科学主义与人文主义视角下大型工程社会稳定风险评估困境及对策探析  

The Analysis on the Predicament and Countermeasures of Social Stability Risk Assessment of Major Projects from the Perspective of Scientism and Humanism

作　　者：胡象明[1] 张丽颖 HU Xiangming, ZHANG Liying(School of Public Administration, Beihang University, Beijing, 100191)

机构地区：[1]北京航空航天大学公共管理学院,北京100191

出　　处：《行政论坛》2018年第2期118-125,共8页Administrative Tribune

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目"大型工程的社会稳定风险评估研究"(11&ZD173)

摘　　要：重大工程社会稳定风险评估问题既是一个科学问题,也是一个人文问题。从科学主义视角看,社会稳定风险评估专家存在学科惯性并且容易被利益掣肘,风险归因理论和风险界定方法具有局限性,科学评估指标及评估模型具有刻板性,以及评估过程中专家与公众获取信息的不对称性,使得社会稳定风险评估陷入"信任危机"困境;从人文主义视角看,由于人类知识的有限性、人性的自利性与脆弱性以及个体认知风险的差异性,使得社会稳定风险评估陷入"利益冲突"困境。为了有效克服双重困境,在评估主体层面,应重视利益相关者的风险感知,完善专家的责任追究制度;在评估方法层面,应以社会民意调查为基础,注重定量与定性方法的结合;在评估内容层面,应灵活运用评估指标,建立特殊化模型;在评估过程层面,应强调风险信息的双向流动,实现专家与公众的认知统一。以人为本,在人文主义基础上进行科学评估,以此提高公众对于社会稳定风险评估结果的可接受性。The problem of risk assessment of social stability so a humanistic one. From the scientific perspective, social fessional knowledge and can be easily influenced by other in major projects is not only a scientific issue but alstability risk assessment experts are limited by prointerest groups; both risk attribution theory and risk definition method have limitations on making comprehensive assessment; scientific evaluation indicator and eval- uation model lack flexibility, and the information obtained by experts and the public during the evaluation process is asymmetric, all of which bring social stability risk assessment into confidence crisis dilemma. From the humanistic perspective, the lack of thorough human knowledge, selfishness and vulnerability of human nature, as well as individual disparities on cognitive risk, cause social stability risk assessment fall into a dilemma of interest conflict. This paper provides four suggestions to resolve this double predicament. First, the risk perception of the stakeholders should be paid attention to and the system of expert accountability should be perfected in the context of risk assessment. Second, assessment method should rely on social polls and combine quantitative and qualitative analysis. Third, in the content of assessment, the evaluation indicator should be used flexibly and a specific model should be established. Finally, in the process of evaluation, the two-way flow of risk information should be emphasized and the risk cognition between the experts and the public should be unified. In the end, this paper indicates that the best way to improve public＇s endorsement on the results of risk assessment is to carry out scientific assessments that based on humanism and people-oriented ideology.

关 键 词：科学主义 人文主义 社会风险 社会稳定风险评估 

分 类 号：D631.43[政治法律—政治学] X820.3[政治法律—中外政治制度]