从特殊预防到风险管控：社区矫正之理论嬗变与进路选择

社区矫正制度肇始于刑法教义学意义上的特殊预防理论。然而在这种理论指引下的社区矫正实践屡出难题。学术界以综合预防主义代替单纯特殊预防的进路转换也因一般预防和特殊预防的理论壁垒宣告失败。特殊预防指引下的社区矫正遭遇实践难题的根本原因是特殊预防理论与法律治理逻辑之悖反。而要解决这个问题,应消解特殊预防的个别化逻辑,以风险分类管控的理论进路展开社区矫正制度之建构完善。风险分类管控进路历经四代演进,目前比较成型的＂风险/需求＂模式较全面平衡刑前犯因风险、矫正中变化风险与犯罪人响应率,动态展现和监控人身风险水平,以期望达致社区矫正效益最大化,从而对我国社区矫正之评估处遇体系建构有重要借鉴意义。     

从某特大火灾分析有毒烟气对人体的危害及预防

本文从某特大火灾分析了有毒烟气对人体的危害,并提出了相应的预防措施。     

新时代我国环境法风险预防原则的制度建构

风险社会背景下,风险预防原则在国际环境法领域的国际习惯法地位逐渐清晰并巩固。为了维护国家生态安全,实现生态环境治理现代化,提升我国生态环境法律体系的协调性与科学性,实现当前生态环境法治改革的逻辑自洽,亟需将风险预防原则确立为我国环境法的基本原则。未来的环境法典中应当明文规定风险预防原则,其展开宜采总分模式。风险预防原则的三种强度版本是相辅相成、彼此衔接的有机统一体,灵活适用于不同类型的、严重的或不可逆转的且发生可能性应达到“合理怀疑”程度的生态环境风险活动。协商合作型生态环境风险规制模式耦合科学理性与社会理性于法律理性之中,将实体上生态环境风险共识的形成纳入程序性的法律制度过程,是生态环境风险规制现实可行的路径选择。     

国际法上的风险预防原则

风险预防原则已经成为国际和国内环境保护法律制度的一项重要的基本原则。该原则要求我们在进行任何的经济活动之前就对该活动可能会对自然环境和生态系统造成的影响进行风险预测,并相应采取针对性的措施,从而更好地保护自然环境和生态系统。但如何将该原则运用到危险废物越境转移领域,仍然有待我们进行理论上的探讨。应加强对危险废物越境转移中运用该原则等方面的探讨。     

从局长到富婆，张海英的“华丽”转身

说张海英是个亿万富婆一点都不夸张，光检察机关起诉书认定的犯罪数额累计就有8700多万元。“成功策划”让她一个华丽转身，从局长变成了董事长。     

浅议企业财务风险的预防与控制

本文从企业财务风险内涵入手,从财务风险产生原因的内外两个方面进行分析,总结归纳出企业财务风险预防与控制措施,如构建完善的财务风险管理体系;加强企业内审制度的完善;建立企业财务风险预警系统;提高人员财务风险防控综合素质;不断提高财务决策的科学性;强化企业财务风险防控意识;加强资金流的控制与管理;制定合理的风险转移策略,降低财务风险带来的损失。     

风险预防原则理论与实践反思——兼论风险预防原则的核心问题

尽管风险预防原则已经获得了广泛的认可,但其在理论和实践两个层面都具有较大的争议性。欲破解风险预防原则的内在困境,应在明晰存在的真正问题的基础上作出解释并提出可能的解决之道,避免仅仅依据法律文本进行＂空对空＂的分析。风险预防原则存在的真正问题是其法律效力问题,这就要求我们放宽研究的视野,从法律实效和社会实证入手,探究风险预防原则如何在社会中发挥效果。     

风险行政的预防原则

风险预防不同于危险防御,其适用于科学上不确定的风险行政领域,在我国具有法律原则的重要地位。为了更好地保护基本权利,国家可以根据预防原则设计风险预防机制,并在特定条件下采取一定的风险预防措施。但因为风险的不确定性,国家在采取风险预防措施时存在较大的裁量空间,也容易侵害经营自由、科研自由或引发贸易纠纷。故而,如果某产品有潜在的负面效果,经风险评估判明存在科学上的不确定性,方可决定采取风险预防措施。在采取措施时,国家应当遵守比例原则、平等对待原则等要求,应当说明理由,保障公众的参与机会,并根据情况变化在事后进行评估与调整,以提高措施的可接受性、充实风险信息。在风险预防措施的合法性引起争讼时,因存在科学上的不确定性而难以适用客观性举证责任,应由双方主体在各自的责任范围内举证说明,以帮助法院解明案情,适时作出裁判。     

论我国邻避风险规制的模式及制度框架

邻避风险规制所涉主体有行政机关、项目建设方、受项目影响的民众与技术专家等,他们在邻避风险议题形成、安全标准制定、风险评估、风险交流与风险管理中具有不同的角色与功能。基于风险知识的专业与信息的异化,不同主体在科学知识与社会价值方面会形成不同的判断与体认,这已使我国当前的邻避风险规制陷入恶性循环。打破恶性循环,需要重塑我国邻避风险规制的合法性。公私合作环境治理的邻避风险规制模式基于当代政治法律理论的支持,能够平衡风险规制中的科学性与民主性,符合我国社会现实需要,其制度框架由基本制度和操作性制度构成。     

Developing Countries and Global Environmental Governance: From Contestation to Participation to Engagement

Developing countries did not start off as demandeurs of global environmental governance. Although they are still rather skeptical about the global environmental enterprise, they have come a long way from being the vigorous contestants that they were three decades ago. This fascinating evolution has not only changed the views of developing countries but has also transformed the shape of the global environmental discourse, most significantly by turning what used to be global environmental politics into what is now the global politics of sustainable development. This paper charts this evolution by using the twin conceptual lenses of effectiveness and legitimacy and the heuristic markers of the three key global conferences on the global environment (Stockholm 1972; Rio de Janeiro 1992; Johannesburg 2002). The paper argues that the pre-Stockholm era was exemplified by a politics of contestation by the South; the Stockholm-to-Rio period was a period of reluctant participation as a new global compact emerged around the notion of sustainable development; and the post-Rio years have seen the emergence of more meaningful, but still hesitant, engagement by the developing countries in the global environmental project but very much around the promise and potential of actualizing sustainable development. The author is grateful to an anonymous review, and to Steinar Andresen, Ellen Hey, and Jessica Green for valuable comments.     

疫情防控中社会治理制度之完善

疫情防控是对我国国家治理体系的集中考验。本文以社会治理制度为着眼点,探讨新冠肺炎疫情防控中社会治理存在的不足并提出相应的建议。坚持和发挥制度优势,这既是抗击疫情、战胜疫情的重要手段,也是今后疫情防控的主要抓手。针对疫情防控中出现的治理问题,应以制度为突破口,补齐短板,完善与疫情防控相关的体系和机制,以有效提升社会治理效能。     

从善秩到善治:乡村治理有效的法治逻辑

全面推进乡村振兴,治理有效是基础,而治理有效需要建立在良好的治理秩序基础之上.建构基于法治的乡村治理秩序,是从善秩到善治的关键,其取决于村内部治理秩序和村外部治理秩序的良性运转、协调与平衡.逻辑框架在于:村内部层面,村民依法自治、依法用权维权;村外部层面,政府依法行政,推进治理法治化;协调与平衡层面,良法善治、缘法而治...     

Reforming International Environmental Governance: An Institutionalist Critique of the Proposal for a World Environment Organisation

This article argues that a World Environment Organisation (WEO) does not promise to enhance international environmental governance. First, we claim that the establishment of an international organisation alone in a policy field currently populated by regimes cannot be expected to significantly improve environmental governance because there is no qualitative difference between these two forms of governance institutions. Second, we submit that significant improvement of international environmental governance through institutional re-arrangement must rely on a modification of decision-making procedures and/or a change of institutional boundaries. Third, we develop three principal models of a possible WEO. A WEO formally providing an umbrella for existing regimes without modifying issue-areas and decision-making procedures would be largely irrelevant. A WEO integrating decision-making processes of existing regimes so as to form comprehensive world environment rounds of intergovernmental bargaining would be largely dysfunctional and prone to a host of negative side-effects. A supranational WEO including large-scale use of majority decision-making and far-reaching enforcement mechanisms across a range of environmental issues might considerably enhance international environmental governance, but it appears to be grossly utopian. In conclusion, a WEO cannot be at the same time realistic, significant and beneficial for international environmental governance. Available political resources should be invested in advancing existing and emerging sectoral environmental regimes rather than in establishing a WEO.     

Policy Coherence, Global Environmental Governance, and Poverty Reduction

This paper explores linkages between policy coherence, global environmental governance, and poverty reduction. It begins with a few thoughts on what these terms mean, and how they are linked. It then provides some perspectives on how the linkages might be improved over time. The paper takes the view that the most coherent institutional framework for both poverty reduction and environmental protection is likely to be one that is relatively decentralised, and based on a modular (networking) structure. The implication is that this framework should rely mainly on domestic and regional governance institutions, rather than on global ones. Effective management of environmental problems (both national and international) also implies a judicious mix of strong government institutions, smooth-functioning markets, and well-targeted infrastructure investments. The business and labour communities are therefore crucial. Other elements of civil society, notably the NGOs, also have important roles to play. Global environmental governance will have to overcome significant resistance insofar as the interests of the developing countries are concerned. Developing countries will need to be convinced that it is in their best interest to participate in global environmental institutions. The best way of making this case is to link (local) poverty reduction objectives explicitly to (both local and global) environmental protection goals. Bringing greater coherence to international trade, investment, and development co-operation policies could make an important contribution to strengthening these linkages. Investment is particularly important here – in the future, investment governance will likely prove to be more important for poverty reduction than environmental governance. Focusing on global environmental governance will not be enough.     

Governing Climate Change: Towards a New Paradigm for Risk Regulation

This article argues that the ascent of climate change on the EU regulatory agenda signals a new era of risk regulation and calls for the establishment of a new paradigm for risk regulation. Climate change is altering the EU's conception of environmental risks and its design of regulatory responses. In contrast to conventional risk regulation, climate change regulation must prioritise the risks of business‐as‐usual over the risks of change, must target systemic change instead of stability, and must favour the virtues of integration and orchestration over those of individualisation and compartmentalisation. There is an important role for risk regulation scholarship to analyse this shift and its consequences for regulation, such as the relocation of legitimacy needs and the emergence of new risks of regulatory failure. Such an enterprise would both reinvigorate risk regulation scholarship and offer a vital contribution to the European Union as it tackles the momentous challenge of climate change governance.     

从权力到权利:算法治理的路径

人工智能时代,算法日益介入社会生活中。我国对算法的治理刚刚起步,现有的算法治理模式并不能适应算法技术的发展。基于对我国算法治理现状和治理困境的分析,提出从权力到权利的算法治理路径,并借助“权利束”这一概念,从整体上对算法权利进行构思,以实现算法控制者和算法相对人的利益平衡。     

法律生态化视角下高校贪腐的预防与治理研究

法律生态化关于以可持续发展为出发点，在立法倾向上以预防优先的观点对于目前我国高校腐败的预防和治理有着积极的理论指导意义。建立健全预防和惩治高校腐败的法律体系，从根本上遏制腐败现象，不仅是依法治校、教育法治的基本要求，也是极具有时代意义和现实意义的一个重要法治课题。     

海外投资风险防范与安全管理的法律思考

近年来,中国的海外投资数额大幅增长,但同时也面临着经营亏损、管理不善、缺乏投资担保机制与损失救济措施等问题。因此有必要充分认识中国海外投资风险,从法律制度层面构建我国海外投资的风险防控机制与安全管理体系,在风险可控的前提下稳步推进“走出去”战略的实施。在分析海外投资风险类型及原因的基础上,从国际法与国内法角度,就我国海外投资风险防范与安全管理的机制构建,阐述具体的路径方法、法律措施与政策建议。     

从人性恶到有效治理：权力制约的新思考——兼论中国权力制约机制的完善

主流理论多从人性角度证成权力制约的正当性和必要性。此一研究路径存在着一些无法克服的缺陷，应当从权力的有效治理的角度来重视认识权力制约的正当性和必要性。