科斯产权理论批判--马克思财产权社会义务理论的比较视角  

Critique of Coase’s Theory of Property Rights:the Comparative View of Marx’s Theory of Social Obligation of Property Rights

作　　者：米运生[1] 危旭芳[2] Mi Yunsheng;Wei Xufang

机构地区：[1]华南农业大学经济管理学院 [2]中共广东省委党校马克思主义学院

出　　处：《新经济》2023年第11期5-25,共21页New Economy

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“乡村振兴与深化农村土地制度改革”(19ZDA115);国家社会科学基金年度项目“农民工返乡创业助推乡村振兴的有效模式与路径优化研究”(20BJY141);。

摘　　要：科斯的产权理论是个迷雾:外部性的真实内核及其隐含的产权观点鲜有人知,庸俗化的科斯定理却广为流传。通过揭示《社会成本问题》的证据、逻辑缺陷及其价值观偏见,本文厘清了科斯对于外部性责任界定问题的真实态度:排污是财产所有者的权利,受害者应承担赔偿责任或采取预防措施;科斯产权理论的真实意图是:以效率之名,施否认财产权的社会义务之实。乔装的科斯定理被视为现代产权理论的拱顶石,成为鼓吹资本主义私有制和攻击社会主义公有制的理论武器。与持公平理念的马克思主义财产权社会义务理论比较,私有制的辩护性和有关外部性政策建议的时光倒置,注定了科斯产权理论的虚妄与落后。The Coase theory of property rights is a theoretical fog.Few people know the true attitude about externalities and their implied ideas on property rights.However,the vulgar Coase Theorem is widely well known.By revealing the logic and digital defect residing in the paper of《The Problem of Social Cost》,we attempts to clear Coase’s real attitude to the definition of externality liability is:pollution is the right of the property owner,and the victim should be liable for compensation or take preventive measures;The underlying view of property rights is that,in the name of efficiency,denying the social obligation of the property right.Coase Theorem in disguise is regarded as the keystone of modern property rights theory,which has become a theoretical weapon to advocate private ownership and attack socialist public ownership.The theoretical justification of private ownership and the inversion of time for policy suggestions doomed the reactionary and backward of Coase's theory of property rights.

关 键 词：科斯 财产权 批判 马克思 社会义务 

分 类 号：F205[经济管理—国民经济]