规则选择的效率比较：以环保制度为例
凌斌规则选择的效率比较：以环保制度为例
Efficiency of Legal Rules: An Example of Environmental Protection System
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：凌斌
单位：北京大学法学院
中文关键词：环境保护;规则的效率标准;法律与市场;界权成本
英文关键词：environmental protection;efficiency of legal rule;law and market;delimitation cost
中文摘要：
环境群体性事件背后的一个重要的理论问题，是在环保制度中如何选择更有效率的法律规则。卡拉布雷西和梅拉米德提出的分析框架，有助于深入理解环境污染的制度设计。“卡-梅框架”对于法律规则的效率比较，基于事后效率（机会成本）与事前效率（行为激励）的法律经济学标准。同时，不同法律规则的经济效果，最终反映在法益的市场定价之上，对应着不同的市场类型。从效率标准和市场类型出发，可以看到各种现行的和可供选择的环保法律制度可能具有的成本收益和实践效果。以环境影响评价法为核心的现行环保体制，要比一刀切式的事前禁止或是造成严重后果后的司法救济更有效率，但是必须提升环保部门的公信力和执行力。
英文摘要：
The key issue behind the environmental group events in law and economics is the efficient choice of the legal rules in environmental protection. The property rules and liability rules framework by Guido Calabresi and Douglas Melamed is of help. The main efficiency standards of C&M Framework are ex post opportunity cost and ex ante incentive efficiency. Taking a thought experiment of environmental pollution as example, the C&M Framework can be extended to five types of rules, corresponding to different types of markets, that is, inactivity rules to yellow market, inalienable rules to black market or no market, property rules to white market, liability rules to green market, and regulation rules to red market and gray market.According to the efficient standards, we may examine the cost-benefits and the practical effects of the existing and potential legal options in environmental protection. By contrast, the current regime based on the Environmental Impact Assessment Law is generally more efficient than the ex ante administrative prohibition and the ex post judicial remedies, but is subject to the credibility of the environmental protection agencies. However, according to the very practice of environmental protection in today’s China, the regulation rules and the inalienable rules are more realistic than the liability rules and the property rules. And the choice between the liability rules and the property rules should take the heaviness of the pollution into account. The choice of rules has to suffer the delimitation cost. Only if all the possible types of rules have been examined and all their efficient differences have been compared, can the choice, evaluation, and improvement of rules be rational.
全文阅读： 点击下载
