以論證觀點分析氣候變遷調適政策

Argumentation on Adaptation Policy

氣候變遷的主要因應策略有減緩（Mitigation）與調適（Adaptation）兩種。目前世界各國在氣候變遷的因應上，側重於調適策略的探討，而調適策略即面對已發生及進行中的氣候變遷，試著運用適當的調整策略，降低其負面衝擊、增加正面效應。而調適的作法，主要有：了解與辨識、推估與研究、規劃與推動、監測與修正。在台灣，氣候變遷的主要調適策略，為「反應性調適」（Reactive Adaptation）與「預防性調適」（Anticipatory Adaptation）。政策論證（policy argument）指在政策運作過程中，政策參與者尋找有利的資訊，以強化本身的政策主張（policy claim），並且提出反證，據以抗辯其他不同主張及看法的一種作法，目的在促使決策者接納或拒絕某項政策方案。政策論證的應用，將使政策方案較具說服力與解釋力，使方案較易獲得採納、支持與順服。將政策論證運用於氣候變遷的調適策略上，為政策創新的另一種嘗試。本文試著以政策論證角度切入，分析目前氣候變遷調適政策之規劃、執行與評估的重要性，而其結構包含：政策相關資訊（policy-relevant information）、政策主張（policy claim）、立論理由（warrant）、立論依據（backing）、駁斥理由（rebuttal）、可信度（qualifier）。本研究透過調適政策的論證結構之分析，發現從全球各主要國家的調適政策之規劃、合法化與評估面向來看，本文所提出之政策相關資訊（I），幾乎均可支持可信度（Q）與政策主張（C），且立論理由（W）與立論依據（B）相當充分，致使駁斥理由（R）幾乎難以存在。惟以目前全球各主要國家的調適政策之合法化面向而言，僅有聯合國發展署（UNDP）與英國發展得較為完整，故對於合法化面向而言，全球各主要國家仍具有許多可資發展與改進的空間存在。對台灣而言，於氣候變遷所需留意的各個領域，實皆有所碰觸，僅深入程度深淺有異。就現階段來看，政策合法化為較需積極進行之努力方向，因此，相關法令的制訂與增修，可說是環保署近期內的工作重點。溫減法2006年送入立法院審議，直至2015年才三讀通過， 秉持使用者付費原則，將溫室氣體排放額度由免費核配逐漸改為配售；另外，由於先前「國家氣候變遷調適政策綱領」在產業調適與空氣污染方面較少著墨，而有現今的空污大修法等工作的積極進行。吾人可透過調適政策的論證結構之分析，據以修訂近程、中程、遠程調適政策進程，做為我國調適政策擬定之參考，以達環境資源的永續發展。

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on 2013-2014 announced its 5th Assessment Report (AR5). In this report, Working Group II focused on climate change adaptation, specifically identified the complexity and variability of climate change, which are the biggest challenge up to this day for policymakers from various countries. If proper climate change adaptation measures are not taken, billions of people will face the threat of coastal flooding by the end of 21^(st) century, and eventually be displaced due to increasing uninhabitable lands. Small island developing States with lower sea-levels will be severely impacted, and are most vulnerable to these changes. Many island regions are small land areas, geographically dispersed (isolated), and low income hence resulting in poor infrastructure, making them especially vulnerable to the threats of climate change and rising sea-levels. As the sea-level rises, saltwater intrudes underground water systems, causing underground water salinization. In addition, climate change could change precipitation patterns, accelerating freshwater resource deficiencies and further threatening the survival of island residents. Moreover, numerous island countries receive income below the international poverty line, thus they lack the necessary resources and capabilities to cope with disasters let alone reconstruction. Once the abnormal climate change disasters hit these island States, it not only becomes difficult to recover, but also causes multidimensional losses in areas of natural environment, economic development and social culture. Mitigation and Adaptation are two major adaptive strategies to confront climate change. In response to climate change, most countries in the world are currently making in-depth investigation on adaptation strategy, where it involves using an appropriate adaptation strategy on already happened or ongoing climate change to reduce its negative impacts and increase the positive effects. Among the main adaptation approaches used are: understanding and identification, predication and research, planning and promotion, and monitoring and correction. In Taiwan, the key adaptation strategies adopted are: Reactive Adaptation and Anticipatory Adaptation. Policy argument refers to as an approach used by the policy participants to pursue favorable information during the course of strategic operation in order to strengthen their own policy claims, and meanwhile, present their contradictions to defend against other ideas and opinions. The purpose is to prompt the policymakers to accept or reject a certain policy proposal. While drawing up a policy proposal, the policy planning staff must hold sufficient information and bases to work as the decision making foundation. In addition, the utilization of policy argument will enhance the policy proposal to gain higher persuasive and explanatory power, and allow the project to receive more acceptance, support and obedience. This article attempts to analyze the structure of the current climate change adaptation policy from the policy argument point of view, which includes the practices of: policy-relevant information, policy claim, argumentation warrant, argumentation backing, rebuttal and qualifier. The study discovers that our country has actually tried working on all the aforesaid policy argument issues but in different extents of involvement. Currently the legalization regarding the industrial adaptation and air pollution policy needs to be strengthened. Therefore it is recommended to continuously comparing and evaluating the possibility on legalizing the climate change adaptation policy. Collaborate closely with the administration offices of the Department of Environmental Resources in order to organize and promote all the legalization components while strengthen future risk assessment. Through the argumentation structure, we can then revise the short-term, medium-term, and long-term policy processes through the adaptation policy to serve as a reference for our country to draft the adaptation policy.