土壤污染风险规制中的行政裁量研究

Administrative Discretion in Regulation of Soil Pollution Risk

中文关键词:  土壤污染风险  行政裁量  风险规制

英文关键词:soil pollution risk  administrative discretion  risk regulation

中文摘要:

      我国土壤污染风险规制在专家遴选标准、建设用地和农用地污染风险管控要求，以及风险管控措施等方面存在不同程度的行政裁量。社会理性和科学理性的缺失形成了土壤污染风险行政裁量困局。土壤污染信息制度中“适时公开”的规定使得公众缺乏必要污染信息，弱化其参与程度，导致对行政决定合法性的质疑。此外，土壤污染风险管控标准中专家遴选标准和论证规则的欠缺导致土壤污染风险规制科学理性的缺失。为此，需要建构关照事实和规范的协商式行政裁量模式，强调公众的实质性参与以弥合技术理性和公众理性的鸿沟。同时，在程序上确定专家遴选标准和风险管控标准的论证规则以保证土壤污染风险管控的科学性和客观性。在不妨碍行政裁量权灵活性和能动性的前提下，规范行政裁量权的行使，控制行政裁量权的滥用。

英文摘要:

      There are different levels of discretion in terms of expert selection, requirements for risk control of construction land and agricultural land, and risk control measures in China. The lack of social rationality and scientific rationality results in administrative discretion dilemmas of soil pollution risk. The uncertainty of timely disclose on soil pollution information lead to insufficient participation, which doubts decisions made by governments.In addition, the lack of expert selection criteria and argumentation rules in soil pollution risk control standards has led to a lack of scientific rationality in soil pollution risk regulation. Therefore,it is necessary to construct a consultative administrative discretion model that takes care of facts and norms, and emphasizes the substantial participation of the public to bridge the gap between technical rationality and public rationality. At the same time, the scientificity and objectivity of soil pollution risk management and control can be enhanced by determining the criteria for selecting experts and the rules of consulting. For the premise of not hindering the flexibility and initiative of administrative discretion, it can regulate the exercise of administrative discretion and control the abuse of administrative discretion.