个体主义方法论和我国法人制度

私法自治是民法的理念,决定了民法理论体系的构建和制度生成。民法的理念决定了民法理论体系的立场是个人主义。私法中所坚持的是个人主义立场,因此决定了个体主义方法论是民法的基本研究方法。自然人与法人是最重要的民事主体类型,是民事主体制度的重要内容。法人是一个组织,但其行为需要由法人机关实施,因此如何合理设计法人法律制度,促使法人内部团体意志有效形成并通过法人机关实现,与第三人实施法律行为参与法律交往,实现法人的利益,同时能够有效约束法人机关,防止其利用代表权谋取私利损害法人的利益,对促进民法体系的完善与成熟,意义重大。本文从个体主义方法论的视角对我国《民法通则》中有关法人人格、法人分类、法人机关等法律制度进行评析并提出完善建议。     

文化自觉的方法论问题初探

文化大发展大繁荣首先需要达到文化自觉。要达到文化自觉,贵在科学应用相关方法论;把握文化自觉内在物质实践规律,厘清文化自觉内在方法论的两大层次是科学应用相关方法论的前提和基础;实现文化价值,从文化自觉的理论方法论视野出发,不仅需要注重跨学科和跨文化的研究,而且需要辩证的思维与视野以及宏观研究与微观研究的有机结合。从文化自觉的实践方法论视野出发,既要坚持走出去与引进来并重原则,也要注重把握时代脉搏,增强中华文化辐射力,更要做到文化融合科技促进创新。     

“解严”后政党角力下台湾新闻自由的进步与迷思

台湾新闻自由实践在其政党角力中扮演着工具角色。换言之,新闻自由从来就不是政党角力的目的,只是权力斗争的工具。多党纷争时期,在野党高举“新闻自由”旗帜,与国民党争夺媒体资源。政党轮替后,对峙的国民两党都是表面附和“新闻自由”,实际上却采用隐性、间接的方式操控媒体。政党竞争带来了广电媒体的解禁、新闻自由法律法规的修正、新闻自由观念的成熟等正面效应。但政党对媒体的变相操控却让新闻自由异化,“只问政党,不问事实”的蓝绿媒体难以承担“第四权”责任。     

新媒体在“太阳花学运”中的动员与支持作用

2014年3月18日,台湾部分反对两岸服务贸易协定的学生占领“立法院”,从而引发震动全岛的“太阳花学运”。学运组织者和参与者广泛利用新媒体传播工具来发布和散播反对意见,建构反服贸集体意识,建立学运动员网络,获取国际支持,筹措行动资源,支持各项行动的组织和管理,对于学运的发动和开展发挥了不可或缺的作用。本文首先阐述新媒体的传播特性及其社会应用,继而着重对新媒体在此次学运过程中的作用和影响进行分析,最后探讨新媒体本身所固有的局限性。     

习惯如何成为习惯法及其方法论意蕴——两种认可说的比较分析

习惯如何成为习惯法的问题必须从界定"习惯"、"习惯法"这对概念入手,而不同的定义将在很大程度上决定人们对该问题的态度或立场。社会认可说与国家认可说是人们在回答上述问题上的两种立场或学说,它们背后各自隐藏着一幅研究者据以解释经验事实的理想图景。其中国家认可说与文化研究中的"大传统"模式、制度研究中的"现代化"范式相互支持,极大地阻碍了习惯法研究。上述讨论启示我们,在习惯法研究中必须确立正确的方法论立场,才能比较客观地还原习惯法的本质和拓展习惯法研究的深度。     

《环境保护法》的前世今生

修订后的《中华人民共和国环境保护法》将于2015年1月1日开始实施,这部法律的前身是1979年《环境保护法（试行）》,基础是1989年颁行的《环境保护法》。1979年的《环境保护法（试行）》虽然不是此次修法的直接文本,但其作为中国第一部环境保护领域的综合性法律,在奠定中国环境保护法律制度体系基础的同时,也为后来留下了一些隐患,成为此次修法的争论的起因。1989年的《环境保护法》是此次修改的直接文本,这部法律的存废之争一直持续了20多年;在2011年年初人大常委会正式启动修法程序后,经历全国人大常委会四次审议、修改草案两次面向社会公开征求意见、从＂修正案＂到＂修订案＂,创造了中国立法史上几个＂第一＂。最终通过的《环境保护法修订案》体现了十八届三中全会提出的建设生态文明,建立最严格制度的要求,确立了其在环境保护领域的基础性、综合性法律的地位,在建立生态环境保护法律机制方面实现了重大突破。     

IMPACT OF VICTIMIZATION ON RESIDENTIAL MOBILITY: EXPLAINING RACIAL AND ETHNIC PATTERNS USING THE NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY

Criminal victimization is known to influence households’ moving decisions, but theories suggest that the processes leading to a moving decision can vary across racial and ethnic groups. Drawing from current literature, we hypothesized that victimization would have a stronger effect on moving decisions for Whites than for Blacks or Hispanics, and that racial/ethnic residential segregation would moderate the impact of victimization on mobility. Using a longitudinal sample of 34,134 housing units compiled from the National Crime Victimization Survey for the 40 largest metropolitan areas in the United States (1995–2003), we found results that both support and contradict the hypotheses. Specifically, White residents display consistent evidence that victimization is a significant predictor of household mobility. Blacks and Hispanics, in contrast, are more varied in their moving behavior after victimization. In addition, significant differences exist among these groups in responses to victimization and in how mobility is influenced by residential segregation. Higher levels of residential segregation play a part in the victimization–mobility relationship among Blacks in a way that is more complex than we hypothesized.     

Area Differences and Time Trends in Crime Reporting: Comparing New York with Other Metropolitan Areas

Police measures of crime are shaped by victims’ decisions to notify the police. To obtain a better understanding of US crime trends, this study uses the National Crime Victimization Survey to examine geographic differences and temporal trends in crime reporting in New York and other metropolitan areas for the period 1979-2004. We find that net of crime characteristics and survey methodology, the New York metropolitan area showed fewer increases in crime reporting than did other metropolitan areas. These divergent trends suggest that the real differences in the drop of nonlethal violence between New York and other areas may have been smaller than those indicated by police-based crime statistics. We also find that from the early 1990s to 2004, New York showed a sharp decrease in the likelihood of victims perceiving that “police wouldn’t help.” This trend suggests that police reforms in New York City have not resulted in more victims using police-related reasons to explain their nonreporting behavior. Instead, researchers need to develop a broader theoretical framework (not an exclusive focus on police actions) to understand how police- and nonpolice-related factors may explain the geographic variation in the trends of reporting observed in this study.     

Studying North Korea through North Korean migrants: lessons from the field

This article examines the use of North Korean defectors’ accounts as a source of information for studying the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). Information from defectors fills a vital knowledge gap and improves our understanding of North Korean politics, economics, and society. Witness accounts and interview data collected from people who were born in North Korea but have since left have been widely used by journalists, government agencies, international organizations, non-governmental organizations, and academics. There are, however, serious methodological issues in collecting, organizing, and interpreting information derived from defectors’ accounts. Selection and demographic biases, power relations between researchers and interviewees, monetary incentives, and language barriers are among those issues. We propose focus group discussions and participatory observation as complementary methods of data collection to mitigate the shortfalls of relying on individual interviews.     

Normative behaviourism as a solution to four problems in realism and non-ideal theory

ABSTRACT

This article advances the case for ‘normative behaviourism’ – a new way of doing political philosophy that tries to turn facts about observable patterns of behaviour, as produced by different political systems, into grounds for specific political principles. This approach is applied to four distinct problems at the heart of the ideal/non-ideal theory and moralism/realism debates: (1) How to distinguish good from bad idealisations; (2) how to rank options of variable feasibility, cost, and danger; (3) how to distinguish legitimate acceptance of a given political system from acceptance based on coercion or false consciousness; and (4) how to translate abstract principles into concrete institutions. Objections against the general viability of normative behaviourism, and against the types of behaviour it tracks, are also considered.