国际海洋争端解决机制的经济学分析：一个“适当论”的视角

发布时间：2018-07-14 15:17

【摘要】：最近几年，海洋法相关论题成为国际公法领域炙手可热的论题，而海洋法争端解决机制又是海洋法研究中经久不衰的主题之一。在海洋法争端解决机制的执行层面，从实际情况看来，强国往往具备更多的话语权。各国使用各种国际辞令来掩饰与公平、正义无关的自利因素所驱动的行为或为此类行为提供辩护，且在依照自利逻辑行事时已选择最有利本国利益的国际法条款或公约为辩护理由，使海洋法争端解决机制不再正义。在法律的制定层面，虽然国际海洋法争端的数量和种类在不断增多，但是解决其矛盾的法律发展却严重滞后。法律人的局限性在于用法律的思维制定法律，用法律的价值考量法律是否公平、正义，最后用法律的技术手段检验法律的制度设计，这一过程可能导致法律的制定和监督主体过度相近的狭隘性。因此，用经济学的方法论和范式去考量法律制度比法学学科内的反思和考量更具有实际意义。经济学运用“成本——收益”分析、“供给——需求”等研究范式对技术的关注远大于对原则的关注。也就是说，经济学作为一种分析工具忽视了对问题宏观原则的概括。因此导致在运用经济学方法分析相关领域的具体问题时产生“道德”和“法律”两难的“斯芬克斯”现象，即虽然运用经济学分析范式得到答案，却违反道德的现象。对于各国在何时以及为何遵守国际法，最合理的解释并不是各国已将国际法内在化，或具有一种遵守国际法的习惯，或受到其道德吸引力的驱使，而仅仅是各国基于自身利益的考量。归根结底，国际法产生于各国之间对国家利益和权力分配的需求，，以实现各国利益最大化为宗旨。国际海洋法及相应争端解决机制是基于各国之间对海洋利益与权力分配的争端，以实现各个国家经济利益与政治权力最大化为法律设置初衷和发展目标。因此，可以在综合运用法律与经济学双重研究方法的基础上，以一种综合的、全方位的、立体式的研究视角，重新审视国际法在处理国家之间经济利益与政治权力争端过程中的重要程度和影响意义。具体而言，就是将“适当”这一原则性、统领性的理念植入法经济学分析范式中，对国际海洋争端解决机制中相关问题进行成本——收益分析、供给——需求分析、博弈分析、法经济学分析等过程中，既不偏执于法学研究对正义的关注，在也不过分侧重于经济学研究对效率的关注，以“适度、正当”作为原则主线，适度参考和平、合作、自愿等标准，最终构建符合各国理性预期的、可被世界各国广泛援引与遵守的、符合普世精神的争端解决机制，重塑法经济学研究视角，实现经济学研究与法学研究的竞合。本文第一章，对法经济学的主要基础理论和基本分析工具做概要介绍。第二章，运用经济学的供给——需求分析工具，研究国际海洋法律制度及争端解决机制的供给与各国的需求状况。首先，厘清海洋争端的渊源，对海洋争端解决机制的本质进行剖析。并指出，由主权争端引发的利益之争是形成海洋争端解决机制需求的本质原因。其次，系统阐述以《联合国海洋公约》为核心的国际海洋法律制度在国际海洋争端解决机制方面的供给。最后，分析中国及周边国家在现有国际海洋争端解决机制的供给状况下的行为选择，并通过案例分析揭示出，目前国际海洋争端机制的法律供给需求处于法律供给小于法律需求的非均衡状态，此为引发国际海洋争端的直接诱因。第三章，对国际海洋争端解决机制进行成本——收益分析。法经济学研究将效率视为研究的出发点和归宿点，是一切法律实践所要追求的终极目标。法律制度安排所追求的效率包括立法、执法、司法、诉讼在内的所有法律设置。因此，本章运用成本——收益分析方法对现存国际海洋法律制度安排给世界各国带来的成本收益的改变，尤其是因海洋法设置缺陷引发海洋争端给各国造成的利益损失分别进行分析，指出现存国际海洋法律制度在立法、执法、司法、诉讼等层面存在的问题，为提出以“适当论”研究视角对国际海洋争端解决机制进行法经济学分析，通过适当的法律制度安排最大限度地实现海洋资源有效配置、最大限度地满足各国对海洋法律制度的需求埋下伏笔。第四章，对国际海洋争端解决机制进行博弈分析，探寻在资源禀赋非对等条件下的制度均衡过程。首先，制度安排和制度结构均衡取决于行为人的资源禀赋。其次，在经济发展和制度均衡的形成过程中，博弈双方资源禀赋的非对等性决定了制度的不平等性。最后，由于资源禀赋的非对等性，最终均衡制度的形成受到资源优势者的控制或影响并非必然有利于实现社会利益最大化，即不一定存在效率。在解决国际海洋争端过程中，资源禀赋较优国在很大程度上影响了法律制度的设置，并在海洋争端解决过程中占主导地位和绝对优势。在个人理性和集体理性存在较大冲突的前提下，这种法律制度设置显然是非均衡的、非效率的。第五章，对国际海洋争端的一种特殊解决机制，即军事措施进行法经济学分析，对军事措施解决国际海洋争端的特殊意义进行解读，指出军事措施作为对效率、公平、均衡同步缺失的补充，是实现国家自身权力与收益救济的有效措施。并得到结论：在国际社会应谨慎且合法使用军事措施，在遇到侵害国家利益寻求法律无果时方可诉诸武力救济，最大限度地维持国际海洋秩序的稳定与和平。第六章，以国际海洋法法庭、常设国际仲裁法庭国际和法院在处理国际海洋争端过程中的优势与劣势比较为例，对《联合国海洋法公约》中有关国际海洋争端解决机制的规则设定进行实证分析。在现有国际海洋法律制度框架内，不论是国际海洋法法庭、常设国际仲裁法庭还是国际法院，在处理国际海洋纠纷时都存在特定优势和薄弱环节。在法律适用和争端解决机构的选择问题上，各国基于理性经济人的假设，以本国利益最大化的目标进行行为选择。第七章，提出运用“适当论”解决国际海洋争端的新视角。文章最后一部分通过对“适当论”理论的研究，尝试归纳“适当论”理论；尝试证明“适当论”理论是法经济学的研究范式；尝试证明“适当论”理论移植法经济学的必要性和可行性。意在让“适当论”理论走出国际私法的领域，尝试论证其成为一种国际法甚至是整个法学学界的普世原则和制度价值评价标尺的可能性。本文的创新之处在于首次提出运用“适当论”这一法学研究范式解决国际海洋争端问题。旨在摒弃经济学和法学研究中所存在的弊端，对法学与经济学的追求目标进行适当取舍与适度糅合，提供一种解决国际海洋争端的“适度、正当”的思维或视角，使国际海洋争端解决机制朝着更为正义和效率的方向发展。同时，在综合运用法律与经济学双重研究方法的基础上，以一种综合的、全方位的、立体式的研究视角，重新审视国际法在处理国家之间经济利益与政治权力争端过程中的重要程度和影响意义。构建符合各国理性预期的、可被世界各国广泛援引与遵守的、符合普世精神的国际海洋争端解决机制，重塑法经济学研究视角，实现经济学研究与法学研究的竞合。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the issues related to the law of the sea have become a hot topic in the field of international public law, and the dispute settlement mechanism of the law of the sea is one of the most persistent themes in the study of the law of the sea. In the implementation of the dispute settlement mechanism of the law of the sea, the power of the power is often provided with more discourse power. All countries use various international rhetoric. To disguise the actions that are driven by the independent factors of equity, justice, or to defend such acts, and to justify the international law clauses or conventions that have chosen the interests of the most interested States in accordance with the logic of self-interest, make the dispute settlement mechanism of the law of the sea no longer just.
At the level of law making, although the number and type of international maritime law disputes are increasing, the legal development of solving its contradictions is seriously lagging behind. The limitation of the legal person lies in the use of legal thinking to establish the law, to examine whether the law is fair, just, and finally to test the legal system with the technical means of law. Design, this process may lead to the formulation of the law and the overseeing the narrow parochial of the subject. Therefore, it is more practical to take the economic methodology and paradigm to examine the legal system than the reflection and consideration of the law.
Economics uses the "cost benefit" analysis, and the research paradigm of "supply and demand" is much more concerned about technology than the principle of concern. In other words, economics as an analytical tool ignores the generalization of the macro principles of the problem. The "Steefan Kors" phenomenon of the dilemma between morality and law, that is, to use the analytical paradigm of economics to get the answer, is a violation of the moral phenomenon. The most reasonable explanation for when and why countries comply with international law is not the international law, or the habit of complying with international law, or its morality. In the final analysis, the international law of the sea and the corresponding dispute settlement mechanism are based on the dispute over the distribution of maritime interests and powers between countries. At present, the economic interests and political power of each country are maximized as the original intention and development goal of the law.
Therefore, on the basis of the comprehensive application of the dual research methods of law and economics, the importance and meaning of international law in the process of dealing with the disputes between countries' economic interests and political power can be reviewed with a comprehensive, comprehensive and stereoscopic perspective. In particular, it is the principle of "appropriate". In the economic analysis paradigm of the integration of the dominant concept, the cost - income analysis, supply - demand analysis, game analysis, and the analysis of law and economics in the international marine dispute settlement mechanism are not paranoid about the concern of justice in legal research, but not on the efficiency of economic research. Pay attention to the principle of "moderation and justification" as the main line, with a moderate reference to the standards of peace, cooperation and voluntariness, and finally build up a dispute settlement mechanism that meets the rational expectations of all countries, which can be widely invoked and observed by all countries, conforms to the universal spirit of the dispute, reshape the perspective of the study of law and economics, and realizes the concurrence of economic research and legal research.
In the first chapter, the main basic theory and basic analytical tools of law and economics are briefly introduced. In the second chapter, the supply of the supply of economic supply and demand analysis is used to study the supply of international marine legal system and dispute settlement mechanism and the needs of countries. First, to clarify the origin of marine disputes and to solve the mechanism of maritime dispute settlement. It also points out that the conflict of interests caused by the sovereignty dispute is the essential reason for the formation of the demand for the settlement mechanism of marine disputes. Secondly, the paper systematically expounds the supply of international maritime legal system based on the United Nations Convention on ocean convention in the international maritime dispute settlement mechanism. Finally, the analysis of China and its surrounding countries in the existing international system The choice of behavior under the supply situation of the marine dispute settlement mechanism reveals that the legal supply demand of the international maritime dispute mechanism is in a non equilibrium state that the legal supply is less than the legal demand. This is the direct cause of the international maritime dispute. The third chapter makes the cost of the international maritime dispute settlement mechanism - The study of law and economics considers efficiency as the starting point and destination of research. It is the ultimate goal to pursue in all legal practices. The efficiency of legal system arrangement includes all legal settings, including legislation, law enforcement, judicature, and litigation. Therefore, this chapter uses the method of cost-benefit analysis to the existing international ocean law. The change in the cost and benefit brought by the law system to the countries of the world, especially the loss caused by maritime disputes caused by maritime disputes, points out the existing problems of the existing international marine legal system in the aspects of legislation, law enforcement, judicature, and litigation. The international maritime dispute settlement mechanism is analyzed by law and economics, and the effective allocation of marine resources can be achieved through the appropriate legal system, and the needs of the marine legal system are met to the greatest extent. The fourth chapter, the game analysis of the international maritime dispute settlement mechanism, explores the non equivalence conditions of the resources endowment. First, the institutional arrangement and the balance of institutional structure depend on the resource endowment of the actor. Secondly, in the process of the formation of economic development and institutional equilibrium, the non equivalence of the resource endowment of the two parties determines the unequal nature of the system. Finally, the final equilibrium system is formed due to the non equivalence of the resources endowment. The control or influence of the resource superior is not necessarily conducive to the realization of the maximization of social interests, that is, it does not necessarily have efficiency. In the process of solving international maritime disputes, the superior country has a great influence on the establishment of the legal system and the dominant and absolute superiority in the process of maritime dispute settlement. On the premise of large conflict, the establishment of the legal system is obviously unbalanced and ineffective. In the fifth chapter, a special settlement mechanism for international maritime disputes, that is, the analysis of military measures in law and economics, the special significance of military measures to solve international maritime disputes, points out that military measures are effective, It is an effective measure to realize the relief of the state's own power and income. It is concluded that in the international community, the military measures should be used cautiously and legally, and in the case of the failure of the national interests to seek the relief of force, the stability and peace of the international marine order should be maintained at the most limit. The six chapter, with the international tribunal of the law of the sea, the international arbitration tribunal of the permanent international tribunal and the court in the process of dealing with international maritime disputes, compares the advantages and disadvantages as an example, and carries out an empirical analysis of the rules setting for the international maritime dispute settlement mechanism in the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea, in the framework of the existing international maritime legal system, whether international The tribunal of the law of the sea, the permanent international arbitration tribunal or the International Court of justice have specific advantages and weak links in dealing with international maritime disputes. On the issue of the application of law and the choice of dispute settlement institutions, countries are based on the hypothesis of rational economy and choose the goal of maximizing the interests of the country. The seventh chapter puts forward the application of "suitable". The last part of the article tries to sum up the theory of "appropriateness" through the study of the theory of "appropriateness", and tries to prove that the theory of "appropriateness" is the research paradigm of law and economics, and tries to prove the necessity and feasibility of the theory of "appropriateness" to transplant economics. The theory of appropriateness "goes out of the field of international private law and tries to demonstrate the possibility that it becomes a universal principle and a criterion for evaluating the value of institutional value in an international law, even in the whole jurisprudential circle."
The innovation of this paper is for the first time to solve the problem of international maritime disputes by using the legal research paradigm of "proper theory". The aim is to abandon the drawbacks in the economic and legal research and to properly mix the pursuit of law and economics and provide a "moderate" to solve the international maritime dispute. The thinking or angle of view makes the international maritime dispute settlement mechanism develop in the direction of more justice and efficiency. At the same time, on the basis of the comprehensive application of the dual research methods of law and economics, a comprehensive, omni-directional and stereoscopic perspective is used to reexamine the international law in dealing with the economic interests and political power disputes between countries. The importance and significance of the end process. It is necessary to construct the international maritime dispute settlement mechanism which is widely invoked and observed by all countries, which conform to the universal spirit, reshape the perspective of the study of law and economics, and realize the competition of economic research and legal research.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D993.5;D90-052

【参考文献】