“职业打假人”是公益性买者吗?——基于“买假索赔”式打假机制的定量研究  

Are “Professional Anti-counterfeiting Personnel” Commonweal Buyers:A Quantitative Research Based on “Fake Claim” Anti-counterfeiting Mechanism

作　　者：赵亚翔[1] ZHAO Ya-xiang(Southwest University of Political Science and Law, Chongqing 401120, China)

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学管理学院,重庆401120

出　　处：《西南政法大学学报》2016年第4期94-100,共7页Journal of Southwest University of Political Science and Law

基　　金：中国博士后科学基金项目"民间职业打假者参与食品安全公共治理的机制研究"(2012M510287)

摘　　要：在"买假索赔"式打假机制运行过程中,"职业打假人"的社会形象与法律地位备受争议却缺乏定量数据的佐证。通过调查问卷采集样本数据、展开定量研究,其结果表明"买假索赔"式打假机制之效能发挥与目的实现在一定程度上存在着"职业打假"依赖,进而认为在社会角色层面"职业打假人"应被视为公益性买者。应采取制度修缮与宣传教育等措施从理性驱力与行为能力这两个方面来提升普通消费者参与打假的积极性,并将《关于审理食品药品纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的规定》的第3条适用范围扩大到食品药品之外的其他消费纠纷案件。In the operation of ＂fake claim＂ anti-counterfeiting mechanism, the social image and legal status of ＂professional anti-counterfeiting personnel＂ are controversial while the quantitative data evidence is inadequate. Through questionnaire to collect sample data and quantitative study, the present study shows that to achieve the efficiency and purpose of ＂fake claim＂ mechanism to some extend depends on ＂professional anti- counterfeiting＂, thus ＂professional anti-counterfeiting personnel＂ should be regarded as commonweal buyers from the perspective of social role. From public policy angle of view, the suggestions of this paper are to revise mechanism and publicize education so as to improve consumers＇ anti-counterfeiting motivation from sides of rational drive and act capacity, and to expand the application of the third article （that is in food and drug consumption disputes, operators are not allowed to raise a plea against those who ＂ buying the fake on purpose＂ ） of ＂regulations on the trial of the law applicable to a number of food and drug disputes＂ to all consumption disputes.

关 键 词：打假 买假索赔 社会角色 官民协同 定量研究 

分 类 号：DF414[政治法律—经济法学]