【摘要】：隨著全球化的不斷深入,我國已經(jīng)進(jìn)入了全球風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì),加之我國的特殊國情,我國所面臨的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)更加具有復(fù)合性,我們?cè)谙硎苋蚧瘞淼慕?jīng)濟(jì)成果的同時(shí),也在經(jīng)歷著財(cái)富分配和風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配這兩個(gè)不同時(shí)段的社會(huì)問題在同一時(shí)間共同呈現(xiàn)的特殊階段。近年來,各種風(fēng)險(xiǎn)問題也正在不斷凸顯出來,喚醒人們的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)思維,逐步成為人們?nèi)粘Ｉ詈蛯W(xué)術(shù)界的熱點(diǎn)話題。文章以“制度主義者”貝克和吉登斯的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)理論為基礎(chǔ),結(jié)合當(dāng)代中國風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)的特征,提出“制度不公正”是當(dāng)代中國風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配不公正的主要根源,并以幾個(gè)制度為例具體分析了制度不公正對(duì)社會(huì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配所產(chǎn)生的影響以及我國風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配的現(xiàn)狀。制度不公正導(dǎo)致了風(fēng)險(xiǎn)人在面對(duì)社會(huì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)時(shí)所擁有的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)應(yīng)對(duì)能力不同,于是就出現(xiàn)了風(fēng)險(xiǎn)強(qiáng)勢(shì)群體和風(fēng)險(xiǎn)弱勢(shì)群體的分化。那些有權(quán)勢(shì)、有財(cái)富、有知識(shí)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)強(qiáng)勢(shì)群體往往就會(huì)利用手中的特權(quán)來使得事情總是往有利于他們的方向進(jìn)行,或者進(jìn)行風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的轉(zhuǎn)嫁,他們總是制造風(fēng)險(xiǎn),再建立一套話語來推卸責(zé)任,這就是所謂的“有組織的不負(fù)責(zé)任”。然而,這些風(fēng)險(xiǎn)制造者最終并不能免于風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的責(zé)難,因?yàn)槿蚧瘯r(shí)代的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)會(huì)逐漸演變?yōu)椤敖K極風(fēng)險(xiǎn)”,“終極風(fēng)險(xiǎn)”面前人人平等,那些早期憑借權(quán)勢(shì)、財(cái)富與知識(shí)進(jìn)行風(fēng)險(xiǎn)轉(zhuǎn)嫁的人或早或晚都會(huì)收到來自風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的報(bào)應(yīng)。因此,充分認(rèn)識(shí)當(dāng)代中國風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)的制度性特征,看清風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配不公正背后的制度不公正本質(zhì),對(duì)于實(shí)現(xiàn)我國社會(huì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)公平再分配具有非常重要的意義。然而,從制度角度來解決風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配不公正問題并不意味著要重新創(chuàng)建制度,而是要在原有制度的基礎(chǔ)上進(jìn)行制度再造,使得制度朝著減少風(fēng)險(xiǎn)產(chǎn)生、保證風(fēng)險(xiǎn)權(quán)勢(shì)在風(fēng)險(xiǎn)人之間公平分配、優(yōu)先化解低層次風(fēng)險(xiǎn)這三個(gè)方向進(jìn)行,這樣的制度才是正義的制度。同時(shí)還要保證公民在風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配方面的話語權(quán),增加其在風(fēng)險(xiǎn)決策方面的參與程度,這樣才能從根本上提高公民認(rèn)識(shí)和應(yīng)對(duì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的能力,減少社會(huì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的生成,達(dá)到風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)治理的目的。
[Abstract]:With the deepening of globalization, our country has entered the global risk society, in addition to the special national conditions of our country, the risks facing China are more complex, while we enjoy the economic fruits of globalization. At the same time, the social problems of wealth distribution and risk distribution are presented at the same time. In recent years, a variety of risk issues are also emerging, awaken people's risk thinking, gradually become a hot topic in people's daily life and academic circles. Based on the risk society theory of "institutionalist" Baker and Giddens, combined with the characteristics of contemporary China's risk society, this paper points out that "institutional injustice" is the main source of risk distribution injustice in contemporary China. Taking several institutions as examples, this paper analyzes the influence of institutional injustice on social risk distribution and the present situation of risk distribution in China. Institutional injustice leads to different risk coping ability of risk person in the face of social risk, so there is a strong risk group and risk vulnerable group differentiation. Powerful, wealthy, knowledgeable and risky groups tend to use their privileges to keep things going in their favor, or to pass on risk, and they always create risk. Another set of words to shirk responsibility is called "organized irresponsibility." Ultimately, however, these risk-makers are not immune to the blame of risk, because risks in the age of globalization will evolve into "ultimate risk", "ultimate risk" in front of everyone equal, those who, in the early days, relied on power. Those who pass on wealth and knowledge risk will receive payoffs from risk sooner or later. Therefore, it is of great significance to realize the fair redistribution of risk in our society by fully understanding the institutional characteristics of the contemporary Chinese risk society and seeing the essence of institutional injustice behind the unfair distribution of risks. However, to solve the problem of unfair distribution of risk from the perspective of institution does not mean to recreate the system, but to rebuild the system on the basis of the original system, which makes the system to reduce the risk. To ensure the fair distribution of the risk power among the risk people and the priority to resolve the lower risk, such a system is the system of justice. At the same time, we should also ensure that citizens have a voice in risk distribution and increase their participation in risk decision-making, so as to fundamentally enhance citizens' ability to understand and cope with risks and reduce the generation of social risks. To achieve the goal of risk social governance.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京航空航天大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D630

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 湯閎淼;;我國社會(huì)救助制度下城鄉(xiāng)最低生活保障標(biāo)準(zhǔn)設(shè)立再思考[J];中國社會(huì)科學(xué)院研究生院學(xué)報(bào);2016年03期

2 譚江華;;混合所有制完善導(dǎo)向下的國有經(jīng)濟(jì)布局再調(diào)整——制度優(yōu)勢(shì)與改革突破點(diǎn)[J];現(xiàn)代經(jīng)濟(jì)探討;2016年02期

3 夏玉珍;卜清平;;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配對(duì)社會(huì)結(jié)構(gòu)的形塑[J];湖北社會(huì)科學(xué);2015年07期

4 馮志宏;;當(dāng)代中國財(cái)富分配、風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配與人的發(fā)展[J];改革與戰(zhàn)略;2015年01期

5 張廣利;閆飛飛;;論現(xiàn)代風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的擴(kuò)張與分配及其對(duì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)治理的啟示[J];晉陽學(xué)刊;2014年06期

6 陶建鐘;;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)的秩序困境及其制度邏輯[J];江海學(xué)刊;2014年02期

7 姚大志;;社會(huì)正義論綱[J];學(xué)術(shù)月刊;2013年11期

8 徐鈍;;社會(huì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配失衡的社會(huì)資本矯正——以法理型社會(huì)資本培育為中心[J];學(xué)術(shù)論壇;2013年07期

9 李義天;邵華;;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)、現(xiàn)代性與倫理危機(jī)[J];國外理論動(dòng)態(tài);2013年05期

10 項(xiàng)繼權(quán);馬光選;;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配的制度正義[J];江漢論壇;2013年04期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 王道勇;;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配中的政府責(zé)任[N];學(xué)習(xí)時(shí)報(bào);2010年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 夏和國;吉登斯風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)理論研究[D];首都師范大學(xué);2014年

2 馬光選;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配與制度正義[D];華中師范大學(xué);2013年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 白利栓;當(dāng)代中國社會(huì)發(fā)展過程中財(cái)富分配與風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配問題研究[D];延安大學(xué);2014年

2 馬穎;國有壟斷企業(yè)的收入分配不公問題研究[D];安徽大學(xué);2012年

3 趙璇;我國風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)治理面臨的挑戰(zhàn)及對(duì)策[D];中國石油大學(xué);2011年

4 卜玉梅;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分配、系統(tǒng)信任與風(fēng)險(xiǎn)感知[D];廈門大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號(hào)：2376531