数字时代中心化治理何以应对电诈去中心化风险  

Centralized Governance and Decentralization Risk of Online Fraud in the Digital Era

作　　者：赵芸 彭宗超[1,2,3] ZHAO Yun;PENG Zongchao(School of Public Policy and Management,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China;Center for Crisis Management Research,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China;Tsinghua University,Center for Social Risk Assessment in China,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China)

机构地区：[1]清华大学公共管理学院,北京100084 [2]清华大学应急管理研究基地,北京100084 [3]清华大学中国社会风险评估研究中心,北京100084

出　　处：《广州大学学报（社会科学版）》2024年第4期5-18,共14页Journal of Guangzhou University:Social Science Edition

基　　金：教育部委托项目(20225770009);博士后基金第71批面上项目(2022M711841)。

摘　　要：电诈犯罪已成为数字时代社会安全治理领域亟待重点关注的新型风险之一。以“技术-组织”关系、风险治理为理论基础构建电诈治理双重转型的分析框架,聚焦A省个案研究发现:数字时代电诈犯罪的转型已经形成了去中心化组织结构和众包犯罪模式,其危害与后果已经演化为一簇去中心化的风险综合体。与之相应,电诈治理通过组建任务型组织、建立技术平台等方式极大地提升了治理效能,但仍然基本延续了政府主导、多元参与的中心化治理模式。面对问题侧与治理侧双重转型持续推进的治理情境,中心化治理如何动态适应去中心化风险,成为数字时代社会安全治理的关键所在。The proliferation of online fraud presents a novel and pressing challenge requiring governance in the digital era. Drawing upon the theory of the ″technology-organization″ relationship and risk governance, we have developed an analytical framework, which is capable of addressing the evolving landscape of online fraud and corresponding shifts in governance strategies. Using Province A as a case, we reveal that online fraud often operates with a decentralized organization structure and crowd-sourcing model, resulting in a cluster of decentralization risks. In response to this, crime governance relies on adhocracy organizations and digital platforms to enhance effectiveness, by maintaining a centralized governance model. The governance challenge lies in how centralized governance can adapt to decentralization risks, which becomes a critical issue in the realm of social security governance in the digital era.

关 键 词：数字技术 “技术-组织”关系 去中心化风险 中心化治理 电诈犯罪 

分 类 号：D630.8[政治法律—政治学] X913.2[政治法律—中外政治制度]