市场竞争中的弱势群体与经济学

中国经济学向何处去是本文的中心议题。文章认为,中国经济学是反映中国经济建设和经济改革实践并为之服务的知识体系,既要开展“国民财富的性质和原因的研究”,又要开展“国民财富的增长和办法的研究”;所以,历史上的这两项研究成果,中国经济学都必须批判地继承和发展;任务的特殊性,决定中国经济学的研究对象既不能定位于生产关系,又不能定位于生产力,应当定位于市场的活动主体:研究对象是家庭、企业的生产和交换活动过程及其条件;研究对象的综合性,又要求研究方法的多样性。中国经济学要想不辱使命,必须从市场竞争中的弱势群体的立场上出发,因为这既是经济科学的优良传统,又是中国全面建设小康社会的着力点。     

论我国饮用水源保护法律调控的基本指导思想

因世界性饮用水源紧缺和污染所导致的饮用水源危机,不仅严重威胁着人们的生命健康和生存,而且随时可能引发国际政治问题。因此,饮用水源的保护被提上了世界各国的议事日程,并成为国际社会共同关注的焦点。可持续发展战略作为一种新的发展模式,是当代人类的普遍共识。本文在分析的基础上提出我国饮用水源保护立法应当以可持续发展为基本指导思想,以期对完善或创新我国饮用水源保护法律调控的理论和实践提供依据和思路。     

我国公用企业的反垄断问题研究

公用企业的垄断是不容忽视的社会现象。公用企业反垄断的完善应立法先行 ,实行企业市场化。改革听证会制度 ,充分发挥听证会的作用     

浅析20世纪初美国与日本东北之争失利的原因

1904～1905年的日俄战争之后,美国和日本成为争夺中国东北的主角,双方在各个方面都进行了角逐。在这场竞争中,美国不敌日本而败下阵来。美国的失利是其对自身远东实力不足的主动选择,是这一时期美国在东北的经济和战略利益没有重要到必须与日本兵戈相见地步的结果,也包含着政治家个人的考虑和对美国不利的外部环境的作用。     

加拿大竞争局的执法方法简介及评价

加拿大竞争局在执行竞争法的过程中,确立了以最大限度地遵守竞争法为目标定位的方法体系, 包括通过教育遵守竞争法的措施、促进遵守竞争法的措施、对不遵守竞争法的应对措施三个方面 的内容。这一执法体系,强调对不正当竞争行为和限制竞争行为的预防和指导,强调和经营者、 政府部门的合作,注重非对抗性程序的应用,提倡高效、及时的解决竞争问题,符合市场经济条件 下效益优先的原则,很好地适应了全球化背景下加拿大解决竞争问题的需要,对我国的竞争执法 工作有相当的借鉴意义。     

政府行为的竞争性分析

在市场经济中,作为市场主体之一的政府也具有竞争性。这种竞争来自于政府之间的竞争、各级政府内部的竞争以及在公共部门中与私营组织的竞争。为了在竞争中获胜,各级政府必须提高公共服务质量、增强公共产品供给的能力、通过公务员竞争机制保证政府运行效率,同时在具有自然垄断性质的公共事业或产业中的非自然垄断环节引进竞争。     

论入世后我国企业竞争策略的调整

入世后我国企业面临着竞争环境的重大变化 ,针对变化了的竞争环境 ,企业必须从各个方面调整竞争策略 ,才能在国际竞争中立于不败之地。认真分析研究入世后企业面临的竞争态势的新变化及应对竞争的策略 ,意义重大     

欧美并购控制法实体标准比较研究

实体标准是整个并购控制体系的核心 ,也是反垄断法的重要内容之一。欧盟最新并购控制立法确立的“严重妨碍有效竞争”实体标准与美国奉行的“实质性减少竞争”标准一样都反映着并购控制的本质。欧美采取大同小异的并购实体标准有利于推动国际跨国并购审查结果的一致性 ,促进并购活动的发展。我国应确立“严重妨害正当竞争”实体标准并配套颁布并购评估指南 ,注重并购审查的经济分析     

The Role of Policy Brokers: The Case of Biotechnology in Kenya

Debates about biotechnology continue to be polarized despite its potential to improve the living standards of the poor in Sub‐Saharan Africa. In the backdrop of this polarized scenario, this paper asked, is there a place for brokers in bringing about a productive debate that is pro‐development? The paper argued that if potential intermediaries are analyzed from the perspective of understanding their role and stakeholding in the regulatory change process, this may help breakout the current polarized anti‐ and pro‐biotechnology debates and thereby focus on how to enable productive biotechnology development. Informed by insights from innovation brokering, the functions of brokers in biotechnology regulation are analyzed through the lens of organizations involved in agricultural biotechnology debates in Kenya. The analysis found that policy brokering function attracts varying opportunities and challenges appropriate for informing relevant policy. The paper drew lessons from Kenya's experience to inform a productive policy brokering model for biotechnology regulation.     

Judiciaries as crucial actors in Southern regulatory systems: A case study of Indian telecom regulation

This article addresses regulatory reforms in the Indian telecommunications sector and emphasizes the role of the Indian judiciary. Our claim is that when confronted with a series of disputes relating to the nascent telecom regulatory landscape, the Supreme Court of India sought to make a constructive contribution to both the actual disputes as well as the overall regulatory framework. Our reading of these cases suggests that in the sphere of telecom, the Supreme Court has been less interested in stamping its own authority on issues, and has instead sought to bolster the authority and legitimacy of the recently constituted telecom regulatory institutions. We seek to draw attention to the role of the Indian judiciary as marking an exceptional feature of evolving regulatory systems in the Global South. Conventional wisdom in the regulatory jurisprudence that has evolved in the Global North suggests that judiciaries should have little or no role to play in regulatory systems. We suggest that to overcome the special challenges that regulatory systems in the Global South confront, more established institutions and actors might have to lend credibility and legitimacy to enable nascent regulatory actors to develop over time. At least in the Indian case, this is one way to understand the Indian judiciary's interventionist actions in the sphere of telecom regulation.