合作网络治理理论的困境与启示

合作网络治理理论是伴随全球化与信息社会的来临而兴起的,它面临着多重困境。从总体上看,合作网络治理理论留给了我们一些有益的启示,即新时期的治理应坚持:回应社会需求,建构新时期公共事务的责任分担格局;在全球化时代倚重本土化,建构公民自主参与的制度平台;明确合作网络组织的能力限度,全面提高其治理能力;坚持权变开发原则,提高合作网络治理的适应性;加强职业伦理建设,重塑合作网络的合法性基础。     

治理视野下我国第三部门的培育

改革开放后,我国第三部门获得了较快发展,但是也面临着很多问题。针对第三部门存在的问题,本文试图从治理理论的视野出发,从法律方面,第三部门与政府的关系方面和第三部门内部管理等多方面、多种途径培育第三部门。     

公共利益与社会治理

本文提出落实科学的发展观,建设小康社会,实现社会和谐,需要对公共利益进行深入的研究,认为公共利益由公共财富和公共福利两个部分构成;公共利益和个人利益之间应该建立良性互动关系;社会治理要格外重视处理公共利益中的社会公共福利与个人福利的关系;实现公共利益和个人利益共同发展,需要加强社会建设和管理,推进社会管理体制的创新。     

略论共产党执政与构建和谐社会的价值契合

中国共产党执政与构建社会主义和谐社会之间必然构成一种相互统一的价值关系、一个相互联系的价值体系、一项相互支撑的价值工程。中国共产党执政与构建社会主义和谐社会的价值契合首先体现在价值主体、价值目标和价值追求等主导价值层面;也体现在经济、政治、文化和人的发展等多维价值层面;还体现在合规律性、合人民性和合法治性等基础价值层面。     

和谐社会视阈下的治理理论

构建社会主义和谐社会是党中央的一项重大战略举措,也是我国社会发展到现阶段的必然要求和广大人民群众的热切愿望。和谐社会不仅是一种美好的社会理想,也是当代中国社会治理的基本价值取向与方法论诉求。治理是超越传统意义上的"统治"和"管理"理念的新的管理理念和管理方式。加强社会和谐建设,促进社会和谐,必须进行社会和谐治理。     

规则治理:中国法律生命进化的关键

现代法治与权利是紧密相联的,中国的古代法、现行法的推进在一定程度上还欠缺权利观念。而中国当代很多学者的论述多是以西方的权利———法治模式为参照,忽视了中国的独特观念和实践,当现代的法治运动摧毁了中国已有的模式,能否建立起西方的权利———法治模式又是值得怀疑的。中国法治理的症结不在于权利的缺失,而在于对于规则的认知不足。中国不应拘泥于西方的模式,要从本国的文化习性和传统,从实用立场出发,用规则治理,用发展了的实践理性才能扎实地推动对法律的反思。     

非营利法人治理对公司治理的借鉴与创新

非营利法人中也存在委托——代理关系产生的风险,为了确保各种利益相关者的利益不被经营管理者伤害,有必要借鉴公司法人的治理经验,建立一套完善的治理体系,包括建立合理的治理结构通过规章制度安排实现内部责任与权力的平衡,以及通过外部市场竞争实现对内部经营管理的约束。其中,外部治理对于非营利法人尤其重要,因此必须在业绩评估、信息公开、人才选聘、打破垄断等方面进行制度创新。     

Justifications of Violence

The classical and the former Catholic doctrines of tyrannicide remind us that in the Western tradition of citizenship and political thought, tyrannicide is worthy. Recent legislation against the glorification of terrorism is too wide and vague, and denies any link between tyrannicide and liberty. A good production of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar should not make the act of tyrannicide per se problematic, but should seize the dilemma of whether or not Julius Caesar was becoming a tyrant rather than a consul with constitutional powers for war or emergency. Both Hannah Arendt and our contemporary Ted Honderich offer philosophical justifications of violence in defined and not uncommon circumstances. Terrorism is sometimes the only resort of the poor and oppressed.     

Municipal Democratisation in Rural Latin America: Methodological Insights from Ecuador

As municipal governments in Latin America acquire greater responsibility for public goods and services and the promotion of economic and social development, and play a greater role in local citizenship, questions about the quality of municipal democracy also need to be taken much more seriously. This article proposes a 'relative power approach' that examines the distribution of social power at the microregional level and its impact on municipal governance as the starting point for the analysis of municipal democratisation in Latin America. The approach lays particular emphasis on historical changes in the distribution of local productive assets, the political organisation of local social actors, coalitions between and divisions within local social sectors and the ways in which local power relations are shaped by global and national forces. The article then explores the practical application of the relative power approach to three municipalities in rural Ecuador.     

Pretend It Doesn'T Work: The ‘Anti-Social’ Bias In The Maryland Scientific Methods Scale

The social constructs and methodological principles embodied in the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale (SMS), comprising part of the Campbell Collaboration in Crime and Justice assessment protocol, induce a series of biases in the evaluation of evidence of crime prevention policy interventions that focus on collective social phenomena, such as communities. Applying these principles leads to negative conclusions about effectiveness; yet their inherent ‘anti-social’ bias may induce Type II error with regard to the desirability of ‘social’ interventions to reduce crime. Policy-making is poorly served as a result. This point is illustrated, first, through a scrutiny of the social constructs used, including those that typify treatments, institutional settings and units of analysis. These are seen as being constructed in a way that is congenial to the underlying methodological issue of ‘control’ but that constitute nevertheless a distorted definition of the governance issues involved in crime reduction in community settings. A model more appropriate for evaluating voluntaristic action in civil society is needed. Second, it is suggested that this methodological bias arises particularly in policy interventions and change programmes that address issues concerning the ‘collective efficacy’ of local communities in reducing crime. An empirical exemplification of these arguments is presented with reference to a completed evaluation research study (Foster and Hope, 1993).