|
| 文章编号：1672-3104(2021)01-0065-11 |
| |
|
环境风险规制中的民意困局及其破解 |
| |
章楚加 |
| |
|
（清华大学法学院，北京，100084） |
| |
| 摘 要： 风险社会转型背景下，“知识-权力”组合型环境风险规制范式因科技理性的独尊与社会理性的式微而深陷民意困局。传统行政规制进路在破解民意困局方面存在三重阻滞：一是法律规范授权明确性弱化导致其对环境风险规制权力的拘束效果减弱；二是环境规制依据客观化与环境风险认知主观化形成对立；三是单极规制逻辑与多元社会利益诉求发生冲突。迈向合作型环境风险规制之范式转型，是破解民意困局的出路所在。应在借助科技理性评估环境风险的基础上，将公众的环境风险沟通及决策参与诉求纳入行政程序法律规范的调控范畴。凭借程序正义弥合规制依据客观性弱化和社会价值谱系多元所造成的环境风险认知分歧，证成环境风险规制的正当性与合理性。 |
| |
| 关键词： 风险社会；民意困局；科技理性；社会理性；合作型环境风险规制 |
| |
|
| |
The dilemma of public opinion in environmental risk regulation and its solution |
| |
ZHANG Chujia |
| |
（School of Law, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China） |
| |
| Abstract: Under the background of the transformation of risk society, the "knowledge-power" environmental risk regulation model is trapped in the dilemma of public opinion due to the dominance of scientific and technological rationality and the forced disappearance of social rationality. The traditional approach of administrative regulation has three obstacles in solving the dilemma of public opinion. Firstly, the weakening clarity of legal norms authorization leads to the reduction of its binding effect on the jurisdiction and regulation of environmental risk. Secondly, the objectification of the legal basis of environmental regulations is contradictory with people’s subjective cognition towards environmental risks. Thirdly, the unipolar regulatory logic is in conflicts with the interest demands of the diverse society. Stepping to the transformation of cooperative environmental risk regulation model is the way out to solve the dilemma. We should, based on assessing environmental risks through scientific rationality, consider and include the public's appeal for environmental risk communication and decision-making participation in the administrative procedure’s regulation. Therefore, cognitive discrepancy in the environmental risks arising from multiple social value spectrum and weakening objectivity of regulation basis could be fixed by virtue of procedural justice, which serves an argumentation for the legitimacy and rationality of environmental risks regulation. |
| |
Key words: risk society; dilemma of public opinion; scientific and technological rationality; social rationality; cooperative environmental risk regulation model |
| |
|
