漫长的多中心之旅

本文讨论了我的个人经历、我们之中与印第安纳大学政治理论与政策分析研究所相关的许多人的努力,即研究在不同背景下,制度是如何影响行动和后果的。首先,我回顾了我作为年轻学子的经历和我的早期职业生涯,旨在激励那些面对难题的人们。然后,我讨论了我们的制度分析和我们对于都市治理和公共池塘资源的研究,这些研究帮助我逐步发展了分析复杂制度的较为一般的框架。这一框架已经能够使我们发掘和分析制度结构、行为和后果,做出和检验内在一致的预测,并且建立更好的理论。最后,我就未来学术发展方向,与大家分享了一些看法。     

Decentralization and Development in Contemporary Uganda

Abstract

There has long been an emphasis on the importance of decentralization in providing better quality public services in the developing world. In order to assess the effectiveness of decentralization I examine here the case study of Uganda, which has seen major decentralization of power over the last quarter-century. In particular the current government has introduced a five-tiered local government structure, decentralized both fiscal and political power to local governments and introduced regular local government elections. However, initial excitement about Uganda's decentralization programme has tapered off in recent years due to a number of problems outlined here. In particular, I show that decentralization in Uganda has suffered from a lack of independence from central government control, which has led to a lack of effectiveness in the provision of high quality public goods.     

试论警务社会化的路径选择

警务社会化是新时期有效供给安全社会秩序的科学合理的途径选择。当前我国实行警务社会化很有必要。应当采取多种路径加以推广。     

A Tale of Two Milibands: From Environmental Citizenship to the Politics of the Common Good

Two different proposals for a political basis for a low carbon transformation in Britain have been put forward in recent years by the Miliband brothers. In 2006, David Miliband argued for a new ‘environmental contract’ between state and citizens, in the spirit of the post‐war social contract. Last year Ed Miliband proposed a ‘politics of the common good’. The historical sociology of citizenship suggests that the environmental contract approach will not work, mainly because of the pure public bad nature of the climate nature and the politics that flow from this. The ‘common good’ approach is more promising, but to make any headway, will have to tackle the strengthening of materialism and populism over the last generation.     

公共产品和垄断产品的关系刍议

或出于政府职能,或由于投入成本太高,无利可图,私人企业不愿意提供公共产品只能由政府提供。久而久之,人们便认为公共产品必然由政府提供,形成公共产品的天然垄断性。是因为这种天然垄断性,使得公共产品与垄断产品易混为一谈。深入理解公共产品和垄断涵义,需要从二者的供给者、需求者、产品范围和供给方式四个方面加以区分。     

公共物品多中心供给模式探究

公共物品的复杂性向单中心供给模式提出了挑战;公共物品多中心供给模式正是在此基础上发展起来的,多中心内含着参与主体相互独立、地位平等、自愿参与一系列同时发生的博弈,达到非均衡平衡状态的性质;多中心的特性满足了公共物品供给复杂性的要求,多中心供给模式是公共物品有效供给的最好选择。     

论无单放货下承运人赔偿责任的例外

文章针对国际海商货物运输中长期存在的无单放货问题,结合联合国贸法会目前正在审议的《UNCITRAL运输法草案》,对特殊情况或符合一定条件的可转让运输单证下的无单放货,承运人无需承担赔偿责任的情况进行探讨。     

无单放货审判实务中货物交付的认定标准

无单放货案件中,承运人有否实施放货,即有关货物交付的事实认定问题,近年来越来越成为海事法院审理此类案件的焦点.如何认定货物交付是一个具有理论价值和实践意义的重要课题.在检索国际海上运输法律制度中对货物交付定义的基础上,具体分析了海事审判实践中提单持有人和承运人各自举证的具体内容,并结合无单放货案件所应体现的价值取向,就此类案件中货物交付的认定标准进行梳理和小结,以期为海商法的理论和实践提供参考.     

International democracy promotion: a role for public goods theory?

The state of international democracy promotion is in flux. After more than fifteen years of increasing activity and with more organisations and resources devoted to promoting democracy than ever before, a mood of uncertainty surrounds democracy support's current performance and future prospects. The last decade has also seen the emergence of a new literature on global public goods theory, offering fresh analytical perspectives on pressing issues in international affairs like peace, security, development, and environmental sustainability. The future of democracy promotion will be determined chiefly by the realities of the political market place, in societies on both sides of the relationship. But could recent theorising about the market for global public goods offer some analytical support for making sense of its current condition and, by identifying the democratic peace as a global public good strengthen the case for greater international cooperation in promoting democracy as means to achieve that end?     

On Who matters: extending the scope of luck egalitarianism to groups

Abstract

What is the scope of principles of egalitarian justice? This is the question that Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen addresses in Chapter 6 of his Luck Egalitarianism, where he comprehensively considers the different dimensions along which the issue of the scope can be articulated (e.g. with respect to time, to the boundaries of states, etc.). For all the dimensions taken into account he defends a broad understanding of the scope of equality, except for one. He thinks that the principle of luck egalitarianism can only apply to individuals and not to groups. In this paper, we show that Lippert-Rasmussen’s reasons for caring only about inequality between individuals are unsatisfactory, and we provide an argument that justifies extending the application of the luck egalitarian principle also to groups.