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:任容庆[1]
机构地区:[1]南开大学法学院,天津300071
出 处:《政法学刊》2015年第3期45-51,共7页Journal of Political Science and Law
摘 要:我国现行调整保障房领域的法律仅关注产权型保障房的分配,而忽视其退出机制,此种立法现状导致的"结构性缺失"是制约产权型保障房制度顺利实施的症结所在。鉴此,构建公平、合理的退出机制是使产权型保障房回归"公共产品"的价值属性之保障。通过分析有限产权理论和共有产权理论下不同的退出模式,可以看出共有产权理论对于解决当前产权型保障房退出机制中存在的问题,具有理论上的正当性和实践中的可操作性,应予以肯定并逐步完善。The current laws dealing with the issue of affordable housing pay more attention to the distribution of ownership types of affordable housing and ignore the exit mechanism. The " structural deficiency" of current legislative situation has restricted the smooth implementation of the institution of ownership types of affordable housing. A fair and reasonable exit mechanism can assure the ownership types of affordable housing and go back to the value attribute of " public products". Through analyzing the different exit models under the theory of the limited property right and the mutual property right, we can see that the theory of the mutual property right has theoretical justification and practical operability for solving the problems existing in the exit mechanism of the ownership types of affordable housing. Therefore, the theory of the mutual property right shall be affirmed and gradually improved.
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:216.73.216.7