简论中国共产党科教兴国战路思想产生的依据

中国共产党科教兴国的战略思想,建立在马克思主义科学理论基础之上,扎根于中华民族优秀传统文化的沃土;是当代中国社会实践发展的客观要求。这一战略的制定有其理论、历史和现实的依据。     

The complexity of diversity and importance for equitable philanthropy

The current U.S. climate of racial and social injustice has prompted a renewed call for diverse and equitable ways to rethink community philanthropy. Community foundations are vehicles for community philanthropy which offer vast benefits for social improvement and community development. The board of directors ensures these organizations fulfill their mission, making decisions on funding priorities and holding the organization functionally and fiscally responsible. Drawing on constructs of diversity and representative bureaucracy and a case study of Florida community foundations, we suggest that diversity is understood in different ways and the presence of diverse board members may be linked to advancing the interests of diverse communities and in achieving outcomes that assist in the needs of certain social groups. Increased understanding of diversity can improve foundation and philanthropic effectiveness and bring broader social change by promoting equity and social justice among community‐based philanthropic organizations.     

Confidence distributions applied to propagating uncertainty to inference based on estimating the local false discovery rate: A fiducial continuum from confidence sets to empirical Bayes set estimates as the number of comparisons increases

Empirical Bayes estimates of the local false discovery rate can reflect uncertainty about the estimated prior by supplementing their Bayesian posterior probabilities with confidence levels as posterior probabilities. This use of coherent fiducial inference with hierarchical models generates set estimators that propagate uncertainty to varying degrees. Some of the set estimates approach estimates from plug-in empirical Bayes methods for high numbers of comparisons and can come close to the usual confidence sets given a sufficiently low number of comparisons.     

Reconsidering the philanthropic foundation minimum payout policy under a “new normal”

With the increasing salience of foundations in many policy fields, and recent changes in market conditions, policies towards foundations designed decades ago seem outdated. In this article we suggest reassessing foundation payout minimums. To examine the impact of payout rates on grantmaking foundations lifespan and performance under “new normal” economics, we simulate multiple foundations lifecycles using Monte Carlo methods in diverse capital market conditions, with varied investment and payout strategies.We find that while under past market regime perpetuity seems to be a given, under more probable future scenarios, foundations might face increasingly early mortality and endowment depletion, limiting their potential impact. Furthermore, lower payout rates allow for higher lifetime grantmaking, higher mean annual grantmaking, and lower giving volatility. Accordingly, we suggest a tiered payout policy, in line with foundations’ missions and proper financial planning.     

The significance of meaning. Why IPBES needs the social sciences and humanities

The term “biodiversity” is often used to describe phenomena of nature, which can be studied without a reference to the socially constructed, evaluative, or indeed normative contexts. In our paper, we challenge this conception by focusing particularly on methodological aspects of biodiversity research. We thereby engage with the idea of interdisciplinary biodiversity research as a scientific approach directed at the recognition and management of contemporary society in its ecological embedding. By doing this, we explore how research on and assessments of biodiversity can be enhanced if meaning, aspiration, desires, and related aspects of agency are methodically taken into account. In six sections, we substantiate our claim that the discourse on biodiversity (including the IPBES (Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services) debate) is incomplete without contributions from the social sciences and humanities. In the introduction, a brief overview of biodiversity’s conceptual history is provided showing that “biodiversity” is a lexical invention intended to create a strong political momentum. However, that does not impede its usability as a research concept. Section 2 examines the origins of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) by way of sociological discourse analysis. Subsequently, it proposes a matrix as a means to structure the ambiguities and tensions inherent in the CBD. The matrix reemphasizes our main thesis regarding the need to bring social and ethical expertise to the biodiversity discourse. In Section 3, we offer a brief sketch of the different methods of the natural and social sciences as well as ethics. This lays the groundwork for our Section 4, which explains and illustrates what social sciences and ethics can contribute to biodiversity research. Section 5 turns from research to politics and argues that biodiversity governance necessitates deliberative discourses in which participation of lay people plays an important role. Section 6 provides our conclusions.     

Doing Good,Public Good,and Public Value

In this article, using multiple illustrative case examples, we demonstrate that philanthropic institutions are in the business of creating public value. In framing the work of philanthropy more broadly to include the process of public value creation, philanthropic institutions and leaders are challenged to be more strategic not only in their mission‐fulfillment grant‐making with nonprofit organizations but also in the way they stimulate and encourage collaboration, create the “third space” necessary to incubate ideas to transform society, and leverage resources to increase the return on their investments toward system‐wide change. The implications for philanthropic actors and institutions suggest that the strategic contributions they make toward creation of public value are those that go beyond transactional performance measures, such as number of dollars spent or clients receiving services, to include ways that their investments are amplified by meaningful partnerships with nonprofit and other organizations, changed behaviors of institutions and individuals, and transformative public policies.     

高等教育产业性与公益性再辨析

高等教育的产业性是生产性与商品性的统一,其中生产性包括一般的生产性和特殊的生产性,特殊的生产性正是生产劳动能力的属性,亦即高等教育的本体功能属性;高等教育的公益性不是体现在高等教育的产品性质上,正是体现在它的社会功能上。高等教育的社会功能通过其本体功能实现,因而高等教育的产业性与公益性在生产性要求上不但不是非此即彼的对立关系,而且是构成手段目的的共存关系。同时,通过克服两者在商品性条件下的矛盾冲突,能够实现高等教育产业性和公益性的统一。     

从单一经济基础论到综合经济基础论

通过对马克思早期进行理论探讨所最为关注的一个实践与理论难点问题———国家与社会的关系的研究,说明"经济基础"概念的制定,对于科学说明国家这类历史上学者们比较关注的现象,起到关键性的作用,其含义是单一经济基础论。在生产力相对落后的国家建设社会主义的实践,尤其是中国特色社会主义市场经济的实践,使人们对经济基础概念的认识深化和扩展:一定时期的经济基础不能离开生产力状况,经济基础具有客观性;我国现阶段的经济基础是综合经济基础;并且是由"综合经济基础"向"单一经济基础"发展的动态过程。对"综合经济基础"动态发展规律把握上的最新阐释,表现了"经济基础"的解释功能由关注革命理论的"主要之点"———无产阶级专政学说向社会主义建设理论的转向。     

Knowledge Transfer between For‐Profit Corporations and Their Corporate Foundations

This article investigates the impact of knowledge transfer (Goh 2002) from founder firms to the corporate foundations (CFs) on the CFs’ effectiveness. Starting from a typology of CFs’ effectiveness (Ostrower 2006a), we conducted a survey addressed to a sample of Italian CFs to address the impact of different knowledge transfer methods (KTMs) on three dimensions of CFs’ orientation to effectiveness: proactive orientation, social advocacy, and capacity building. The research identified four different KTMs and, using a linear regression, pointed out that the methods adopted by founder firms have a significant influence on proactivity, competences, and on social advocacy of CFs.     

Rockefeller Philanthropy and the Institute of Pacific Relations: A Reappraisal of Long-Term Mutual Dependency

Archival evidence is used to explore the development of funding for the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR) and the Canadian Institute of International Affairs (the secretariat for the Canadian national council of the IPR) provided by the Rockefeller Foundation (RF). It suggests that the withdrawal of funding should be interpreted in a long-term perspective as a joint responsibility of mutually dependent recipients and funders, rather than simply as the fault of RF decision makers responding reactively to the prevailing climate of McCarthyism. Moreover, it is argued that the conventional wisdom as to the balance of influence within the RF between key staff and trustees is in need of revision. Conceptual implications of these examples of recipient dependence are explored, including the reasons for and dangers of such mutual dependence, the meaning of donor responsibility, and the mediating role of foundation officers.