請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/51618
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 羅昌發(Chang-fa Lo) | |
dc.contributor.author | Chia-chi Chen | en |
dc.contributor.author | 陳佳琦 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T13:41:26Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2016-02-15 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2016-02-15 | |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2016-01-06 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 中文資料
專書 朱柏松 (2001)。《消費者保護法論》。臺北:翰蘆。 林彩瑜 (2013)。《WTO制度與實務:世界貿組織法律研究(三)》。臺北:元照。 葉俊榮 (2002)。《環境政策與法律》。臺北:元照。 羅昌發 (2010)。《國際貿易法》。臺北:元照。 期刊/書之篇章 牛惠之 (2005)。〈預防原則之研究 ─ 國際環境法處理欠缺科學證據之環境風險議題之努力與爭議〉,《國立臺灣大學法學論叢》,第34卷第3期,頁1-71。 王服清 (2012)。〈論預防原則之意涵與應用〉,《國立中正大學法學集刊》,第37期,頁117-187。 吳全峰 (2009)。〈從健康人權之角度論菸草控制框架公約之發展與國家菸害防制之義務〉,《月旦法學》,第169期,頁32-52。 李建良 (1997)。〈基本權利理論體系之構成及其思考層次〉,《人文及社會科學集刊》,第9卷第1期,頁39-83。 李建良 (1998)。〈環境議題的形成與國家任務的變遷〉,《憲政體制與法治行政》,頁275-342,臺北:三民。 李建良 (2000)。〈永續發展與國家責任〉,《臺北大學法學論叢》,第46期,頁79-112。 李震山 (2005)。〈論憲政改革與基本權利保障〉,《中正法學集刊》,18期,頁183-252。 周任芸(譯) (2007)。〈風險社會、不確定性和科學民主化: STS 的未來〉,《科技、醫療與社會》,第5期,頁15-42。 周桂田 (1998)。〈現代性與風險社會〉,《臺灣社會學刊》,第21期,頁89-129。 林明昕 (2005)。〈健康權 ─ 以「國家之保護義務」為中心〉,《法學講座》,第32期,頁26-38。 林明鏘 (2014)。〈比例原則之功能與危機〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,231期,頁65-79。 林彩瑜 (2009)。〈論WTO架構下基因改良食品標示之貿易法問題〉,林彩瑜(著),《貿易與公共衛生之法律問題》,頁78-79。臺北:元照。 邱文聰 (2012)。〈如何克服公衛訴訟中因果推論的難題─法律系統面對風險社會的一個挑戰〉,《科技、醫療與社會》,第14期,頁227-263。 洪德欽 (2011)。〈預防原則歐盟化之研究〉,《東吳政治學報》,第29卷第2期,頁1-56。 許宏達 (2014)。〈環境風險管制之法律建制:以行政管制方法之變遷為中心〉,《國立中正大學法學集刊》,第44期,頁113-202。 許宗力 (1993)。〈論法律保留原則〉,許宗力(著),《法與國家權力》,頁117-213。臺北:月旦。 陳建仁 (2008)。〈流行病學原理與方法〉,財團法人陳拱北預防醫學基金會(編),《公共衛生學:中冊》,頁15-28。臺北:健康文化事業股份有限公司,修訂四版。 陳春生 (1996),〈行政上之預測決定與司法審查〉,陳春生(著),《行政法之學理與體系(一) ─ 行政行為形式論》,頁188-190。臺北:三民。 陳春生 (2007)。〈行政法學上之風險決定與行政規則 ─ 以規範具體化行政規則為中心〉,陳春生(著)《行政法之學理與體系(二)》,頁164。臺北:元照。 程明修 (2009)。〈行政法上之預防原則(Vorsorgeprinzip) ─ 食品安全風險管理手段之擴張〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,第167期,頁127-136。 黃昭元 (2013)。〈法官解釋審查標準之發展(1996-2011):比例原則的繼受與在地化〉,《臺大法學論叢》,42卷2期,頁215-258。 蔡宗珍 (1999)。〈公法上之比例原則初論-以德國法的發展為中心〉,《政大法學評論》,第62期,頁75-103。 蔡宗珍 (2006)。〈營業自由之保障與其限制 ─ 最高行政法院2005年11月22日 庭長法官聯席會議決評釋〉,《臺大法學論叢》,第35期第3卷,頁277-321。 蔡宗珍 (2010)。〈法律保留思想及其發展的制度關聯要素探微〉,《臺大法學論叢》,第39卷第3期,頁1-68。 蔡震榮 (2014)。〈論釋字七一八號有關緊急性與偶發性集會遊行之解釋〉,《月旦法學》,第230期,頁102-118。 顏忠華 (1994)。〈風險社會的概念及其理論意涵〉,《國立政治大學學報》,第69期,頁57-79。 網路資料 The News Lens 關鍵評論 (09/26/2015),〈最健康的吸菸法,就是「不要吸菸」-電子菸的奇蹟和迷思〉,網址:http://www.thenewslens.com/post/ 217725/。 聯合報 (09/20/2015),〈開學到 電子菸現蹤校園〉,網址:http://udn.com/news/story/9/1199240-%E9%96%8B%E5%AD%B8%E5%88%B0-%E9%9B%BB%E5%AD%90%E8%8F%B8%E7%8F%BE%E8%B9%A4%E6%A0%A1%E5%9C%92。 其他 〈出席第14屆WCPH世界公共衛生大會出國報告〉,《參與第14屆世界公衛大會計畫》。臺北:衛生福利部國民健康署http://report.nat.gov.tw/ ReportFront/report _detail.jspx?sysId=C10400318。 《103年全國物質使用調查計畫》。臺北:衛生福利部食品藥物管理署、國立台灣大學公共衛生學院http://www.fda.gov.tw/TC/newsContent.aspx?id= 12195&chk=9e37b3ac-504c-454e-85d1-e8e345e223f1#.VZEZ4Buqpg8。 司法院釋字第443號解釋理由書。 司法院釋字第445號理由書。 司法院釋字第514號理由書。 司法院釋字第577號理由書。 司法院釋字第584號理由書。 司法院釋字第649號理由書。 司法院釋字第718號理由書。 林昱梅 (2012)。〈食品安全之風險管理規範─由臺北高等行政法院101年度訴字第93號判決出發〉,《行政院1011年學術研討會,環境資源、食品安全、暫時性處分─風險治理規範之研究》,頁79-116。臺北:行政院。 羅昌發,司法院釋字第701號解釋協同意見書。 英文資料 Books BERNASCONI-OSTERWALDER, NATHALIE ET AL. (2012), ENVIRONMENT AND TRADE: A GUIDE TO WTO JURISPRUDENCE. DOUGLAS, MARY & AARON WILDAVSKY (1983), RISK AND CULTURE: AN ESSAY ON THE SELECTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DANGERS. FOSTER, CAROLINE E. (2013), SCIENCE AND PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN INTERNATIONAL COURTS AND TRIBUNAL. LUHMANN, NIKLAS (1993), RISK: A SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY. SZAJKOWSKA, ANNA (2012), REGULATING FOOD LAW: RISK ANALYSIS AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE AS GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF EU LAW. TAYLOR, PRUE (1998), AN ECOLOGICAL APPROACH TO INTERNATIONAL LAW ─ RESPONDING TO CHALLENGE OF CLIMATE CHANGE. VISCUSI, W. KIP (1998), RATIONAL RISK POLICY. ZANDER, JOAKIM (2010), THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN PRACTICE, COMPARATIVE DIMENSION. Articles/Short Works in Collection Adam, Barbara & Joost van Loon (2000), Introduction: Repositioning Risk; the Challenge for Social Theory, in THE RISK SOCIETY AND BEYOND, CRITICAL ISSUES FOR SOCIAL THEORY 1 (Ulrich Beck et al. eds.). Arnold, Carrie (2014), Vaping and Health: What Do We Know about E-Cigarette, 122(9) ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSPECTIVES 1. Bergkamp, Lucas (2002), Understanding the Precautionary Principle (Part I), in ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITY 18 (2002). Bjartveit, K & A Tverdal (2005), Health consequences of smoking 1-4 cigarettes per day, 14(3) TOBACCO CONTROL 315. Bolye, A. E. (1996), The Rio Convention on Biological Diversity, in INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE CONSERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 33 (Michael Bowman & Catherine Redgwell eds.). Burton, Diana M. (2011), Environmental Regulation Cost and Industry Structure Changes, 87(3) LAND ECONOMICS 545. Cameron, Jennifer M (2014), Variable and potentially fatal amounts of nicotine in e-cigarette nicotine solutions, 23 TOBACCO CONTROL 77. Charnley, Gail & Michael D. Roger (2011), Frameworks for Risk Assessment, Uncertainty, and precaution, in THE REALITY OF PRECAUTION, COMPARING RISK REGULATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE 361 (Jonathan B, Wiener et al. eds.). Cross, Frank B. (1996), Paradoxical Perils of the Precautionary Principle, 53(3) WASHINGTON AND LEE LAW REVIEW 851. Douglas, Heather et al. (2015), E-cigarettes and the Law in Australia, 44(6) AUSTRALIAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN 415. Dovers, Stephen (2008), Precautionary policy assessment for sustainability, in IMPLEMENTING THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE 88 (Elizabeth Fisher et al. eds.). Fischoff, Baruch (1995), Risk Perception and Communication Unplugged: Twenty Years of Process, 15(2) RISK ANALYSIS 137. Gee, David & Andrew Stirling (2003), Late Lesson from Early Warnings: Improving Science and Governance Under Uncertainty and Ignorance, in PRECAUTION, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, AND PREVENTIVE PUBLIC POLICY 195 (Joel A. Tickner ed.). Girela, Miguel Angel Recuerda (2011), The EU Precautionary Principle impacts both food safety and market entry and competitiveness, in INSTITUTIONS AND REGULATION FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH? PUBLIC INTERESTS VERSUS PRIVATE INCENTIVES 97 (Emiel F.M. Wubben ed.). Goldstein, Bernard D. (2011), The precautionary principle also applies to public health actions. 91(9) AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH 1358. Goniewicz, Maciej L. et al. (2013), Patterns of electronic cigarette use and user beliefs about their safety and benefits: An Internet survey, 32(2) DRUG AND ALCOHOL REVIEW 133. Gourdet, C K et al. (2014), A baseline understanding of state laws governing e-cigarette, 23 Tobacco Control 37. Graham, John D. & Susan Hsia (2002), Europe’s precautionary principle: promise and pitfalls, 5(4) JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH 371. Graham, John D. (1997), Legislative Approaches to Achieving More Protection Against at Less Cost, UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LEGAL FORUM 13. Grana, Rachel et al. (2014), E-Cigarette: A Scientific Review, 129 CIRCULATION (JOURNAL OF AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION) 1972. Grandjean, Philippe (2004), Implications of the Precautionary Principle for Primary Prevention and Research, 25(1) ANNUAL REVIEW OF PUBLIC HEALTH 199. Gullett, Warwick (2000), The precautionary principle in Australia: policy, law and potential precautionary EIAs, 11(2) RISK: HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT 93. Gullett, Warwick (2008), The threshold test of the precautionary principle in Australian courts and tribunals: lessons for judicial review, in IMPLEMENTING THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE ─ PERSPECTIVES AND PROSPECTS 182 (Elizabeth Fisher et al. eds.). Karlsson, Mikeal (2006), The Precautionary Principle, Swedish Chemicals Policy and Sustainable Development, 9(4) JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH 337. Majone, Giandomenico (2002), What Price Safety? The Precautionary Principle and its Policy Implications, 40(1) JOURNAL OF COMMON MARKET STUDIES 89. McDonald, Jan (2008), Tr(e)ading cautiously: precaution in WTO decision making, in IMPLEMENTING THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE ─ PERSPECTIVES AND PROSPECTS 160 (Elizabeth Fisher et al. eds.). Mitchell, Ronald B. (2003), International Environmental Agreements: A Survey of Their Features, Formation, and Effects, 28 ANNUAL REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESOURCES 429. Nitzkin, Joel L. (2014), The Case in Favor of E-Cigarettes for Tobacco Harm Reduction, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 6459. O’ Brien, Mary (2003), Science in the Service of Good: The Precautionary Principle and Positive Goals, in PRECAUTION, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, AND PREVENTIVE PUBLIC POLICY 265 (Joel A. Tickner ed.). Paradise, Jordan (2013), No Sisyphean Task: How the FDA Can Regulate Electronic Cigarette 13(2) YALE JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY LAW AND ETHICS 326. Paradise, Jordan (2013), No Sisyphean Task: How the FDA Can Regulate Electronic Cigarettes, 13(2) YALE JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY, LAW AND ETHICS 326. Petersmann, Ernst-Ulrich (2007), Biotechnology, Human Rights and International Economic Law, in BIOTECHNOLOGY AND INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS 229 (Francesco Francioni ed.). Polosa, Riccardo et al. (2011), Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e-Cigarette) on smoking reduction and cessation: a prospective 6-month pilot study, 11 BMC PUBLIC HEALTH 786. Polosa, Riccardo et al. (2013), A fresh look at tobacco harm reduction: the case for electronic cigarette, 10(1) HARM REDUCTION JOURNAL 19. Sandin, Per (2006), A Paradox Out of Context: Harris and Holm on the Precautionary Principle, 15(2) CAMBRIDGE QUARTERLY OF HEALTHCARE ETHICS 175. Sandin, Per (2007), Common-sense Precaution and Varieties of the Precautionary Principle, in RISK: PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVES 99 (Tim Lewens ed.). Schober, Wolfgang et al. (2014), Use of Electronic Cigarettes (E-Cigarettes) Impairs Indoor Air Quality and Increases FeNO Levels of E-Cigarette Consumers, 217 (6) INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYGIENE AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 628. Schober, Wolfgang et al. (2014), Use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) impairs indoor air quality and increases FeNO levels of e-cigarette consumers, 217(6) INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYGIENE AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 627. Schripp, T. et al. (2013), Does E-Cigarette Consumption Cause Passive Vaping? 23(1) INDOOR AIR 25. Schripp, T. et al. (2013), Does e-cigarette consumption cause passive vaping? 23(1) INDOOR AIR 25. Stirling, Andrew (2007), Risk, precaution and science : towards a more constructive policy debate ─ Talking point on precautionary principle, 8(4) EMBO REPORTS 309. Sunstein, Cass R. (2003), Beyond the Precautionary Principle, 151(3) UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW 1003. Walker, Warren et al. (2003), Defining Uncertainty: A Conceptual Basis for Uncertainty Management in Model-Based Decision Support, 4(1) INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT 5. Wiener, J. & M. D. Rogers (2002), Comparing Precaution in the United States and Europe, 5(4) JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH 317. Treaties Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity, December 29, 1993, https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cartagena-protocol-en.pdf. Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic, September 22, 1992. Convention on Biological Diversity, June 5, 1992, https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd -en.pdf. Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, March 17, 1992. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, Preamble, amended in 1999, http://www.theozonehole.com/montext.htm. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, May 9, 1992, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, U.N. Doc. A/AC.237/18 (Part II)/Add.1 (March 21, 1994). United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June 3-14, 1992, Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.151/26 (Vol. I), Annex I (August 12, 1992). World Charter for Nature, G.A. Res. 37/7, U. N. Doc. A/RES/37/7 (October 28, 1982). International documents Communication from the Commission on the precautionary principle, COM(2000) 1 final (February 2, 2000). Department of Health Therapeutic Goods Administration, Poisons Standard 2015, https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2015L00128 (February 5, 2015). Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC, 2014 O.J. (L 127/1). Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Regulations 2006 (Vic) (Austl.) FCTC, Control and prevention of smokeless tobacco products and electronic cigarettes ─ Report by the Convention Secretariat, FCTC/COP/4/12 (September 15, 2010). FCTC, Control and prevention of smokeless tobacco products and electronic cigarettes Report by the Convention Secretariat, FCTC/COP/4/12 (September 15, 2010) FCTC, Control and prevention of smokeless tobacco products Report by the Convention Secretariat, FCTC/COP/5/12 (July 10, 2012). FCTC, Control and prevention of waterpipe tobacco products Report by the Convention secretariat, FCTC/COP/6/11 (July18, 2014). FCTC, Decision ─ Control and prevention of smokeless tobacco products and electronic nicotine delivery systems, including electronic cigarettes, FCTC/COP5(10) (November 17, 2012). FCTC, Decision ─ Electronic nicotine delivery systems and electronic non-nicotine delivery systems, FCTC/COP6(9) (October 18, 2014). FCTC, Electronic nicotine delivery systems ─ Report by WHO, FCTC/COP/6/10 (July 21, 2014). FCTC, Electronic nicotine delivery systems and electronic non-nicotine delivery systems, FCTC/COP6(9) (Oct. 18, 2014). FCTC, Electronic nicotine delivery systems and electronic non-nicotine delivery systems, FCTC/COP6(9) (October 18, 2014). FCTC, Electronic nicotine delivery systems Report by WHO, FCTC/COP/6/10 Rev.1 (September 1, 2014). FCTC, Electronic nicotine delivery systems Report by WHO, FCTC/COP/6/10 Rev.1 (September 1, 2014). FCTC, Electronic nicotine delivery systems, including electronic cigarettes ─ Report by the Convention Secretariat, FCTC/COP/5/13 (June 18, 2012). FCTC, Electronic nicotine delivery systems, including electronic cigarettes Report by the Convention Secretariat, FCTC/COP/5/13 (June 18, 2012) FCTC, Guidelines for implementation of Article 8, FCTC/COP2(7) (July 2007). FCTC, Partial Guidelines for Implementation of Articles 9 and 10 of the Who Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (Regulation of the Contents of Tobacco Products and of Tobacco Product Disclosures), FCTC/COP4(10), http://www.who.int/fctc/guidelines/Decisions9and10.pdf. Food and Drug Administration of Department of Health and Human Services, Deeming Tobacco Products To Be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as Amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act; Regulations on the Sale and Distribution of Tobacco Products and Required Warning Statements for Tobacco Products, 79(80) FEDERAL REGISTER, http://www.fda.gov/downloads/TobaccoProducts/Labeling/RulesRegulationsGuidance/UCM394914.pdf. (Apr. 25, 2014). Food and Drug Administration of Department of Health and Human Services, Regulations Restricting the Sale and Distribution of Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco To Protect Children and Adolescents, 75(53) FEDERAL REGISTER, 13225 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-03-19/pdf/2010-6087.pdf. Health (Drugs and Poisons) Regulation 1996 (Qld) (Austl.) Ministry of Health of NSW Government, Alphabetical Poisons List (June 1, 2015), http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/pharmaceutical/ Documents/poisons-list-alpha.pdf. Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Regulation 2008 (NSW) (Austl.) Public Health (Tobacco) Amendment (E-cigarettes) Bill 2015 (NSW) (Austl.) Public Health Act 1997 (Tas) (Austl.) Publich Health (Tobacco) Act 2008 (NSW) (Austl.). Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety, 45 OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2002.031.01.0001.01.ENG (2002). Tobacco Act 1927 (ACT) (Austl.). Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 (WA) (Austl.) Tobacco Products Regulation Act 1997 (SA) (Austl.) Cases Appellate Body Report, European Community — Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), WT/DS26/AB/R, WT/DS48/AB/R (January 16, 1998). Appellate Body Report, Japan — Measures Affecting Agricultural Products, WT/DS76/AB/R (February 22, 1999). Appellate Body Report, Japan — Measures Affecting the Importation of Apples, WT/DS245/AB/R (November 26, 2003). Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), 1997 I.C.J. 7 (September 25, 1997). Panel Report, European Communities — Measures Affecting The Approval And Marketing of Biotech Products, WT/DS291/R, WT/DS292/R, WT/DS293/R (September 29, 2006). Panel Report, European Community — Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), WT/DS26/R, WT/DS48/R (August 18, 1997). Panel Report, Japan — Measures Affecting the Importation of Apples, WT/DS245/R (July 15, 2003). Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases, Requests for provisional measures, Order (New Zealand v. Japan; Australia v. Japan), ITLOS/PV .99/21 (August 27, 1999). The MOX Plant Case, Request for provisional measures, Order (Ireland v. United Kingdom), ITLOS/PV.01/10 (December 3, 2001). Working papers Asselt, M. B. A. van et al. (2000), Uncertainty & RIVM’s Environmental Outlooks Documenting a learning process (National Institute of Public Health and Environment (RIVM), RIVM Report 55002001), available at http://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/cms/publicaties/550002001.pdf. Stirling, Andrew et al. (2001), On Science and Precaution in the Management of Technological Risk (European Science Technology Observatory (ESTO), Report EUR 19056/EN/2), available at http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/eur19056IIen.pdf. WHO Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation ─ Report on Scientific Basis of Tobacco Product Regulation: Third Report of a WHO Study Group, (WHO, WHO Technical Report Series 955, 2008) available at http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/44213/1/9789241209557_eng.pdf. Internet Sources Are Electronic Cigarettes Legal in NSW?, NSW HEALTH (2015), http:// www.health.nsw.gov.au/ tobacco/Factsheets/e-cigs-are-they-legal.pdf. BEST ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE BRANDS FOR 2015, https://quitsmokingcommunity.org/ electronic-cigarettes/ (last visited October 1, 2015) BUSINESSDICTIONARY.COM, available at http://www.businessdictionary.com/ definition/maximin-criterion.html. Country Laws Regulating E-cigarettes: A Policy Scan, INSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL TOBACCO CONTROL, JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH (May 2015), http://globaltobaccocontrol.org/sites/default/files/E_cigarette_scan_ May2015FINAL.pdf. Candy-flavoured smokes for kids. “Vaping” in the West is seen as a way to quit smoking. In China, it may not be, THE ECONOMIST (June 13, 2015), http://www.economist.com/news/china/21654108-vaping-west-seen-way-quit-smoking-china-it-may-not-be-candy-flavoured-smokes?fsrc=scn%2Ftw%2Fte%2Fpe%2Fst%2Fcandyflavouredsmokesforkids. E-CIGARETTE HALO G6, https://www.halocigs.com/e-cigarette.html (last visited October 1, 2015). Electronic (e-) Cigarettes and Secondhand Aerosol, AMERICANS FOR NONSMOKERS’ RIGHTS (2014), http://no-smoke.org/pdf/ecigarette-secondhand-aerosol.pdf. Electronic (e-) Cigarettes and Secondhand Aerosol, AMERICANS FOR NONSMOKERS’ RIGHTS (2014), http://no-smoke.org/pdf/ecigarette-secondhand- aerosol.pdf. Electronic cigarettes, LIBRARY OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT (2013), http://www. europarl. europa.eu/eplibrary/Electronic-cigarettes.pdf. Elizabeth Fernandez, E-Cigarettes Expose People to More Than ‘Harmless’ Water Vapor, First Comprehensive Analysis Shows that Industry Health Claims are Unsupported by Data, University of California San Francisco News Center (May 13, 2014), https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2014 /05/114301/e-cigarettes-expose- people-more-%E2%80%98harmless%E2%80%99-water-vapor-and-should-be-regulated. Fontem Ventures, TOBACCO TACTICS, http://www.tobaccotactics.org/ index.php/Fontem_Ventures. Gender, Women, and the Tobacco Epidemic, WHO 141-142 (2010), http://www.who.int/tobacco/publications/gender/en_tfi_gender_women_addiction_nicotine.pdf. Hagopian, Amy et al. (Jan. 1, 2015), E-Cigarette: Evidence and policy options for Washington State, University of Washington School of Public Health, 1, http://www.governor. wa.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ECigWhitePaper.PDF. History of Electronic Cigarette, EVERSMOKE, http://www.learn. eversmoke.com /history-of-electronic-cigarettes.html. History of Electronic Cigarette, EVERSMOKE, http://www.learn.eversmoke.com/ history-of-electronic-cigarettes.html. Ministry of Health of NSW Government, No smoking in commercial outdoor dining areas, (July 6, 2015), http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/tobacco/Factsheets/ commercial-outdoor- dining.pdf Personal Importation Scheme, THERAPEUTIC GOODS ADMINISTRATION (March 18, 2015), http://www.tga.gov.au/consumers/personal-importation-scheme.htm#.U_ iT4F4it8E. QLd Man Fined for Selling E-cigarettes, THE AUSTRALIAN (July 10, 2014, 7:04 PM), http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/qld-man-fined-for-selling-e-cigarettes/story-fn3dxiwe-1226984769775. Questions & Answers: New rules for tobacco products, European Commission (February 26, 2014), http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-134_en.htm. The NRC Risk Assessment Paradigm, UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, http://www2.epa.gov/fera/nrc-risk-assessment-paradigm. THE BEST CIG-A-LIKE STARTER KITS FOR 2015, http://info-electronic-cigarette.com/ rechargeable-electronic-cigarettes/ (last visited Dec. 22, 2015). Using E-Cigarettes to Quit Smoking, ECIG REVIEWS UNBIASED E-CIGARETTE REVIEWS AND INFORMATION, http://ecig-reviews.net/using-e-cigarettes-quit- smoking/. VAPORFI STRATUS DRY HERB VAPORIZER, http://www.vaporfi.com/electronic -cigarettes/vaporfi-stratus-dry-herb-vaporizer.html (last visited October 1, 2015) White Paper: Electronic Cigarette in the Indoor Environment, American Industrial Hygiene Association 18 (October 19, 2014), https://www.aiha.org/government- affairs/Documents/Electronc%20Cig%20Document_Final.pdf. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/51618 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 有鑑於科技商品化而生的新型態產品,時常在未及制定相應的安全性驗證與適當規範的情況下,進入人民的日常生活中;此外,由於科技的日新月異,自其衍伸而出的新型態產品,更經常超越決策者的想像,使得關於此類產品的安全性與可能危害的判定倍顯艱難。是以,應如何劃定公權力行使的界線,同時亦平衡人民可能因而遭受的危害,實屬一大挑戰。
本文針對前述問題,擬透過「風險」的視角進行檢討與分析,亦即,跳脫該項產品是否確實有危害的辯證,直接針對其存有風險的狀態,討論決策者是否以及應如何介入管制。而在風險與其因應的相關討論中,本文選擇以經常在環境風險的因應中被提及的「預防原則」為主軸,藉由分析預防原則的概念意涵與歸納其過往的適用情況,嘗試將預防原則進一步抽象化,並適用於科技商品化所衍伸之新型態產品的管制議題中,作為驗證決策者對於此類產品所採取之舉措是否適當的檢證依據。此外,為能更清楚的闡述與演繹本文所關懷的管制議題,以下將舉電子菸為例,自其所衍伸的風險情狀與產品屬性等面向著手進行分析;復回應預防原則適用於電子菸之管制措施時可能產生的爭議;並依循本文針對預防原則所歸納出之前提要件與適用上之法律界限進行討論。 申言之,有鑑於電子菸對於使用者及非使用者可能產生的健康影響,與其對於菸害防制措施之實行與延續的可能影響,均有待科學證據進一步核實或排除,而屬於存有科學上不確定性之風險情狀;並且,自電子菸衍伸之風險若確實實現,其所生損害亦具有重大性。電子菸所衍伸之風險情狀當符合本文針對預防原則所歸納之適用前提,亦即「風險情狀存在科學上不確定性」與「風險實現所生損害具有重大性」兩者,應有適用預防原則之空間。而在其適用上之法律界限的討論上,亦即關於比例原則的檢驗,本文認為各國目前對於電子菸的管制內涵,雖在規範分類與管制密度上各有不同,惟大抵仍在預防原則之適用範圍內,而得以藉由預防原則之適用加以正當化。惟全面禁止電子菸之措施,因係對於具有科學上不確定性之風險情狀,透過全面而永久的禁絕措施予以因應,應難以通過比例原則的必要性審查,而無法透過預防原則之適用予以正當化。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Since the products derived from commercialization of scientific research achievement are usually devoted into our daily life without corresponding mechanism for safety evaluation and appropriate regulation, it is quite a challenge for decision makers to strike a balance between the harmful effect possibly undertaken by people and the boundary of the right to regulate. In addition, the continued evolution of cutting-edge science and technology applied in the above products, which often transcend the imagination of decision makers, would also make the evaluation of safety and possible harm much harder than ever.
This article intends to elaborate and analyze the above issue from the aspect of “risk” instead of the debate of the existence of real harm. In other words, the author would focus on the present circumstance, which involved the factor of risk and discuss whether or how to regulate the risk posed by the above products. And “precautionary principle” which has been frequently mentioned in the field of environmental risk and the corresponding regulation would be the main approach of this article when dealing with the issue of risk. To apply precautionary principle in the issue of regulating above products and invoke it as a criterion to determine whether the measures adopted by the decision maker are appropriate, this article would also be devoted to the abstraction of precautionary principle by analyzing its essential meaning and generalizing the experiences of past applications. Additionally, in order to elaborate and demonstrate the core of this article in a more precise way, the author would take the regulation of electronic cigarette (hereinafter “e-cigarette”) as an example. To apply the precautionary principle in the regulation of e-cigarette, the following manuscript would be started from the characterization of e-cigarette and the risk derived from it; then consequently respond to the controversy over the application; and discuss the detailed application by the prerequisite and legal boundary addressed by the author in this article. Further speaking, since both the health effect derived from e-cigarette on the user and non-user and the possible influence on the implementation and continuity of tobacco control measures have not yet been confirmed or eliminated by scientific evidence, the risk derived from e- cigarette could be characterized as “the risk with scientific uncertainty”. And the damages caused by the realization of the risk derived from e-cigarette would also be substantial. Hence, the risk derived from e-cigarette indeed fit in with the prerequisite of applying precautionary principle generalized by this article, which are “the risk with scientific uncertainty” and “the damages caused by the realization of risk are substantial”. With regard to the legal boundary of its application which is the scrutiny of the principle of proportionality, the author is of the view that most of the measures adopted by individual countries are within the legal boundary of applying precautionary principle and could be justified by the application of precautionary principle, even though the category and intensity of the regulation are diverse. However, “the total ban approach” which advocate the completely elimination of the risk with scientific uncertainty is not pass the examination of the necessity test included in the principle of proportionality and could not be justified by the application of precautionary principle. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T13:41:26Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-105-R01a21025-1.pdf: 2185744 bytes, checksum: 49d5b23a59366dec2a00565d7fbeed0e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 目錄
第一章 導論 1 第一節 問題意識與研究背景 1 第二節 研究方法 2 第三節 概念分析與研究範圍界定 3 第一項 預防原則之概念界定 3 第二項 預防原則於風險管理之定位 5 第三項 電子菸之介紹與範圍界定 17 第二章 預防原則於國際上之適用分析 25 第一節 國際環境法與國際海洋法上之適用情況 25 第一項 國際環境文件 25 第二項 相關爭端案例分析 32 第二節 歐盟相關規範 37 第一項 TFEU對於預防原則之描述 37 第二項 COM/2000/1通知文件 38 第三項 食品安全相關規範之發展 41 第三節 SPS協定相關討論 43 第一項 概述 43 第二項 SPS協定第5.7條之討論 44 第二項 爭端解決實務之見解 45 第四節 適用領域歸納 ─ 兼論我國適用現況 47 第三章 預防原則適用於新風險產品之爭議與法律上界線 50 第一節 「新風險產品」之界定 50 第二節 適用爭議探討 51 第一項 阻礙新科技之進展與應用 51 第二項 經濟層面的負面影響 52 第三項 忽略風險之負面互動 54 第四項 小結 56 第三節 前提要件之檢驗 56 第一項 風險情狀存在科學上不確定性 57 第二項 風險實現所生損害具有重大性 59 第三項 小結 62 第四節 適用上法律界線 ─ 比例原則之操作 63 第一項 適用預防原則可能之界線 63 第二項 比例原則之具體操作 66 第四章 電子菸之管制現況分析 71 第一節 國際上之管制趨勢 71 第一項 《世界衛生組織菸草控制框架公約》之適用性分析 72 第二項 各國管制模式綜覽 74 第二節 歸類為「菸品」加以管制者 ─ 以美國法相關規範為例 75 第一項 規範內涵與特徵 75 第二項 美國相關規範分析 76 第三節 歸類為「藥品」加以管制者 ─ 以澳洲相關規範為例 81 第一項 規範內涵與特徵 81 第二項 澳洲相關規範分析 82 第四節 雙軌模式 ─ 以歐盟相關規範為例 89 第一項 規範內涵與特徵 89 第二項 歐盟相關規範分析 89 第五節 我國管制現況分析 96 第一項 主管機關對電子菸採行的規範分類 96 第二項 現行以藥事法規範之具體內涵 100 第五章 預防原則於電子菸管制措施之適用與其法律界限 104 第一節 電子菸管制措施適用預防原則之爭議與回應 104 第二節 前提要件之檢驗 107 第一項 電子菸是否屬於「新風險產品」之討論 107 第二項 電子菸所形成之風險情狀是否存有科學上不確定性 108 第三項 風險實現所生損害是否具有重大性 109 第三節 電子菸相關措施適用預防原則之法律界限 111 第一項 與一般商品相當之管制強度 111 第二項 超越一般商品之管制強度 114 第三項 全面禁止措施 124 第六章 結論 127 參考文獻 131 中文資料 131 英文資料 135 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 論預防原則於風險管制措施之適用及法律上界線 ─ 以電子菸之管制措施為例 | zh_TW |
dc.title | The Application and Boundary of Precautionary Principle in Risk Regulation ─ Regulating Electronic Cigarette as an Example | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 104-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 林彩瑜(Tsai-yu Lin),吳全峰(Chuan-feng Wu) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 預防原則,比例原則,風險,風險管制,新風險產品,電子菸/煙,菸害防制,世界衛生組織菸草控制框架公約, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | precautionary principle,principle of proportionality,risk,risk regulation,products with new-developed risk,electronic cigarette,tobacco control,WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), | en |
dc.relation.page | 147 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2016-01-06 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 法律學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 法律學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-105-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.13 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。