Crucial relationship between the privatized sector and the generic private sector in post-communist privatization: Determinants of economic performance

This article looks at the issue — largely neglected in the transition literature — of the relative weights of the privatized sector and the generic private sector (of de novo private firms) in the emerging private sector of post-communist economies in transition. The present writer posits that the relative weight of each in the aggregate share of a private sector (generally expanding over time as transition progresses) strongly influences economic performance, both during correctional recession and during recovery and expansion period. Another, interrelated issue considered here is the interaction between the evolving institutional framework and the expansion of the generic private sector, that is the most dynamic one in the transition economy. It is true that the interaction between institutions and performance has been a staple of a very large number of books, articles, and papers.However, this article concentrates on one component of a private sector only, that is the generic private sector. But at the same time it looks beyond the ‘Holy Trinity’ of transition (stabilization, liberalization, and privatization) towards a wider institutional framework of political liberty, law and order. The foregoing wider framework, and the emerging general trust, matters as much — if not more — for the present writer as the standard transition program.It is the relative dynamics of both components of the private sector, affected by both standard transition programs and the above-mentioned wider institutional framework, that is of primary importance for the economic performance in post-communist transition. In the last part of the article I will try also to answer, tentatively, the question under which circumstances the wider institutional framework may emerge in the transition process.     

财产权及其哲学基础

财产权作为一种基本的人权是以所有权为核心建立起来的。它的外在表现虽是一种对物的权利,但实质上却体现了一种人与人之间的关系,因此从一开始,财产权就是为实行私有财产而提出的。西方思想家洛克、黑格尔、庞德、波斯纳、罗尔斯分别从不同的角度对财产权的合法性基础提供了理论上的论证。     

和谐行政法律秩序的建构——基于“5.12地震”展现的行政法治化路径

有什么样的民众就有什么样的政府。法治化的行政相对人更有利于催生出法治化的行政主体。故行政法治之构建,需要行政相对人担负起主体角色,履行主体责任。在"5.12地震"中,普通民众秉持法治精神与政府善意合作,实现了行政相对人主体性的个案回归。主体性回归以及由此形成的交往理性提供了一个异于传统方式的行政法治化进路,并标志着"和谐行政法"时代的到来。     

国际私法的统一化刍议

随着科学技术的发展以及全球化的影响 ,国际私法呈现出统一化的趋势。国际私法的统一不仅包括冲突规范的统一 ,还包括各国实体民法的统一。国际私法的统一化给国际私法带来了巨大的挑战。我国国际私法的立法必须在立足我国特殊情况的前提下借鉴国际社会的普遍实践。     

论私人产权与社会主义公有制

建立现代产权制度 ,不是用私有制否定公有制 ,社会主义公有制和私人产权是可以兼容的 ,和私人产权兼容、产权清晰的社会主义公有制有着广阔的发展前景。     

行政征收的法律规制论纲

公民财产权的排他性支配属性及其在公民权利体系中的地位呼唤法律对行政征收进行有效规制。首先,行政征收立法应遵守法律保留原则,并以公共利益条款限制征收目的。其次,行政征收程序应吸纳正当法律程序的精髓——参与,并且这一参与应是有效参与。最后,在不得不征收公民财产时,行政机关应给予公平补偿。     

刑事和解框架下新型“自告制度”之构建——从追问我国现行自诉制度存在必要性谈起

现行自诉制度弊端丛生,已背离其应有的制度价值和要义,几无存在必要性。对此,以"不告不侦、有告必侦"为内核的新型"自告制度"可取而代之,同时将保障被害人权益这一自诉制度的首要精神保留下来,在刑事和解框架下开启一套崭新的公诉程序。     

晋江民营企业融资难现状及解决途径

本文就晋江民营企业融资难问题的成因作了较全面的分析，并结合晋江的具体情况，运用相关理论探讨在集群效应下构建协同模式来解决融资难问题。     

论警察权的私权基础

传统警察法多从公法角度研究警察权问题,鲜有人从私法角度进行深入思考.事实上,警察权有着深厚的私法和私权基础.循着公私法划分的起源和发展,我们能够找到原始的公权力与私法的关系.从警察权的本原上,我们可以进一步厘清警察权的公权力属性,并进而寻找到警察权的私权基础.警察消极行政作用的强化和警察比例原则的普适化是警察权私权基础的集中反映.     

Private Interest Governments are Dead. Long Live Private Interest Governments? Lessons from Swiss Cows

This article looks at the most recent developments of the interest associations in the Swiss dairy sector. In the past, these had become famous as so‐called “Private Interest Governments” (PIGs) in which interest associations were equipped with public authority. The initial abolition of the PIG of the Swiss dairy sector in 1999 resulted in a significant and disruptive weakening of the traditional actors which were consequently transformed into liberalised service‐oriented organisations, and it seemed that the Swiss dairy sector could be an example of a long‐time “path” which had come to an end. However, more recent developments, which were partially induced by the associations themselves and partially coincidental, have led to the emergence of a “differentiated PIG”. Although associational governance has not been completely re‐introduced, and the sector remains largely liberalised, the example shows that a path which has been followed for more than 80 years cannot simply be reversed and replaced by a new path, and that deeply institutionalised structures can partially survive if a “window of opportunity” opens.