从主权国家的兴衰看权力博弈形态的转型

传统的国际关系理论,无论是现实主义、自由主义、建构主义还是科学行为主义理论,都是把主权国家抽象成一个统一的国际关系行为体。这一行为主体有一致的利益,也自然要有一致的对外政策目标和手段。在20世纪,尤其是在两次世界大战和冷战期间,这一概念抽象是非常准确的。但冷战结束以后,尤其是进入21世纪以后,这一概念抽象逐渐与国际关系的现实相违背。一方面,国家综合实力并不能直接转化为具体领域的竞争优势;另一方面,很多国家,包括超级大国在内,其对外政策的主要阻力可能不是所谓的竞争对手,而是其国内不同的利益集团。这导致传统的国际关系理论,从假设到概念和推理层面,都已经无法解释和预测今天的世界,而权力小博弈理论可以为认识多元复杂互动博弈时代的国际关系提供一个新的解释框架。     

Statistical testing strategies for assessing treatment efficacy and marker accuracy in phase III trials

When a candidate predictive marker is available, but evidence on its predictive ability is not sufficiently reliable, all‐comers trials with marker stratification are frequently conducted. We propose a framework for planning and evaluating prospective testing strategies in confirmatory, phase III marker‐stratified clinical trials based on a natural assumption on heterogeneity of treatment effects across marker‐defined subpopulations, where weak rather than strong control is permitted for multiple population tests. For phase III marker‐stratified trials, it is expected that treatment efficacy is established in a particular patient population, possibly in a marker‐defined subpopulation, and that the marker accuracy is assessed when the marker is used to restrict the indication or labelling of the treatment to a marker‐based subpopulation, ie, assessment of the clinical validity of the marker. In this paper, we develop statistical testing strategies based on criteria that are explicitly designated to the marker assessment, including those examining treatment effects in marker‐negative patients. As existing and developed statistical testing strategies can assert treatment efficacy for either the overall patient population or the marker‐positive subpopulation, we also develop criteria for evaluating the operating characteristics of the statistical testing strategies based on the probabilities of asserting treatment efficacy across marker subpopulations. Numerical evaluations to compare the statistical testing strategies based on the developed criteria are provided.     

司法附属行政语境下的中国古代法官地位

“司法附属行政”是中国古代司法的一个重要特征。在这一背景下，中国古代法官地位就呈现出鲜明的附属性特征，这种特征同样体现在法院的地位和司法权的地位上，这也导致中国古代法官没有专门的职业保障制度，而这一切都深深地镶嵌在当时的人治大背景之中。通过与现代法官地位的比较，可以更加深切地感受到古今法官地位以至整个司法状况的巨大差异。中国现代法官地位在独立性方面相对于古代法官有了巨大改善，但仍然不尽如人意，还需要在今后的司法改革中进行反思和重点关注。     

康区"三魔女",还是"康区三度母"——近代康区妇女精英研究

二十世纪上半叶康区三位著名妇女精英甘孜的孔萨?央金堪珠、德格的夏克? 泽旺志玛和瞻对的甲日?其美志玛在康区政治生活中扮演了重要的角色。她们之所以获得权力，是因为康区的传统习惯法以及清末和民国时期的法律都允许妇女在一个家族没有男性继承人的情况下继承名号和土司或头人的地位。为了获得和巩固政治地位，她们往往陷入多方势力的权力争斗中，这些势力包括其家族中的男性、来自其它家族的男性、地方军阀、中央政府，有时还有西藏地方政府。研究揭示了正是康区在夹缝中生存的各土司统治区域割裂、分权的性质为地方首领，特别是妇女领袖提供了较多的施展其政治才能的空间。     

The impact of social power and influence on the implementation of innovation strategies: A case study of a UK mega infrastructure construction project

Influence plays a key role in reaching consensus among multiple actors involved in project-based decision-making processes. While prior literature devotes considerable attention to describing influence, little attention has been paid to influence at the individual level of the strategic project manager within the context of megaprojects. This research intended to fill this knowledge gap by identifying and describing the influence strategies that a strategic project manager applies when implementing innovation strategies on megaprojects. A qualitative case study was used to examine the complex social processes involved in a major UK capital investment programme. The findings underline a critical subset of influence strategies, notably higher-management support, inspirational appeal and bargaining. The study proposes a utilitarian structure of social power comprising selective, supportive and executory power bases.     

现代中国自由主义知识分子的 "叙拉古情结"——以胡适为中心

作为现代史上涉足政治最深的自由主义知识分子, "爱惜羽毛" 的胡适难掩其对政治的浓厚兴趣, 他的政治野心屡受打击, 却百折不挠. "四一二事变" 后, 在客居上海的三年半时间里, 胡适与政治权力之间历经从疏离、 接近、 受挫再到反抗、 放弃和妥协的心路历程. 胡适在上海期间与国民党的话语权冲突, 源于其逼仄的生存空间以及欧美宪政理念与军事强人政治的分歧, 体现了自由主义知识分子对精神自由和人格独立的追求, 是 "叙拉古" 母题下 "知识分子遇到政治" 的典型样本.     

Institutional evolution and abrupt change: Reforming the administration of social assistance in Finland

Historical institutionalist studies have explained institutional change as resulting from critical junctures that interrupt long periods of stability or from endogenous, incremental evolution. Building on these theories, discursive institutionalists have focused on the roles of agency, ideas and discourse as explainers of change. Combining these approaches, this article analyses Finland’s decision in 2014 to transfer the administration of basic social assistance from municipalities to the central government. This study demonstrates that institutional change can be both abrupt and evolutionary. Due to sudden, exceptional political circumstances, the decision in question was made quickly and under pressure, circumventing possible veto players. However, it was possible only because of the incremental, endogenous change that had occurred in the way in which social assistance was administered at the municipal level. It enabled a change in political discourse, which eroded the credibility of the ideational frames that policy actors had previously utilised to reject the centralised model.     

“Who generates this city”? Socialist strategy in contemporary London

This essay, based on a “militant ethnography” of the attempts of the small radical grassroots activist group, Our London (a pseudonym), to mobilize a collective oppositional politics through activities around an election campaign, engages critically with E. Laclau and C. Mouffe's arguments on discourse and collectivity in Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (London: Verso, 1985). I argue, on the basis of my findings, that while their model does provide insights that help describe the process of building collectivity from among disparate perspectives and identities, we need to go beyond a focus on discourse alone and consider the ways politics is shaped by material contexts. This is necessary if we are to understand the continued appeal of class politics as well as the difficulties in mobilizing collectivity in highly unequal and fragmented cities. From an activist perspective, the essay also highlights how developing a conception of collective interests and a critique of overarching systems of exploitation can be important in building political unity.