【摘要】：從分配視角出發(fā),權(quán)力是稀缺的產(chǎn)物。稀缺使分配成為了必要,權(quán)力則產(chǎn)生于分配的行為與過程之中。分配可以采取設(shè)置一個(gè)分配者,由它決定所有社會剩余之歸屬的方式,也可以采取設(shè)置某種競爭規(guī)則,由社會成員通過競爭來獲取社會剩余的方式。在這兩種分配方式中,實(shí)踐性權(quán)力與制度性權(quán)力有著不同的功能與特征。實(shí)踐性權(quán)力的行使并不必然造成支配,只有當(dāng)不存在退出選項(xiàng)時(shí),實(shí)踐性權(quán)力關(guān)系才變成了支配關(guān)系�，F(xiàn)代社會保障個(gè)體層面的退出自由,在很大程度上祛除了實(shí)踐性權(quán)力的支配性。結(jié)果,支配更多成為了制度性權(quán)力行使的結(jié)果。當(dāng)集體決策中出現(xiàn)了永久少數(shù),或授權(quán)決策中的授權(quán)決策者失去了中立性時(shí),制度性權(quán)力就變成了一種支配性力量。
[Abstract]:From the perspective of distribution, power is the product of scarcity. Scarcity makes distribution necessary, while power comes from the behavior and process of distribution. Allocation can be done by setting a distributor, who decides the ownership of all the social residues, or by setting some kind of competition rules, in which the members of the society can obtain the social surplus through competition. In these two ways of distribution, practical power and institutional power have different functions and characteristics. The exercise of practical power does not necessarily lead to domination, only when there is no exit option, the practical power relationship becomes dominance. The freedom to withdraw from the individual level of modern social security, to a great extent, dispel the dominance of practical power. As a result, domination has become the result of the exercise of institutional power. When there is a permanent minority in collective decision-making, or the authorized decision maker loses its neutrality, institutional power becomes a dominant force.
【作者單位】： 南京大學(xué)政府管理學(xué)院;南京大學(xué)人文社會科學(xué)高級研究院;
【基金】：國家社會科學(xué)基金青年項(xiàng)目“治理能力現(xiàn)代化視閾下政府職能履行方式研究”(項(xiàng)目號:14 CZZ003)的階段性成果 江蘇服務(wù)型政府建設(shè)研究基地資助(NO.30916014110 & NO.30916013123)
【分類號】：D033;C912.3

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 張力毅;論通過契約實(shí)現(xiàn)的物之支配關(guān)系[D];南京大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號：2248147