关于人口均衡发展与妇女民生的理性思考

坚持计划生育的基本国策有利于推动人口长期均衡发展,有利于改善妇女民生和促进妇女发展。控制人口总量的适度规模、优化人口自然结构、合理分布人口、提高人口素质与促进妇女发展和进步之间具有高度的同一性及互促性。从其长远和根本来看,我国的生育政策调整有利于人口长期均衡发展,有益于国计民生,但在一定时期内,它也可能对妇女民生及妇女发展造成某些不良影响,应当采取有力措施给予妥善解决。     

湖北省公路货运运力结构的现状分析与调整对策

以湖北省公路货运运力为研究对象,分别从总量、车型、布局、技术性能等方面分析湖北省公路货运运力的现状,在对比国内其他地区运力发展趋势的基础上,提出了湖北省运力结构调整的目标和措施、对策。     

全面建设小康社会与社会主义生产目的的实现

在不断发展社会生产力的同时,满足广大人民的利益要求、实现共同富裕是社会主义生产目的的基本的和本质的规定性。"三个代表"的出发点和归宿点都是实现、维护和不断发展人民的利益。全面建设小康社会目标的实现,将使经济更加发展,民主更加健全,科技更加进步,文化更加繁荣,社会更加和谐,人民生活更加殷实。这一目标要求我们:要尊重和保护一切有益于人民和社会的劳动,充分调动一切积极因素,发展社会主义生产力;确立劳动、资本、技术和管理等生产要素按贡献参与分配的原则,坚持效率优先,兼顾社会公平;切实解决好下岗失业人员的基本生活需要和再就业问题,维护和保障国有企业职工的权益。     

婚姻立法系统化的审思--兼评《婚姻法》第32条

<婚姻法>修正案虽取得了良好的立法效果,但仍有不足.以逐步完善<婚姻法>第32条的立法设计为契机,进一步思考和实现婚姻立法的系统化,将有助于婚姻制度的完善与科学.为此,我们应从司法解释和完备立法的角度探寻婚姻制度的科学化,以保障婚姻法的有效操作.     

现阶段中国农业发展方式的选择与转变途径

运用实证研究的方法,依据历史数据考察了中国改革开放以来农业生产要素、技术进步、结构调整等因素变化对农业发展方式的影响。研究结果表明：现阶段我国农业发展方式具有外延型增长和粗放型增长的双重特点。与之相对应,转变农业发展方式包括两个方面：外延型增长向内涵型增长转变、粗放型增长向集约型增长转变。就目前来讲转变的重点应是后者。     

从国际视野看研究生教育成本分担

在西方国家,研究生交费入学,即生均教育成本分担被视为必然现象。如何联系我国研究生教育发展的实际,积极借鉴发达国家发展研究生教育的经验,把制订研究生教育成本分担与资助政策作为推进我国研究生教育运行机制改革的有效手段,已成为人们关注的焦点。建议在构建我国研究生教育投资主体多元化与资助政策的过程中,积极引进政策调节与市场竞争相结合的机制;实行研究生教育成本分担与资助的政策措施要与高校内部管理体制的改革有机结合起来。     

中国粮食增产的主要因素贡献分解与实证估算

已有测算中国粮食增产要素贡献率的方法存在虚增或低估某要素贡献率的缺陷,文章通过改进粮食增产贡献率测算方法实证估计了2003—2016年期间单产、播种面积和结构调整对中国粮食增产的贡献。结果表明,中国粮食实现“十二连增”的巨大成就主要是单产增长贡献,年均贡献率50%以上,播种面积和作物内部结构调整也是不可忽视的重要力量,年均贡献率分别为30%与10%以上。然而,未来中国粮食增产依靠播种面积扩大和结构调整的空间变窄,需要探索新的增产路径。     

An evaluation of alternative fiscal adjustment plans: The case of Italy

What advice can be given to the policymaker to reduce the burden of public debt after a crisis? In this situation, the debt consolidation calls for fiscal surplus based on increases in taxes and/or reductions in public spending. This paper aims at answering to the above question. Specifically, it evaluates different policy options on the table using the estimated model of the Italian dynamic General Equilibrium Model (IGEM). Our main message is that plans aimed at reducing the public debt based on tax increases rather than expenditure reductions are more effective. Therefore, consolidation should be designed on the former.     

Parenting Disputes After Separation and Divorce: Who Needs a Family Lawyer?

Australia's family law system continues to be plagued by serious delays. This article acknowledges the need for legal interventions in post‐separation parenting disputes in which individuals may be at risk, or in cases of genuine emergency. The article next contrasts cases involving significant risk or urgency with the many ‘ordinary’ (even if sometimes complex) post‐separation disputes over parenting in which these circumstances are not present. I argue that in such cases, legal advice, legally informed dispute processes, and court hearings are remnants from earlier attitudes to separation and divorce. These interventions are expensive, frequently destructive of ongoing parental relationships, and at their heart, inappropriate for considering the needs of children. They also divert time and resources from the critical investigative and legal decision‐making processes needed in urgent or risk‐related cases. I propose that legal narratives in ‘ordinary’ post‐separation parenting disputes be replaced by narratives focused on the main drivers of these disputes, which are invariably expressed in terms of relationship difficulties. Such narratives are amenable to facilitative, therapeutic, and systemic interventions aimed at achieving self‐determined resolutions. They contrast markedly with narratives reflecting common law notion of normative resolutions derived from the application of legal precedent. Key issues in the first section of the article are then teased out via the reflections of an imaginary separated parent in an ‘ordinary,’ albeit difficult and emotionally intense, dispute about how to care for the children. In the final section, I offer brief clinical and systemic reflections on past practice and on future narratives focused on individual self‐determination.     

Reasons That Could Lead People to Divorce in an Evolutionary Perspective: Evidence from Cyprus

In the current research, we aimed to identify the reasons that could drive people to get a divorce. In Study 1, we employed qualitative research methods, and we identified 62 reasons that could potentially drive people to get a divorce. Using quantitative research methods, in Study 2 we classified these reasons into 7 broader factors. We found that being a harmful spouse was the most important factor for divorce, followed by incompatibility and in-law problems. We also found significant sex differences in several factors such as women indicating a higher willingness than men to divorce a harmful spouse. In addition, participants with children were less willing to divorce a harmful spouse than those who had no children. Finally, using second-order principal components analysis, we classified the 7 factors into 2 broader domains of reasons for getting a divorce.