华中农业大学学报:社会科学版
華中農業大學學報:社會科學版
화중농업대학학보:사회과학판
Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University(Social Sciences Edition)
2013年
2期
71~76
,共null页
农村基层社会 解决机制 法经济学 成本 收益
農村基層社會 解決機製 法經濟學 成本 收益
농촌기층사회 해결궤제 법경제학 성본 수익
social contradictions of rural grass roots; mechanism of settlement; law and econom-ics; cost; profit
基于当前农村基层社会矛盾现状,结合问卷调查的结果,以理性人为前提,用成本和收益理论分析了农村基层社会矛盾各种解决机制——和解、调解、诉讼与信访的运行情况。结果发现,现行农村基层矛盾解决机制运行中存在的问题:诉讼机制成为当事人的劣后选择;当事人过分依赖调解与和解机制;信访机制被架空等。进一步分析了问题产生的根源:诉讼机制的各项成本均偏高;强制执行力的不足导致和解及调解机制存在收益偏低的风险;信访成本收益的失衡导致农民将其视为最差选择。最后提出了构建成本较低且收益较高的农村基层矛盾解决机制的建议:针对标的额小的婚姻、继承等家庭纠纷和债务纠纷,主张采用调解或者和解机制;针对“利益大”的一些案件,如土地、承包经营等问题,可以先调解,调解不成再诉讼;针对农村黑恶势力的案件,以诉讼为主;万不得已才选用信访。
基于噹前農村基層社會矛盾現狀,結閤問捲調查的結果,以理性人為前提,用成本和收益理論分析瞭農村基層社會矛盾各種解決機製——和解、調解、訴訟與信訪的運行情況。結果髮現,現行農村基層矛盾解決機製運行中存在的問題:訴訟機製成為噹事人的劣後選擇;噹事人過分依賴調解與和解機製;信訪機製被架空等。進一步分析瞭問題產生的根源:訴訟機製的各項成本均偏高;彊製執行力的不足導緻和解及調解機製存在收益偏低的風險;信訪成本收益的失衡導緻農民將其視為最差選擇。最後提齣瞭構建成本較低且收益較高的農村基層矛盾解決機製的建議:針對標的額小的婚姻、繼承等傢庭糾紛和債務糾紛,主張採用調解或者和解機製;針對“利益大”的一些案件,如土地、承包經營等問題,可以先調解,調解不成再訴訟;針對農村黑噁勢力的案件,以訴訟為主;萬不得已纔選用信訪。
기우당전농촌기층사회모순현상,결합문권조사적결과,이이성인위전제,용성본화수익이론분석료농촌기층사회모순각충해결궤제——화해、조해、소송여신방적운행정황。결과발현,현행농촌기층모순해결궤제운행중존재적문제:소송궤제성위당사인적렬후선택;당사인과분의뢰조해여화해궤제;신방궤제피가공등。진일보분석료문제산생적근원:소송궤제적각항성본균편고;강제집행력적불족도치화해급조해궤제존재수익편저적풍험;신방성본수익적실형도치농민장기시위최차선택。최후제출료구건성본교저차수익교고적농촌기층모순해결궤제적건의:침대표적액소적혼인、계승등가정규분화채무규분,주장채용조해혹자화해궤제;침대“이익대”적일사안건,여토지、승포경영등문제,가이선조해,조해불성재소송;침대농촌흑악세력적안건,이소송위주;만불득이재선용신방。
According to the current social contradictions in rural grass roots and results of surveys, this paper used the cost and profit theory to unscramble the move of various mechanism of settlements, such as reconciliation,conciliation,litigation and letter petition with law and economics analysis methods and the rational man premise. The law and economics analysis reveals the questions in the move of mech- anism in settlements of social contradictions in rural grass roots as below: litigation has been the last choice; the parties are too dependent on reconciliation and conciliation; letter petition is unpractical. The paper also clarified the underlying reasons such as, the higher cost of litigation; lack of executive force results in the risk of lower income from reconciliation and conciliation; unbalanced cost-benefit of letter petition leads to the worse choice by peasants. All the analysis above contributed to the final proposal of building a multi-dimensional mechanism of settlement of social contradictions to benefit rural grass roots at the lowest cost. Firstly, reconciliation and conciliation are adopted against part of the small-scale fami-ly dispute over marriage and inheritance, and debt dispute; secondly, reconciliation can be firstly used to deal with high benefit cases like land and contractual operation before litigation comes into use; thirdly, litigation can be mainly used ainst evil power in rural area. At last, letter petition can be chosen in case of no alternative.