental Law and Economics[M].London:Blackwell Publishers,2002.113.
[1]李晓西,赵少钦.可持续发展的成本效益分析[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2004,(4):91.
[2]MARTIN,GAUTHIER-ST.The Case Against Cost—Benefit Analysis[J].Ecology Law Quarterly,2005,(32):371.
[1]MANDEL,GREGORY N.& GATHII,JAMES THUO.Cost-Benefit Analysis versus the Precautionary Principle:Beyond Cass Sunstein's Laws of Fear[J].University of Illinois Law Review,2006,(2006):1045.
[1]MANDEL,GREGORY N.& GATHII,JAMES THUO.Cost-Benefit Analysis versus the Precautionary Principle:Beyond Cass Sunstein's Laws of Fear[J].University of Illinois Law Review,2006,(2006):1049.
[1][美]E·.M·鲍基斯.海洋管理与联合国[M].孙清等译,北京:海洋出版社,1996.97.
[2]侯富儒.关于新世纪国际法发展趋势的思考[J].广西社会科学,2003,(12):96.
[3]李爱年,韩广.人类社会的可持续发展与国际环境法[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.57.
[1]李爱年,韩广.人类社会的可持续发展与国际环境法[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.58.
[2][美]E·.M·鲍基斯.海洋管理与联合国[M].孙清等译,北京:海洋出版社,1996.101.
[1]TEOUWBORST,ARIE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.13.
[2]Id.,p14.
[1][美]E·.M·鲍基斯.海洋管理与联合国[M].孙清等译,北京:海洋出版社,1996.105.
[2]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.90.
[1]刘健.经济全球化与国际法基本原则的发展[J].北京科技大学学报,2002,(3):29.
[2][奥]菲德罗斯.国际法[M].李浩培译,北京:商务印书馆,1981.21.
[3]蔡高强.论全球化进程中主权权力的让渡[J].湖南省政法管理干部学院学报,2002,(18):20.
[1]蔡高强.论全球化进程中主权权力的让渡[J].湖南省政法管理干部学院学报,2002,(18):22.
[2]BOLIVAR,MAURA MULLEN D.A Comparison of Protecting the Environmental Interests of Latinamerican Indigenous Communities from Transnational Corporations under International Human Rights and Environmental Law[J].Journal of Transnational Law& Policy,1998,(Fall):128-129.
[1]KUNICH,JOHN CHARLES,Losing Nemo:The Mass Extinction Now Threatening the World's Ocean Hotspots[J].Columbia Journal of Environmental Law,2005,(30):67-68.
[1]凯尔森.国际法原理[M].王铁崖译,北京:华夏出版社,1988.254.
[2]周鲠生.国际法[M].北京:商务出版社,1976.10.
[3]慕亚平.国际法原理[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2005.28.
[4]王铁崖.国际法[M].北京.法律出版社,1995.10.
[1]MCOMBER,ELISABETH M.Problems in Enforcement of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species[J].Brooklyn Journal of International Law,2002,(27):685-687.
[2]《波罗的海和北海小型鲸类养护协定》于1991年制定,并于1994年生效。参见INKELAS,DANIEL.Security,Sound,and Cetaceans:Legal Challenges to Low Frequency Active Sonar under U.S.and International Environmental Law[J].George Washington International Law Review,2005,(37):226.
[3]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.159.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.159-160.
[2]《南极海洋生物资源养护公约》于1980年5月20日签署,1982年4月7日生效,目前共有33个缔约方。《南极海洋生物资源养护公约》适用于南纬60度以南和该纬度与南极幅合带之间区域的南极海洋生物资源。参见OPPENHEIM,ADRIENNE J.The Plight of the Patagonian Toothfish:Lessons from the Volga Case[J].Brooklyn Journal of International Law,2004,(30):309.
[1]缺失补充水平与预警参考点意义相似,是指对处于该水平的生物种群必须采取养护行动。以促进种群的恢复.否则生物种群可能受到严重破坏,并无法再行恢复。参见KAYE,STUART B.Legal Appmaches to Polar Fisheries Regimes:A Comparative Analysis of the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources and the Bering Sea Doughnut Hole Convention[J].California Western International Law Journal,1995,(Fall):93.
[2]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.154.
[3]Id.,pp.155-156.
[1]CASSESE,ANTONIO.International Law[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2005.196.
[2]我国远洋渔船就曾发生过螺旋桨被流网缠绕而不能行驶的事故。如果船舶被流网缠绕时再遇台风或低气压天气,则必会颠覆。参见李振龙.聚焦中国渔政北太平洋巡航检查[J].中国水产,2004,(8):2.
[3]中国水产:聚焦中国渔政北太平洋巡航检查[EB/OL].http://www.cnfm.gov.cn/info/display.asp?sortid=75&id=3467,2007-11-13.
[1]ZHAREN,W.M.VON.Ocean Ecosystem Stewardship[J].William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review,1998,(23):47.
[2]《坎昆宣言》是于1992年5月6日至8日在墨西哥坎昆由FAO和墨西哥合作召开的“国际负责任捕捞会议”上通过的。参见FREESTONE,DAVID.A Decade of the Law of the Sea Convention:Is It a Success?[J].George Washington International Law Review,2007,(39):506-507.
[1]《守则》包括捕捞、加工、销售、养殖、渔业研究和管理等方面,共12个议题条文和2个附件,内容涵盖了整个渔业管理,是最为广泛的规范渔业行为的重要国际性文件。参见粮农组织渔业部.负责任渔业行为守则[EB/OL].http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/v9878c/v9878c00.htm,2007-11-14.
[1]傅岷成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅崐成.海洋法专题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.100.
[2]CHRISTIE,DONNA R.It Don't Come EEZ:The Failure and Future of Coastal State Fisheries Management[J].Journal of Transnational Law & Policy,2004,(Fall):30-31.
[3][德]赫蒂根.欧洲法[M].张恩民译,北京:法律出版社,2003.62.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.258-259.
[2]《欧洲联盟条约》在很大程度上只是一个政治性宣言。在《欧洲联盟条约》生效后,《欧洲经济共同体条约》(EEC Treaty)改称为《欧洲共同体条约》(EC Treaty)。参见TOTDAL,TORE.An Introduction to the European Community and to European Community Law[J].North Dakota Law Review,1999,(75):63.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle-Its Application in lnternational European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.273.
[1]欧共体于1992年5月21日通过了关于自然栖息地和野生动植物保护的第92/43号指令。后于1997年11月27日,欧共体第97/62号指令修订了第92/43号指令。参见BACKES,CHRIS W.& VERSCHUUREN,JONATHAN M.The Precautionary Principle In International,European,And Dutch Wildlife Law[J].Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy,1998,(Winter):61.
[2]BERG,ASTRID.Implementing and Enforcing European Fisheries Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,1999.45
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.169-170.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.326-327.
[1]《欧共体环境保护计划一》引入了很多为欧共体当今环境法规所采纳的重要原则,如该计划中的预警方法。另外《欧共体环境保护计划一》还采纳了污染者付费原则。参见COLLINS,NATALIE.European Environmental Policy and Its Effects on Free Trade[J].William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review,2001,(Fall):189.
[2]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.200.
[3]Id.,p.202.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.240.
[2]Id.,p.243.
[1]MARCHANT,GARY E.& MOSSMAN,KENNETH L.Arbitrary and Capricious-The Precautionary Principle in the Europeon Union Courts[M].Washington D.C.:The AEI Press,2004.25-26.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.174-175.
[2]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.82.
[3]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.186-187.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.196-197.
[2]1997年克林顿总统指示环境保护署发布《空气管理条例》,在新鲜空气和悬浮微粒方面,对各州提出了更加严格的标准。该条例受到商界和工业集团的强烈反对,而环境与健康专家则认为,为了防止人们患上呼吸疾病,应对烟尘实行更严格的控制。参见STEINZOR,RENA I.Reinventing Environmental Regulation:The Dangerous Journey from Command to Self-control[J].The Harvard Environmental Law Renew,1998,(17):136.
[3]同本页注①,第200-201页。
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.202-203.
[2]这显然不同于国际层面上的预警原则发展经验,即最先始于全球性公约或宣言,然后再逐渐辐射至国内层面。
[3]同本页注①,第263-264页。
[1]《加拿大濒危物种保护法》于1996年10月通过,规定了一系列的濒危物种保护措施。参见VALIANTE,MARCIA.“Welcomed Participants”or“Environmental Vigilantes”? The CEPA Environmental Protection Action and the Role of Citizen Suits in Federal Environmental Law[J].Dalhousie Law Journal,2002,(Spring):87.
[2]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.258.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.259-260.
[2]加拿大21世纪海洋战略主要包括三项内容:可持续发展、综合管理和预警原则。参见HAWARD.MARCUS.Fisheries and Oceans Governance in Australia and Canada:from Sectoral Management to Integration?[J].Dalhousie Law Journal,2003,(Spring):44.
[3]同本页注①,第263-264页.
[4]GARCIA,S.M.The Precautionary Approach to the Fisheries:Progress Review and Main Issues(1995-2000)[A].NORDQUIST,M.H.& MOORE,J.N.Current Fisheries Issues and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations[C].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2000.505-506.
[1]1998年摩尔诉大堡礁海洋公园管理机构案是关于大堡礁公园管理机构基于保护海洋生态系统的完整性,而拒绝在肯特岛(Kent Island)之外养殖珍珠牡蛎的申请。参加MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.170.
[2]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.225.
[1]“非风险原则”是一些预警原则的批评者所提出的,他们认为预警原则实质上是赋予了管理机构在不存在风险情况时,也采用应对措施的理由。参见RECHTSCHAFFEN,CLIFFORD.Giving Concrete Content to Abstract Ethical Norms:Advancing Environmental Justice Norms[J].U.C.Davis Law Review,2003,November(37):116.
[2]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.231.
[1]1989年荷兰《水资源管理文件》的目标是发展并保护健康的水资源系统,以维护一个安全且适宜居住的国家。参见KELLEY,SALLY J.& PROCTOR,KELLY A.& BRITTION,SUSAN DALE S.Agricultural Law:A Selected Bibliography,1985-1992[J].William Mitchell Law Review,1993,(Spring):532.
[2]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.387.
[3]荷兰《国家环境政策计划四》主要是规划荷兰自2000年起下一个三十年的环境保护目标。参见STEWART,RICHARD B.A New Generation of Environmental Regulation?[J].Capital University Law Review,2001,(29):160.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.391.
[2]Id.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.399.
[2]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle-Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.400.
[3]Id.
[1]在荷兰《环境管理法》中,并不存在有关预警原则的独立条文,但是该法中的有关规定.如第8.8条“相关活动对环境的影响”,为预警原则的适用预留了空间。参见BACKES,CHRIS W.& VERSCHUUREN,JONATHAN M.The Precautionary Principle ln International,Europoan,And Dutch Wildlife Law[J].Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy,1998,(Winter):51-52.
[2]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.171-172.
[3]在1996年荷兰运输、公共事业和水资源管理部长签发了向瓦登海倾倒10万吨钢和磷矿渣的许可,以便修护海堤。瓦登海环境保护团体认为该许可会致使瓦登海受到废渣中重金属的污染,整个生态系统将遭到破坏。参见ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.409.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.179-180.
[2]在瓦登海贝类开采案中,一些环境保护主义者认为运输、公共事业和水资源管理部长所签发的瓦登海贝类开采许可可能会破坏瓦登海的生态系统,要求法院撤销该许可。参见ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle-Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.423.
[3]同本页注①,第172页。
[4]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea-Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.170-171.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea-Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.170-171.
[2]Id.,pp.168-169.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea-Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.168-169.
[2]Id.
[1]WT/DS26/AB/R,Appellate Body Report,EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products(Hormones),adopted 16 January 1998,para.124[EB/OL].http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtoab/ec-hormones(ab).pdf,2007-12-15.
[2]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.113.
[1]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):51.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea-Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.6.
[1]傅崐成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅崐成.海洋法专题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.99-100.
[2]同上,第101页。
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.168.
[2]傅崐成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅崐成.海洋法专题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.103.
[1]慕永通.渔业管理:以基于权利的管理为中心[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.127-128.
[2]同上,第128页。
[3]国际捕鲸委员会(IWC)在创立之初是将鲸鱼作为一种鱼类种群加以养护。然而,后来IWC成为保护所有鲸鱼种群的重要国际组织。IWC任务的转变始于20世纪70年代早期,并且与1972年在斯德哥尔摩召开的联合国人类环境大会有着密切的联系。IWC任务的转变主要体现在对商业捕鲸活动为期5年的暂停计划的采纳。这一计划在1986年启动,并延续至今。而且IWC还将南极设为鲸鱼的避难所。参见CARON,DAVID D.The International Whaling Commission and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission:the Institutional Risks of Coercion in Consensual Structures[J].American Journal of International Law,1995,(January):157.
[1]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.128.
[1]慕永通.渔业管理:以基于权利的管理为中心[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.140.
[2]同上,第142页。
[1]慕永通.渔业管理:以基于权利的管理为中心[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.152.
[2]郭守前.海洋渔业资源管理的理论探讨[J].华南农业大学学报,2004,(2):93.
[3]同本页注①,第143页。
[4]采用无偿发放捕捞许可证的一个弊端是,获得许可证的渔民相当于获得了一笔额外收益。而这种结果与渔业资源的社会性是相矛盾的。因为根据渔业资源的社会性,整个社会都应从渔业资源的利用中获益,而不是社会中的少数人。参见:慕永通.渔业管理:以基于权利的管理为中心[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.144.
[1]黄金玲,黄硕琳.总可捕量制度在我国的可行性分析[J].上海水产大学学报,2002,(12):343.
[2]同上。
[1]郭文路,黄硕琳.总可捕量制度不同实施方式的比较分析[J].海洋湖沼通报,2001,(4):63.
[1]苏永华,杨松.我国渔业管理引进TAC、ITQ制度的思考[J].中国渔业经济,2004,(6):29.
[2]郭文路,黄硕琳.总可捕量制度不同实施方式的比较分析[J].海洋湖沼通报,2001,(4):64.
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.191.
[2]KUNICH,JOHN C.Killing Our Oceans:Dealing with the Mass Extinction of Marine Life[M].London:Westport Connecticut,2006.96.
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.192.
[1]傅秀梅,王长云,王亚楠.海洋生物资源与可持续利用对策研究[J].中国生物工程杂志,2006,(7):106.
[2]许兆滨.发胜我国海洋渔业经济必经之路[J].中国渔业经济,2003,(4):14.
[1]国家环境保护总局组织的渤、黄海和东、南海近岸海域环境综合调查结果表明,中国近岸海域沉积物已普遍受到污染物的影响,其中东、南海(特别是厦门港、珠江口附近海域)污染严重,渤、黄海的沉积物污染较轻。参见张秋华.渔业水域生态环境保护和管理[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2004.55
[2]傅秀梅等.海洋生物资源与可持续利用对策研究[J].中国生物工程杂志,2006,(7):106.
[3]同春芬.海洋渔业社会的和谐发展[J].自然辩证法研究,2006,(8):7.
[4]国家海洋局.2006年中国海洋环境质量通报[EB/OL].http://www.soa.gov.cn/hygb/2006hyhj/2.htm,2008-02-17.
[1]国家海洋局.2007上半年中国海洋环境质量通报[EB/OL].http://www.soa.gov.cn/hygb/2007shhyhj.htm,2008-02-17.
[2]国家海洋局.2006年中国海洋环境质量通报[EB/OL].http://www.soa.gov.cn/hygb/2006hyhj/2.htm,2008-02-17.
[3]东海的半封闭性使得该海域内的生物资源具有明显的地方性,并缺乏大洋性种类补充。如果一旦资源遭到破坏,便无法通过外界条件弥补,所以东海生态系统具有脆弱性,容易被破坏。参见叶属峰,温泉,周秋麟.海洋生态系统管理——以生态系统为基础的海洋管理新模式探讨[J].海洋开发与管理,2006,(1):79.
[4]唐议,黄硕琳.专属经济区制度下东海渔业资源的可持续利用[J].集美大学学报(自然科学版),2003,(6):117.
[5]同上,第118页。
[1]唐议,黄硕琳.专属经济区制度下东海渔业资源的可持续利用[J].集美大学学报(自然科学版),2003,(6):118.
[2]在20世纪60年代,大黄鱼、小黄鱼、带鱼、银鲳等优质鱼类占东海渔获总量的51%,而在20世纪70年代这些种类比例下降至46%,80年代更跌至18%。参见陈新军,主编.渔业资源与渔场学[M].北京:海洋出版社,2004.268.
[3]同本页注①。
[4]国家海洋局.2007上半年中国海洋环境质量通报[EB/OL].http://www.soa.gov.cn/hygb/2007shhyhj.htm,2008-03-17.
[5]苏冠强.南海渔业资源现状一瞥[EB/OL].http://www.nanhai.org.cn/news/news_info.asp?ArticleID=448,2007-12-04.
[1]国家海洋局.2006年中国海洋环境质量通报[EB/OL].http://www.soa.gov.cn/hygb/2006hyhj/2.htm,2008-03-17.
[2]金显仕等.黄、渤海生物资源与栖息环境[M].北京:科学出版社,2005.391.
[3]农业部渔业局.农业部渔业局关于2004年环境公报新闻发布的说明[EB/OL].http://www.cafs.ac.cn/page./BookInfo.cbs?ResName=NEWS_B&order=1578,2007-12-24.
[1]农业部渔业局.农业部渔业局关于2004年环境公报新闻发布的说明[EB/OL].http://www.cafs.ac.cn/page/BookInfo.cbs?ResName=NEWS_B&order=1578,2007-12-24.
[2]林景祺.海洋渔业资源导论[M].北京:海洋出版社,1996.49-50.
[1]王海燕.“渔船报废”确保海洋渔业的可持续发展[J].中国水产,2004,(6):28.
[1]韩立民等.渔业经济前沿问题探索[M].北京:海洋出版社,2007.141.
[2]于秀娟.实施最小网目尺寸标准:保护和合理利用渔业资源[J].中国水产,2003,(7):76.
[3]这四艘中国流网渔船分别是“启东821”、“舟顺渔2002”、“鲁渔01”和“曙光渔1”。参见中国水产杂志社.《中国水产》:聚焦中国渔政北太平洋巡航检查[EB/OL].http://www.cnfm.gov.cn/info/display.up?id=3467,2008-01-14.
[1]用拖网进行捕捞的渔船称为拖网渔船。拖网渔船可分为大、中、小型拖网渔船。最常见的是底拖网,即渔网在海底被拖曳。参见陈学雷.海洋资源开发与管理[M].北京:科学出版社,2000.375.
[2]1979年国务院所划定的渤海机动渔船拖网禁渔区是以辽宁省旅顺市老铁山灯塔至蓬莱市蓬莱灯塔之间的连线,在此线以西的渤海海域全年禁止机动渔船拖网作业。参见蓬莱生态市建设规划[EB/OL].http://www.ytepb.gov.cn/pl/download/guihua.doc,2008-04-06.
[3]刘新山、黄世福.试析我国的渔业捕捞许可制度[J].海洋渔业,1999,(3):101.
[1]孙吉亭,潘克厚.我国渔业资源开发问题的经济学分析[J].中国渔业经济,2002,(6):17.
[1]于秀娟.实施最小网目尺寸标准:保护和合理利用渔业资源[J].中国水产,2003,(7):77.
[1]目前我国海洋自然保护区的主管部门有海洋、林业、环保、农业、国土等,其中海洋部门管理的保护区类型比较全面,其主管的保护区占总量的40%,面积占总面积的70%。各部门都有自己的管理体制、经费来源,都在积极发展隶属于本部门的保护区,由此造成相互竞争、重复建设、各自为政、整体效率低下的后果。而且由于受到部门体制的制约,综合管理部门与具体主管部门之间缺少主动的沟通和协调,综合管理部门很难对各部门的自然保护区在宏观决策、政策指导与监督检查方面有所作为。参见刘岩,丘君.我国海洋自然保护区存在的主要问题及对策建议[EB/OL].http://www.nre.cn/htm/04/luzx/02-16-16313.htm,2008-03-24.
[2]崔凤,刘变叶.我国海洋自然保护区存在的主要问题及深层原因[J].中国海洋大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(2):14.
[3]同上。
[4]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.31.
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.32.
[2]同上。
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.32.
[2]孙书贤,主编.海洋行政执法法律依据汇编[Z].北京:海洋出版社,2007.70.
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.33.
[2]农业部渔业局渔政渔港监督处.《渔业捕捞许可管理规定》主要修改内容[J].中国水产,2002,(10):11,14.
[3]同本页注①。
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.33.
[2]同上,第34页。
[3]同上,第34页。
[1]南非是第一个保护大白鲨的国家,1991年南非立法明确规定禁止捕杀或销售大白鲨。参见PHILPOTT ROMNEY.Why Sharks May Have Nothing to Fear More Than Fear Itself." An Analysis of the Effect of Human Attitudes on the Conservation of the Great White Shark[J].Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy,2002,(Summer):456-457.
[2]唐议,黄硕琳.专属经济区制度下东海渔业资源的可持续利用[J].集美大学学报(自然科学版),2003,(6):119.
[1]唐议,黄硕琳.专属经济区制度下东海渔业资源的可持续利用[J].集美大学学报(自然科学版),2003,(6):119-120.
[1]郭文路,黄硕琳,曹世娟.东海区渔业资源的区域合作管理与共同养护[J].自然资源学报,2003,(7):396.
[2]同上,第397页。
[3]詹秉义.渔业资源评估[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1995.346.
[1]杨培举.中国远洋渔业直面海洋寒冰[J].中国船检,2005,(8):29.
[1]高粱.物候、天时和渔业资源的保护利用[J].古今农业,2001,(4):48.
[2]“网罟”是网目细小的渔网,对幼鱼具有极大的杀伤力,因而被列入禁止使用范围之内。参见高粱.物候、天时和渔业资源的保护利用[J].古今农业,2001,(4):48.
[3]“缴网”也是古代人所采用的一种网目细小的渔网,类似于“网罟”。参见高粱.物候、天时和渔业资源的保护利用[J].古今农业,2001,(4):48.
[4]“罛罟”是指捕捞用的渔网。参见郑星象,主编.古汉语字典[Z].福州:祸建人民出版社.1998.610.
[5]“无漉陂池”是指不要过度捕捞,而令池沼中的鱼类枯竭。其中“漉”是令干涸的意思,“陂池”是指池沼、池塘。参见郑星象,主编.古汉语字典[Z].祸州:福建人民出版社,1998.122,361.
[6]同本页注①。
[1]中国21世纪议程——中国21世纪人口、环境与发展白皮书[Z].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1994.127.
[2]王建廷.我国水生生物资源养护立法的现状分析[J].当代法学,2007,(5):109.
[1]根据加拿大《海洋法》,渔业和海洋部为牵头的协调机构。参见联合国粮农组织.向雷克雅未克海洋生态系统负责任渔业会议提交的文件摘要[EB/OL].http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y3545C00.HTM,2008-03-13.
[2]吕耀东.日本为“海洋国家战略”立法[J].瞭望,2007,(7):55.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.258.
[2]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.168-169.
[1]MARK,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.169,170-171.
[1]ZOU,KE YUAN.China's Marine Legal System and the Law of the Sea[M].Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.2005.15.
[2]曹文振等.经济全球化时代的海洋政治[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.42
[1]韩勇.美国渔业资源的管理和保护[J].海洋开发与管理,2006,(3):91-92.
[2]同上。
[3]中国的渔业环境监测网络[EB/OL].http://www.aptcm.com/apagri/16.nsf/6044201c5661d05c4825697b001292fe/5e714d99476a65b248256b8c0016e9b 8?OpenDocument,2008-03-18.
[1]许琳之.关于加强海洋监测工作的几点建议[J].海洋信息,2000,(1):20.
[2]同上,第21页。
[3]中国21世纪议程——中国21世纪人口、环境与发展白皮书[Z].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1994.128.
[4]同上。
[1]中国海洋21世纪议程[EB/OL].http://sdinfo.coi.gov.cn/hyfg/hyfgdb/fg8.htm,2008-02-13.
[2]陈新军.渔业资源可持续利用评价理论和方法[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2004.152.
[1]曹文振等.经济全球化时代的海洋政治[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.
[2]邓子基.现代西方财政学[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,1994.
[3]陈德恭.现代国际海洋法[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1988.
[4]陈荔彤.海洋法论[M].台北:元照出版公司,2002.
[5]陈新军,主编.渔业资源与渔场学[M].北京:海洋出版社,2004.
[6]陈新军.渔业资源可持续利用评价理论和方法[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2004.
[7]陈学雷.海洋资源开发与管理[M].北京:科学出版社,2000.
[8]陈友龙,缪代文.现代四方经济学[J].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002.
[9]韩立民等.渔业经济前沿问题探索[M].北京:海洋出版社,2007.
[10]金显仕等.黄、渤海生物资源与栖息环境[M].北京:科学出版社,2005.
[11]李爱年,韩广.人类社会的可持续发展与国际环境法[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.
[12]李浩培.条约法概论[M].北京:法律出版社,2003.
[13]李耀芳.国际环境法缘起[M].中山大学出版社,2002.
[14]林灿铃.国际环境法[M].北京:人民出版社,2004.
[15]林景祺.海洋渔业资源导论[M].北京:海洋出版社,1996.
[16]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.
[17]慕亚平.国际法原理[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2005.
[18]慕永通.渔业管理:以基于权利的管理为中心[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.
[19]丘宏达.现代国际法[M].台湾:三民书局出版社,2000.
[20]史忠良,肖四如.资源经济学[M].北京:北京出版社,1993.
[21]世界科学知识与技术伦理委员会.预防原则[M].巴黎:联合国教育、科学及文化组织出版,2005
[22]王铁崖.国际法[M].北京.法律出版社,1995.
[23]吴慧.国际海洋法法庭研究[M].北京:海洋出版社,2001.
[24]曾令良,饶戈平.国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[25]詹秉义.渔业资源评估[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1995.
[26]张秋华.渔业水域生态环境保护和管理[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2004.
[27]赵理海.海洋法的新发展[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1984.
[28]周鲠生.国际法[M].北京:商务出版社,1976.
[29]周忠海.国际法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[30]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.
[1][美]E·M·鲍基斯.海洋管理与联合国[M].孙清等译,北京:海洋出版社,1996.
[2][英]TIM HILLIER.国际公法[M].杨泽伟编注,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[3][美]爱蒂丝·布朗·魏伊丝.公平地对待未来人类:国际法、共同遗产与世代间衡平[M].汪劲等译,北京:法律出版社,2000.
[4][英]波尼,[英]波义尔.国际法与环境[M].那力,王彦志,王小钢译,北京:高等教育出版社,2007.
[5][英]蒂莫西·希利尔.国际公法原理[M].曲波译,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[6][奥]菲德罗斯.国际法[M].李浩培译,北京:商务印书馆,1981.
[7]菲尔德,亨普尔,萨默海斯.2020年的海洋:科学、发展趋势和可持续发展面临的挑战[M].吴克勤,林宝法,祈冬梅译,北京:海洋出版社,2004.
[8][荷]格老秀斯.论海洋自由[M].马忠法译,上海:上海人民出版社,2005.
[9][德]赫蒂根.欧洲法[M].张恩民译,北京:法律出版社,2003.
[10]凯尔森.国际法原理[M].王铁崖译,北京:华夏出版社,1988.
[11][韩]柳炳华.国际法[M].朴玉哲,朴玉姬译,北京:中国政法大学出版社,1997.
[12][英]苏珊·沃尔夫.欧盟法简明案例(影印本)[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2004.
[1]BERG,ASTRID.Implementing and Enforcing European Fisheries Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,1999.
[2]BIRNIE,PATRICIA W.& BOYLE,ALAN E.International Law and the Environment[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2002.
[3]BLAY,SAM & PIOTROWICZ,RYSZARD & TSAMENYI,B.MARTIN.Public International Law[M].New York:Oxford University Press,1997.
[4]CARON,DAVID D.& SCHEIBER,HANY N.Bringing New Law to Ocean Waters[M].The Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2004.
[5]CASSESE,ANTONIO.International Law[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2005.
[6]HARREMO(E|¨)S,POUL,ed.The Precautionary Principle in 20th Century:Late Lessons from Early Warnings[M].London:Earthscan Publications Ltd,2002.
[7]HOHMANN,H.Precautionary Legal Duties and Principles of Modern International Environmental Law—The Precautionary Principle:International Environmental Law Between Exploitation and Protection[M].London:Graham & Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff,1994.
[8]KAYE,STUART M.International Fisheries Management[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2001.
[9]KUNICH,JOHN C.Killing Our Oceans:Dealing with the Mass Extinction of Marine Life[M].London:Westport Connecticut,2006.
[10]MARCHANT,GARY E.& MOSSMAN,KENNETH L.Arbitrary and Capricious—The Precautionary Principle in the Europeon Union Courts[M].Washington D.C.:The AEI Press,2004.
[11]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.
[12]ODA,SHIGERU.Fifty Years of the Law of the Sea[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.
[13]RAO,P.K.International Environmental Law and Economics[M].London:Blackwell Publishers,2002.
[14]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law&Policy,2001.
[15]SOHN,LOUIS B.& NOYES,JOHN E.Cases and Materials on the Law of the Sea[M].New York:Transnational Publishers,Inc.,2004.
[16]SUNSTEIN,CASS R.Law of Fear:Beyond the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cambridge University Press,2005.
[17]TEOUWBORST,ARIE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.
[18]VUKAS,BUDISLAV.The Law of the Sea[M].Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2004.
[19]ZOU,KE YUAN.China's Marine Legal System and the Law of the Sea[M].Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2005.
[20]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle-Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.
[1]蔡高强.论全球化进程中主权权力的让渡[J].湖南省政法管理干部学院学报,2002,(18).
[2]陈锦淘,戴小杰.鱼类标志放流技术的研究现状[J].上海水产大学学报,2005,14(4).
[3]陈鹏,黄硕琳,陈锦辉.沿海捕捞渔民转产转业政策的分析[J].上海水产大学学报,2005,(4).
[4]陈思行.“预警性参考点”及其在渔业养护和管理上的应用[J].中国渔业经济研究,1999,(1).
[5]崔凤,刘变叶.我国海洋自然保护区存在的主要问题及深层原因[J].崔凤,主编.海洋与社会[C].哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社,2007.
[6]傅崐成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅岷成.海洋法专 题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.
[7]傅秀梅,王长云,王亚楠.海洋生物资源与可持续利用对策研究[J].中国生物工程杂志,2006,(7).
[8]傅秀梅等.海洋生物资源与可持续利用对策研究[J].中国生物工程杂志,2006,(7).
[9]高粱.物候、天时和渔业资源的保护利用[J].古今农业,2001,(4).
[10]郭守前.海洋渔业资源管理的理论探讨[J].华南农业大学学报,2004,(2).
[11]郭文路,黄硕琳,曹世娟.东海区渔业资源的区域合作管理与共同养护[J].自然资源学报,2003,(7).
[12]郭文路,黄硕琳.总可捕量制度不同实施方式的比较分析[J].海洋湖沼通报,2001,(4).
[13]慕韩勇.美国渔业资源的管理和保护[J].海洋开发与管理,2006,(3).
[14]侯富儒.关于新世纪国际法发展趋势的思考[J].广西社会科学,2003,(12).
[15]胡斌.试论国际环境法中的预警原则[J].法制与管理,2002,(6).
[16]黄金玲,黄硕琳.总可捕量制度在我国的可行性分析[J].上海水产大学学报,2002,(12).
[17]李晓西,赵少钦.可持续发展的成本效益分析[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2004,(4).
[18]李振龙.聚焦中国渔政北太平洋巡航检查[J].中国水产,2004,(8).
[19]刘健.经济全球化与国际法基本原则的发展[J].北京科技大学学报,2002,(3).
[20]刘新山、黄世福.试析我国的渔业捕捞许可制度[J].海洋渔业,1999,(3).
[21]吕炳斌.生物安全与环境法的新课题[A].王曦.国际环境法与比较环境法评论[C].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[22]吕耀东.日本为“海洋国家战略”立法[J].瞭望,2007,(7).
[23]牛惠之.预防原则之研究—国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3).
[24]秦天宝.国际环境法基本原则出探[J].法学,2001,(10).
[25]丘君,李明杰.我国海洋自然保护区面临的主要问题及对策[J].海洋开发 与管理,2005,(4).
[26]苏永华,杨松.我国渔业管理引进TAC、ITQ制度的思考[J].中国渔业经济,2004,(6).
[27]孙吉亭,潘克厚.我国渔业资源开发问题的经济学分析[J].中国渔业经济,2002,(6).
[28]孙世芳、穆兴增、周核心.“海上秦唐沧”建设中的问题与建议[J].经济论坛,1997,(20).
[29]唐议,黄硕琳.专属经济区制度下东海渔业资源的可持续利用[J].集美大学学报(自然科学版),2003,(6).
[30]唐议,唐建业.我国实施捕捞限额制度的有关问题[J].上海水产大学学报,2003,(9).
[31]同春芬.海洋渔业社会的和谐发展[J].自然辩证法研究,2006,(8).
[32]王建廷.我国水生生物资源养护立法的现状分析[J].当代法学,2007,(5).
[33]许琳之.关于加强海洋监测工作的几点建议[J].海洋信息,2000,(1).
[34]许兆滨.发展我国海洋渔业经济必经之路[J].中国渔业经济,2003,(4).
[35]杨培举.中国远洋渔业直面海洋寒冰[J].中国船检,2005,(8).
[36]叶属峰,温泉,周秋麟.海洋生态系统管理—以生态系统为基础的海洋管理新模式探讨[J].海洋开发与管理,2006,(1).
[37]于秀娟.实施最小网目尺寸标准:保护和合理利用渔业资源[J].中国水产,2003,(7).
[1]BACKES,CHRIS W.& VERSCHUUREN,JONATHAN M.The Precautionry Principle In International,European,And Dutch Wildlife Law[J].Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy,1998,(Winter).
[2]BELL,DAVID EUGENE.The 1992 Convention on Biologcal Diversity:the Continuing Significance of U.S.Objections at the Earth Summit[J].George Washington Journal of International Law & Economics,1993,(26).
[3]BERGER-EFORO,JUDITH.Sanctuary for the Whales:Will This be the Demise of the International Whaling Commission or a Viable Strategy for the Twenty-first Century?[J].Pace International Law Review,1996,(Spring).
[4] BOLIVAR, MAURA MULLEN D. A Comparison of Protecting the Environmental Interests of Latinamerican Indigenous Communities from Transnational Corporations under International Human Rights and Environmental Law[J]. Journal of Transnational Law& Policy, 1998, (Fall).
[5] CAMERON, FRASER K. The Greenhouse Effect: Proposed Reforms for the Australian Environmental Regulatory Regime[J]. Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, 2000, (25).
[6] CAMERON, J. & ABOUCHAR, J. The Precautionary Principle: A Fundamental Principle of Law and Policy for the Protection of the Global Environment [J]. Boston College International and Comparative Law Review,1991.(2).
[7] CAMERON, JAMES & ABOUCHAR, JULI. The Status of the Precautionary Principle[A]. FREESTONE, DAVID & HEY, ELLEN, the Precautionary Principle and International Law: the Challenge of Implementation[C]. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1996.
[8] CARON, DAVID D. The International Whaling Commission and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission: the Institutional Risks of Coercion in Consensual Structures[J]. American Journal of International Law, 1995, (January)
[9] CHIRCOP, AIDO & MARCHAND, BRUCE A. Oceans Act: Uncharted Seas for Offshore Development in Atlantic Canada?[J]. Dalhousie Law Journal, 2001, (Spring).
[10] CHRISTIE, DONNA R. It Don't Come EEZ: The Failure and Future of Coastal State Fisheries Management[J]. Journal of Transnational Law & Policy, 2004, (Fall).
[11] COLEMAN, LINDA O'NEIL. The European Union: An Appropriate Model for a Precautionary Approach?[J]. Seattle University Law Review, 2002, (Winter).
[12] COLLINS, NATALIE. European Environmental Policy and Its Effects on Free Trade[J]. William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review, 2001,(Fall).
[13] CONKO, GREGORY. Safety, risk and the precautionary principle: rethinking precautionary approaches to the regulation of regulation of transgenic plants[J]. Transgenic Research, 2003, (12).
[14] COY, JONATHAN. Defending Against the Fourth Horse: The Endangered Species Act and the Threat of Communicable Disease[J]. Penn State Environmental Law Review, 2004, (Winter).
[15] DAVIS, LESLIE A. North Pacific Pelagic Driftnetting: Untangling The High Seas Controversy[J]. University of Southern California, 1991, (5).
[16] DERNBACH, JOHN C. Sustainable Development as a Framework for National Governance[J]. Case Western Reserve University, 1998, (Fall).
[17] EICHENBERG, TIM & SHAPSON, MITCHELL. The Promise of Johannesburg: Fisheries and the World Summit on Sustainable Development[J]. Golden Gate University Law Review, 2004, (Spring).
[18] FONTAUBERT, A. CHARLOTTE DE. Biodiversity in the Sea: Implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity in Marine and Coastal Habitats[J]. Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, 1998, (Spring).
[19] FORD, ROSEMARY A. The Beef Hormone Dispute and Carousel Sanctions: a Roundabout Way of Forcing Compliance with World Trade Organization Decisions[J]. Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 2002, (27).
[20] FRADY, MARIKA. Developments in Land-Based Pollution: From Sewer to Shining Sea[J]. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, 2003 Yearbook, (2003).
[21] FREESTONE, DAVID. A Decade of the Law of the Sea Convention: Is It a Success?[J]. George Washington International Law Review, 2007, (39).
[22] FRISCHMANN, BRETT. A Dynamic Institutional Theory of International Law[J]. Buffalo Law Review, 2003, (Summer).
[23] GARCIA, S. M. The Precautionary Approach to the Fisheries: Progress Review and Main Issues(1995-2000)[A]. NORDQUIST, M. H. & MOORE, J. N. Current Fisheries Issues and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations[C]. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2000.
[24] GARRETT, NATHANIEL. "Life is the Risk We Cannot Refuse:" A Precautionary Approach to the Toxic Risks We Can[J]. Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, 2005, (Spring).
[25] GEE, P. H. DAVID & MACGARVIN, MALCOLM. The Precautionary Principle in the 20th Century — Late Lessons from Early Warnings[J]. European Environment Agency. 2002. (8).
[26] GELFAND, MARTIN D. Practical Application of International Environmental Law: Does It Work Atoll?[J]. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 1997, (Winter).
[27] HANNA, SUSAN STEELE. Implementing Effective Regional Ocean Governance: Perspectives From Economics[J]. Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum, 2006, (Spring).
[28] HAUSRATH, KATHERINE. Crossing Borders: the Extraterritorial Application of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act[J]. University of Baltimore Journal of Environmental Law, 2005, (Fall).
[29] HAWARD, MARCUS. Fisheries and Oceans Governance in Australia and Canada: from Sectoral Management to Integration?[J]. Dalhousie Law Journal, 2003, (Spring).
[30] HERN, SEAN. Competing Values: Taking a Broad View on the Narrowing Conservation Regime of the 1982 Unted Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea[J]. American University International Law Review, 2000, (16).
[31 ] INKELAS, DANIEL. Security, Sound, and Cetaceans: Legal Challenges to Low Frequency Active Sonar under U.S. and International Environmental Law[J]. George Washington International Law Review, 2005, (37).
[32] JAMIESON, BY DALE. Uncertainty and Risk Assessment: Scientific Uncertainty and the Political Process[J]. The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1996, (5).
[33] JENNINGS, PATRICK J. Do Chemicals Found in Plastic Toys Pose a Threat to the Children Who Play with Them? The European Community's Attempt to Regulate the Use of Chemical Plasticizers[J]. Dickinson Journal of International Law, 2000, (Winter).
[34] JUDA, LAWRENCE. Changing Perspectives on the Oceans: Implications for International Fisheries and Oceans Governance[A]. LOWE, VAUGHAN. Bringring New Law to Ocean Waters[C]. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2004.
[35] KAYE, DAVID. Adjudicating Self-Defense: Discretion, Perception, and the Resort to Force in International Law[J]. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 2005, (44).
[36] KAYE, STUART B. Legal Approaches to Polar Fisheries Regimes: A ComPtive Analysis of the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources and the Bering Sea Doughnut Hole Convention[J]. California Western International Law Journal, 1995, (Fall).
[37] KELLEY, SALLY J. & PROCTOR, KELLY A. & BRITTION, SUSAN DALE S. Agricultural Law: A Selected Bibliography, 1985-1992[J]. William Mitchell Law Review, 1993, (Spring).
[38] KRUCHEK, BETH L. Extending Wetlands Protection Under the Ramsar Treaty's Wise Use Obligation[J]. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 2003, (Summer).
[39] KUNICH, JOHN CHARLES. Losing Nemo: The Mass Extinction Now Threatening the World's Ocean Hotspots[J]. Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, 2005, (30).
[40] LAROCQUE, EMILY E. The Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean: Can Tuna Promote Development of Pacific Island Nations?[J]. University of Hawaii Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal, 2003, (February).
[41] MANDEL, GREGORY N. & GATHII, JAMES THUO. Cost-Benefit Analysis versus the Precautionary Principle: Beyond Cass Sunstein's Laws of Fear[J]. University of Illinois Law Review, 2006, (2006).
[42] MARCHANT, GARY E. From General Policy to Legal Rule: Aspirations and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle[J]. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2003, (34).
[43] MARTIN, GAUTHIER-ST. The Case Against Cost-Benefit Analysis[J]. Ecology Law Quarterly, 2005, (32).
[44] MCOMBER, ELISABETH M. Problems in Enforcement of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species[J]. Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 2002, (27).
[45] MCRAE, DONALD. Trade and the Environment: Competition, Cooperation or Confusion?[J]. Alberta Law Review, 2003, (12).
[46] ONZIVU, WILLIAM. International Environmental Law, the Public's Health, and Domestic Environmental Governance in Developing Countries[J]. American University International Law Review, 2006, (21).
[47] OPPENHEIM, ADRIENNE J. The Plight of the Patagonian Toothfish: Lessons from the Volga Case[J]. Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 2004, (30).
[48] ORELLANA, MARCOS A. The Law on Highly Migratory Fish Stockes: ITLOS Jurisprudence in Context[J]. Golden Gate University Law Review, 2004, (Spring).
[49] PALMER, GEOFFREY. New Ways to Make internatonal Environmental Law[J]. American Journal of International Law, 1992, (April).
[50] PHILPOTT, ROMNEY. Why Sharks May Have Nothing to Fear More Than Fear Itself: An Analysis of the Effect of Human Attitudes on the Conservation of the Great White Shark[J]. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, 2002, (Summer).
[51] RAYFUSE, ROSEMARY etc. Australia and Canada in Regional Fisheries Organizations: Implementing the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement[J]. Dalhousie Law Journal, 2003, (Spring).
[52] RECHTSCHAFFEN, CLIFFORD. Giving Concrete Content to Abstract Ethical Norms: Advancing Environmental Justice Norms[J]. U.C. Davis Law Review, 2003, November(37).
[53] SCHEIBER,HARRY N. & CARR, CHRISTOPHER J. From Extended Jurisdiction to Privatization: International Law, Biology, and Economics in the Marine Fisheries Debates, 1937-1976[J]. Berkeley Journal of International Law, 1998, (16).
[54] SCHNIER, DAVID J. Genetically Modified Organisms & the Cartagena Protocol[J]. Fordham Environmental Law Journal, 2001, (Spring).
[55] SONG, YANN HUEI. The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Possibility of Judicial Settlement of Disputes Involving the Fishing Entity of Taiwan - Taking CCSBT as an Example[J]. San Diego International Law Journal, 2006, (Fall).
[56] STEINZOR, RENA I. Reinventing Environmental Regulation: The Dangerous Journey from Command to Self-control[J]. The Harvard Environmental Law Review, 1998, (17).
[57] STEPHAN, PAUL B. Exploring the Need for International Harmonization: Courts, Tribunals, and Legal Unification—The Agency Problem[J]. Chicago Journal of International Law, 2002, (Fall).
[58]STEWART,RICHARD B.A New Generation of Environmental Regulation?[J].Capital University Law Review,2001,(29).
[59]SUNSTE1N,CASS R.RISK AND THE LAW:Precautions Against What? The Availability Heuristic and Cross-Cultural Risk Perception[J].Alabama Law Review,2005,(Fall).
[60]TELESCA,THOMAS A.Sovereignty or the Precautionary Principle:Which Will Save Our Fish[J].Southeastern Environment Law Journal,2003,(23).
[61]TEMTO,MICHELE.The Precautionary Principle in Marine Fisheries Conservation and the U.S.[J].Vermont Law Review,2000,(Summer).
[62]TOTDAL,TORE.An Introduction to the European Community and to European Community Law[J].North Dakota Law Review,1999,(75).
[63]VALIANTE,MARCIA."Welcomed Participants" or "Environmental Vigilantes"? The CEPA Environmental Protection Action and the Role of Citizen Suits in Federal Environmental Law[J].Dalhousie Law Journal,2002,(Spring).
[64]ZHAREN,W.M.VON.Ocean Ecosystem Stewardship[J].William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review,1998,(Fall).
[1]国家海洋局政策法规办公室.中华人民共和国海洋法规选编[Z].北京:海洋出版社,2001.
[2]傅崐成,主编.海洋法相关公约及中英文索引[Z].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2005.
[3]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[Z].北京:法律出版社,2000.
[4]中国21世纪议程——中国21世纪人口、环境与发展白皮书[Z].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1994.
[5]孙书贤,主编.海洋行政执法法律依据汇编[Z].北京:海洋出版社,2007.
[6]国家环境保护总局自然生态保护司.生物多样性相关国际条约汇编[Z].北京:中国环境科学出版社,2005.
[7][英]尼格尔·G·福斯特.欧盟立法(2005—2006)(上卷)[Z].何志鹏,孙璐译,北京:北京大学出版社,2007.
[8]郑星象,主编.古汉语字典[Z].福州:福建人民出版社,1998.
[1]国际法院:http://www.icj-cij.org
[2]国际海洋法庭:http://www.itlos.org
[3]国家海洋局:http://www.soa.gov.cn
[4]联合国:http://www.un.org
[5]联合国粮农组织:http://www.fao.org
[6]世界贸易法律网:http://www.worldtradelaw.net
[7]武汉大学国际法研究所:http://translaw.whu.edu.cn
[8]烟台市环境保护局:http://www.ytepb.gov.cn
[9]中国南海研究院:http://www.nanhai.org.cn
[10]中国水产科技信息网:http://www.cafs.ac.cn
[11]中国渔业政府网:http://www.cnfm.gov.cn
[12]中华人民共和国环境保护部:http://www.zhb.gov.cn
[13]中华人民共和国农业部:http://www.agri.gov.cn
[2]MARCHANT,GARY E.& MOSSMAN,KENNETH L.Arbitrary and Capricious—The Precautionary Principle in the European Union Courts[M].Washington D.C.:The AEI Press,2004.1.
[3]TEOUWBORST,ARIE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.1.
[1]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):4-5.
[2]TEOUWBORST,ANE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.10-11.
[3]Id.,p.11.
[4]Id.,p.8.
[1][美]爱蒂丝·布朗·魏伊丝.公平地对待未来人类:国际法、共同遗产与世代间衡平[M].汪劲等译,北京:法律出版社,2000.1-2.
[2]德国是最早利用预警思想处理“森林死亡”及空气污染问题的国家。参见CAMERON,FRASER K.The Greenhouse Effect:Proposed Reforms for the Australian Environmental Regulatory Regime[J].Columbia Journal of Environmental Law,2000,(25):359.
[3]同本页注①,第17页。
[4]TEOUWBORST,ANE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.18.
[1]TEOUWBORST,ANE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.18.
[2]在“特雷尔冶炼厂仲裁案”中,位于美国和加拿大边境的加拿大锌矿厂所释放的二氧化硫气体飘到美国境内,并对美国的环境构成危害。仲裁庭认为加拿大有责任限制其境内的二氧化硫对美国所造成的损害.参见HAUSRATH,KATHERINE.Crossing Borders:the Extraterritorial Application of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation and Liability Act[J].University of Baltimore Journal of Environmental Law,2005,(Fall):22.
[1]HARREMOES,POUL,ed.The Precautionary Principle in 20th Century:Late Lessons from Early Warnings[M].London:Earthscan Publications Ltd,2002.4
[2]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle(M].London:Cameron May International Law & Policy,2001.163.
[3]Id.
[4]Id.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.166.
[1]1987年《蒙特利尔协定书》主要是关于处理氯氟化碳化合物等破坏臭氧层的各种物质的公约。参见PALMER,GEOFFREY.New Ways to Make international Environmental Law[J].American Journal of International Law,1992,(April):275.
[2]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.109.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.109.
[2]SOHN,LOUIS B.& NOYES,JOHN E.Cases and Materials on the Law of the Sea[M].New York:Transnational Publishers,Inc.,2004.756.
[1]陈荔彤.海洋法论[M].台北:元照出版公司,2002.145
[2]胡斌.试论国际环境法中的预警原则[J].法制与管理,2002,(6):18.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.131.
[1]Dissenting Opinion of Judge Weeramantry.New Zealand v.France.Nuclear Tests Ⅱ.1995[EB/OL].http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pl=3&p2=3&k=78&case=58&code=af&p3=4,2007-04-21.
[2]Dissenting Opinion of Judge Koroma.New Zealand v.France.Nuclear Tests Ⅱ.1995[EB/OL].http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pl=3&p2=3&k=6b&case=59&code=nzf&p3=5,2007-04-21.
[3]Dissenting Opinion of Judge ad hoc Sir Geoffery Palmer.New Zealand v.France.Nuclear Tests Ⅱ.1995[EB/OL].http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pl=3&p2=3&k=6b&case=59&code=nzf&p3=5,2007-04-21.
[4]Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Pmiect(Hungary-Slovakia),ICJ Report 1997,1-241.转引自:牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):29.
[5]1993年1月1日捷克斯洛伐克共和国分立为两个独立的主体国家——捷克共和国和斯洛伐克共和国。国际法院判定斯洛伐克作为捷克斯洛伐克的继承国成为1977年捷克斯洛伐克和匈牙利所签署的有关建造并运营水力发电厂条约的一方当事人。参见国际法院判决书、咨询意见和命令摘要(1997-2002)[EB/OL].http://www.icj-cij.org/homepage/ch/summary.php,2007-03-14.
[1]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):35.
[2]New Zealand v.Japan;Australia v.Japan.Southern Bluefin Tuna Case.Order 1999/2 of 3 August 1999[EB/OL].http://www.itlos.org/start2_en.html,2007-05-12.
[3]根据《南方黑鲔保育公约》,日本、澳大利亚和新西兰三国将总渔获量从38,650吨减少至11,750吨,而日本的渔获配额从23,150吨削减至6,065吨。因此,日本渔民为维持经营不得不转换渔场。迫于国内压力,日本从1995年开始正式向南方黑鲔保育委员会(Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna,CCSBT)提出增加渔获配额的要求,但是澳大利亚和新西兰认为哪怕只多捕一尾。都存在很大可能使得南方黑鲔资源绝迹,所以一直不同意日本的要求。双方见解的差异主要在于资源评估方面.对此,日本向CCSBT提议为达成双方的共识而共同进行渔获实验调查作业以搜集科学资料,并在1995年初提出议案,于1996年正式向科学委员会要求审议,但是澳大利亚和新西兰两国连续两年拒绝该项提案。至1998年日本终不顾澳大利亚和新西兰两国的反对单独进行渔获实验。参见SONG,YANNHUEI.The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Possibility of Judicial Settlement of Disputes Involving the Fishing Entity of Taiwan—Taking CCSBT as an Example[J].San Diego International Law Journal,2006,(Fall):63.
[1]学者J.Cameron将ITLOS在南方黑鲔案中作出的临时性裁定视为“a particularly illuminating example of the established status of the precautionary principle under international law”。参见RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law & Policy,2001.142.
[2]吴慧.国际海洋法法庭研究[M].北京:海洋出版社,2001.248
[3]同上,第250-251页。
[4]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):36-37.
[1]Ireland v.United Kingdom.MOX Plant Case.Order of 3 December 2001[EB/OL].http://www.itlos.org/cgi-bin/cases/case_detail,2007-04-02.
[2]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):39.
[1]WT/DS26/AB/R,WT/DS48/AB/R,Appellate Body Report,EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones),adopted 16 January 1998,para.60,120,253[EB/OL].http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtoab/ec-hormones(ab).pdf,2007-05-17.
[2]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea-Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.2.
[1]CAMERON,J.& ABOUCHAR,J.The Precautionary Principle:A Fundamental Principle of Law and Policy for the Protection of the Global Environment[J].Boston College International and Comparative Law Review,1991.(2).
[1]HOHMANN,H.Precautionary Legal Duties and Principles of Modern International Environmental Law—The Precautionary Principle:International Environmental Law Between Exploitation and Protection[M].London:Graham & Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff,1994.10.
[2]KAYE,STUART M.International Fisheries Management[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2001.170.
[3]CARON,DAVID D.& SCHEIBER,HANY N.Bringing New Law to Ocean Waters[M].The Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2004.358.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O & CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law & Policy,2002.20
[1][英]蒂莫西·希利尔.国际公法原理[M],曲波译,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.17.
[2]丘宏达.现代国际法[M].台湾:三民书局出版社,2000.64.
[3]CAMERON,JAMES & ABOUCHAR,JULI.The Status of the Precautionary Principle[A].FREESTONE,DAVID & HEY,ELLEN.the Precautionary Principle and International Law:the Challenge of Implementation[C].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,1996.51.
[1]KAYE,STUART M.International Fisheries Management[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2001.183.
[2]Id.
[3]BIRNIE,PATRICIA W.& BOYLE,ALAN E.International Law and the Environment[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2002.98.
[1]BIRNIE,PATRICIA W.& BOYLE,ALAN E.International Law and the Environment[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2002.98.
[2]曾令良,饶戈平.国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.65.
[3]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.204.
[4][英]蒂莫西·希利尔.国际公法原理[M],曲波译,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.25.
[5]1967年北海大陆架案是第一个通过国际司法程序解决大陆架划界争端的案例。在这个案子中国际法院就大陆架划界的原则和方法发表了重要意见:一、等距离法是一种简便的划界方法,但所谓的“等距离原则”并非大陆架概念中所固有的原则,因而等距离的划界方法并不是必须遵守的。不应在任何情况下均适用单一的划界方法,在划界时还应考虑其它相关情况。换言之,等距离原则并不是火陆架划界的一项习惯国际法规则;二、应根据公平原则进行大陆架划界。参见BLAY,SAM & PIOTROWICZ,RYSZARD & TSAMENYI,B.MARTIN.Public International Law[M].New York:Oxford University Press,1997.341.
[1]BIRNIE,PATRICIA W.& BOYLE,ALAN E.International Law and the Environment[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2002.98.
[2]周忠海.国际法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.101.
[3]辅助原则并非新概念。在西方哲学界中很早就出现了辅助原则的概念,其最早可以追溯到中世纪阿奎那斯(Saint Thomas Aquinas),甚至更早的亚里士多德的政治哲学,近则可溯至19世纪蒲鲁东(Pierre Joseph Proudhon)。而且,由于国家权利日益腐蚀教会,罗马教廷在20世纪上半叶提出将辅助原则作为重建社会秩序的基本原则。二战后,欧洲国家逐渐将此社会哲学转化为法律概念,如德国和瑞士将该原则纳入其宪政体制中,以解决联邦和地方政府的分权问题。辅助原则是规范社会组织的基本原则。简言之,即在社会中直接影响人民生活的决定,原则上应由最接近个人的小单位来制定,只有当他们无能力作好时,才可由较大单位加以协助。欧共体《马斯特里赫特条约》以明确的宪法性条文形式将辅助原则的要旨引入《欧共体条约》,增强了法律的确定性和可预见性,限制了欧共体权能的过分扩张。参见:武汉大学国际法研究所.欧盟法中的辅助原则和相称性原则[EB/OL].http://translaw.whu.edu.cn/cn/gjfbaseknow/20050613/143543.php,2007-11-10。
[4]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.34.
[1]傅崐成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅岷成.海洋法专题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.107.
[2]柳炳华.国际法[M].朴玉哲,朴玉姬译,北京:中国政法大学出版社,1997.207-208.
[3]TEOUWBORST,ARIE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law Intonational,2002.17.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O & CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.163.
[2]1972年美国制定了《海洋哺乳动物保护法》,目的是保护包括海豚在内的海洋哺乳动物。参见COY,JONATHAN.Defending Against the Fourth Horse:The Endangered Species Act and the Throat of Communicable Discase[J].Penn Stare Environmental Law Review,2004,(Winter):291-292.
[3]美国《濒危物种法》于1973年颁布实施.该法一向被视为美国已通过的环境法中最有效率且最有争议的法律。参见COY,JONATHAN.Defending Against the Fourth Horse:The Endangered Species Act and the Threat of Communicable Disease[J].Penn State Environmental Law Review,2004,(Winter):292-293.
[4]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.151.
[1]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.153.
[2]1998年《温氏毕声明》除了对预警原则的概念作了界定之外,还规定:“应用预警原则的过程应是开放、民主的。同时,还应允许可能受影响的各方参与进来。而且应谨慎审查所有的选择,不作为的选择也包括在内。”参见COLEMAN,LINDA O'NEIL.The European Union:An Appropriate Model for a Precautionary Approach?[J].Seattle University Law Roview,2002,(Winter):635.
[1]MARCHANT,GARY E.From General Policy to Legal Rule:Aspirations and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle[J].Environmental Health Perspectives,2003,(34):1800.
[1]MARCHANT,GARY E.& MOSSMAN,KENNETH L.Arbitrary and Capricious:The Precautionary Principle in the European Union Courts[M].Washington D.C.:the AEI Press,2004.7.
[2]MARCHANT,GARY E.From General Policy to Legal Rule:Aspirations and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle[J].Environmental Health Perspectives,2003,(34):1800.
[1]MARCHANT,GARY E.& MOSSMAN,KENNETH L.Arbitrary and Capricious:The Precautionary Principle in the European Union Courts[M].Washington D.C.:the AEI Press,2004.15.
[2]MARCHANT,GARY E.From General Policy to Legal Rule:Aspirations and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle[J].Environmental Health Perspectives,2003,(34):1801.
[1]MARCHANT,GARY E.From General Policy to Legal Rule:Aspirations and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle[J].Environmental Health Perspectives,2003,(34):1801.
[2]Id.
[3]秦天宝.国际环境法基本原则出探[J].法学,2001,(10):30.
[4]该案仲裁庭于1938年和1941年两次作出裁决。在1938年的第一次裁决中,仲裁庭判定冶炼厂的烟雾对华盛顿州造成了损害,并裁决加拿大应赔偿特雷尔冶炼厂对美国土地造成的损害。在1941年第二次裁决中,仲裁庭提出了预防原则。参见GELFAND,MARTIN D.Practical Application of International Environmental Law:Does It Work Atoll?[J].Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law,1997.(Winter):77-78.
[5]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.20.
[1]实际情况表明,全球性协定较多采用“预警方法”这一术语,而欧洲条约和欧共体法则较多采用“预警原则”这一提法,例如欧共体的《阿姆斯特丹条约》、《都柏林宣言》等。参见CONKO,GREGORY.Safety,risk and the precautionary principle:rethinking precautionary approaches to the regulation of regulation of transgenic plants[J].Transgenic Research,2003,(12):642.
[2]CONKO,GREGORY.Safety,risk and the precautionary principle:rethinking precautionary approaches to the regulation of regulation of transgenic plants[J].Transgenic Research,2003,(12):642-643.
[1]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):44.
[2]同上,第45页。
[3]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.18.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.18.
[2]CONKO,GREGORY.Safety,risk and the precautionary principle:rethinking precautionary approaches to the regulation of regulation of transgenic plants[J].Transgenic Research,2003,(12):642.
[3]傅崐成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅岷成.海洋法专题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.103.
[4]同本页注①。
[1]JAMIESON,BY DALE.Uncertainty and Risk Assessment:Scientific Uncertainty and the Political Process[J].The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science,1996,(5):37-38.
[1]李耀芳.国际环境法缘起[M].中山大学出版社,2002.160.
[2]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.23.
[3]GEE,P.H.DAVID & MACGARVIN,MALCOLM.The Precautionary Principle in the 20th Century—Late Lessons from Early Warnings[J].European Environment Agency.2002.(8).
[1]WT/DS26/AB/R,WT/DS48/AB/R,Appellate Body Report,EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormone),adopted 16 January 1998,para.124[EB/OL].http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtoab/ec-hormones(ab).pdf,2007-06-10.
[2]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.38.
[3]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.24.
[4]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.23.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.24.
[2]联合国秘书长.秘书长报告:海洋与海洋法[EB/OL].http://www.un.org/chinese/ga/56/pv/a56pv65.pdf,2007-06-08.
[1]联合国秘书长.秘书长报告:海洋与海洋法[EB/OL].http://www.un.org/chinese/ga/56/pv/a56pv65.pdf,2007-06-08.
[1]联合国秘书长.秘书长报告:海洋与海洋法[EB/OL].http://www.un.org/chinese/ga/56/pv/a56pv65.pdf,2007-03-04.
[1]JUDA,LAWRENCE.Changing Perspectives on the Oceans:Implications for International Fisheries and Oceans Governance[A].LOWE,VAUGHAN.Bringring New Law to Ocean Waters[C].Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2004.22.
[2]1989年联合国大会为禁止在公海进行大型流网作业,作出了第44/225号决议。我国对该决议投了赞成票,并且我国农业部于1990年发布了“关于印发联合国大会通过禁止在公海使用大型流网决议的通知”(1990农(渔政)字第18号)。参见中国水产杂志社.《中国水产》:聚焦中国渔政北太平洋巡航检查[EB/OL].http://www.cnfm.gov.cn/info/display.asp?id=3467,2007-9-14.
[3]邓子基.现代西方财政学[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,1994.183.
[1]邓子基.现代西方财政学[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,1994.187.
[2]在理想状态下,边际成本是每变动一个单位的生产量而使成本变动的数量。边际效益是每变动一个单位的生产量而使收益变动的数量。参见陈友龙,缪代文.现代四方经济学[J].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002.128.
[3]同本页注①。
[1]史忠良,肖四如.资源经济学[M].北京:北京出版社,1993.268.
[1]MARTIN,GAUTHIER-ST.The Case Against Cost-Benefit Analysis[J].Ecology Law Quarterly,2005,(32):349.
[2]Id.,p.350.
[1]MARTIN,GAUTHIER-ST.The Case Against Cost-Benefit Analysis[J].Ecology Law Quarterly,2005,(32):349.
[2]SUNSTEIN,CASS R.Law of Fear:Beyond the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cambridge University Press,2005.129.
[1]MANDEL,GREGORY N.& GATHII,JAMES THUO.Cost-Benefit Analysis versus the Precautionary Principle:Beyond Cass Sunstein's Laws of Fear[J].University of Illinois Law Review,2006,(2006):1048.
[2]RAO,P.K.International Environmental Law and Economics[M].London:Blackwell Publishers,2002.113.
[1]李晓西,赵少钦.可持续发展的成本效益分析[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2004,(4):91.
[2]MARTIN,GAUTHIER-ST.The Case Against Cost—Benefit Analysis[J].Ecology Law Quarterly,2005,(32):371.
[1]MANDEL,GREGORY N.& GATHII,JAMES THUO.Cost-Benefit Analysis versus the Precautionary Principle:Beyond Cass Sunstein's Laws of Fear[J].University of Illinois Law Review,2006,(2006):1045.
[1]MANDEL,GREGORY N.& GATHII,JAMES THUO.Cost-Benefit Analysis versus the Precautionary Principle:Beyond Cass Sunstein's Laws of Fear[J].University of Illinois Law Review,2006,(2006):1049.
[1][美]E·.M·鲍基斯.海洋管理与联合国[M].孙清等译,北京:海洋出版社,1996.97.
[2]侯富儒.关于新世纪国际法发展趋势的思考[J].广西社会科学,2003,(12):96.
[3]李爱年,韩广.人类社会的可持续发展与国际环境法[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.57.
[1]李爱年,韩广.人类社会的可持续发展与国际环境法[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.58.
[2][美]E·.M·鲍基斯.海洋管理与联合国[M].孙清等译,北京:海洋出版社,1996.101.
[1]TEOUWBORST,ARIE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.13.
[2]Id.,p14.
[1][美]E·.M·鲍基斯.海洋管理与联合国[M].孙清等译,北京:海洋出版社,1996.105.
[2]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.90.
[1]刘健.经济全球化与国际法基本原则的发展[J].北京科技大学学报,2002,(3):29.
[2][奥]菲德罗斯.国际法[M].李浩培译,北京:商务印书馆,1981.21.
[3]蔡高强.论全球化进程中主权权力的让渡[J].湖南省政法管理干部学院学报,2002,(18):20.
[1]蔡高强.论全球化进程中主权权力的让渡[J].湖南省政法管理干部学院学报,2002,(18):22.
[2]BOLIVAR,MAURA MULLEN D.A Comparison of Protecting the Environmental Interests of Latinamerican Indigenous Communities from Transnational Corporations under International Human Rights and Environmental Law[J].Journal of Transnational Law& Policy,1998,(Fall):128-129.
[1]KUNICH,JOHN CHARLES,Losing Nemo:The Mass Extinction Now Threatening the World's Ocean Hotspots[J].Columbia Journal of Environmental Law,2005,(30):67-68.
[1]凯尔森.国际法原理[M].王铁崖译,北京:华夏出版社,1988.254.
[2]周鲠生.国际法[M].北京:商务出版社,1976.10.
[3]慕亚平.国际法原理[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2005.28.
[4]王铁崖.国际法[M].北京.法律出版社,1995.10.
[1]MCOMBER,ELISABETH M.Problems in Enforcement of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species[J].Brooklyn Journal of International Law,2002,(27):685-687.
[2]《波罗的海和北海小型鲸类养护协定》于1991年制定,并于1994年生效。参见INKELAS,DANIEL.Security,Sound,and Cetaceans:Legal Challenges to Low Frequency Active Sonar under U.S.and International Environmental Law[J].George Washington International Law Review,2005,(37):226.
[3]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.159.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.159-160.
[2]《南极海洋生物资源养护公约》于1980年5月20日签署,1982年4月7日生效,目前共有33个缔约方。《南极海洋生物资源养护公约》适用于南纬60度以南和该纬度与南极幅合带之间区域的南极海洋生物资源。参见OPPENHEIM,ADRIENNE J.The Plight of the Patagonian Toothfish:Lessons from the Volga Case[J].Brooklyn Journal of International Law,2004,(30):309.
[1]缺失补充水平与预警参考点意义相似,是指对处于该水平的生物种群必须采取养护行动。以促进种群的恢复.否则生物种群可能受到严重破坏,并无法再行恢复。参见KAYE,STUART B.Legal Appmaches to Polar Fisheries Regimes:A Comparative Analysis of the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources and the Bering Sea Doughnut Hole Convention[J].California Western International Law Journal,1995,(Fall):93.
[2]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.154.
[3]Id.,pp.155-156.
[1]CASSESE,ANTONIO.International Law[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2005.196.
[2]我国远洋渔船就曾发生过螺旋桨被流网缠绕而不能行驶的事故。如果船舶被流网缠绕时再遇台风或低气压天气,则必会颠覆。参见李振龙.聚焦中国渔政北太平洋巡航检查[J].中国水产,2004,(8):2.
[3]中国水产:聚焦中国渔政北太平洋巡航检查[EB/OL].http://www.cnfm.gov.cn/info/display.asp?sortid=75&id=3467,2007-11-13.
[1]ZHAREN,W.M.VON.Ocean Ecosystem Stewardship[J].William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review,1998,(23):47.
[2]《坎昆宣言》是于1992年5月6日至8日在墨西哥坎昆由FAO和墨西哥合作召开的“国际负责任捕捞会议”上通过的。参见FREESTONE,DAVID.A Decade of the Law of the Sea Convention:Is It a Success?[J].George Washington International Law Review,2007,(39):506-507.
[1]《守则》包括捕捞、加工、销售、养殖、渔业研究和管理等方面,共12个议题条文和2个附件,内容涵盖了整个渔业管理,是最为广泛的规范渔业行为的重要国际性文件。参见粮农组织渔业部.负责任渔业行为守则[EB/OL].http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/v9878c/v9878c00.htm,2007-11-14.
[1]傅岷成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅崐成.海洋法专题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.100.
[2]CHRISTIE,DONNA R.It Don't Come EEZ:The Failure and Future of Coastal State Fisheries Management[J].Journal of Transnational Law & Policy,2004,(Fall):30-31.
[3][德]赫蒂根.欧洲法[M].张恩民译,北京:法律出版社,2003.62.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.258-259.
[2]《欧洲联盟条约》在很大程度上只是一个政治性宣言。在《欧洲联盟条约》生效后,《欧洲经济共同体条约》(EEC Treaty)改称为《欧洲共同体条约》(EC Treaty)。参见TOTDAL,TORE.An Introduction to the European Community and to European Community Law[J].North Dakota Law Review,1999,(75):63.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle-Its Application in lnternational European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.273.
[1]欧共体于1992年5月21日通过了关于自然栖息地和野生动植物保护的第92/43号指令。后于1997年11月27日,欧共体第97/62号指令修订了第92/43号指令。参见BACKES,CHRIS W.& VERSCHUUREN,JONATHAN M.The Precautionary Principle In International,European,And Dutch Wildlife Law[J].Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy,1998,(Winter):61.
[2]BERG,ASTRID.Implementing and Enforcing European Fisheries Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,1999.45
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.169-170.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.326-327.
[1]《欧共体环境保护计划一》引入了很多为欧共体当今环境法规所采纳的重要原则,如该计划中的预警方法。另外《欧共体环境保护计划一》还采纳了污染者付费原则。参见COLLINS,NATALIE.European Environmental Policy and Its Effects on Free Trade[J].William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review,2001,(Fall):189.
[2]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.200.
[3]Id.,p.202.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.240.
[2]Id.,p.243.
[1]MARCHANT,GARY E.& MOSSMAN,KENNETH L.Arbitrary and Capricious-The Precautionary Principle in the Europeon Union Courts[M].Washington D.C.:The AEI Press,2004.25-26.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.174-175.
[2]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.82.
[3]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.186-187.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.196-197.
[2]1997年克林顿总统指示环境保护署发布《空气管理条例》,在新鲜空气和悬浮微粒方面,对各州提出了更加严格的标准。该条例受到商界和工业集团的强烈反对,而环境与健康专家则认为,为了防止人们患上呼吸疾病,应对烟尘实行更严格的控制。参见STEINZOR,RENA I.Reinventing Environmental Regulation:The Dangerous Journey from Command to Self-control[J].The Harvard Environmental Law Renew,1998,(17):136.
[3]同本页注①,第200-201页。
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.202-203.
[2]这显然不同于国际层面上的预警原则发展经验,即最先始于全球性公约或宣言,然后再逐渐辐射至国内层面。
[3]同本页注①,第263-264页。
[1]《加拿大濒危物种保护法》于1996年10月通过,规定了一系列的濒危物种保护措施。参见VALIANTE,MARCIA.“Welcomed Participants”or“Environmental Vigilantes”? The CEPA Environmental Protection Action and the Role of Citizen Suits in Federal Environmental Law[J].Dalhousie Law Journal,2002,(Spring):87.
[2]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.258.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.259-260.
[2]加拿大21世纪海洋战略主要包括三项内容:可持续发展、综合管理和预警原则。参见HAWARD.MARCUS.Fisheries and Oceans Governance in Australia and Canada:from Sectoral Management to Integration?[J].Dalhousie Law Journal,2003,(Spring):44.
[3]同本页注①,第263-264页.
[4]GARCIA,S.M.The Precautionary Approach to the Fisheries:Progress Review and Main Issues(1995-2000)[A].NORDQUIST,M.H.& MOORE,J.N.Current Fisheries Issues and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations[C].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2000.505-506.
[1]1998年摩尔诉大堡礁海洋公园管理机构案是关于大堡礁公园管理机构基于保护海洋生态系统的完整性,而拒绝在肯特岛(Kent Island)之外养殖珍珠牡蛎的申请。参加MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.170.
[2]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.225.
[1]“非风险原则”是一些预警原则的批评者所提出的,他们认为预警原则实质上是赋予了管理机构在不存在风险情况时,也采用应对措施的理由。参见RECHTSCHAFFEN,CLIFFORD.Giving Concrete Content to Abstract Ethical Norms:Advancing Environmental Justice Norms[J].U.C.Davis Law Review,2003,November(37):116.
[2]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.231.
[1]1989年荷兰《水资源管理文件》的目标是发展并保护健康的水资源系统,以维护一个安全且适宜居住的国家。参见KELLEY,SALLY J.& PROCTOR,KELLY A.& BRITTION,SUSAN DALE S.Agricultural Law:A Selected Bibliography,1985-1992[J].William Mitchell Law Review,1993,(Spring):532.
[2]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.387.
[3]荷兰《国家环境政策计划四》主要是规划荷兰自2000年起下一个三十年的环境保护目标。参见STEWART,RICHARD B.A New Generation of Environmental Regulation?[J].Capital University Law Review,2001,(29):160.
[1]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.391.
[2]Id.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.399.
[2]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle-Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.400.
[3]Id.
[1]在荷兰《环境管理法》中,并不存在有关预警原则的独立条文,但是该法中的有关规定.如第8.8条“相关活动对环境的影响”,为预警原则的适用预留了空间。参见BACKES,CHRIS W.& VERSCHUUREN,JONATHAN M.The Precautionary Principle ln International,Europoan,And Dutch Wildlife Law[J].Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy,1998,(Winter):51-52.
[2]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.171-172.
[3]在1996年荷兰运输、公共事业和水资源管理部长签发了向瓦登海倾倒10万吨钢和磷矿渣的许可,以便修护海堤。瓦登海环境保护团体认为该许可会致使瓦登海受到废渣中重金属的污染,整个生态系统将遭到破坏。参见ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle—Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.409.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.179-180.
[2]在瓦登海贝类开采案中,一些环境保护主义者认为运输、公共事业和水资源管理部长所签发的瓦登海贝类开采许可可能会破坏瓦登海的生态系统,要求法院撤销该许可。参见ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle-Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.423.
[3]同本页注①,第172页。
[4]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea-Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.170-171.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea-Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.170-171.
[2]Id.,pp.168-169.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea-Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.168-169.
[2]Id.
[1]WT/DS26/AB/R,Appellate Body Report,EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products(Hormones),adopted 16 January 1998,para.124[EB/OL].http://www.worldtradelaw.net/reports/wtoab/ec-hormones(ab).pdf,2007-12-15.
[2]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.113.
[1]牛惠之.预防原则之研究——国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3):51.
[1]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea-Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.6.
[1]傅崐成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅崐成.海洋法专题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.99-100.
[2]同上,第101页。
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.168.
[2]傅崐成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅崐成.海洋法专题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.103.
[1]慕永通.渔业管理:以基于权利的管理为中心[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.127-128.
[2]同上,第128页。
[3]国际捕鲸委员会(IWC)在创立之初是将鲸鱼作为一种鱼类种群加以养护。然而,后来IWC成为保护所有鲸鱼种群的重要国际组织。IWC任务的转变始于20世纪70年代早期,并且与1972年在斯德哥尔摩召开的联合国人类环境大会有着密切的联系。IWC任务的转变主要体现在对商业捕鲸活动为期5年的暂停计划的采纳。这一计划在1986年启动,并延续至今。而且IWC还将南极设为鲸鱼的避难所。参见CARON,DAVID D.The International Whaling Commission and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission:the Institutional Risks of Coercion in Consensual Structures[J].American Journal of International Law,1995,(January):157.
[1]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.128.
[1]慕永通.渔业管理:以基于权利的管理为中心[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.140.
[2]同上,第142页。
[1]慕永通.渔业管理:以基于权利的管理为中心[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.152.
[2]郭守前.海洋渔业资源管理的理论探讨[J].华南农业大学学报,2004,(2):93.
[3]同本页注①,第143页。
[4]采用无偿发放捕捞许可证的一个弊端是,获得许可证的渔民相当于获得了一笔额外收益。而这种结果与渔业资源的社会性是相矛盾的。因为根据渔业资源的社会性,整个社会都应从渔业资源的利用中获益,而不是社会中的少数人。参见:慕永通.渔业管理:以基于权利的管理为中心[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.144.
[1]黄金玲,黄硕琳.总可捕量制度在我国的可行性分析[J].上海水产大学学报,2002,(12):343.
[2]同上。
[1]郭文路,黄硕琳.总可捕量制度不同实施方式的比较分析[J].海洋湖沼通报,2001,(4):63.
[1]苏永华,杨松.我国渔业管理引进TAC、ITQ制度的思考[J].中国渔业经济,2004,(6):29.
[2]郭文路,黄硕琳.总可捕量制度不同实施方式的比较分析[J].海洋湖沼通报,2001,(4):64.
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.191.
[2]KUNICH,JOHN C.Killing Our Oceans:Dealing with the Mass Extinction of Marine Life[M].London:Westport Connecticut,2006.96.
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.192.
[1]傅秀梅,王长云,王亚楠.海洋生物资源与可持续利用对策研究[J].中国生物工程杂志,2006,(7):106.
[2]许兆滨.发胜我国海洋渔业经济必经之路[J].中国渔业经济,2003,(4):14.
[1]国家环境保护总局组织的渤、黄海和东、南海近岸海域环境综合调查结果表明,中国近岸海域沉积物已普遍受到污染物的影响,其中东、南海(特别是厦门港、珠江口附近海域)污染严重,渤、黄海的沉积物污染较轻。参见张秋华.渔业水域生态环境保护和管理[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2004.55
[2]傅秀梅等.海洋生物资源与可持续利用对策研究[J].中国生物工程杂志,2006,(7):106.
[3]同春芬.海洋渔业社会的和谐发展[J].自然辩证法研究,2006,(8):7.
[4]国家海洋局.2006年中国海洋环境质量通报[EB/OL].http://www.soa.gov.cn/hygb/2006hyhj/2.htm,2008-02-17.
[1]国家海洋局.2007上半年中国海洋环境质量通报[EB/OL].http://www.soa.gov.cn/hygb/2007shhyhj.htm,2008-02-17.
[2]国家海洋局.2006年中国海洋环境质量通报[EB/OL].http://www.soa.gov.cn/hygb/2006hyhj/2.htm,2008-02-17.
[3]东海的半封闭性使得该海域内的生物资源具有明显的地方性,并缺乏大洋性种类补充。如果一旦资源遭到破坏,便无法通过外界条件弥补,所以东海生态系统具有脆弱性,容易被破坏。参见叶属峰,温泉,周秋麟.海洋生态系统管理——以生态系统为基础的海洋管理新模式探讨[J].海洋开发与管理,2006,(1):79.
[4]唐议,黄硕琳.专属经济区制度下东海渔业资源的可持续利用[J].集美大学学报(自然科学版),2003,(6):117.
[5]同上,第118页。
[1]唐议,黄硕琳.专属经济区制度下东海渔业资源的可持续利用[J].集美大学学报(自然科学版),2003,(6):118.
[2]在20世纪60年代,大黄鱼、小黄鱼、带鱼、银鲳等优质鱼类占东海渔获总量的51%,而在20世纪70年代这些种类比例下降至46%,80年代更跌至18%。参见陈新军,主编.渔业资源与渔场学[M].北京:海洋出版社,2004.268.
[3]同本页注①。
[4]国家海洋局.2007上半年中国海洋环境质量通报[EB/OL].http://www.soa.gov.cn/hygb/2007shhyhj.htm,2008-03-17.
[5]苏冠强.南海渔业资源现状一瞥[EB/OL].http://www.nanhai.org.cn/news/news_info.asp?ArticleID=448,2007-12-04.
[1]国家海洋局.2006年中国海洋环境质量通报[EB/OL].http://www.soa.gov.cn/hygb/2006hyhj/2.htm,2008-03-17.
[2]金显仕等.黄、渤海生物资源与栖息环境[M].北京:科学出版社,2005.391.
[3]农业部渔业局.农业部渔业局关于2004年环境公报新闻发布的说明[EB/OL].http://www.cafs.ac.cn/page./BookInfo.cbs?ResName=NEWS_B&order=1578,2007-12-24.
[1]农业部渔业局.农业部渔业局关于2004年环境公报新闻发布的说明[EB/OL].http://www.cafs.ac.cn/page/BookInfo.cbs?ResName=NEWS_B&order=1578,2007-12-24.
[2]林景祺.海洋渔业资源导论[M].北京:海洋出版社,1996.49-50.
[1]王海燕.“渔船报废”确保海洋渔业的可持续发展[J].中国水产,2004,(6):28.
[1]韩立民等.渔业经济前沿问题探索[M].北京:海洋出版社,2007.141.
[2]于秀娟.实施最小网目尺寸标准:保护和合理利用渔业资源[J].中国水产,2003,(7):76.
[3]这四艘中国流网渔船分别是“启东821”、“舟顺渔2002”、“鲁渔01”和“曙光渔1”。参见中国水产杂志社.《中国水产》:聚焦中国渔政北太平洋巡航检查[EB/OL].http://www.cnfm.gov.cn/info/display.up?id=3467,2008-01-14.
[1]用拖网进行捕捞的渔船称为拖网渔船。拖网渔船可分为大、中、小型拖网渔船。最常见的是底拖网,即渔网在海底被拖曳。参见陈学雷.海洋资源开发与管理[M].北京:科学出版社,2000.375.
[2]1979年国务院所划定的渤海机动渔船拖网禁渔区是以辽宁省旅顺市老铁山灯塔至蓬莱市蓬莱灯塔之间的连线,在此线以西的渤海海域全年禁止机动渔船拖网作业。参见蓬莱生态市建设规划[EB/OL].http://www.ytepb.gov.cn/pl/download/guihua.doc,2008-04-06.
[3]刘新山、黄世福.试析我国的渔业捕捞许可制度[J].海洋渔业,1999,(3):101.
[1]孙吉亭,潘克厚.我国渔业资源开发问题的经济学分析[J].中国渔业经济,2002,(6):17.
[1]于秀娟.实施最小网目尺寸标准:保护和合理利用渔业资源[J].中国水产,2003,(7):77.
[1]目前我国海洋自然保护区的主管部门有海洋、林业、环保、农业、国土等,其中海洋部门管理的保护区类型比较全面,其主管的保护区占总量的40%,面积占总面积的70%。各部门都有自己的管理体制、经费来源,都在积极发展隶属于本部门的保护区,由此造成相互竞争、重复建设、各自为政、整体效率低下的后果。而且由于受到部门体制的制约,综合管理部门与具体主管部门之间缺少主动的沟通和协调,综合管理部门很难对各部门的自然保护区在宏观决策、政策指导与监督检查方面有所作为。参见刘岩,丘君.我国海洋自然保护区存在的主要问题及对策建议[EB/OL].http://www.nre.cn/htm/04/luzx/02-16-16313.htm,2008-03-24.
[2]崔凤,刘变叶.我国海洋自然保护区存在的主要问题及深层原因[J].中国海洋大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(2):14.
[3]同上。
[4]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.31.
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.32.
[2]同上。
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.32.
[2]孙书贤,主编.海洋行政执法法律依据汇编[Z].北京:海洋出版社,2007.70.
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.33.
[2]农业部渔业局渔政渔港监督处.《渔业捕捞许可管理规定》主要修改内容[J].中国水产,2002,(10):11,14.
[3]同本页注①。
[1]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.33.
[2]同上,第34页。
[3]同上,第34页。
[1]南非是第一个保护大白鲨的国家,1991年南非立法明确规定禁止捕杀或销售大白鲨。参见PHILPOTT ROMNEY.Why Sharks May Have Nothing to Fear More Than Fear Itself." An Analysis of the Effect of Human Attitudes on the Conservation of the Great White Shark[J].Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy,2002,(Summer):456-457.
[2]唐议,黄硕琳.专属经济区制度下东海渔业资源的可持续利用[J].集美大学学报(自然科学版),2003,(6):119.
[1]唐议,黄硕琳.专属经济区制度下东海渔业资源的可持续利用[J].集美大学学报(自然科学版),2003,(6):119-120.
[1]郭文路,黄硕琳,曹世娟.东海区渔业资源的区域合作管理与共同养护[J].自然资源学报,2003,(7):396.
[2]同上,第397页。
[3]詹秉义.渔业资源评估[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1995.346.
[1]杨培举.中国远洋渔业直面海洋寒冰[J].中国船检,2005,(8):29.
[1]高粱.物候、天时和渔业资源的保护利用[J].古今农业,2001,(4):48.
[2]“网罟”是网目细小的渔网,对幼鱼具有极大的杀伤力,因而被列入禁止使用范围之内。参见高粱.物候、天时和渔业资源的保护利用[J].古今农业,2001,(4):48.
[3]“缴网”也是古代人所采用的一种网目细小的渔网,类似于“网罟”。参见高粱.物候、天时和渔业资源的保护利用[J].古今农业,2001,(4):48.
[4]“罛罟”是指捕捞用的渔网。参见郑星象,主编.古汉语字典[Z].福州:祸建人民出版社.1998.610.
[5]“无漉陂池”是指不要过度捕捞,而令池沼中的鱼类枯竭。其中“漉”是令干涸的意思,“陂池”是指池沼、池塘。参见郑星象,主编.古汉语字典[Z].祸州:福建人民出版社,1998.122,361.
[6]同本页注①。
[1]中国21世纪议程——中国21世纪人口、环境与发展白皮书[Z].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1994.127.
[2]王建廷.我国水生生物资源养护立法的现状分析[J].当代法学,2007,(5):109.
[1]根据加拿大《海洋法》,渔业和海洋部为牵头的协调机构。参见联合国粮农组织.向雷克雅未克海洋生态系统负责任渔业会议提交的文件摘要[EB/OL].http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y3545C00.HTM,2008-03-13.
[2]吕耀东.日本为“海洋国家战略”立法[J].瞭望,2007,(7):55.
[1]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law& Policy,2001.258.
[2]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.168-169.
[1]MARK,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.169,170-171.
[1]ZOU,KE YUAN.China's Marine Legal System and the Law of the Sea[M].Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.2005.15.
[2]曹文振等.经济全球化时代的海洋政治[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.42
[1]韩勇.美国渔业资源的管理和保护[J].海洋开发与管理,2006,(3):91-92.
[2]同上。
[3]中国的渔业环境监测网络[EB/OL].http://www.aptcm.com/apagri/16.nsf/6044201c5661d05c4825697b001292fe/5e714d99476a65b248256b8c0016e9b 8?OpenDocument,2008-03-18.
[1]许琳之.关于加强海洋监测工作的几点建议[J].海洋信息,2000,(1):20.
[2]同上,第21页。
[3]中国21世纪议程——中国21世纪人口、环境与发展白皮书[Z].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1994.128.
[4]同上。
[1]中国海洋21世纪议程[EB/OL].http://sdinfo.coi.gov.cn/hyfg/hyfgdb/fg8.htm,2008-02-13.
[2]陈新军.渔业资源可持续利用评价理论和方法[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2004.152.
[1]曹文振等.经济全球化时代的海洋政治[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.
[2]邓子基.现代西方财政学[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,1994.
[3]陈德恭.现代国际海洋法[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1988.
[4]陈荔彤.海洋法论[M].台北:元照出版公司,2002.
[5]陈新军,主编.渔业资源与渔场学[M].北京:海洋出版社,2004.
[6]陈新军.渔业资源可持续利用评价理论和方法[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2004.
[7]陈学雷.海洋资源开发与管理[M].北京:科学出版社,2000.
[8]陈友龙,缪代文.现代四方经济学[J].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002.
[9]韩立民等.渔业经济前沿问题探索[M].北京:海洋出版社,2007.
[10]金显仕等.黄、渤海生物资源与栖息环境[M].北京:科学出版社,2005.
[11]李爱年,韩广.人类社会的可持续发展与国际环境法[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.
[12]李浩培.条约法概论[M].北京:法律出版社,2003.
[13]李耀芳.国际环境法缘起[M].中山大学出版社,2002.
[14]林灿铃.国际环境法[M].北京:人民出版社,2004.
[15]林景祺.海洋渔业资源导论[M].北京:海洋出版社,1996.
[16]马英杰,田其云.海洋资源法律研究[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.
[17]慕亚平.国际法原理[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2005.
[18]慕永通.渔业管理:以基于权利的管理为中心[M].青岛:中国海洋大学出版社,2006.
[19]丘宏达.现代国际法[M].台湾:三民书局出版社,2000.
[20]史忠良,肖四如.资源经济学[M].北京:北京出版社,1993.
[21]世界科学知识与技术伦理委员会.预防原则[M].巴黎:联合国教育、科学及文化组织出版,2005
[22]王铁崖.国际法[M].北京.法律出版社,1995.
[23]吴慧.国际海洋法法庭研究[M].北京:海洋出版社,2001.
[24]曾令良,饶戈平.国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[25]詹秉义.渔业资源评估[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1995.
[26]张秋华.渔业水域生态环境保护和管理[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2004.
[27]赵理海.海洋法的新发展[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1984.
[28]周鲠生.国际法[M].北京:商务出版社,1976.
[29]周忠海.国际法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[30]朱建庚.风险预防原则与海洋环境保护[M].北京:人民法院出版社,2006.
[1][美]E·M·鲍基斯.海洋管理与联合国[M].孙清等译,北京:海洋出版社,1996.
[2][英]TIM HILLIER.国际公法[M].杨泽伟编注,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[3][美]爱蒂丝·布朗·魏伊丝.公平地对待未来人类:国际法、共同遗产与世代间衡平[M].汪劲等译,北京:法律出版社,2000.
[4][英]波尼,[英]波义尔.国际法与环境[M].那力,王彦志,王小钢译,北京:高等教育出版社,2007.
[5][英]蒂莫西·希利尔.国际公法原理[M].曲波译,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[6][奥]菲德罗斯.国际法[M].李浩培译,北京:商务印书馆,1981.
[7]菲尔德,亨普尔,萨默海斯.2020年的海洋:科学、发展趋势和可持续发展面临的挑战[M].吴克勤,林宝法,祈冬梅译,北京:海洋出版社,2004.
[8][荷]格老秀斯.论海洋自由[M].马忠法译,上海:上海人民出版社,2005.
[9][德]赫蒂根.欧洲法[M].张恩民译,北京:法律出版社,2003.
[10]凯尔森.国际法原理[M].王铁崖译,北京:华夏出版社,1988.
[11][韩]柳炳华.国际法[M].朴玉哲,朴玉姬译,北京:中国政法大学出版社,1997.
[12][英]苏珊·沃尔夫.欧盟法简明案例(影印本)[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2004.
[1]BERG,ASTRID.Implementing and Enforcing European Fisheries Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,1999.
[2]BIRNIE,PATRICIA W.& BOYLE,ALAN E.International Law and the Environment[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2002.
[3]BLAY,SAM & PIOTROWICZ,RYSZARD & TSAMENYI,B.MARTIN.Public International Law[M].New York:Oxford University Press,1997.
[4]CARON,DAVID D.& SCHEIBER,HANY N.Bringing New Law to Ocean Waters[M].The Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2004.
[5]CASSESE,ANTONIO.International Law[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2005.
[6]HARREMO(E|¨)S,POUL,ed.The Precautionary Principle in 20th Century:Late Lessons from Early Warnings[M].London:Earthscan Publications Ltd,2002.
[7]HOHMANN,H.Precautionary Legal Duties and Principles of Modern International Environmental Law—The Precautionary Principle:International Environmental Law Between Exploitation and Protection[M].London:Graham & Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff,1994.
[8]KAYE,STUART M.International Fisheries Management[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2001.
[9]KUNICH,JOHN C.Killing Our Oceans:Dealing with the Mass Extinction of Marine Life[M].London:Westport Connecticut,2006.
[10]MARCHANT,GARY E.& MOSSMAN,KENNETH L.Arbitrary and Capricious—The Precautionary Principle in the Europeon Union Courts[M].Washington D.C.:The AEI Press,2004.
[11]MARR,SIMON.The Precautionary Principle in the Law of the Sea—Modern Decision Making in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.
[12]ODA,SHIGERU.Fifty Years of the Law of the Sea[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2003.
[13]RAO,P.K.International Environmental Law and Economics[M].London:Blackwell Publishers,2002.
[14]RIORDAN,TIM O.& CAMERON,JAMES.Reinterpreting the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cameron May International Law&Policy,2001.
[15]SOHN,LOUIS B.& NOYES,JOHN E.Cases and Materials on the Law of the Sea[M].New York:Transnational Publishers,Inc.,2004.
[16]SUNSTEIN,CASS R.Law of Fear:Beyond the Precautionary Principle[M].London:Cambridge University Press,2005.
[17]TEOUWBORST,ARIE.Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law[M].The Hague:Kluwer Law International,2002.
[18]VUKAS,BUDISLAV.The Law of the Sea[M].Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2004.
[19]ZOU,KE YUAN.China's Marine Legal System and the Law of the Sea[M].Leiden:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2005.
[20]ZWARTS,F.The Precautionary Principle-Its Application in International,European and Dutch Law[M].Leiden:Wybe Theodorus Douma,2003.
[1]蔡高强.论全球化进程中主权权力的让渡[J].湖南省政法管理干部学院学报,2002,(18).
[2]陈锦淘,戴小杰.鱼类标志放流技术的研究现状[J].上海水产大学学报,2005,14(4).
[3]陈鹏,黄硕琳,陈锦辉.沿海捕捞渔民转产转业政策的分析[J].上海水产大学学报,2005,(4).
[4]陈思行.“预警性参考点”及其在渔业养护和管理上的应用[J].中国渔业经济研究,1999,(1).
[5]崔凤,刘变叶.我国海洋自然保护区存在的主要问题及深层原因[J].崔凤,主编.海洋与社会[C].哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社,2007.
[6]傅崐成.国际渔业管理法中的预警方法或预警原则[A].傅岷成.海洋法专 题研究[C].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2003.
[7]傅秀梅,王长云,王亚楠.海洋生物资源与可持续利用对策研究[J].中国生物工程杂志,2006,(7).
[8]傅秀梅等.海洋生物资源与可持续利用对策研究[J].中国生物工程杂志,2006,(7).
[9]高粱.物候、天时和渔业资源的保护利用[J].古今农业,2001,(4).
[10]郭守前.海洋渔业资源管理的理论探讨[J].华南农业大学学报,2004,(2).
[11]郭文路,黄硕琳,曹世娟.东海区渔业资源的区域合作管理与共同养护[J].自然资源学报,2003,(7).
[12]郭文路,黄硕琳.总可捕量制度不同实施方式的比较分析[J].海洋湖沼通报,2001,(4).
[13]慕韩勇.美国渔业资源的管理和保护[J].海洋开发与管理,2006,(3).
[14]侯富儒.关于新世纪国际法发展趋势的思考[J].广西社会科学,2003,(12).
[15]胡斌.试论国际环境法中的预警原则[J].法制与管理,2002,(6).
[16]黄金玲,黄硕琳.总可捕量制度在我国的可行性分析[J].上海水产大学学报,2002,(12).
[17]李晓西,赵少钦.可持续发展的成本效益分析[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2004,(4).
[18]李振龙.聚焦中国渔政北太平洋巡航检查[J].中国水产,2004,(8).
[19]刘健.经济全球化与国际法基本原则的发展[J].北京科技大学学报,2002,(3).
[20]刘新山、黄世福.试析我国的渔业捕捞许可制度[J].海洋渔业,1999,(3).
[21]吕炳斌.生物安全与环境法的新课题[A].王曦.国际环境法与比较环境法评论[C].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[22]吕耀东.日本为“海洋国家战略”立法[J].瞭望,2007,(7).
[23]牛惠之.预防原则之研究—国际环境法处理欠缺科学证据之环境风险议题之努力与争议[J].国立台湾大学法学论从,2005,(3).
[24]秦天宝.国际环境法基本原则出探[J].法学,2001,(10).
[25]丘君,李明杰.我国海洋自然保护区面临的主要问题及对策[J].海洋开发 与管理,2005,(4).
[26]苏永华,杨松.我国渔业管理引进TAC、ITQ制度的思考[J].中国渔业经济,2004,(6).
[27]孙吉亭,潘克厚.我国渔业资源开发问题的经济学分析[J].中国渔业经济,2002,(6).
[28]孙世芳、穆兴增、周核心.“海上秦唐沧”建设中的问题与建议[J].经济论坛,1997,(20).
[29]唐议,黄硕琳.专属经济区制度下东海渔业资源的可持续利用[J].集美大学学报(自然科学版),2003,(6).
[30]唐议,唐建业.我国实施捕捞限额制度的有关问题[J].上海水产大学学报,2003,(9).
[31]同春芬.海洋渔业社会的和谐发展[J].自然辩证法研究,2006,(8).
[32]王建廷.我国水生生物资源养护立法的现状分析[J].当代法学,2007,(5).
[33]许琳之.关于加强海洋监测工作的几点建议[J].海洋信息,2000,(1).
[34]许兆滨.发展我国海洋渔业经济必经之路[J].中国渔业经济,2003,(4).
[35]杨培举.中国远洋渔业直面海洋寒冰[J].中国船检,2005,(8).
[36]叶属峰,温泉,周秋麟.海洋生态系统管理—以生态系统为基础的海洋管理新模式探讨[J].海洋开发与管理,2006,(1).
[37]于秀娟.实施最小网目尺寸标准:保护和合理利用渔业资源[J].中国水产,2003,(7).
[1]BACKES,CHRIS W.& VERSCHUUREN,JONATHAN M.The Precautionry Principle In International,European,And Dutch Wildlife Law[J].Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy,1998,(Winter).
[2]BELL,DAVID EUGENE.The 1992 Convention on Biologcal Diversity:the Continuing Significance of U.S.Objections at the Earth Summit[J].George Washington Journal of International Law & Economics,1993,(26).
[3]BERGER-EFORO,JUDITH.Sanctuary for the Whales:Will This be the Demise of the International Whaling Commission or a Viable Strategy for the Twenty-first Century?[J].Pace International Law Review,1996,(Spring).
[4] BOLIVAR, MAURA MULLEN D. A Comparison of Protecting the Environmental Interests of Latinamerican Indigenous Communities from Transnational Corporations under International Human Rights and Environmental Law[J]. Journal of Transnational Law& Policy, 1998, (Fall).
[5] CAMERON, FRASER K. The Greenhouse Effect: Proposed Reforms for the Australian Environmental Regulatory Regime[J]. Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, 2000, (25).
[6] CAMERON, J. & ABOUCHAR, J. The Precautionary Principle: A Fundamental Principle of Law and Policy for the Protection of the Global Environment [J]. Boston College International and Comparative Law Review,1991.(2).
[7] CAMERON, JAMES & ABOUCHAR, JULI. The Status of the Precautionary Principle[A]. FREESTONE, DAVID & HEY, ELLEN, the Precautionary Principle and International Law: the Challenge of Implementation[C]. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1996.
[8] CARON, DAVID D. The International Whaling Commission and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission: the Institutional Risks of Coercion in Consensual Structures[J]. American Journal of International Law, 1995, (January)
[9] CHIRCOP, AIDO & MARCHAND, BRUCE A. Oceans Act: Uncharted Seas for Offshore Development in Atlantic Canada?[J]. Dalhousie Law Journal, 2001, (Spring).
[10] CHRISTIE, DONNA R. It Don't Come EEZ: The Failure and Future of Coastal State Fisheries Management[J]. Journal of Transnational Law & Policy, 2004, (Fall).
[11] COLEMAN, LINDA O'NEIL. The European Union: An Appropriate Model for a Precautionary Approach?[J]. Seattle University Law Review, 2002, (Winter).
[12] COLLINS, NATALIE. European Environmental Policy and Its Effects on Free Trade[J]. William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review, 2001,(Fall).
[13] CONKO, GREGORY. Safety, risk and the precautionary principle: rethinking precautionary approaches to the regulation of regulation of transgenic plants[J]. Transgenic Research, 2003, (12).
[14] COY, JONATHAN. Defending Against the Fourth Horse: The Endangered Species Act and the Threat of Communicable Disease[J]. Penn State Environmental Law Review, 2004, (Winter).
[15] DAVIS, LESLIE A. North Pacific Pelagic Driftnetting: Untangling The High Seas Controversy[J]. University of Southern California, 1991, (5).
[16] DERNBACH, JOHN C. Sustainable Development as a Framework for National Governance[J]. Case Western Reserve University, 1998, (Fall).
[17] EICHENBERG, TIM & SHAPSON, MITCHELL. The Promise of Johannesburg: Fisheries and the World Summit on Sustainable Development[J]. Golden Gate University Law Review, 2004, (Spring).
[18] FONTAUBERT, A. CHARLOTTE DE. Biodiversity in the Sea: Implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity in Marine and Coastal Habitats[J]. Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, 1998, (Spring).
[19] FORD, ROSEMARY A. The Beef Hormone Dispute and Carousel Sanctions: a Roundabout Way of Forcing Compliance with World Trade Organization Decisions[J]. Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 2002, (27).
[20] FRADY, MARIKA. Developments in Land-Based Pollution: From Sewer to Shining Sea[J]. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, 2003 Yearbook, (2003).
[21] FREESTONE, DAVID. A Decade of the Law of the Sea Convention: Is It a Success?[J]. George Washington International Law Review, 2007, (39).
[22] FRISCHMANN, BRETT. A Dynamic Institutional Theory of International Law[J]. Buffalo Law Review, 2003, (Summer).
[23] GARCIA, S. M. The Precautionary Approach to the Fisheries: Progress Review and Main Issues(1995-2000)[A]. NORDQUIST, M. H. & MOORE, J. N. Current Fisheries Issues and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations[C]. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2000.
[24] GARRETT, NATHANIEL. "Life is the Risk We Cannot Refuse:" A Precautionary Approach to the Toxic Risks We Can[J]. Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, 2005, (Spring).
[25] GEE, P. H. DAVID & MACGARVIN, MALCOLM. The Precautionary Principle in the 20th Century — Late Lessons from Early Warnings[J]. European Environment Agency. 2002. (8).
[26] GELFAND, MARTIN D. Practical Application of International Environmental Law: Does It Work Atoll?[J]. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 1997, (Winter).
[27] HANNA, SUSAN STEELE. Implementing Effective Regional Ocean Governance: Perspectives From Economics[J]. Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum, 2006, (Spring).
[28] HAUSRATH, KATHERINE. Crossing Borders: the Extraterritorial Application of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act[J]. University of Baltimore Journal of Environmental Law, 2005, (Fall).
[29] HAWARD, MARCUS. Fisheries and Oceans Governance in Australia and Canada: from Sectoral Management to Integration?[J]. Dalhousie Law Journal, 2003, (Spring).
[30] HERN, SEAN. Competing Values: Taking a Broad View on the Narrowing Conservation Regime of the 1982 Unted Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea[J]. American University International Law Review, 2000, (16).
[31 ] INKELAS, DANIEL. Security, Sound, and Cetaceans: Legal Challenges to Low Frequency Active Sonar under U.S. and International Environmental Law[J]. George Washington International Law Review, 2005, (37).
[32] JAMIESON, BY DALE. Uncertainty and Risk Assessment: Scientific Uncertainty and the Political Process[J]. The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1996, (5).
[33] JENNINGS, PATRICK J. Do Chemicals Found in Plastic Toys Pose a Threat to the Children Who Play with Them? The European Community's Attempt to Regulate the Use of Chemical Plasticizers[J]. Dickinson Journal of International Law, 2000, (Winter).
[34] JUDA, LAWRENCE. Changing Perspectives on the Oceans: Implications for International Fisheries and Oceans Governance[A]. LOWE, VAUGHAN. Bringring New Law to Ocean Waters[C]. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,2004.
[35] KAYE, DAVID. Adjudicating Self-Defense: Discretion, Perception, and the Resort to Force in International Law[J]. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 2005, (44).
[36] KAYE, STUART B. Legal Approaches to Polar Fisheries Regimes: A ComPtive Analysis of the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources and the Bering Sea Doughnut Hole Convention[J]. California Western International Law Journal, 1995, (Fall).
[37] KELLEY, SALLY J. & PROCTOR, KELLY A. & BRITTION, SUSAN DALE S. Agricultural Law: A Selected Bibliography, 1985-1992[J]. William Mitchell Law Review, 1993, (Spring).
[38] KRUCHEK, BETH L. Extending Wetlands Protection Under the Ramsar Treaty's Wise Use Obligation[J]. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 2003, (Summer).
[39] KUNICH, JOHN CHARLES. Losing Nemo: The Mass Extinction Now Threatening the World's Ocean Hotspots[J]. Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, 2005, (30).
[40] LAROCQUE, EMILY E. The Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean: Can Tuna Promote Development of Pacific Island Nations?[J]. University of Hawaii Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal, 2003, (February).
[41] MANDEL, GREGORY N. & GATHII, JAMES THUO. Cost-Benefit Analysis versus the Precautionary Principle: Beyond Cass Sunstein's Laws of Fear[J]. University of Illinois Law Review, 2006, (2006).
[42] MARCHANT, GARY E. From General Policy to Legal Rule: Aspirations and Limitations of the Precautionary Principle[J]. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2003, (34).
[43] MARTIN, GAUTHIER-ST. The Case Against Cost-Benefit Analysis[J]. Ecology Law Quarterly, 2005, (32).
[44] MCOMBER, ELISABETH M. Problems in Enforcement of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species[J]. Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 2002, (27).
[45] MCRAE, DONALD. Trade and the Environment: Competition, Cooperation or Confusion?[J]. Alberta Law Review, 2003, (12).
[46] ONZIVU, WILLIAM. International Environmental Law, the Public's Health, and Domestic Environmental Governance in Developing Countries[J]. American University International Law Review, 2006, (21).
[47] OPPENHEIM, ADRIENNE J. The Plight of the Patagonian Toothfish: Lessons from the Volga Case[J]. Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 2004, (30).
[48] ORELLANA, MARCOS A. The Law on Highly Migratory Fish Stockes: ITLOS Jurisprudence in Context[J]. Golden Gate University Law Review, 2004, (Spring).
[49] PALMER, GEOFFREY. New Ways to Make internatonal Environmental Law[J]. American Journal of International Law, 1992, (April).
[50] PHILPOTT, ROMNEY. Why Sharks May Have Nothing to Fear More Than Fear Itself: An Analysis of the Effect of Human Attitudes on the Conservation of the Great White Shark[J]. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, 2002, (Summer).
[51] RAYFUSE, ROSEMARY etc. Australia and Canada in Regional Fisheries Organizations: Implementing the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement[J]. Dalhousie Law Journal, 2003, (Spring).
[52] RECHTSCHAFFEN, CLIFFORD. Giving Concrete Content to Abstract Ethical Norms: Advancing Environmental Justice Norms[J]. U.C. Davis Law Review, 2003, November(37).
[53] SCHEIBER,HARRY N. & CARR, CHRISTOPHER J. From Extended Jurisdiction to Privatization: International Law, Biology, and Economics in the Marine Fisheries Debates, 1937-1976[J]. Berkeley Journal of International Law, 1998, (16).
[54] SCHNIER, DAVID J. Genetically Modified Organisms & the Cartagena Protocol[J]. Fordham Environmental Law Journal, 2001, (Spring).
[55] SONG, YANN HUEI. The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Possibility of Judicial Settlement of Disputes Involving the Fishing Entity of Taiwan - Taking CCSBT as an Example[J]. San Diego International Law Journal, 2006, (Fall).
[56] STEINZOR, RENA I. Reinventing Environmental Regulation: The Dangerous Journey from Command to Self-control[J]. The Harvard Environmental Law Review, 1998, (17).
[57] STEPHAN, PAUL B. Exploring the Need for International Harmonization: Courts, Tribunals, and Legal Unification—The Agency Problem[J]. Chicago Journal of International Law, 2002, (Fall).
[58]STEWART,RICHARD B.A New Generation of Environmental Regulation?[J].Capital University Law Review,2001,(29).
[59]SUNSTE1N,CASS R.RISK AND THE LAW:Precautions Against What? The Availability Heuristic and Cross-Cultural Risk Perception[J].Alabama Law Review,2005,(Fall).
[60]TELESCA,THOMAS A.Sovereignty or the Precautionary Principle:Which Will Save Our Fish[J].Southeastern Environment Law Journal,2003,(23).
[61]TEMTO,MICHELE.The Precautionary Principle in Marine Fisheries Conservation and the U.S.[J].Vermont Law Review,2000,(Summer).
[62]TOTDAL,TORE.An Introduction to the European Community and to European Community Law[J].North Dakota Law Review,1999,(75).
[63]VALIANTE,MARCIA."Welcomed Participants" or "Environmental Vigilantes"? The CEPA Environmental Protection Action and the Role of Citizen Suits in Federal Environmental Law[J].Dalhousie Law Journal,2002,(Spring).
[64]ZHAREN,W.M.VON.Ocean Ecosystem Stewardship[J].William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review,1998,(Fall).
[1]国家海洋局政策法规办公室.中华人民共和国海洋法规选编[Z].北京:海洋出版社,2001.
[2]傅崐成,主编.海洋法相关公约及中英文索引[Z].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2005.
[3]对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司.乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本[Z].北京:法律出版社,2000.
[4]中国21世纪议程——中国21世纪人口、环境与发展白皮书[Z].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1994.
[5]孙书贤,主编.海洋行政执法法律依据汇编[Z].北京:海洋出版社,2007.
[6]国家环境保护总局自然生态保护司.生物多样性相关国际条约汇编[Z].北京:中国环境科学出版社,2005.
[7][英]尼格尔·G·福斯特.欧盟立法(2005—2006)(上卷)[Z].何志鹏,孙璐译,北京:北京大学出版社,2007.
[8]郑星象,主编.古汉语字典[Z].福州:福建人民出版社,1998.
[1]国际法院:http://www.icj-cij.org
[2]国际海洋法庭:http://www.itlos.org
[3]国家海洋局:http://www.soa.gov.cn
[4]联合国:http://www.un.org
[5]联合国粮农组织:http://www.fao.org
[6]世界贸易法律网:http://www.worldtradelaw.net
[7]武汉大学国际法研究所:http://translaw.whu.edu.cn
[8]烟台市环境保护局:http://www.ytepb.gov.cn
[9]中国南海研究院:http://www.nanhai.org.cn
[10]中国水产科技信息网:http://www.cafs.ac.cn
[11]中国渔业政府网:http://www.cnfm.gov.cn
[12]中华人民共和国环境保护部:http://www.zhb.gov.cn
[13]中华人民共和国农业部:http://www.agri.gov.cn