节点文献
权力不对称与路径依赖
Asymmetries of Power and Path Dependence
【作者】 严震宇；
【导师】 刘少杰；
【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 马克思主义哲学， 2006， 博士
【副题名】国有企业产权改革“制度失效”的经济社会学分析
【摘要】 本文研究的是国有企业产权改革中的制度失效现象,它主要包括国有资产流失、国有企业效度低迷以及职工地位下降。通过借鉴历史制度主义、市场转型理论及其争辩和嵌入性的概念,本文首先批判经济学以股份制改造和民营化为导向的产权制度设计均存在弊端,它们共同忽略了转型社会所具有的政治强制性、经济渐进性、文化异己性以及市场非均衡发展特征。从社会学视角出发,本文强调中国国有企业的产权制度变迁是在再分配体制内的渐进式改革,因此国有企业的性质、单位制度以及依附文化为产权改革提供了一个结构基础。在此基础上,本文指出产权制度失效的根源在于权力不对称与路径依赖。前者说明政府权力对产权改革的过渡干预以及利益集团对政策制定的影响力阻碍产权改革公平、良性发展;后者指企业对政府的政策依赖以及经理人员和工人对旧体制的依附心态导致产权改革达不到既定目标。因此,产权改革需要克服“只改产权”的片面做法,而采取一种制度互补与共同演化的思路。即,只有产权制度与非产权制度相互补充,正式制度与非正式制度共同演化,产权改革才能良性发展。
【Abstract】 Since the 3rd Universal Conference of the 11th Central Committee of CCP in 1978, an overall reform has been launched in China, represented as both an outward-open policy and an internal economic reform from central command economy to market. Companied with the transition towards socialist market economy, numerous new arguments on economic reform have emerged. Especially, the most important and also difficult point is how to integrate the socialist ownership system into the growing-up market structure, which is drawing more and more attention from the government as well as form the academic field. This form has experienced from“the plan economy is the mainstream and the market adjustment is the accessory”to“the commercial economy with plan”, to“socialist market economy”, and nowadays finally to the property rights reform that is aimed at an institution consisting of the stock system and other various vigorous mixed economic forms. The gradual reform has evolved from“release power and transfer benefits”to an institutional innovation. As far as the content of the property rights reform is concerned, the mainstream economists in China insist on to resolve the inherent weakness of SOEs through redesigning the property sights system. Among them, some argue that SOEs should carry out a stock reform, while others tend to privatize the SOEs. Generally speaking, the stock reform calls on to set up the property rights organizations of SOEs’juridical persons and then the modern enterprise institution so that the smooth operation of SOEs can be guaranteed. However, the thought of privatizing SOEs argues that state estate should withdraw