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
机构地区:[1]西南政法大学行政法学院
出 处:《法学研究》2016年第3期20-35,共16页Chinese Journal of Law
基 金:中国法学会重点委托课题"全面推进依法治国背景下的地方法治建设问题研究"(CLS(2015)ZDWT10);司法部国家法治与法学理论研究项目"法治指数及其中国应用研究"(14SFB2002);2015年重庆市研究生科研创新项目"地方立法的公共参与研究"(YKC201501085)成果
摘 要:对法治状态的定量评价,可以为法治建设提供方向和技术指引。法治评估中所运用的量化方法科学与否,将直接影响评估结果的合理性、执行力及社会效果。通过对几种典型的法治量化评估体系在数据搜集处理、权重设置、指数计算中采用的计量方法进行比对分析,可以发现,当前实践与理论研究中量化方法存在着整体局面复杂混乱、具体运用多有瑕疵、实施过程不公开、缺乏结果校验机制等问题。必须正视当下法治评估背后所隐藏的计量隐患,以社会实效为导向探索和建构法治评估的方法论体系。Quantitative evaluation of the rule of law can provide direction and technical guidance for the construction of the rule of law. The scientificity of quantitative methods used in the assessment of the rule of law will directly affect the rationality, execution, and social effect of the results of evaluation. A comparative analysis of some typical quantitative assessment systems in terms of the methods for data collection and processing, weight setting, and index calculation shows that there are many problems with the quantitative methods currently used in practice and theoretical studies, including complicated and disorganized assessment methods, unsound applications, non-transparent assessment process, and the absence of result verifying mechanism. China needs to face up to the problems in the current system of assessment of the rule of law, focus on practical social effect, and explore and con- struct a sound methodological system for the assessment of the rule of law.
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:216.73.216.145