检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:赵延聪[1]
机构地区:[1]山东大学,山东济南250100
出 处:《广西警官高等专科学校学报》2014年第1期53-57,共5页Journal of Guangxi Police College
基 金:山东省社科基金重点项目(08JDB004)
摘 要:学者们主要从程序法治的角度切入,寻求行政决策法治化的解决方案。这样的研究进路有其深刻的理论、社会和历史背景。行政决策法治化的程序进路对理论研究、立法实践、公众舆论以及普通人的思维和行动都有很大影响。程序进路虽然能够有效地回应理论上的质疑,但对于行政决策法治化的实践难题却未能提供可行的解决方案。因为这些问题不是单纯靠引入先进的程序制度和理论所能解决的,我们需要的是能够表达自己真实生活感受的实证研究。During the last decade, administrative decision-making has become one oi the hot points m jurisprudential study. Scholars usually choose procedural route to study how to rule administrative decision- making by law, which is not accidental. Procedural route has profound theoietical, social and historical background. And it has exerted great influence on theoretical research, legislative practice, public opinion, and even the thinking and actions of ordinary people. Although procedural route is able to respond to the theoretical challenges effectively, it has done little to the practical difficulties of administrative decision-making which can not be resolved simply by introducing foreign procedural institutions and theories. Above all, we need empirical studies which can express our own feelings in the real life.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.44