《民法典·继承编》的人文观照与制度保障

我国《民法典·继承编》编纂几易其稿,民众对其抱有较大寄望与期盼。寄望其展现人文观照情愫,尊重生存价值、维护自主能力、推进实质平等;期盼其完善制度保障体系,彰显继承意愿、提供救济机制、维护继承秩序。人文观照路径,在于完善继承制度与规范配置,回应社会分层现实,彰显继承宗旨,协调继承利益;制度保障路径,在于融贯形式平等与实质平等,解决继承纠纷,回应社会需要。     

公共行政学的起源、演进与现代性困惑——基于制度经济学的解释

公共行政学发生的内在动力源于寻求制度理性,以规避资源有限与人类欲望无限悖论下＂合成的谬误＂,寻求理性与美国进步时代的外在压力促使了公共行政学的发生,寻求秩序的理性贯穿于公共行政的整个历史进程。将技术理性与公共行政的结合视为建构美好未来的途径致使人们遭遇了现代性的困境,如何探求宏大的科学理性是未来公共行政学研究的方向。     

中国刑事诉讼制度变迁的多重逻辑：一个分析框架

中国的刑事诉讼制度正在发生深刻的变迁。这种变迁来自于中央司法机构、地方司法机构与民间主体这三类群体具体行为的推动,而这些群体的行为受各自所处场域的制度逻辑支配。支配这些群体行为方式的制度逻辑在很大程度上还是中国刑事诉讼制度变迁的制度逻辑。中国刑事诉讼制度变迁的轨迹与方向在很大程度上取决于参与其中的多重制度逻辑的作用。从＂多重制度逻辑＂来解释中国刑事诉讼制度的变迁,不仅可以更好地把握这一复杂的变迁过程,也具有一定的方法论意义。     

审判中心视角下的行政诉讼制度构造

"以审判为中心"的政法政策同样适用于行政诉讼制度改革,它要求法院发挥自身司法能力和司法制度能力,有效地介入涉法行政争议之中,并藉此保护法益。在行政诉讼中,司法权与行政权之间是法律监督上的国家权力结构关系。法院优位于行政机关,法院作为独立裁判者指挥诉讼管理关系和裁判过程。以审判为中心的行政诉讼制度构造,应最大限度地发挥法院司法能力在解决行政争议上的优位角色,应完整地发挥行政诉讼法的制度能力,即发挥立法、司法解释、司法组织及指导性案例的制度功能。行政诉讼司法准入、行政机关负责人出庭应诉、诉讼管辖、庭审制度等,是否体现了"以审判为中心"的制度改革方向,主要看其是否有利于行政争议的实质解决和法益有效保护。"多元化纠纷解决机制"政策和行政行为合法性审查为中心的行政诉讼制度,影响了法院的诉讼角色和功能。回归司法权和诉讼制度本质,宜在行政争议、行政行为和法益之间构造出一致性的诉讼结构关系;宜从组织和体制改革转向程序改革,发挥行政程序和司法程序在塑造司法公正和司法效率上的作用。     

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。     

新时代党建引领乡村治理创新的路径研究

在新的时代条件下,将制度优势更好地转化为治理效能,既是一个重大的理论问题,也是一个重大的现实问题。党建引领乡村治理是实现制度优势向治理效能转化相关领域的一个重要体现。改革开放40年的发展,乡村治理面临社会阶层分化、治理主体缺位、党组织建设不完善等困境,进一步提升乡村治理效能迫在眉睫。理论分析基层党建与乡村治理的逻辑机理,发现:党的领导是乡村治理的领导核心、党的建设是乡村振兴进程中的坚强堡垒、创新基层治理是巩固党的执政根基的客观要求。新时代提升乡村治理效能必须坚持以党建为引领、以基层为主体、以人民为中心、以问题为导向、以创新为手段、以制度为保障,构建乡村治理新格局。     

Explaining Reforms of Parliamentary Minority Rights: A Theoretical Framework with Case Study Application

How can we explain institutional reforms that redistribute institutional power between the parliamentary majority and minority? This paper proposes an informal theoretical model to explain such reforms in European parliaments based on congressional literature and inductive explanations from case studies. The article argues that political parties as the relevant actors pursue institutional reforms based on their substantive goals, their current and expected future government status, transaction and audience costs of reforms, second-order institutions that regulate the relative influence of actors in changing parliamentary rules, and the institutional status quo. Hypotheses derived from this model are tested with a qualitative case study of all standing order reforms in the Austrian parliament from 1945 to 2014. The empirical analysis finds support for various hypotheses and their underlying causal mechanisms. As Austria constitutes a least-likely case, the evidence provides strong support for the theoretical model.     

中国经济挑战制度经济学?

中国经过20几年的改革实践,GDP以年均超过9%的速度增长,但中国法治与产权保护还很欠缺,这似乎在一些方面挑战现存的制度经济学。制度经济学关注的核心是产权保护与合约执行机制。其实,中国经济在制度资本欠缺的情况下仍能增长的一个重要原因在于其增长所依赖的行业。这就是制造业和服务业的发展对制度环境有着截然不同的制度要求。中国改革实践不但没有挑战制度经济学的核心命题,反倒证实了制度经济学的指导意义。     

反腐倡廉要更加注重制度建设

制度建设是反腐倡廉建设的重要组成部分，是从源头上预防腐败的重要保证。当前，健全完善反腐倡廉制度应从以下三个方面加大力度：一是从抓思想教育入手，增强反腐倡廉的自觉性；二是从完善监督机制入手，营造廉洁自律的“小环境”；三是从落实党风廉政责任制入手，自觉塑造廉洁勤政的领导干部形象。     

Clustering of Multilateral Environmental Agreements: Potentials and Limitations

The concept of clustering of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), i.e. the integration of groups of MEAs or parts thereof, has acquired prominence in recent discussions about reforming international environmental governance. Understood as a continuing process, clustering of MEAs aims at advancing the ongoing process of integrating the elements of this system more systematically and dynamically. This paper proceeds in three steps. First, it demonstrates that a distinction needs to be made between clustering of organisational elements of MEAs and their functions, since the conditions and the effects of their integration differ significantly. Second, it argues that – in contrast to several existing approaches that seek to build clusters starting from similarities in one dimension – any attempt to integrate elements of MEAs needs to be based upon the analysis of a range of factors that influence the prospects of such integration (including overlap of membership and issues, practical feasibility, legal obstacles, and functional requirements). Third, the article contrasts the main potential benefits of a clustering of MEAs, namely efficiency gains and an increase in the coherence of international environmental governance, with the main challenges of international environmental policy, namely reaching agreement, implementing such agreement effectively and preventing/managing inter-institutional conflict. While clustering cannot be expected to make a significant direct contribution to addressing these challenges, it has a potential to economise and enhance the system of international environmental governance with positive indirect effects promoting better international environmental protection in the longer term.