學術產出-學位論文
文章檢視/開啟
書目匯出
-
題名 畜產品有機驗證基準之法制研究—以維護動物福祉為中心
A legal Research On Organic Certification Standards of Livestock - Centering On Maintaining Animal Welfare作者 陳廣祐
Chen, Kuang-Yo貢獻者 傅玲靜
Fu, Ling-Ching
陳廣祐
Chen, Kuang-Yo關鍵詞 有機畜牧
高水準動物福祉
驗證制度
驗證基準
授權明確性
規範密度
Organic animal husbandry
High level of animal welfare
Certification system
Certification standard
The principle of the explicit delegation
Normative density日期 2019 上傳時間 5-九月-2019 16:20:54 (UTC+8) 摘要 自1940年代起，有機農業成為對抗慣行農業之生產方法，其中有機畜牧關注到動物福祉之問題。若畜牧措施同時考量到動物情緒狀態、動物健康以及動物自然生活狀態之良好生存條件三要素，則可被稱之為高水準之動物福祉，而注重生態、公平、謹慎、健康之有機畜牧措施合致於此三要素，因此屬於高水準之動物福祉。為在有機農業中維護動福祉，須依賴消費者、生產者以及國家三方合作，準此，使用認證、驗證、稽查、驗證基準之制定以及有機標示與標章之制度，確保驗證機構、生產者與消費者皆能發揮其各自之力量維護動物福祉。惟此驗證制度本身亦可能遭遇驗證機構未忠實執行業務、生產者未誠實依有機方式生產，驗證基準之標準明確性不足以及標準未與一般法規範分級之問題。歐盟、美國與我國之有機農業法制皆以驗證制度維護動物福祉，並分別回應上述問題。我國之動物福祉驗證基準原則上符合高水準之動物福祉，但我國之有機農業促進法與依本法所授權之動物福祉驗證基準之間產生斷裂，母法授權之意旨不明，導致動物福祉驗證基準可能增加母法所無之限制。除此之外，雖原則上符合高水準之動物福祉，惟仍有少部分之規範闕漏導致規範密度不足，而無法達到高水準動物福祉。
Since the 1960s, organic ariculture has become a method of production against conventional agriculture, and organic animal husbandry is concerned with animal welfare. If the animal husbandry measure takes into account the three elements of good living conditions of livestock, affective state, health, and the natural living conditions of animals at the same time, it can be called the high level of animal welfare. Organic animal husbandry measures focus on ecology, fairness, caution, and health of animal, which are eaqual to the high level of animal welfare.For the purpose of maintaining animal welfare in organic agriculture, it needs the cooperation of consumers, producers, and nation. Therefore, the certification system which including the accreditation, certification, auditing, certification standard, organic labeling and logo is used to achieve the goal of maintaining high level of animal welfare. However, the certification system itself may also encounter problems, such as the certification body fails to faithfully execute the business, the producer doesn’t produce with the organic agricultural method, the standard of the certification is insufficiently clear, and the standard doesn’t make a difference with the general law.Taiwan`s organic animal welfare certification standard is in principle consistent with high level of animal welfare, but there is a gap between Organic Agriculture Promotion Act and the animal welfare certification standard delegated by this Act. The intention of delegation of this Act is unknown, as a result, the animal welfare certification standard may increase the restrictions that are not in the Act. In addition, although in principle, the animal welfare certification standard meets the high level of animal welfare, but there are still a small part of normative leaks leading to insufficient density.參考文獻 一、中文文獻（ㄧ）專書王宏文、宮文祥、陳淳文（2016），食安風暴下的農產品標章制度—臺灣實證研究，新北：華藝學術。吳東傑（2005），臺灣的有機農業，臺北：遠足。李衛華（2009），農場動物福利規範（國外資料彙編），北京：中國農業科學技術出版社。曹菡艾（2007），動物非物：動物法在西方，中國：法律出版社。陳敏（2011），行政法總論，七版，臺北：自版。陳麗娟（2013），里斯本條約後歐洲聯盟新面貌，二版，臺北：五南。董時叡（2007），有機之談：有機農業的非技術面思考，臺中：董時叡。廖震元（2012），畜產專家也敢吃的好肉好蛋，臺北：天下雜誌。（二）翻譯書Beckoff, Marc編，錢永祥、彭淮棟、陳真等譯（2002），動物權與動物 福利小百科，臺北：臺灣動物社會研究會。Carson, Rachel著、溫繼榮、李文蓉合譯（1970），寂靜的春天，七版，臺北：大中國。Schmidt-Aβmann, Eberhard 著，林明鏘、陳英鈐、孫迺翊、陳耀祥、許春鎮、張錕盛、張桐銳譯（2009），行政法總論作為秩序理念—行政法體系建構的基礎與任務，臺北：元照。Singe, Peter著、孟祥森、錢永祥譯（1996），動物解放，臺北：關懷生命協會。（二）專書論文李建良（2004），略論動物保護的憲法問題－憲法基本權的法理思考，收於：《多元價值、寬容與法律》，亞圖考夫曼教授紀念集，頁499-518，臺北：五南。李震山（2011），人性尊嚴之憲法意義，收於：人性尊嚴與人權保障，頁1-24，臺北：元照。許曉芬（2015），商標使用與證明標章、團體商標及團體標章，收於：黃銘傑編，「商標使用」規範之現在與未來，頁373-395，台北：元照。（三）期刊論文戈定軍編譯（2013），在牲畜市場、運輸過程和屠宰前的動物福利（一），中國畜牧雜誌，45卷11期，頁20-24。王毓正（2013），環境權於學理上之發展及其於司法實務上之適用，臺灣環境與土地法學雜誌，1卷6期，頁120-132。吳光平（2009），動物法之構成—動物法導論，玄奘法律學報，11期，頁201-260。吳光平（2014），歐盟動物法導論—動物保護立法之區域統合（上），玄奘法律學報，20期，頁129-196。李建良（2000），論環境保護與人權保障之關係，東吳大學法律學報，12卷2期，頁1-46。李茂生（2003），動物權的概念與我國動物保護法的文化意義，月旦法學雜誌，94期，頁155-180。李崇僖（2008），理念與實踐：有機農業的法政策課題，律師雜誌，345期，頁11-21。李凱恩（2012），寵物對人類健康所可能帶來的正面影響－兼論寵物飼養的道德爭議，應用倫理評論，52期，頁203-218。李凱恩（2014），Regan與動物權，應用倫理評論，56期，頁1-8。李寧修（2012），從憲法觀點論消費資訊公開請求權，憲政時代，38期2卷，頁217-244。汪盈利（2015），50年間消逝的生命：臺灣流浪動物議題簡史，思想29期，頁99-115。周敬凡（2016），宗教自由與動物保護，興大法學，第20期，頁41-125。林俊義（2002），有機農業的理念與發展收錄於：行政院農業委員會農業試驗所編，作物有機栽培，特刊102號，頁1-6。俞凱菱、孫同文（2006），公私協力的課責：我國有機農產品驗證制度的績效評估，第三部門學刊，6期，頁35-65。洪美仁、藍景彥（2017），政府管制任務民營化之代理人問題分析：以有機農產品驗證制度運作為例，政治科學論叢，74期，頁114-148。胡慎芝、陳誌雄（2017），從美國基改食品標示規範論消費者知情選擇的內涵及實踐，成大法學，34卷，頁1-57。宮文祥（2008），以資訊揭露做為環境保護規範手段之研究─以美國法為參考，法學新論，5期，頁53-86。郭華仁（2009），我國需要怎樣的有機法規，有機誌，28期，頁90-92。郭華仁（2012），有機農業的必然與實現－典範移轉與立法，臺灣國際法季刊，9卷4期，頁81-111。郭蕙如（2018），識別永續性：美國永續農業的測量與類型，歐美研究，48卷2期，頁195-222。陳玠廷、王慧瑜（2016），有機3.0的倡議與實踐：兼談臺灣有機農業立法，農業推廣文彙，61輯，頁145-156。陳榮五（2009），台灣有機農業發展之瓶頸，台中區農業改良場特刊，96號，頁9-17。陳誌雄、胡慎芝（2016），歐盟追蹤追溯系統在食品安全體系中的功能：從風險管理到消費者知情選擇，歐美研究，46卷4期，頁457-499。陳聰富（2003），契約自由之限制：國家政策或契約正義？，臺大法學論叢，32期1卷，頁119-164。甯立志、董曉鈴（2005），論信息不對稱與消費者知情權，月旦財經法雜誌，2期，頁105-124。費昌勇、楊書瑋（2011），動物權與動物對待，應用倫理評論，51期，頁75-103。黃璋如（2003），有機農業驗證制度與標章之研究，臺中區農業改良場特刊，57期，頁33-51。黃樹民（2013），臺灣有機農業的發展及其限制：一個技術轉變簡史，臺灣人類學刊，11卷4期，頁9-34。楊冠政（1999），邁向全球化的環境倫理，哲學雜誌，30期，頁4-32。詹鎮榮（2003），論民營化類型中之「公私協力」，月旦法學雜誌，102期，頁8-29。詹鎮榮（2004），德國法中「社會自我管制」機制初探，政大法學評論，78期，頁79-120。劉宗德（2013），公私協力與自主規制之公法學理論，月旦法學雜誌，217期，頁42-62。（四）學位論文周孟萱，（2009），消費者對雞蛋偏好與對動物福利願付價格之研究－聯合分析法之應用，國立宜蘭大學應用經濟系碩士論文。林祐立（2013），農場動物福利之實然與應然－以我國法制之檢討分析為中心，國立臺灣大學法律學院法律學系研究所碩士論文。林素妃（2017），論有機農業3.0之法律意涵並檢視我國現行有機農業相關法規，國立成功大學法律學系研究所碩士論文。劉凱翔（2007），有機農業法規及政策之研究，國立臺灣大學生物資源暨農學院農藝學系碩士論文。（五）研討會論文林怡君（2018），如何落實友善飼養—淺談剪喙之動物福利議題，從巢箱到餐盤—蛋雞動物福利國際研討會，行政院農委會主辦，2018年11月15日、16日。（六）網路文獻李蒼郎，國家有機農業發展策略（2004），http://13.115.226.180/wp-content/uploads/old_img/721/planning.pdf。林穎禎（2013），歐盟對有機農產品之規範，農政與農情，253期，https://www.coa.gov.tw/ws.php?id=2447906。林麗芳（2014），美國有機農產品之管理及貿易概況，農政與農情，261期，https://www.coa.gov.tw/ws.php?id=2500919。鄭玉磬（2010），有機畜產品管理及驗證制度之推動，農業生技產業季刊，第23期，http://www.biotaiwan.org.tw/MAG/image_doc/23/03有機畜產品管理及驗證制度之推動.pdf。二、英文文獻（一）專書Clark, Lisa F. 2015. The Changing Politics of Organic Food in North America. UK: Edward Elgar Pub.Favre, David. 2011 . Animal Law. 2nd ed .New York , NY: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.Lund, Vonne. 2002. Ethics and Animal Welfare in Organic Animal Husbandry—An interdisciplinary approach. Skara : Sveriges lantbruksuniv.（二）專書論文Broom, Donald M. 2011. Defining Agriculture Animal Welfare Varing Viewpoints and Approaches-Second Viewpoint: From a Sustainability and Product Quality Perspective. Pp. 84-91 in Animal Welfare In Animal Agriculture－Husbandry, Stewardship, and Sustainability In Animal Production , edited by Wilson G. Pond, Fuller W. Bazer, and Bernard E. Rollin. NY: CRC Press.Fraser, David. 2011. Defining Agriculture Animal Welfare Varing Viewpoints and Approaches-Third Viewpoint: Understanding Animal Welfare From a Research Scientist’s Perspectiv. Pp. 91-98 in Animal Welfare In Animal Agriculture－Husbandry, Stewardship, and Sustainability In Animal Production , edited by Wilson G. Pond, Fuller W. Bazer, and Bernard E. Rollin. NY: CRC Press.Illukpitiya, Prabodh, and Pramatma Khanal. 2016. Consumer Perception of Organic Food and Product Marketing. Pp. 315-324 , in Organic Farming for Sustainable Agriculture , edited by Dilip Nandwani. Switzerland: Springer Press.Kirschenmann, Frederick. 2011. Animal Welfare in the Context of Ecological Sustainability. Pp. 223-240 in Animal Welfare In Animal Agriculture－Husbandry,Stewardship,and Sustainability In Animal Production, edited by Wilson G. Pond, Fuller W. Bazer, and Bernard E. Rollin. NY: CRC Press.Martin, Robert P. 2011. The Opinions and Recommendations of One Particular Study Group: The Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production. Pp. 45-73 in Animal Welfare In Animal Agriculture－Husbandry,Stewardship,and Sustainability In Animal Production , edited by Wilson G. Pond, Fuller W. Bazer, and Bernard E. Rollin. NY: CRC Press.Ryland, Diane. 2017. Animal Welfare Standards in Agriculture: Drivers,Implications,Interface?. Pp. 181-210 in Agriculture Law ,edited by Mariagrazia Alabrese, Margherita Brunori, Silvia Rolandi, and Andrea Saba. Switzerland: Spinger Nature Press.Wolfson, David J., and Mariann Sullivan. 2005 . Foxes in the hen house: animals, agribusiness, and the law: a modern American fable. Pp. 205-206 in Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, edited by Cass R. Sunstein, and Martha C. Nussbaum. Oxford: Oxford University Press.（三）期刊論文Akerlof, George A. 1970. The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 84:3 : 488-500.Francione, Gary L. 1996. Animal Rights and Animal Welfare. Rutgers Law Review 48:397-469.Heerwagen, Lennart Ravn, Morten Raun Mørkbak, Sigrid Denver, Peter Sandøe, and Tove Christensen. 2015. The Role of Quality Labels In Market-Driven Animal Welfare, Journal of Agricultural and Environment Ethics 28:1 : 67-84Keeling, Linda (ed.) .2009. An Overview of the Development of the Welfare Quality Assessment Systems. Welfare Quality Reports 12:1-97.Lund, Vonne, and Helena Röcklinsberg. 2001. Outlining a Conception of Animal Welfare for Organic Farming Systems. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25:3 : 391-424.Lund, Vonne, Raymond Amthony, and Helena Röcklinsberg. 2004. The ethical contract as a tool in organic animal husbandry. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17: 23–49.Lund, Vonne. 2006. Natural living—a precondition for animal welfare in organic farming. Livestock Science 100 : 71-83.Lundmark, Frida, C. Berg, O. Schmid, D. Behdadi, and H. Ro ̈cklinsberg . 2014. Intentions and Values in Animal Welfare Legislation and Standards. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27: 6 : 991-1017.Lusk, Jayson L. 2011. The market for animal welfare. Agriculture and Human Values 28: 4 : 561-575.Matheny, Gaverick and Cheryl Leahy. 2007. Farm-Animal Welfare, Legislation and Trade. Law and Contemporary Problems 70: 325-358.Merchant, Fatema. 2008 .Got Organic Milk? “Pasture”-Ize It!:An Analysis of the USDA’s Pasture Regulations For Organic Dairy Animals, Animal Law 14: 237-262.Passantino, A., F.Conte and M. Russo. 2008. Animal Welfare Labelling and the Approch of the European Union: An Overview on the Current Situation. Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit 3:4 : 396,398.Paulsen, Aurora. 2011. Welfare Improvements For Organic Animals: Closing Loopholes In the Regulation of Organic Animal Husbandry. Animal Law 17: 337-365.Schaefer, Scarlettah. 2014. Let’s Stop Worrying and Learn To Love Transpaency:Food and Technology in the Information Age, Journal of Food Law and Policy 10: 233-279.Sullivan, Sean P. 2013. Empowering Market Regulation Of Agricultural Animal Welfare Through Product Labelling. Animal Law 19 : 391-422.Vaarst, Mette and Hugo F. Alrøe. 2012. Concepts of Animal Health and Welfare in Organic Livestock Systems. Drake Journal of Agricultural Law 25: 3 :333-347.Yunlong, C., and B. Smit. 1994. Sustainability in agriculture : a general review. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment 49 : 299-307.（四）網路文獻Animal welfare: How to make an informed choice. 2009. https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/animals/docs/aw_factsheet_2009_en.pdfBroom, Donald M. 2017. Animal welfare in the European Union, European Union, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/583114/IPOL_STU(2017)583114_EN.pdf.Communication From the Commission To the European Parliament, The Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the European Union Strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012-2015, https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/animals/docs/aw_eu_strategy_19012012_en.pdfConsumer Reports. 2017. Consumer Reports survey finds consumers think it’s important to have high animal welfare standards for organic food. https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/press_release/consumer-reports-survey-finds-consumers-think-its-important-to-have-high-animal-welfare-standards-for-organic-food/IFAOM EU Group. 2018. The new EU organic regulation, what will change?, https://www.ifoam-eu.org/sites/default/files/eb_ifoameu_regulation_what_will_change_1.pdfIFOAM EU Group. 2016. Organic in Europe: Prospects and Developments, https://www.ifoam-eu.org/sites/default/files/ifoameu_organic_in_europe_2016.pdf.Jahn, Gabriele, Matthias Schramm, and Achim Spiller. 2004. Differentiation of Certification Standards: The Trade-off between Generality and Effectiveness in Certification Systems.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228865678_Differentiation_of_Certification_Standards_The_Trade-off_between_Generality_and_Effectiveness_in_Certification_Systems.Jespersen, Lizzie Melby, Susanne Padel, and Otto Schmid, ORGANIC REVISION–Research to support the revision of the EU Regulation on organic agriculture, http://orgprints.org/12962/1/12962.pdf.Markus, Arbenz, Gould David, and Stopes Christopher, Organic 3.0—for truly sustainable farming and consumption. 2016. IFOAM Organics International, https://www.ifoam.bio/sites/default/files/organic3.0_v.2_simplified_chinese.pdf（五）歐洲法院判決Oeuvre d’assistance aux bêtes d’abattoirs (OABA) v Ministre de l`Agriculture et de l`Alimentation and Others.Case C-497/17. ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2019:137. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
法律學系
104651046資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104651046 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 傅玲靜 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Fu, Ling-Ching en_US dc.contributor.author (作者) 陳廣祐 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (作者) Chen, Kuang-Yo en_US dc.creator (作者) 陳廣祐 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Chen, Kuang-Yo en_US dc.date (日期) 2019 en_US dc.date.accessioned 5-九月-2019 16:20:54 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 5-九月-2019 16:20:54 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 5-九月-2019 16:20:54 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0104651046 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/125661 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 法律學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 104651046 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 自1940年代起，有機農業成為對抗慣行農業之生產方法，其中有機畜牧關注到動物福祉之問題。若畜牧措施同時考量到動物情緒狀態、動物健康以及動物自然生活狀態之良好生存條件三要素，則可被稱之為高水準之動物福祉，而注重生態、公平、謹慎、健康之有機畜牧措施合致於此三要素，因此屬於高水準之動物福祉。為在有機農業中維護動福祉，須依賴消費者、生產者以及國家三方合作，準此，使用認證、驗證、稽查、驗證基準之制定以及有機標示與標章之制度，確保驗證機構、生產者與消費者皆能發揮其各自之力量維護動物福祉。惟此驗證制度本身亦可能遭遇驗證機構未忠實執行業務、生產者未誠實依有機方式生產，驗證基準之標準明確性不足以及標準未與一般法規範分級之問題。歐盟、美國與我國之有機農業法制皆以驗證制度維護動物福祉，並分別回應上述問題。我國之動物福祉驗證基準原則上符合高水準之動物福祉，但我國之有機農業促進法與依本法所授權之動物福祉驗證基準之間產生斷裂，母法授權之意旨不明，導致動物福祉驗證基準可能增加母法所無之限制。除此之外，雖原則上符合高水準之動物福祉，惟仍有少部分之規範闕漏導致規範密度不足，而無法達到高水準動物福祉。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Since the 1960s, organic ariculture has become a method of production against conventional agriculture, and organic animal husbandry is concerned with animal welfare. If the animal husbandry measure takes into account the three elements of good living conditions of livestock, affective state, health, and the natural living conditions of animals at the same time, it can be called the high level of animal welfare. Organic animal husbandry measures focus on ecology, fairness, caution, and health of animal, which are eaqual to the high level of animal welfare.For the purpose of maintaining animal welfare in organic agriculture, it needs the cooperation of consumers, producers, and nation. Therefore, the certification system which including the accreditation, certification, auditing, certification standard, organic labeling and logo is used to achieve the goal of maintaining high level of animal welfare. However, the certification system itself may also encounter problems, such as the certification body fails to faithfully execute the business, the producer doesn’t produce with the organic agricultural method, the standard of the certification is insufficiently clear, and the standard doesn’t make a difference with the general law.Taiwan`s organic animal welfare certification standard is in principle consistent with high level of animal welfare, but there is a gap between Organic Agriculture Promotion Act and the animal welfare certification standard delegated by this Act. The intention of delegation of this Act is unknown, as a result, the animal welfare certification standard may increase the restrictions that are not in the Act. In addition, although in principle, the animal welfare certification standard meets the high level of animal welfare, but there are still a small part of normative leaks leading to insufficient density. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1第一節 研究動機 1第二節 文獻回顧 2第三節 研究範圍及研究方法 3第四節 研究架構 5第二章 有機農業與我國有機農業法制之發展沿革 7第一節 有機農業之發展背景 7第二節 有機農業之概念與特徵 12第三節 我國有機農業法制之發展沿革 18第四節 小結 28第三章 有機農業與動物福祉之維護 29第一節 人類對待動物之倫理演進及現今法規範角度 29第二節 判斷動物福祉品質之標準 35第三節 有機農業中高水準之動物福祉 40第四節 小結 45第四章 有機農產品驗證制度與維護動物福祉之功能 47第一節 有機農產品驗證及有機之標示與標章 47第二節 有機農產品驗證、標示及稽查—歐洲聯盟與美國法制之觀察 54第三節 有機標章維護動物福祉之功能 62第四節 小結 65第五章 動物福祉作為有機農產品之驗證基準—歐盟與美國法制之觀察 67第一節 歐洲聯盟有機驗證基準中動物福祉之規範 67第二節 美國有機驗證基準中動物福祉之規範 79第三節 歐盟與美國有機驗證基準中動物福祉規範之比較與分析 84第四節 與一般動物福祉法規範之差異 88第五節 確保有機農業中高水準動物福祉之判決 91第六節 小結 97第六章 我國有機農業促進法中維護動物福祉之規範與檢討 99第一節 動物福祉保障之目的正當性基礎 99第二節 我國有機畜產品驗證制度 106第三節 有機農業促進法驗證基準相關規範之檢討與建議 121第四節 小結 131第七章 結論 133參考文獻 137 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2151988 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104651046 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 有機畜牧 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 高水準動物福祉 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 驗證制度 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 驗證基準 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 授權明確性 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 規範密度 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Organic animal husbandry en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) High level of animal welfare en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Certification system en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Certification standard en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) The principle of the explicit delegation en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Normative density en_US dc.title (題名) 畜產品有機驗證基準之法制研究—以維護動物福祉為中心 zh_TW dc.title (題名) A legal Research On Organic Certification Standards of Livestock - Centering On Maintaining Animal Welfare en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文文獻（ㄧ）專書王宏文、宮文祥、陳淳文（2016），食安風暴下的農產品標章制度—臺灣實證研究，新北：華藝學術。吳東傑（2005），臺灣的有機農業，臺北：遠足。李衛華（2009），農場動物福利規範（國外資料彙編），北京：中國農業科學技術出版社。曹菡艾（2007），動物非物：動物法在西方，中國：法律出版社。陳敏（2011），行政法總論，七版，臺北：自版。陳麗娟（2013），里斯本條約後歐洲聯盟新面貌，二版，臺北：五南。董時叡（2007），有機之談：有機農業的非技術面思考，臺中：董時叡。廖震元（2012），畜產專家也敢吃的好肉好蛋，臺北：天下雜誌。（二）翻譯書Beckoff, Marc編，錢永祥、彭淮棟、陳真等譯（2002），動物權與動物 福利小百科，臺北：臺灣動物社會研究會。Carson, Rachel著、溫繼榮、李文蓉合譯（1970），寂靜的春天，七版，臺北：大中國。Schmidt-Aβmann, Eberhard 著，林明鏘、陳英鈐、孫迺翊、陳耀祥、許春鎮、張錕盛、張桐銳譯（2009），行政法總論作為秩序理念—行政法體系建構的基礎與任務，臺北：元照。Singe, Peter著、孟祥森、錢永祥譯（1996），動物解放，臺北：關懷生命協會。（二）專書論文李建良（2004），略論動物保護的憲法問題－憲法基本權的法理思考，收於：《多元價值、寬容與法律》，亞圖考夫曼教授紀念集，頁499-518，臺北：五南。李震山（2011），人性尊嚴之憲法意義，收於：人性尊嚴與人權保障，頁1-24，臺北：元照。許曉芬（2015），商標使用與證明標章、團體商標及團體標章，收於：黃銘傑編，「商標使用」規範之現在與未來，頁373-395，台北：元照。（三）期刊論文戈定軍編譯（2013），在牲畜市場、運輸過程和屠宰前的動物福利（一），中國畜牧雜誌，45卷11期，頁20-24。王毓正（2013），環境權於學理上之發展及其於司法實務上之適用，臺灣環境與土地法學雜誌，1卷6期，頁120-132。吳光平（2009），動物法之構成—動物法導論，玄奘法律學報，11期，頁201-260。吳光平（2014），歐盟動物法導論—動物保護立法之區域統合（上），玄奘法律學報，20期，頁129-196。李建良（2000），論環境保護與人權保障之關係，東吳大學法律學報，12卷2期，頁1-46。李茂生（2003），動物權的概念與我國動物保護法的文化意義，月旦法學雜誌，94期，頁155-180。李崇僖（2008），理念與實踐：有機農業的法政策課題，律師雜誌，345期，頁11-21。李凱恩（2012），寵物對人類健康所可能帶來的正面影響－兼論寵物飼養的道德爭議，應用倫理評論，52期，頁203-218。李凱恩（2014），Regan與動物權，應用倫理評論，56期，頁1-8。李寧修（2012），從憲法觀點論消費資訊公開請求權，憲政時代，38期2卷，頁217-244。汪盈利（2015），50年間消逝的生命：臺灣流浪動物議題簡史，思想29期，頁99-115。周敬凡（2016），宗教自由與動物保護，興大法學，第20期，頁41-125。林俊義（2002），有機農業的理念與發展收錄於：行政院農業委員會農業試驗所編，作物有機栽培，特刊102號，頁1-6。俞凱菱、孫同文（2006），公私協力的課責：我國有機農產品驗證制度的績效評估，第三部門學刊，6期，頁35-65。洪美仁、藍景彥（2017），政府管制任務民營化之代理人問題分析：以有機農產品驗證制度運作為例，政治科學論叢，74期，頁114-148。胡慎芝、陳誌雄（2017），從美國基改食品標示規範論消費者知情選擇的內涵及實踐，成大法學，34卷，頁1-57。宮文祥（2008），以資訊揭露做為環境保護規範手段之研究─以美國法為參考，法學新論，5期，頁53-86。郭華仁（2009），我國需要怎樣的有機法規，有機誌，28期，頁90-92。郭華仁（2012），有機農業的必然與實現－典範移轉與立法，臺灣國際法季刊，9卷4期，頁81-111。郭蕙如（2018），識別永續性：美國永續農業的測量與類型，歐美研究，48卷2期，頁195-222。陳玠廷、王慧瑜（2016），有機3.0的倡議與實踐：兼談臺灣有機農業立法，農業推廣文彙，61輯，頁145-156。陳榮五（2009），台灣有機農業發展之瓶頸，台中區農業改良場特刊，96號，頁9-17。陳誌雄、胡慎芝（2016），歐盟追蹤追溯系統在食品安全體系中的功能：從風險管理到消費者知情選擇，歐美研究，46卷4期，頁457-499。陳聰富（2003），契約自由之限制：國家政策或契約正義？，臺大法學論叢，32期1卷，頁119-164。甯立志、董曉鈴（2005），論信息不對稱與消費者知情權，月旦財經法雜誌，2期，頁105-124。費昌勇、楊書瑋（2011），動物權與動物對待，應用倫理評論，51期，頁75-103。黃璋如（2003），有機農業驗證制度與標章之研究，臺中區農業改良場特刊，57期，頁33-51。黃樹民（2013），臺灣有機農業的發展及其限制：一個技術轉變簡史，臺灣人類學刊，11卷4期，頁9-34。楊冠政（1999），邁向全球化的環境倫理，哲學雜誌，30期，頁4-32。詹鎮榮（2003），論民營化類型中之「公私協力」，月旦法學雜誌，102期，頁8-29。詹鎮榮（2004），德國法中「社會自我管制」機制初探，政大法學評論，78期，頁79-120。劉宗德（2013），公私協力與自主規制之公法學理論，月旦法學雜誌，217期，頁42-62。（四）學位論文周孟萱，（2009），消費者對雞蛋偏好與對動物福利願付價格之研究－聯合分析法之應用，國立宜蘭大學應用經濟系碩士論文。林祐立（2013），農場動物福利之實然與應然－以我國法制之檢討分析為中心，國立臺灣大學法律學院法律學系研究所碩士論文。林素妃（2017），論有機農業3.0之法律意涵並檢視我國現行有機農業相關法規，國立成功大學法律學系研究所碩士論文。劉凱翔（2007），有機農業法規及政策之研究，國立臺灣大學生物資源暨農學院農藝學系碩士論文。（五）研討會論文林怡君（2018），如何落實友善飼養—淺談剪喙之動物福利議題，從巢箱到餐盤—蛋雞動物福利國際研討會，行政院農委會主辦，2018年11月15日、16日。（六）網路文獻李蒼郎，國家有機農業發展策略（2004），http://13.115.226.180/wp-content/uploads/old_img/721/planning.pdf。林穎禎（2013），歐盟對有機農產品之規範，農政與農情，253期，https://www.coa.gov.tw/ws.php?id=2447906。林麗芳（2014），美國有機農產品之管理及貿易概況，農政與農情，261期，https://www.coa.gov.tw/ws.php?id=2500919。鄭玉磬（2010），有機畜產品管理及驗證制度之推動，農業生技產業季刊，第23期，http://www.biotaiwan.org.tw/MAG/image_doc/23/03有機畜產品管理及驗證制度之推動.pdf。二、英文文獻（一）專書Clark, Lisa F. 2015. The Changing Politics of Organic Food in North America. UK: Edward Elgar Pub.Favre, David. 2011 . Animal Law. 2nd ed .New York , NY: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.Lund, Vonne. 2002. Ethics and Animal Welfare in Organic Animal Husbandry—An interdisciplinary approach. Skara : Sveriges lantbruksuniv.（二）專書論文Broom, Donald M. 2011. Defining Agriculture Animal Welfare Varing Viewpoints and Approaches-Second Viewpoint: From a Sustainability and Product Quality Perspective. Pp. 84-91 in Animal Welfare In Animal Agriculture－Husbandry, Stewardship, and Sustainability In Animal Production , edited by Wilson G. Pond, Fuller W. Bazer, and Bernard E. Rollin. NY: CRC Press.Fraser, David. 2011. Defining Agriculture Animal Welfare Varing Viewpoints and Approaches-Third Viewpoint: Understanding Animal Welfare From a Research Scientist’s Perspectiv. Pp. 91-98 in Animal Welfare In Animal Agriculture－Husbandry, Stewardship, and Sustainability In Animal Production , edited by Wilson G. Pond, Fuller W. Bazer, and Bernard E. Rollin. NY: CRC Press.Illukpitiya, Prabodh, and Pramatma Khanal. 2016. Consumer Perception of Organic Food and Product Marketing. Pp. 315-324 , in Organic Farming for Sustainable Agriculture , edited by Dilip Nandwani. Switzerland: Springer Press.Kirschenmann, Frederick. 2011. Animal Welfare in the Context of Ecological Sustainability. Pp. 223-240 in Animal Welfare In Animal Agriculture－Husbandry,Stewardship,and Sustainability In Animal Production, edited by Wilson G. Pond, Fuller W. Bazer, and Bernard E. Rollin. NY: CRC Press.Martin, Robert P. 2011. The Opinions and Recommendations of One Particular Study Group: The Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production. Pp. 45-73 in Animal Welfare In Animal Agriculture－Husbandry,Stewardship,and Sustainability In Animal Production , edited by Wilson G. Pond, Fuller W. Bazer, and Bernard E. Rollin. NY: CRC Press.Ryland, Diane. 2017. Animal Welfare Standards in Agriculture: Drivers,Implications,Interface?. Pp. 181-210 in Agriculture Law ,edited by Mariagrazia Alabrese, Margherita Brunori, Silvia Rolandi, and Andrea Saba. Switzerland: Spinger Nature Press.Wolfson, David J., and Mariann Sullivan. 2005 . Foxes in the hen house: animals, agribusiness, and the law: a modern American fable. Pp. 205-206 in Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, edited by Cass R. Sunstein, and Martha C. Nussbaum. Oxford: Oxford University Press.（三）期刊論文Akerlof, George A. 1970. The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 84:3 : 488-500.Francione, Gary L. 1996. Animal Rights and Animal Welfare. Rutgers Law Review 48:397-469.Heerwagen, Lennart Ravn, Morten Raun Mørkbak, Sigrid Denver, Peter Sandøe, and Tove Christensen. 2015. The Role of Quality Labels In Market-Driven Animal Welfare, Journal of Agricultural and Environment Ethics 28:1 : 67-84Keeling, Linda (ed.) .2009. An Overview of the Development of the Welfare Quality Assessment Systems. Welfare Quality Reports 12:1-97.Lund, Vonne, and Helena Röcklinsberg. 2001. Outlining a Conception of Animal Welfare for Organic Farming Systems. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25:3 : 391-424.Lund, Vonne, Raymond Amthony, and Helena Röcklinsberg. 2004. The ethical contract as a tool in organic animal husbandry. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17: 23–49.Lund, Vonne. 2006. Natural living—a precondition for animal welfare in organic farming. Livestock Science 100 : 71-83.Lundmark, Frida, C. Berg, O. Schmid, D. Behdadi, and H. Ro ̈cklinsberg . 2014. Intentions and Values in Animal Welfare Legislation and Standards. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27: 6 : 991-1017.Lusk, Jayson L. 2011. The market for animal welfare. Agriculture and Human Values 28: 4 : 561-575.Matheny, Gaverick and Cheryl Leahy. 2007. Farm-Animal Welfare, Legislation and Trade. Law and Contemporary Problems 70: 325-358.Merchant, Fatema. 2008 .Got Organic Milk? “Pasture”-Ize It!:An Analysis of the USDA’s Pasture Regulations For Organic Dairy Animals, Animal Law 14: 237-262.Passantino, A., F.Conte and M. Russo. 2008. Animal Welfare Labelling and the Approch of the European Union: An Overview on the Current Situation. Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit 3:4 : 396,398.Paulsen, Aurora. 2011. Welfare Improvements For Organic Animals: Closing Loopholes In the Regulation of Organic Animal Husbandry. Animal Law 17: 337-365.Schaefer, Scarlettah. 2014. Let’s Stop Worrying and Learn To Love Transpaency:Food and Technology in the Information Age, Journal of Food Law and Policy 10: 233-279.Sullivan, Sean P. 2013. Empowering Market Regulation Of Agricultural Animal Welfare Through Product Labelling. Animal Law 19 : 391-422.Vaarst, Mette and Hugo F. Alrøe. 2012. Concepts of Animal Health and Welfare in Organic Livestock Systems. Drake Journal of Agricultural Law 25: 3 :333-347.Yunlong, C., and B. Smit. 1994. Sustainability in agriculture : a general review. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment 49 : 299-307.（四）網路文獻Animal welfare: How to make an informed choice. 2009. https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/animals/docs/aw_factsheet_2009_en.pdfBroom, Donald M. 2017. Animal welfare in the European Union, European Union, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/583114/IPOL_STU(2017)583114_EN.pdf.Communication From the Commission To the European Parliament, The Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the European Union Strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012-2015, https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/animals/docs/aw_eu_strategy_19012012_en.pdfConsumer Reports. 2017. Consumer Reports survey finds consumers think it’s important to have high animal welfare standards for organic food. https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/press_release/consumer-reports-survey-finds-consumers-think-its-important-to-have-high-animal-welfare-standards-for-organic-food/IFAOM EU Group. 2018. The new EU organic regulation, what will change?, https://www.ifoam-eu.org/sites/default/files/eb_ifoameu_regulation_what_will_change_1.pdfIFOAM EU Group. 2016. Organic in Europe: Prospects and Developments, https://www.ifoam-eu.org/sites/default/files/ifoameu_organic_in_europe_2016.pdf.Jahn, Gabriele, Matthias Schramm, and Achim Spiller. 2004. Differentiation of Certification Standards: The Trade-off between Generality and Effectiveness in Certification Systems.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228865678_Differentiation_of_Certification_Standards_The_Trade-off_between_Generality_and_Effectiveness_in_Certification_Systems.Jespersen, Lizzie Melby, Susanne Padel, and Otto Schmid, ORGANIC REVISION–Research to support the revision of the EU Regulation on organic agriculture, http://orgprints.org/12962/1/12962.pdf.Markus, Arbenz, Gould David, and Stopes Christopher, Organic 3.0—for truly sustainable farming and consumption. 2016. IFOAM Organics International, https://www.ifoam.bio/sites/default/files/organic3.0_v.2_simplified_chinese.pdf（五）歐洲法院判決Oeuvre d’assistance aux bêtes d’abattoirs (OABA) v Ministre de l`Agriculture et de l`Alimentation and Others.Case C-497/17. ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2019:137. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU201900711 en_US
