后实证主义视角下的全球治理机制碎片化及其管控  

Regime Fragmentation in Global Governance and Its Management:A Post-Positivist Perspective

作　　者：王亚琪[1] Wang Yaqi

机构地区：[1]南开大学周恩来政府管理学院,天津300350

出　　处：《国际论坛》2022年第2期135-154,160,共21页International Forum

基　　金：中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目“全球治理的不确定性研究”(项目号:63202004)的阶段性研究成果。

摘　　要：机制碎片化已经成为当前全球治理发展的一个核心特征和重要趋势。但在围绕整体性治理与复杂性治理的长期争论中,实证主义研究路径未能就机制碎片化对全球治理的影响向度作出判定,从而无法阐明面对整体性治理机制的低效或停滞,符合全球治理“去中心化”基本取向的机制碎片化发展为何没有实现多元协调和有效治理,反而加剧了全球治理失灵。文章引入后实证主义研究视角,阐释了人类现代化与全球化进程共同催生的当代全球风险社会下,理性行为体在碎片化的机制复合体中走向“有组织的不负责任”,导致机制碎片化在全球治理中产生负面作用的必然性。全球风险在国际体系系统层次引发的“根本的不确定性”取代个体有限理性,成为行为体在全球治理中建立合作秩序的主要障碍。为消减有组织的不负责任、管控机制碎片化,全球治理机制构建的价值应当被理解为向行为体提供应对“根本的不确定性”的社会空间。以务实性治理实践缓和机制间竞争,以互补性机制协调抑制“规则套利”,以共同发展为导向塑造确定性合作共识,促使各治理主体在机制复合体中聚焦共同治理目标、形成共同责任感、凝聚治理方案共识、提升共同行动能力。Regime fragmentation has become a core feature and important trend in contemporary global governance.However,in the long-running debate between holistic governance and complex governance,the positivist approach has failed to gauge the direction of regime fragmentation’s impact on global governance.It thus cannot explain why regime fragmentation which developed in line with the basic orientation of“decentralization”in global governance has not brought about diversified,coordinated and effective governance that is expected to address the inefficiency or stagnation of holistic governance mechanisms.Instead,it has exacerbated the failures of global governance.Adopting the post-positivist perspective,this paper contends that in the contemporary global risk society spawned by both modernization and globalization,rational actors move towards“organized irresponsibility”in the fragmented regime complex,inevitably causing negative impact on global governance.The“fundamental uncertainty”caused by global risk at the international system level has replaced individual bounded rationality,becoming the main obstacle to a cooperative order in global governance.In order to reduce organized irresponsibility and manage regime fragmentation,the value of the global governance regime lies in providing actors with the social space that responds to“fundamental uncertainty.”We should ease competition among mechanisms by introducing pragmatic governance practices,curb“rule arbitrage”through complementary coordination,and take common development as the shared goal to shape a consensus on certainty.In this way,we can hopefully encourage all actors involved in the regime complex to focus on common governance objectives,foster a shared sense of common responsibility,reach consensus on governance schemes and enhance joint action capabilities.

关 键 词：机制碎片化 后实证主义 全球治理 风险社会 有组织的不负责任 

分 类 号：D80[政治法律—政治学]