This study aims to analyze about the evaluation of home builders what factors contribute to the improvement of thermal insulation performance of new detached houses. The analysis focuses on five factors; the financial incentives to home buyers, the standard of energy efficiency to home builders, the building performance labeling, market needs, and technical factors of insulation. I conduct an empirical analysis based on questionnaire survey of 180 home builders. The result shows that large-scale company provides relatively more houses with better insulation property. Most of home builders recognize the influences of financial incentives and next is market needs. The result also implies that the “ Eco-point ”， which is a financial incentive widely used, contribute to promote the adoption of better insulated windows, and to stimulate particularly small contractors to use insulating materials.It is also implied that the comfort and reduction of energy bills are equally recognized as benefits of insulation.

抄録全体を表示

わが国において、環境を保全する権利として環境権は必ずしも承認されているわけではない。このような状況のもとで最近、所有論に依拠して環境保全の論拠を提示しようとする議論が見受けられる。その論点を一言でいえば、地域に居住する住民には共同占有権（都市地域）、総有権ないし入会権（農山村地域）が存在し、それが環境保全の権利根拠になり得る、というものである。しかしこういった議論は次の点で問題が残る。

（1）入会、総有は基本的に封建的所有形態であり、封建的な共同体（Gemeinde）が解体した近代以降の社会においては存続し得ない。

（2）また住民がそこに居住していることの反射的な権利としての入会的な権利は法律の保護の対象とはならず、したがって環境保全の権利根拠とはなり得ない。

（3）入会的な山林所有の形態はわが国の歴史的現実に照らしてみても環境保全的であるとはいい難い。

このように所有の視点を環境保全の論拠とすることには限界がある。そこでこの限界を突破するための環境保全の戦略として、この小論では（1）環境権の中核としての人格権が差し止め請求の法的根拠として判例上認定されていることを足場として、身近な生活環境に関する保全の論拠を提示し、また（2）貴重な自然環境の保全についても、個々人の利益の集積を代表するという論理で、裁判における「訴えの利益」を主張していく、という方向性を提示した。

抄録全体を表示

The purposes of this study are firstly, to review the Rice Policy Reform (2004 2009 FY), secondly, to characterize the transition form the Rice Policy Reform to the Pilot Program for Direct Payment of Income Support, and thirdly, to consider further policy implications based on the examination of the results of the latter program. The Rice Policy Reform was a policy package to reduce governmental commitments for preventing oversupply and relieving the decline of rice prices. However, its income stabilization program for selected farmers couldn't compensate them for the decline of rice prices. As a result, the strengthening of paddy farming structure, which was one of the most important aims of the Reform, couldn't be achieved. The Pilot Program for Direct Payment of Income Support, started in 2010 FY, succeeded the previous policies in its aspects of making the rice production control program selective, and coped with the decline of rice price exclusively through income stabilization measures. On the other hand, the production supports for food rice and other strategic crops on paddy fields were coupled with their planted areas and applicable to all farmers. These aspects are discontinuous from the previous policies. The 2010 rice price was much lower than the previous year, mainly because of oversupply due to the selective production controls and weakened consumers purchasing power. The government inevitably decided to implement some price support measures, as well as the Program's income stabilization payment, which worked as a deficiency payment. As a result, the economic ability of larger farms to rent more paddy field seemed improved. These facts imply the necessity for rebuilding an effective rice production control system and stable price supports, along with deficiency payments for the full-dressed Program for Direct Payment of Income Support.

抄録全体を表示