“大数据杀熟”行为政府治理路径探讨

“大数据杀熟”行为严重损害了消费者权益.相对于传统商业“杀熟”行为, “大数据杀熟”行为更隐蔽,消费者维权更艰难.这种利用算法应用技术损害消费者权益的行为严重违背商业伦理,不仅关乎消费者个人权益,更会影响公共利益,仅凭市场调节难以纠正,需要通过法律进行救济.政府应在遵循辅助性原则的前提下,通过算法应用技术备案、建立“政...     

私人主体参与全球行政法

在全球化环境下,除了国家、正在争取独立的民族以及国家间的国际组织,越来越多的私人主体直接参与到超国家行政关系中来,成为全球行政法的主体。"全球行政法"被定义为包括那些促进或以其他方式影响全球行政机构问责性,特别是确保其达到透明度、参与性、合理决策和合法性方面的充分标准以及对其形成的规则和决定提供有效审查的机制、原则、惯例和支持性的社会认同。从全球行政法形成的三个阶段可以清晰看出,传统二元性法律理论与全球行政法发展之间的联系,进而明晰私人主体是如何一步步迈向全球行政法,成为全球行政法主体。在当前的环境下,私人主体参与全球行政法也面临一些困境,需要逐步解决。     

提升社会治理效能:社会企业生产要素社会性变革及其制度优势

社会企业通过市场机制参与社会治理的行动根植于经济嵌入社会的关系之中。生产要素本身具备多种属性和功能,长期以来商品经济理论对生产要素的单向商品化使用,造成了经济与社会、文化等非商品化属性的隔离。正如波兰尼所言,土地作为自然存在,劳动力和企业管理者作为社会人,本身并不是生产出来供销售的商品,资金使用的信用、信任和合法认可也不能作为商品去生产。因此,重新审视经济行为的目的,可以发现社会企业的发展动因。社会企业以社会企业家精神为内生动力,以企业家管理才能为社会目标通向经济行动的镶嵌通道,通过制度创新改变社会问题,并运用社会管理技术系统提升社会治理效能,将组织的制度优势转化为社会治理效能,对推动良性社会运行具有积极的作用。     

儒家君子观与为政之道的德行实践

传统儒家"君子"称谓作为一种行为规范,向古人指明了恰当的作为方向,也凸显了中国古代政治的德性追求。挖掘儒家"君子"之良善观念,重点在于厘清中国古典政治理念与现代政治思想之间的会通,探究"君子儒"所蕴含的理想人格,分析君子养成"三达德"君子之道的行为规范,归纳儒家"修己安人""尊五美屏四恶""内圣外王"的为政之道。借由中国传统道德与当代公共责任伦理的契合,探讨儒家君子观之国家治理的德性意义。     

从“中国之制”看“中国之治”——应急状态下的国家治理思考

“中国之制”源于“中国之治”的实践之中,二者相互依存,共同演进、互为表里。处在新的历史起点上,不同社会制度、发展模式的竞争较量更为尖锐复杂,只有不断完善“中国之制”,才能战胜各种风险挑战,为完成历史赋予的时代使命提供制度支撑,开创“中国之治”的新阶段、新境界。     

乡村振兴战略下中缅边境村寨边民流失问题及其治理策略

作为建设现代化强国的重要战略构想,乡村振兴是解决我国新时代主要矛盾的重大举措。中缅边境村寨边民流失大致可分为边民自发迁移和政府主导下的易地搬迁,其外流不仅受到当地各种推拉因素的影响,而且还与边境地区地缘、族缘跨国社会网络密切相关。边民流失导致了边境虚空与守土乏人,当地少数民族传统文化传承遭遇困境,边民社会传统秩序瓦解,跨境外流的边民面临境外宗教渗透风险,以及伴生性的跨境婚姻、拐卖妇女、贩运毒品、艾滋病蔓延等相互交织的社会问题。政府主导下的村寨治理应包括形塑边民守土固边的职责意识,改善边民生活质量以增进边民福祉,提升边民的综合素质与抵御潜在风险的能力。     

马克思主义社会治理观在民族地区的实践研究

马克思主义社会治理观在民族地区治理实践中发挥着重要作用,是改善民族地区治理效果的重要理论基础。基于此,以马克思主义社会治理观作为研究对象,结合马克思主义社会治理观的主要内容,分析当前民族地区社会治理存在的问题,并从经济、政治、文化以及社会生活等方面的结合阐述马克思主义社会治理观在民族地区的实践与应用。     

The mimicry of the state as a state practice: the regulation of rickshaw licenses in Dhaka (Bangladesh)

Around half a million cycle rickshaws are currently active in Dhaka, Bangladesh. With only 86,000 official licenses available, different types of organizations supply licenses to most rickshaw drivers. These non-official licenses mimic the language of the state. This article argues that while these licenses appear as part of non-state, hybrid, or twilight institutions, they in fact constitute a state practice. Based on approximately 200 semi-structured interviews at six locations in Dhaka and offering a conceptualization of the Bangladesh state as a party-state, the article shows that the operation of non-official rickshaw licenses and the mimicry entailed is an inherent part of party-state governance, one which is not morally neutral. While most respondents saw the everyday benefits of non-official licenses in the absence of sufficient official ones, the latter remained the most prized and, if made available, respondents agreed that the former would become redundant.     

State of the field: What can political ethnography tell us about anti-politics and democratic disaffection?

This article adopts and reinvents the ethnographic approach to uncover what governing elites do, and how they respond to public disaffection. Although there is significant work on the citizens’ attitudes to the governing elite (the demand side) there is little work on how elites interpret and respond to public disaffection (the supply side). It is argued here that ethnography is the best available research method for collecting data on the supply side. The article tackles longstanding stereotypes in political science about the ethnographic method and what it is good for, and highlights how the innovative and varied practices of contemporary ethnography are ideally suited to shedding light into the ‘black box’ of elite politics. The potential pay-off is demonstrated with reference to important examples of elite ethnography from the margins of political science scholarship. The implications from these rich studies suggest a reorientation of how one understands the drivers of public disaffection and the role that political elites play in exacerbating cynicism and disappointment. The article concludes by pointing to the benefits to the discipline in embracing elite ethnography both to diversify the methodological toolkit in explaining the complex dynamics of disaffection, and to better enable engagement in renewed public debate about the political establishment.     

The importance of input and output legitimacy in democratic governance: Evidence from a population-based survey experiment in four West European countries

The study of subjective democratic legitimacy from a citizens’ perspective has become an important strand of research in political science. Echoing the well-known distinction between ‘input-oriented’ and ‘output-oriented’ legitimacy, the scientific debate on this topic has coined two opposed views. Some scholars find that citizens have a strong and intrinsic preference for meaningful participation in collective decision making. But others argue, to the contrary, that citizens prefer ‘stealth democracy’ because they care mainly about the substance of decisions, but much less about the procedures leading to them. In this article, citizens’ preferences regarding democratic governance are explored, focusing on their evaluations of a public policy according to criteria related to various legitimacy dimensions, as well as on the (tense) relationship among them. Data from a population-based conjoint experiment conducted in eight metropolitan areas in France, Germany, Switzerland and the United Kingdom is used. By analysing 5,000 respondents’ preferences for different governance arrangements, which were randomly varied with respect to their input, throughput and output quality as well as their scope of authority, light is shed on the relative importance of different aspects of democratic governance. It is found, first, that output evaluations are the most important driver for citizens’ choice of a governance arrangement; second, consistent positive effects of criteria of input and throughput legitimacy that operate largely independent of output evaluations can be discerned; and third, democratic input, but not democratic throughput, is considered somewhat more important when a governance body holds a high level of formal authority. These findings run counter to a central tenet of the ‘stealth democracy’ argument. While they indeed suggest that political actors and institutions can gain legitimacy primarily through the provision of ‘good output’, citizens’ demand for input and throughput do not seem to be conditioned by the quality of output as advocates of stealth democratic theory suggest. Democratic input and throughput remain important secondary features of democratic governance.