The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami: The highest casualties and largest reconstruction funds—Characteristics of major disasters and future challenges in developed countries

The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake was a disaster that led to the greatest number of casualties related to any form of natural disaster seen in developed countries since World War II. Furthermore, this earthquake occurred in an area where tsunami countermeasures had been prioritized. This disaster, therefore, led to the question “Is it impossible to reduce the number of victims of huge catastrophes, even in cases in which advanced disaster prevention measures have been taken?” Part of the reason this particular earthquake caused the largest number of deaths was because the tsunami that followed — which exceeded the “design load” of the seawall — hit the urban area. In addition, the tsunami, which also exceeded the “estimated loads” of the established disaster prevention plan, caused many “evacuation failures.” Another factor that contributed to the deaths was that the disaster prevention measures, up to that point, had relied primarily on the recognition that disasters could be prevented by the development of “hard,” or tangible, disaster prevention facilities in addition to “soft,” or intangible, measures, such as issuing warnings, without imposing space restrictions. Another characteristic of the Great East Japan Earthquake was that the largest reconstruction budget associated with any disaster in postwar Japan was compiled for it. Although the reconstruction project was over-specified for the disaster-afflicted area in terms of scale, cost, and duration of reconstruction, many unused land areas were also created in the new urban areas created during the reconstruction project. Furthermore, the reconstruction projects undertaken with the huge reconstruction budget were not based on the “choice to rebuild the lives” of the disaster-afflicted areas and the victims, but were rather implemented while simultaneously “marginalizing” said victims and areas as a whole. The over-specified reconstruction projects and the associated marginalization of disaster victims tend to exist in a mutually regulated relationship. Therefore, there are concerns about the future sustainability of the noted disaster-afflicted areas, which are already suffering from a severe population decline. Based on the previously presented discussion, it is possible to highlight various issues associated with disaster measures implemented in developed countries. First, regardless of how advanced disaster measures are, a “surge in disaster damage” can occur, which can lead to a “black swan” event. Therefore, it is necessary to formulate disaster prevention measures based on the assumption that such crises will occur in the future. Second, it is necessary for developed countries to determine how best to formulate reconstruction policies to avoid marginalizing disaster victims as well as to prevent over-specified reconstruction. In examining these two issues, the common problem that arises is how to conduct “risk assessment and enable its acceptance” most calmly immediately after a disaster and then formulate disaster prevention measures based on such assessment. Finally, the future of disaster sociology is detailed in this work. More specifically, in order for disaster sociology to escape its “marginal” status in sociology, it is necessary to consider “disaster” in the context of both a social structure and a social change—similar to how risk theory views the issue.     

村社赋权何以提升乡村治理能力？以四川战旗村村社组织再造过程为例

拥有多维复合型权力的村社组织是提升乡村治理能力的关键，而不同来源的村社赋权塑造了乡村治理能力的不同面向。基于村社赋权的分析框架，对四川战旗村村社组织再造过程进行分析，研究发现：村社组织的权力来源于乡土社会、国家与市场的递进式赋权。首先，乡土赋权是一种内源性的赋权，村社内生的土地资源与社会资源赋予村社组织丰富的实践权力，形塑村社组织的连带式治理能力，促进村庄社会秩序和公共价值的再生产。其次，国家赋权是一种“能促性赋权”，即通过党建、试点、项目赋权赋予了村社组织能动性的政治权力，强化村社组织的统合型治理能力，建构以基层党组织为核心的“一核多元”的乡村治理体系，优化乡村治理结构。最后，市场赋权遵循着一种嵌入性赋权的逻辑，在资本、人才和技术赋权的过程中为村社组织提供可持续运作的市场权能，增强村社组织的经营型治理能力，有利于在维系乡村治理秩序的基础上促进乡村发展与共同富裕。因此，无论是乡土社会，还是国家和市场，都要注重赋予村社组织可支配的资源与权力，在此基础上增强村社组织的治理与发展能力。     

清代土司基层社会治理组织体系重构:以改土归流地区为中心

王朝国家对边疆少数民族基层社会的治理模式通常以推行、移植内地基层社会组织,使其发生结构性变革。清代改土归流后土司地区里甲(保甲)、汛塘、义学的设置与运转,使该地区原有的社会组织施行受到国家权力制约。当国家权力在边疆地区基层社会受阻之时,王朝国家则适当保留少数民族固有社会组织结构,承认其存在合法性,在形式上进行适当改革,以发挥边疆地区基层组织的社会治理效能。这对新时代创新边疆民族地区基层社会治理实践提供重要历史借鉴。     

职务发明权属的模式反思与制度重构

我国职务发明制度肇生于计划经济时代，起初专利权由国家所有、单位持有的模式具有较为浓厚的时代特色。2000年《专利法》修改时将该规定删除，并建立了以法定权属规则为主，辅之以约定权属规则的“雇主主义”模式。尽管此次修法在一定程度上与我国的产业变革和技术革新需求相适配，但仍存在转化结构失调、激励机制失效和交易效率失衡等问题。横向考察国际视野下的职务发明权属制度可以发现，现有的雇主主义模式和雇员主义模式两种主要立法例均未臻完善。将专利权完全归属于雇主抑或是完全归属于雇员发明人，势必在二者之间产生职务发明权利分配不公的争议，进而导致雇主与雇员发明人之间的严重隔阂，从而抑制雇员发明人的创新活力或雇主的投资积极性。多数国家的做法是打破绝对的“雇主主义”和“雇员主义”立法路径，采取混合主义的立法模式。我国职务发明权属制度采取“雇主主义”模式是实现职务发明创造转化和运用的根本途径，但对于调动人的创新积极性增加财产总量仍存有不足之处。我国关于职务发明权属制度的改革应当着眼于三个方面：一是采取“执行任务”标准，限缩职务发明类型范围。首先，基于雇员发明人在劳动关系中的人身依附性，将“物质技术条件标准”排除出职...     

技术不确定性下算法推荐新闻的伦理风险及其法律规制

大数据、人工智能、算法推荐技术等信息技术的快速迭代,推动了传统社会的数字化转型,传统新闻业同样在开展数字化转型升级。在此背景下,随着新闻信息过载的不断加剧,由大数据衍生出的算法推荐新闻迅速崛起,算法信任、数据优势与新闻媒介的数字化客观上为算法推荐新闻的应用和发展奠定了基础。毋庸置疑,算法推荐新闻对于实现新闻准确分发、增强新闻受众黏性具有重要意义,智慧化、瞬时性的算法推荐新闻具有精准、高效、个性化优势,但同时算法作为一种复杂性、不确定性技术,带来了多层面、多环节、多领域的风险挑战和制度掣肘,算法推荐新闻同样引发了"算法黑箱" "算法偏差" "技术霸权""责任缺口"与"信息泄露"等多种伦理风险。当前,学界对于算法推荐技术本身是否真的成熟,以及算法推荐新闻可能引发的伦理危机研判明显不足。对此,从技术不确定性理论所内嵌的技术本身不确定性、技术认知不确定性与技术制度不确定性三个向度,可以为算法推荐新闻的伦理风险提供适当的分析框架,在此基础上厘清算法推荐新闻伦理风险发生的根源,可将其归纳为技术本身不确定性向度的数学洗脑与主体性缺失、技术认知不确定性向度的能力不足与底线失守以及技术制度不确定性向度的法律规范与伦理体系的不完善。具言之,算法推荐新闻作为一种新兴技术,已有伦理形态与法律规范逐渐无法有效规制其伦理风险,亟需建构专业化、制度化的算法推荐新闻伦理风险规制体系。算法推荐新闻伦理风险的法律规制应当奉行何种原则是规制路径建构的前提性、方向性议题,分析认为技术不确定性下算法推荐新闻伦理风险的法律规制需坚持新闻透明原则、价值中立原则和德法共治原则。当然,随着算法推荐技术、云计算等新兴技术的不断进化,新闻透明原则亦需与时俱进,对算法推荐新闻的新兴伦理风险予以有效规制,新闻从业者、算法推荐新闻分发平台等要坚持以价值中立原则为指导,强化算法推荐新闻中"人"的主体性地位,并在德法共治原则指导下明确算法推荐新闻伦理风险的法律规制范式。从以上原则出发,算法推荐新闻伦理风险的法律规制,应当针对不同类型的伦理风险进行有针对性的制度建构,即在技术本身不确定性向度加强算法公开与算法解释权、数据权利等保障,在技术认知不确定性向度推动新闻从业者计算思维的培养及伦理约束,在技术制度不确定性向度采取伦理结构化与法律问责等规制对策。     

论宋代孔子地位变化

两宋时期是孔子地位跌荡起伏、重构发展的一个重要阶段。历经唐末五代丧乱后，在宋初社会的普遍认知中，儒家面临崩坏边缘，作为儒门先圣的孔子，其社会地位也伴随儒学地位的低落而跌落。与此同时，则是世俗认知中佛学及其人物地位的不断上升。南宋时，孔子地位持续跌落，后者地位远超前者。在宋代社会生活中，许多供奉孔子的建筑年久失修、祭拜孔子的仪式常年荒废，在书画、雕塑等艺术作品中，孔子地位也受到道释人物形象的挑战，甚至有优伶以孔子为戏。无论是孔子的无形思想，还是孔子的有形塑像，都面临失去原有凭依与地位的困境。为重树孔子地位及儒学权威，宋代士大夫不懈努力，如王安石儒学创新高度和地位超迈先贤，可与孔孟比高低；二程发挥孔孟绝学创立"洛学"，经后续传播演进，至南宋朱熹集大成，形成新的儒学即"理学"思想体系，其贡献等同孔子；宋儒也利用书院及州县学极力抬高孔子地位，同佛、道争夺生存空间。南宋理宗正式将"理学"升至官学正统地位，同时也热衷于佛教，此为儒佛认知转变之重要导向，许多士人也倾向于儒佛并重，三教并尊。此后，长期以来儒佛发展偏失的趋势发生重大变化，儒佛地位得以重新调整和建构，二者走向均衡发展趋势。孔子地位又有所上升，也再次为后世孔子及其学说奠定了不可动摇的地位。