Pub Date : 2020-01-25DOI: 10.1163/18760104-01701002
Lorenzo Squintani
{"title":"Editorial Note","authors":"Lorenzo Squintani","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01701002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01701002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760104-01701002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42533187","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-25DOI: 10.1163/18760104-01701006
R. Kegge, A. Drahmann
This article aims to assess whether a programmatic approach could still be a useful legal instrument for the allocation of scarce environmental rights and a legitimate tool for implementing EU Directives. In response to the recent judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (cjeu) in the Dutch Programmatic Approach to Nitrogen case, 1 we will examine under what conditions a programmatic approach could be compatible with the precautionary principle and the freedom to conduct a business as protected by EU law. These principles are inextricably linked, and the Member States and the cjeu must find a balance between a high level of environmental protection and the freedom to conduct a business.
{"title":"The Programmatic Approach: Finding the Right Balance between the Precautionary Principle and the Right to Conduct a Business","authors":"R. Kegge, A. Drahmann","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01701006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01701006","url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to assess whether a programmatic approach could still be a useful legal instrument for the allocation of scarce environmental rights and a legitimate tool for implementing EU Directives. In response to the recent judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (cjeu) in the Dutch Programmatic Approach to Nitrogen case,\u00001\u0000 we will examine under what conditions a programmatic approach could be compatible with the precautionary principle and the freedom to conduct a business as protected by EU law. These principles are inextricably linked, and the Member States and the cjeu must find a balance between a high level of environmental protection and the freedom to conduct a business.","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760104-01701006","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47071685","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-25DOI: 10.1163/18760104-01701007
L. Krämer
{"title":"To justifie the wayes of God to men. Limits to the Court’s powers of interpretation, written by Matthijs van Wolferen (2018)","authors":"L. Krämer","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01701007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01701007","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760104-01701007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45562396","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-25DOI: 10.1163/18760104-01701005
L. Krämer
This paper passes in review the different pieces of legislation and court judgments which were issued until now as regards rights of nature, and critically comments on their impact. In a first section, the legislation, including the constitutional texts of some countries, will be presented. In a second section, the implementation of the different measures will be discussed, also with a view, whether the EU could learn from the trend to give natural assets rights of their own. Short concluding remarks will end the contribution.
{"title":"Rights of Nature and Their Implementation","authors":"L. Krämer","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01701005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01701005","url":null,"abstract":"This paper passes in review the different pieces of legislation and court judgments which were issued until now as regards rights of nature, and critically comments on their impact. In a first section, the legislation, including the constitutional texts of some countries, will be presented. In a second section, the implementation of the different measures will be discussed, also with a view, whether the EU could learn from the trend to give natural assets rights of their own. Short concluding remarks will end the contribution.","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760104-01701005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43560081","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-25DOI: 10.1163/18760104-01701004
M. Fermeglia, Alessandra Mistura
In the landmark Slowakische Republik v. Achmea BV judgment, the ecj arguably took a resolute stance against the compatibility of International Investment Agreements between EU Member States and the inherent functioning of EU’s legal order. However, the issue as to whether the foreign investment protection regime is at odds with the sound application of EU law is far from being settled. Furthermore, the international investment protection regime as interpreted by investment tribunals may hamper EU Member States’ regulatory space, especially in the implementation of ambitious environmental and climate policies. The recent surge of litigation before international investment tribunals triggered by retrospective changes to supporting schemes for renewable energy sources and the phase-out of nuclear power plants in some European Member States is a telling example. The purpose of this article thus is to analyse the avenues currently available to ensure consistency between EU’s environmental and climate policies as implemented by EU Member States and the investment protection regime as applied by investment tribunals in the wake of the Achmea decision, with a view to devising a benchmark to prevent and avoid, rather than foster, policy conflicts.
在具有里程碑意义的Slowakische Republik v. AchmeaBV判决中，欧洲法院可以说采取了坚决的立场，反对欧盟成员国之间的国际投资协定与欧盟法律秩序的内在功能的兼容性。然而，关于外国投资保护制度是否与欧盟法律的合理适用相抵触的问题，远未得到解决。此外，由投资法庭解释的国际投资保护制度可能会阻碍欧盟成员国的监管空间，特别是在实施雄心勃勃的环境和气候政策方面。最近一些欧洲成员国对可再生能源支助计划的追溯性改变和逐步淘汰核电站所引发的国际投资法庭诉讼激增就是一个很好的例子。因此，本文的目的是分析目前可用的途径，以确保欧盟成员国实施的欧盟环境和气候政策与Achmea裁决后投资法庭适用的投资保护制度之间的一致性，以期制定一个基准来预防和避免(而不是助长)政策冲突。
{"title":"The Fate of EU Environmental and Investment Law after the Achmea Decision","authors":"M. Fermeglia, Alessandra Mistura","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01701004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01701004","url":null,"abstract":"In the landmark Slowakische Republik v. Achmea\u0000BV judgment, the ecj arguably took a resolute stance against the compatibility of International Investment Agreements between EU Member States and the inherent functioning of EU’s legal order. However, the issue as to whether the foreign investment protection regime is at odds with the sound application of EU law is far from being settled. Furthermore, the international investment protection regime as interpreted by investment tribunals may hamper EU Member States’ regulatory space, especially in the implementation of ambitious environmental and climate policies. The recent surge of litigation before international investment tribunals triggered by retrospective changes to supporting schemes for renewable energy sources and the phase-out of nuclear power plants in some European Member States is a telling example. The purpose of this article thus is to analyse the avenues currently available to ensure consistency between EU’s environmental and climate policies as implemented by EU Member States and the investment protection regime as applied by investment tribunals in the wake of the Achmea decision, with a view to devising a benchmark to prevent and avoid, rather than foster, policy conflicts.","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760104-01701004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46301543","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-25DOI: 10.1163/18760104-01701003
C. Streck
The 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change abandons the Kyoto Protocol’s paradigm of binding emissions targets and relies instead on countries’ voluntary contributions. However, the Paris Agreement encourages not only governments but also sub-national governments, corporations and civil society to contribute to reaching ambitious climate goals. In a transition from the regulated architecture of the Kyoto Protocol to the open system of the Paris Agreement, the Agreement seeks to integrate non-state actors into the treaty-based climate regime. In 2014 the secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Peru and France created the Non-State Actor Zone for Climate Action (and launched the Global Climate Action portal). In December 2019, this portal recorded more than twenty thousand climate-commitments of private and public non-state entities, making the non-state venues of international climate meetings decisively more exciting than the formal negotiation space. This level engagement and governments’ response to it raises a flurry of questions in relation to the evolving nature of the climate regime and climate change governance, including the role of private actors as standard setters and the lack of accountability mechanisms for non-state actions. This paper takes these developments as occasion to discuss the changing role of private actors in the climate regime.
{"title":"Filling in for Governments? The Role of the Private Actors in the International Climate Regime","authors":"C. Streck","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01701003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01701003","url":null,"abstract":"The 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change abandons the Kyoto Protocol’s paradigm of binding emissions targets and relies instead on countries’ voluntary contributions. However, the Paris Agreement encourages not only governments but also sub-national governments, corporations and civil society to contribute to reaching ambitious climate goals. In a transition from the regulated architecture of the Kyoto Protocol to the open system of the Paris Agreement, the Agreement seeks to integrate non-state actors into the treaty-based climate regime. In 2014 the secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Peru and France created the Non-State Actor Zone for Climate Action (and launched the Global Climate Action portal). In December 2019, this portal recorded more than twenty thousand climate-commitments of private and public non-state entities, making the non-state venues of international climate meetings decisively more exciting than the formal negotiation space. This level engagement and governments’ response to it raises a flurry of questions in relation to the evolving nature of the climate regime and climate change governance, including the role of private actors as standard setters and the lack of accountability mechanisms for non-state actions. This paper takes these developments as occasion to discuss the changing role of private actors in the climate regime.","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760104-01701003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46300115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-12-06DOI: 10.1163/18760104-01604002
Sabine Schlacke, Michèle Knodt
On 24 December 2018, the Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 on the governance system of the Energy Union and Climate Action entered into force. The Governance Regulation provides the European Union with a new regulatory regime for renewable energies and energy efficiency. It has the function of an ‘Umbrella Regulation’ which aims at the overarching control of energy and climate policies for the period 2021 to 2030. Its target is to implement the climate protection goals of the Paris Agreement. At the same time, it represents a compromise and compensation for the European Union’s lack of competences in the area of energy supply, especially concerning the determination of the energy mix of the Member States. Despite choosing a Regulation (which applies automatically) as the legislative tool, its steering and sanctioning mechanisms are in this respect rather ‘soft’: The Regulation gives the Member States a wide scope of decision-making. Which goals and instruments are established by the Governance Regulation, which scope of decision making remains at the national level, how Germany exercises its decision making powers and how it should be exercised are key questions addressed in this article.
{"title":"The Governance System of the European Energy Union and Climate Action","authors":"Sabine Schlacke, Michèle Knodt","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01604002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01604002","url":null,"abstract":"On 24 December 2018, the Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 on the governance system of the Energy Union and Climate Action entered into force. The Governance Regulation provides the European Union with a new regulatory regime for renewable energies and energy efficiency. It has the function of an ‘Umbrella Regulation’ which aims at the overarching control of energy and climate policies for the period 2021 to 2030. Its target is to implement the climate protection goals of the Paris Agreement. At the same time, it represents a compromise and compensation for the European Union’s lack of competences in the area of energy supply, especially concerning the determination of the energy mix of the Member States. Despite choosing a Regulation (which applies automatically) as the legislative tool, its steering and sanctioning mechanisms are in this respect rather ‘soft’: The Regulation gives the Member States a wide scope of decision-making. Which goals and instruments are established by the Governance Regulation, which scope of decision making remains at the national level, how Germany exercises its decision making powers and how it should be exercised are key questions addressed in this article.","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2019-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42409558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-12-06DOI: 10.1163/18760104-01604004
Dr. Ulrich Gieseke
The Aarhus Convention aims to democratize environmental decision-making. Since its adoption 20 years ago, the Aarhus Convention has led to a fundamental change in German environmental administration. This article explores the administrative capacities, organizational structures and enforcement requirements, identifies challenges for environmental authorities and outlines prospects for better implementing the Aarhus Convention. The main challenges are: extended responsibilities for authorities, greater complexity of environmental decisions, increased transparency, more external communication, stricter procedural requirements, extended access to justice and the reduction of enforcement deficits. The success of the Aarhus Convention largely depends on high-capacity administration, which adapts its way of decision-making to these challenges. In addition, substantive environmental law is the foundation upon which the three pillars of the Aarhus Convention rest. Therefore, this article argues that legal instruments and a high level of substantive environmental law are essential for environmental authorities to achieve effectively the objective of the Aarhus Convention.
{"title":"The Aarhus Convention in Practice: Challenges and Perspectives for German Environmental Authorities","authors":"Dr. Ulrich Gieseke","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01604004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01604004","url":null,"abstract":"The Aarhus Convention aims to democratize environmental decision-making. Since its adoption 20 years ago, the Aarhus Convention has led to a fundamental change in German environmental administration. This article explores the administrative capacities, organizational structures and enforcement requirements, identifies challenges for environmental authorities and outlines prospects for better implementing the Aarhus Convention. The main challenges are: extended responsibilities for authorities, greater complexity of environmental decisions, increased transparency, more external communication, stricter procedural requirements, extended access to justice and the reduction of enforcement deficits. The success of the Aarhus Convention largely depends on high-capacity administration, which adapts its way of decision-making to these challenges. In addition, substantive environmental law is the foundation upon which the three pillars of the Aarhus Convention rest. Therefore, this article argues that legal instruments and a high level of substantive environmental law are essential for environmental authorities to achieve effectively the objective of the Aarhus Convention.","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2019-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42729055","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-12-06DOI: 10.1163/18760104-01604003
C. Backes, A. Keessen, H. Anker, L. Baaner
This article provides a comparative analysis of the regulation of ammonia emissions, primarily from livestock installations, in Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands. It discusses the challenges of regulating agricultural ammonia emissions in view of the rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union (cjeu) on Art. 6(3) of the Habitats Directive. It is argued that the need to ensure certainty concerning the absence of significant effects on Natura 2000 sites is challenged by the uncertainties regarding both the state of individual habitat types and the potential impact of individual projects. A more integrated or programmatic approach may provide an alternative approach to individual assessments, but it is necessary to ensure that additional loads from new or enlarged livestock installations are permitted in areas with high ammonia loads only where it is certain that a programmatic approach will ensure that there are no harmful effects. This might be an almost impossible task.
{"title":"Natura 2000 and the Regulation of Agricultural Ammonia Emissions","authors":"C. Backes, A. Keessen, H. Anker, L. Baaner","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01604003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01604003","url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a comparative analysis of the regulation of ammonia emissions, primarily from livestock installations, in Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands. It discusses the challenges of regulating agricultural ammonia emissions in view of the rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union (cjeu) on Art. 6(3) of the Habitats Directive. It is argued that the need to ensure certainty concerning the absence of significant effects on Natura 2000 sites is challenged by the uncertainties regarding \u0000both the state of individual habitat types and the potential impact of individual projects. A more integrated or programmatic approach may provide an alternative approach to individual assessments, but it is necessary to ensure that additional loads from new or enlarged livestock installations are permitted in areas with high ammonia loads only where it is certain that a programmatic approach will ensure that there are no harmful effects. This might be an almost impossible task.","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2019-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43553107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-12-06DOI: 10.1163/18760104-01604005
Lars Jerrentrup, Bastian Lotz, Silvana Tiedemann, Lion Hirth
European Union competition law, intended to thwart subsidies paid out by national governments, plays an important role in shaping EU Member States’ support schemes for renewable energy. The Environmental and Energy State Aid Guidelines 2014–2020, which formalize the European Commission’s take on subsidies in the electricity sector, prescribe technology-neutral auctions as the standard mechanism to determine support levels. In this study, we have assessed the formal decisions of the Commission with respect to technology-neutrality between July 2014 and May 2018. It turns out that 16 out of 18 schemes are not technology-neutral and figure high degrees of technology-differentiation. We have also studied the exemption clauses invoked to justify technology-discrimination, finding that the most ambiguous clause is used most frequently, and that the application and level of scrutiny varies strongly from case to case. The State Aid Guidelines are meant to increase transparency and legal certainty. We find that with respect to technology-neutral auctions for renewable energy, the Guidelines fail to deliver on their purpose.
旨在阻止各国政府补贴的欧盟竞争法，在制定欧盟成员国可再生能源支持计划方面发挥着重要作用。《2014-2020年环境和能源国家援助指南》(Environmental and Energy State Aid Guidelines 2014-2020)正式确立了欧盟委员会对电力行业补贴的态度，将技术中立拍卖作为确定支持水平的标准机制。在本研究中，我们评估了欧盟委员会在2014年7月至2018年5月期间就技术中立性做出的正式决定。结果表明，18个方案中有16个不是技术中立的，并且显示出高度的技术分化。我们还研究了为证明技术歧视的合理性而援引的豁免条款，发现最模棱两可的条款使用得最频繁，审查的适用范围和水平因案件而异。《国家援助指南》旨在增加透明度和法律确定性。我们发现，就可再生能源的技术中立拍卖而言，《指南》未能实现其目的。
{"title":"Technology-Neutral Auctions for Renewable Energy: EU Law vs. Member State Reality","authors":"Lars Jerrentrup, Bastian Lotz, Silvana Tiedemann, Lion Hirth","doi":"10.1163/18760104-01604005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01604005","url":null,"abstract":"European Union competition law, intended to thwart subsidies paid out by national governments, plays an important role in shaping EU Member States’ support schemes for renewable energy. The Environmental and Energy State Aid Guidelines 2014–2020, which formalize the European Commission’s take on subsidies in the electricity sector, prescribe technology-neutral auctions as the standard mechanism to determine support levels. In this study, we have assessed the formal decisions of the Commission with respect to technology-neutrality between July 2014 and May 2018. It turns out that 16 out of 18 schemes are not technology-neutral and figure high degrees of technology-differentiation. We have also studied the exemption clauses invoked to \u0000justify technology-discrimination, finding that the most ambiguous clause is used most frequently, and that the application and level of scrutiny varies strongly from case to case. The State Aid Guidelines are meant to increase transparency and legal certainty. We find that with respect to technology-neutral auctions for renewable energy, the Guidelines fail to deliver on their purpose.","PeriodicalId":43633,"journal":{"name":"Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2019-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48640389","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：