本文对当前关于全球气候变暖的论辩和早前20世纪70年代关于“增长的极限”的论辩进行比较研究。我们特别关注的是这两个案例中的同与异,进而比较其中的政策困境及其需要吸取的经验教训。这两场论辩尽管在许多重大问题上观点不同,但它们在公共政策上都倾向于技术专家治国论,因此招致相似的缺陷。在这两场论辩中,关于未来灾难的耸人描述起了关键作用。我们认为有关应对气候变化的政策研究,需要密切关注的应当是气候变化的社会、经济和政治的维度,而不是过分关注减排目标。我们还认为,对市场机制提供减缓全球变暖的技术的过分信任,十分可疑。有鉴于此,我们切实考察了排放目标的政治意蕴及其时间表,并对如何推进政策研究提出了建议。 This article compares current arguments about global warming with those of the earlier 1970s on “limits of growth.” We are particularly concerned with the similarities and differences between the two cases and further with the policy dilemmas and their lessons learned. Despite their different views on many major issues, both of these arguments have tended to be technocratic in public policy and have therefore caused similar pitfalls. In both of these arguments, a sensational account of the future catastrophe played a key role. We think the policy research on coping with climate change should pay close attention to the social, economic and political dimensions of climate change rather than pay too much attention to emission reduction targets. We also think that it is doubtful that the market mechanism will provide excessive trust in the technology to mitigate global warming. In view of this, we have conscientiously reviewed the political implications of the emission targets and their timetables, and put forward suggestions on how to promote policy research.