信用法治研究:“瓶颈”与前景  

Research on Law for the Social Credit System:“Bottlenecks”and Prospects

作　　者：戴昕[1] Dai Xin

机构地区：[1]北京大学法学院

出　　处：《地方立法研究》2025年第2期39-56,共18页Local Legislation Journal

基　　金：国家社科基金重大项目“社会信用体系的法律保障机制研究”(21&ZD199)资助。

摘　　要：社会信用法治研究近年来取得显著成果,在实践层面也形成积极影响,但由于主干议题已常规化,基础理论争议又难有突破,其进一步推进面临“瓶颈”。既有研究已系统梳理信息权益保护、信用惩戒措施合法性、征信及替代性征信等相关制度信用治理核心法治议题。未决的核心争议聚焦于“信用”范畴的界定。支持狭义信用论者主张回归金融征信的逻辑,避免社会信用建设政策泛化,而开放治理工具论者则强调信用作为提升治理能力的技术载体价值。狭义信用论相对更容易在操作层面落地,但会进一步压缩创新空间。近年的域外信用研究则呈现了信用法治问题外部认知的复杂性。部分客观分析看到社会信用体系服务于后发国家的治理创新,但许多研究仍有过强意识形态预设,而后者产生了更明显的政策影响,如《欧盟人工智能法》对“社会评分”的象征性禁令。展望未来,信用法治研究突破瓶颈需将研究延伸至数字治理的底层逻辑。公共数据开发利用的合法性框架、信用基础设施与数字政府转型的制度耦合、智能技术驱动的信用评价范式革新等议题,或为理论深化和扩展提供新的契机。Despite considerable theoretical progress and practical impacts in recent years,research on the legal aspects of the Social Credit System now encounters bottlenecks,marked by stabilized research paradigms and lingering fundamental theoretical disagreements.Extant work has comprehensively addressed pivotal legal matters in relation to the practices of credit-based governance,including the safeguarding of personal and entity information rights,the legality of credit-based punitive measures,and the legal framework for credit assessment and alternative credit assessment.The key dispute unresolved focuses on delineating the boundaries of the Social Credit System.Those advocating for a narrower scope of the credit system argue for reverting to financial credit principles to prevent the overextension of credit mechanisms,while supporters of a broader definition emphasize social credit mechanisms’instrumental role in enhancing governance efficacy.Although the former viewpoint may translate to more practicable strategies for implementation,it may limit room for innovation.Overseas research presents a mixed picture.While objective analyses recognize the governance needs of developing countries served by the Social Credit System,many overseas observers are still often influenced by their ideological predispositions.This latter research has even influenced policy,contributing to the symbolic prohibition of“social scoring”in the EU's Artificial Intelligence Act.Moving forward,to transcend this bottleneck,legal investigations of the Social Credit System must delve into the fundamental logic of digital governance.Examining issues such as the legal framework for public data development and utilization,the institutional integration of social credit infrastructure with digital government transformation,and the innovation of credit evaluation paradigms fueled by intelligent technologies.These topics may offer new paths for the field to advance further.

关 键 词：社会信用 信用法治 公共数据 信用智能化 

分 类 号：D92[政治法律—法学]