台灣濕地保育法的規範化歷程：與拉姆薩公約的比較

Abstract

20世紀全球永續發展的目標與實體內涵越趨完整，人類的經濟、社會、文化活動開始被納入整體生態圈的思考。在這樣的背景下，「濕地」作為重要的自然生態系以及人類活動場域，其保育機制的論述出現新穎的樣貌。濕地生態種類多元、功能複雜，是世界重要的遷徙性鳥類棲地鏈的一環，也是許多特有物種的重要棲地；同時，濕地也承載著當地居民的生計、經濟發展與生活文化，也與水資源和人類的健康息息相關。濕地的自然生態功能，造就人類需要的生態系統服務，勾勒出環境保育與土地利用互動的面貌，也進一步點出人類活動為自然生態之一部的本質。這樣的本質會如何形塑濕地保育需要的規範內涵？會對環境立法模式帶來什麼挑戰？ 本文以規範化歷程為研究方法，觀察分析《拉姆薩公約》與《台灣濕地保育法》兩個濕地保育機制，從科學事實發現、成為議題，到形成規範共識，以及後續的規範實效化歷程，並以《拉姆薩公約》作為濕地保育機制規範化歷程的參考。本文認為，台灣《濕地保育法》實質上大量承襲國際公約的規範精神，但是台灣在參考《拉姆薩公約》的規範化歷程是不完整的，也因為無法在超越公約本文之外，吸收更充實細緻的規範內涵，而使得《濕地保育法》無法真正落實其所標榜的明智利用原則。這些出現在形成規範，以及規範實效化兩個階段的斷裂點，使得拉姆薩公約的規範內涵無法深化；再加上台灣特殊的環境立法脈絡，使得濕地保育議題迅速從「立法」尋求解套，與《拉姆薩公約》明智利用下的規範機制設計原則有所出入，使得從明智利用出發的濕地保育機制更無法落實在台灣的脈絡。

As we move toward the end of the 20th century, we see the burgeoning of Sustainable Development rhetoric, which resulted in a paradigm shift from polarizing environmental protection and human’s utilization of natural resource, to realizing that human activity is an integral part of the very environment our past effort is trying to protect. This shift is especially interesting when set against the background of wetlands. Wetland is a vibrant, complex and dynamic ecosystem, having a myriad of ecological functions that mirrors ecological services which have been long utilized by the human society. It is then particularly interesting to ask, when we try to construct a regulatory regime for wetland conservation, would the values of this new paradigm be adequately reflected? What type of challenges might be posed to our existing ways of establishing environmental law? Through legal process analysis, this thesis examines separately the Ramsar Convention and Taiwan’s Wetland Conservation Act, an international regime and a domestic regime. This thesis argues that Taiwan’s Wetland Conservation Act has incorporated to a certain degree, the core the regulatory elements enshrined in the Ramsar Convention. However, this incorporation process is an incomplete one. Particularly, in the regulation forming stage and later on, the effectuating stage of the formed regulations. Taiwan’s Wetland Conservation Act has failed, in some aspects, to deliver and accommodate the regulatory concepts embedded in the Ramsar Convention due to the local context of its environmental movement which caused it to turn too quickly to legislation for regulatory solution, and its failure to monitor and absorb the growth and development of the managerial rhetoric which continue to abound in the international convention.