【作者】 张祥伟；

【导师】 崔凤；

【作者基本信息】 中国海洋大学 ， 环境与资源保护法学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 伴随着环境问题的日益显现并趋于严重化，针对环境法的研究同样也是日益扩展和深化。自20世纪60至70年代始，我国的环境法制建设也开始踏上征程，与此同时甚或更早我国的环境法理论研究也真正地开始了艰难的起步。如果以1972年斯德哥尔摩会议的参加作为真正的起点，我国的环境法研究已历经40多年的发展。中国环境法的研究涉及范围、视角十分广阔，但在中国环保现实中却存在着这样一个悖论：环境理论、环境制度、环境法律日益增多的同时，环境问题、环境危机却也在不断发生、甚至增强。这不得不令人反思，产生如此悖论的原因究竟何在？对此，学者们从不同的视角给出了自己的观点，可是悖论却仍未消除。综合分析这些观点，却为本文提供了针对整个中国环境法研究而进行反思的方向——整合研究，与反思的层次——路径研究。文章始终围绕“整合路径”这一中心问题展开论述，并主要按照整合的必要性、整合工具的选择、整合的前提和整合的实现途径这一逻辑进行论证。文章第一部分主要分析我国环境法研究所存在的问题，这是整合之必要性的重要组成部分。文章主要总结了三个方面的问题：一是理论研究所呈现出来的“散”；二是实践研究所呈现出来的“松”；三是整个环境法研究所存在的“偏”。文章第二部分则主要分析问题产生的原因及所造成的研究困境。问题产生的原因是对“病根”的分析，而问题所造成的困境则是对问题所产生影响的深入性分析。同时，这二者都对环境法的研究提出了整合的必要。文章从哲学和法学两个不同的层面对问题产生的原因予以分析。通过分析得出，中国环境法研究所存在的问题其产生的原因，是对环境法规则性的本质特征和实践性的本质要求的忽略和淡忘。对问题所造成的困境主要从缺乏体系性、不利于学科发展和实施过程中问题丛生三个方面进行了分析。而要解决这些困境同时又要满足环境法规则性与实践性的要求，则必须依赖于对人类环境行为的研究。文章的第三部分则是对环境行为这一整合工具进行选择和确定的原因分析。基于对方法论意义及价值的探讨，文章选择从环境法研究的方法论这一视角进行阐释。换句话说，就是根据学者们在对环境法进行研究时所必须面对和解决的问题这一视角进行的阐释。进行细致的类型划分便可将这些问题划分为：事实判断问题、价值判断问题、规范选择问题、立法技术问题、法律适用问题。该部分也主要是从以上几个方面进行的原因分析。文章的第四部分则是对整合前提的论述，即运用环境行为这一整合工具实现对环境法研究进行整合的前提的论证。要发挥环境行为这一整合性的功能，必须首先要为环境行为与环境法的理论研究和实践研究架起连接的桥梁，而这一桥梁的架设便是将环境行为确立为环境法的直接调整对象。只有将环境行为作为环境法的直接调整对象，环境行为的整合功能才能真正得以发挥。文章的第五部分主要针对环境行为的内涵、环境行为明确之途径、环境行为法律表达之范围等方面对环境行为予以细致化的分析。文章并未企图去为环境行为界定一个明确的内涵，而是阐释一种帮助明确其内涵的途径和努力的方向。途径就是尽力实现环境行为的法律表达，而努力的方向则是尽可能明确环境行为法律表达的范围。至此，文章对于“中国环境法研究的整合路径”这一论题所得出的阶段性结论就是：中国的环境法研究需要整合，而整合的工具就是环境行为，整合的前提则是把环境行为作为环境法的直接调整对象，而整合方式就是实现环境行为的法律表达。更多还原

【Abstract】 With the environmental issues becoming apparent increasingly andtending aggravation, the study of environmental law is also expanding anddeepening. Beginning with the1960s to the1970s, the construct of China’senvironmental legal system had begun to embark on the journey. At the sametime or even earlier, the theoretical study of environmental law also hadbegun a difficult start. Taking the participation in the1972StockholmConference as a real starting point, the study of Chinese environmentallaw has gone through40years.The research on Chinese environmental law involving a lot ofperspectives, and the scope is very broad. However, there is such a paradoxin practice: while a growing number of environmental theory,environmental institution and environmental law, the environmentalissues and environmental crisis continue to occur and even enhanced. Itforces us to reflect on the causes of this paradox? Some scholars presentedtheir own proposals from different perspectives, but the paradox has notbeen eliminated. However, the proposals offer us a reflective lever——path research, and a reflective direction——integration for theentire Chinese environmental law research.This article focus on the central question——"Research on theintegration path ". It includes that the necessity of integration, andthe selection of integration tool, and the feasibility of the integrationtools, the premise of integration, and the way of integration. The firstpart analyzes the problems of the study of Chinese Environmental Law,which is an important part of the necessity of integration. The articlesummarizes three aspects: First, the study on theories is "scattered";Second, the study on practice is "loose"; Third, the study onenvironmental law is not derived from China’s reality.The second part is the analysis of the causes of the problems and thepredicament caused by the problems. Predicaments caused by the problemscan still be attributed to "the necessity of integration", and the purposeof discussion of the causes of the problems which is to find the "rootcause", that is the premise the selection of integration tool. Followedby the reason be analyzed from two different aspects between philosophyand legal. We can conclude that the causes of the problems are becausescholars ignored the regularity of the law and the practicality of thelaw. Predicaments caused by the problems include the lack of systematic,and impeding the development of the subject, and implementation processfilled with problems. To meet the requirements of the regularity and practicality of the law must rely on the research on human environmentalbehavior.The third part of the article is discussing why we choose theenvironmental behavior as the integrate tool, and the discussion in theperspective of methodology of the environmental law research. In otherwords, discussion is mainly on the aspects which scholars must face andsolve at the time of environmental law research. The aspects can be dividedinto those issues: fact judgment, value judgment, norms choice,legislative technical issues, legal application.The forth part of the article is to discuss the premise of theintegration, which is how to use the environmental behavior to achievethe goal of the integration of environmental law research. To make thisintegrated functionality come into play, it is a must to set up theconnection between the study of the theory and practice of environmentallaw and the environmental behavior. The connection needs to takeenvironmental behavior as a direct adjustment of environmental law object.Only by this way, the integrated functionality of environmental behaviorcan really be played.The fifth part of the article mainly focused on these issues: theconception of environmental behavior, how to define the environmentalbehavior and the scope of the environmental behavior. However, thisarticle does not attempt to define a clear conception of the environmentalbehavior. It only told the way to help define the environmental behaviorclearly and the direction of efforts. The way is to try to achieve thelegal expression of environmental behavior, and the direction is to definethe range of the legal expression of environmental behavior as clearlyas possible.At this point, the article for "research on the integrated path ofthe study on Chinese environmental law" can draw the conclusion: theresearch of Chinese environmental law needs to be integrated, and theintegration tool is environmental behavior, and the premise is to takeenvironmental behavior as direct adjustment of environmental law object,and the way is to make environmental behavior legalization.更多还原