杨红强,张小标

• 1:南京林业大学经济管理学院
• 2:南京大学长江三角洲经济社会发展研究中心
• 3:国家林业局林产品经济贸易研究中心

摘要(Abstract)：

从"减排能力原则"的视角,依据全球20个代表性HWP生产国的经济发展水平和技术效率提升速率设置4个分析情景,使用GFPM模型模拟并评价2010—2030年全球HWP碳库变动和相应的责任分担。研究表明:1技术效率是提升全球HWP碳库水平的重要因素,发达国家若以既定于样本国平均进步速率提升自身技术效率,可以实现2.9×103Tg C的全球碳库增量。2发达国家HWP碳库替代减排的能力较强,应承担76%~97%的责任,发展中国家的减排分担仅需发达国家的11%~31%。3美国、瑞典、芬兰和德国是全球HWP碳库替代减排责任的主要承担国,中国技术效率优势明显,其HWP碳库的减排替代将在未来应对气候变化中具有重要的分担贡献。

关键词(KeyWords)： 共同但有区别责任;全球HWP碳库;技术效率;减排分担

Abstract:

Keywords:

基金项目(Foundation): 国家社会科学基金重点项目(14AJY014);; 教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目(13YJAZH114);; 江苏省高校“青蓝工程”中青年学术带头人项目(2012-12#)

作者(Author): 杨红强,张小标

DOI: 10.16195/j.cnki.cn36-1328/f.2015.03.013

参考文献(References)：

• [1]Tol R S J,Verhenyen R.State responsibility and compensation for climate change damages:A legal and economic assessment[J].Energy Policy,2004,32(9):1109-1130.
• [2]Voigt C.State responsibility for climate change damages[J].Nordic Journal of International Law,2008,77(1):1-22.
• [3]UNFCCC.United Nations framework convention on climate change with Annex[J].United Nations-Treaty Series,1994,1771(30882):139-165.
• [4]IPCC.Climate change 2014:Mitigation of climate change[M].New York:Cambridge University Press,2014:113-143.
• [5]Marina C,Michael T.Climate change economics and policy:An RFF anthology[M].New York,Washington D C:Resource for the Future,2000:50-89.
• [6]Lasse R,Asbjorn T,Arild U.Burden sharing and fairness principles in international climate policy[J].International Environmental Agreements:Politics,Law and Economics,2002,2(1):1-22.
• [7]Wei Y,Zou L,Wang K,et al.Review of proposals for an agreement on future climate policy:Perspectives from the responsibilities for GHG reduction[J].Energy Strategy Reviews,2013,2(2):161-168.
• [8]Caney S.Cosmopolitan justice,responsibility,and global climate change[J].Leiden Journal of International Law,2005,18(4):747-775.
• [9]Bortscheller M J.Equitable but ineffective:How the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities hobbles the global fight against climate change?[J].Sustainable Development Law and Policy,2010,10(2):49-68.
• [10]Phylipsen G J M,Bode J W,Blok K,et al.A triptych sectoral approach to burden differentiation:GHG emissions in the European bubble[J].Energy Policy,1998,26(12):929-943.
• [11]Shoibal C,Ananth C,Heleen De C,et al.Sharing global CO2emission reductions among one billion high emitters[J].Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences of the United States of America,2009,106(29):11884-11889.
• [12]Rive N,Torvanger A,Fuglestvedt J S.Climate agreements based on responsibility for global warming:Periodic updating,policy choices,and regional costs[J].Global Environmental Change,2006,16(2):182-194.
• [13]Müller B,Hhne N,Ellermann C.Differentiating(historic)responsibilities for climate change[J].Climate Policy,2009,9(6):593-611.
• [14]Madele Ine H.Equity and international climate change negotiations:A matter of perspective[J].Climate Policy,2007,7(6):518-534.
• [15]Hamdi-Cherif M,Guivarch C,Quirion P.Sectoral targets for developing countries:Combining“Common but differentiated responsibilities”with“Meaningful participation”[J].Climate Policy,2010,11(1):731-751.
• [16]Liverman D M.Conventions of climate change:Constructions of danger and the dispossession of the atmosphere[J].Journal of Historical Geography,2009,35(2):279-256.
• [17]Lo S.The differing capabilities to respond to the challenge of climate change across Annex Parties under the Kyoto Protocol[J].Environmental Science and Policy,2010,13(1):42-54.
• [18]Dellink R,Elzen M,Aiking H,et al.Sharing the burden of financing adaptation to climate change[J].Global Environmental Change,2009,19(4):411-421.
• [19]Akimoto K,Sano F,Homma H,et al.Estimates of GHG emission reduction potential by country,sector and cost[J].Energy Policy,2010,38(7):3384–3393.
• [20]Wang T,Watson J.China’s Carbon emission and international trade:Implications for post-2012 policy[J].Climate Policy,2008,8(6):577-587.
• [21]Steininger K,Lininger C,Droege S,et al.Justice and cost effectiveness of consumption-based versus production-based approaches in the case of unilateral climate policies[J].Global Environmental Change,2014,24:75-87.
• [22]Wang S H,Zhang M Z,Zhao P A,et al.Modelling the spatial distribution of forest carbon stocks with artificial neural network based on TM images and forest inventory data[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2011,31(4):998-1008.
• [23]Nabuurs G J,Pivinen R,Sikkema R,et al.The role of European forests in the global carbon cycle-A review[J].Biomass Bioenergy,1997,13(6):345-358.
• [24]杨红强,季春艺,杨惠,等.全球气候变化下中国林产品的减排贡献:基于木质林产品减排功能的核算[J].自然资源学报,2013,28(12):2023-2033.
• [25]伦飞,李文华,王震,等.中国伐木制品碳储量时空差异[J].生态学报,2012,32(9):2918-2928.
• [26]Lee J.Application of the three-stage DEA in measuring efficiency-an empirical evidence[J].Applied Economics Letters,2008,15(1):49-52.
• [27]田杰,姚顺波.中国林业生产的技术效率测算与分析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2013 23(11):66-72.
• [28]Kallio M,Dykstra D P,Binkley C S.The global forest sector,an analytical perspective[M].New York:Wiley,1987:459-472.
• [29]Kallio A M I,Moiseyev A,Solberg B.The global forest sector model EFI-GTM-the model structure[R].EFI Technical Report Joensuu:European Forest Institute.
• [30]Buongiorno J,Zhu S,Zhang D,et al.The global forest products model:Structure,estimation and applications[M].San Diego:Academic Press,2003:1-51.
• [31]IPCC.IPCC Guidelines for National greenhouse gas inventories,intergovernmental panel on climate change 2006[M].Cambridge,New York:Cambridge University Press,2006:12.5-12.31.
• [32]Kalio M,Dykstra D P,Binkley C S.The Global Forest Sector:An Analytical Perspective[M].UK:John Wiley&Sons,Inc.,1987:1-12.
• [33]Cardellichio P A,Youn Y C,Binkley C S,et al.An economic analysis of short-run timber supply around the global[C]//CINTRAFOR Working Paper:18 CINTRAEFOR,College of Forest Resources.University of Washington,1988.
• [34]Gregory S L,Hanne K S,Birger S.A review of recent developments and applications of partial equilibrium models of the forest sector[J].Journal of Forest Economics,2013,19(4):350-360.
• [35]张小标,杨红强,聂影.GFPM模型:研究综述与应用范畴[J].林业经济,2014(7):79-84.
• [36]张小标,杨红强.基于全球均衡市场的中国人造板产业的动态演化[J].林业经济,2015(1):62-69.
• [37]白彦锋,姜春前,张守攻.中国木质林产品碳储量及其减排潜力[J].生态学报,2009,29(1):399-405.
• [38]Skog K E.Sequestration of carbon in harvested wood products for the United States[J].Forest Products Journal,2008,58(6):56-72.
• [39]Boungiorno J,Zhu S.Technical change in forest sector models:The global forest products model approach[J].Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research,2014,30(1):30-48.
• [40]Buongiornoa J,Raunikar R,Zhu S.Consequences of increasing bioenergy demand on wood and forests:An application of the Global Forest Products Model[J].Journal of Forest Economics,2011,17(2):214-229.
• [41]Zhang H,Boungiorno J.Domestic and foreign consequences of China's land tenure reform on collective forests[J].International Forestry Review,2012,14(3):349-362.
• 1研究中各国按照经济发展水平分为发达国家、发展中国家两大类,发展中国家可细分为主要发展中国家(以巴西、俄罗斯、印度和中国等金砖四国为代表)和其他发展中国家。
• 1研究约束的HWP碳库包括UNFCCC分类下的其他工业原木、锯材、胶合板、刨花板、纤维板、纸和纸板六类产品的碳储量,其中前五类为硬木类产品,纸和纸板为纸类产品。
• 1图1中的实线部分代表林产品从初级产品到最终产品的加工过程,虚线部分表示当薪材价格上升到一定程度时,工业原木可以用于生产新材。
• 1在GFPM(Version 2013)模型中,以2010年作为基期。
• 2实际上,在GFPM的基准分析情境中,对未来I-O系数的变动进行了初步模拟。
• 3由于研究基于技术效率视角,故筛选样本国家时侧重关注森工产品(锯材、胶合板、刨花板、纤维板、纸和纸板)的产量。
• 4GFPM模型中基期I-O系数是基于1992—2011年FAOSTAT数据库产量和贸易量数据模拟计算得出[39],同时在模拟出的I-O系数中,部分纸类产品的I-O系数未来呈现上升趋势,这可能是产品质量提升的要求,这部分I-O系数不纳入研究范畴。
• 1在GFPM模型基准分析情景中,假定各国每阶段的平均技术效率进步量等于全球水平[39],研究认为这是值得商榷的,本文在此基础上计算样本国的平均技术效率进步率,以进步率进行进一步地设置分析情景。
• 2由于2009年及之前的HWP碳库存量是一个常量,为简化研究,假定2009年及之前的HWP碳库存量为零。
• 1 另外,贸易也是影响国家间碳库水平的重要因素,但考虑到贸易带来的碳流动并不能改变全球HWP碳库水平,无法确切表达确切表达一国由于生产技术效率提升对全球HWP碳库的真实贡献,并不属于能力原则范畴,故而本研究并不考虑贸易因素。
• 2 尽管本研究基于减排能力(技术效率)视角在样本国之间分担全球HWP碳库责任,但在结论论述方面仍然遵循目前普遍认可的、UNFCCC及京都议定书框架下确定的“发达国家是强制减排执行国,发展中国家无约束性义务”这一CBDR的基本理念,发展中国家的碳库责任分担仅作为未来可能的气候责任分配下的量化佐证。