【作者】 肖艳辉；

【导师】 王全兴；

【作者基本信息】 湖南大学 ， 经济法学， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 我国转型期的“制度性贫困”背景对社会救助制度的责任模式选择有着急切的定位需要。从一个全球范围的视角来比较不同发达程度国家的社会救助责任模式,找出共同经验,为我所用,意义重大。发达国家的英、美、德、瑞典都经历了国家无责任阶段的慈善救济模式、国家有限责任的补济救助模式、国家强责任阶段的凯恩斯-贝弗里奇模式、多元主体责任阶段的国家和社会共享模式阶段。这几种模式变迁有着深刻的原因：既有共同的社会大背景,也有不同发展阶段的理论影响。工业化发展带来的经济危机、丁人运动的大规模爆发和社会主义阵营的形成、福利依赖现象的滋长是其共同的社会原因。理论原因的影响因不同的阶段而分别不同：国家无责任阶段,主要有致贫原因个人因素论、社会连带思想、守望相助思想。国家有限责任阶段,主要有制度变迁理论、负所得税理论。国家强责任阶段,主要有社会制度不平等论、德国新历史学派和凯恩斯主义、福利经济学、新剑桥学派、费边社会主义、社会保障基础理论发展等的影响。多元主体责任阶段,主要有经济自由主义、市场失灵与政府失灵理论、社会风险分担理论、“合理利己主义”理论、贫困陷阱理论、福利依赖理论、社会民主主义“第三条道路”思想的影响。发展中国家的南非、拉美国家、俄罗斯和我国,其经济发展水平和制度模式有着一定的类同性。改革开放前基本上都是实行全民覆盖与有选择补助的社会救助计划,而在民主化的改革进程中,得益于联合国的推动,将阿马蒂亚森的“可行能力”理论应用于国内的社会救助制度改革,从以往单纯的生活救助变为发展被救助者“可行能力”的救助,以解决社会救助水平与经济发展水平相互制约的紧张关系；在责任承担上,除了强调国家的主要救助责任外,也开始强调被救助者和社会的共同责任,一些救助项目开始实行私有化改革,充分发挥社会力量和社会资金在救助方面的效用。理论方面的影响主要是贫困者应得权利理论和“可行能力”理论。我国社会救助责任模式变迁的主要原因有：儒家传统思想、社会结构贫困观、社会救助“秩序控制论”、社会救助“经济影响论”、马克思主义的国家观和“人民利益观”、唯物史观应用于社会救助制度及反“福利依赖”思想、社会排斥理论等。域外国家制度变迁带给我们的启示主要有：在制度模式上由单纯的生活救助向工作导向型转换,注重发展被救助者的可行能力；国家权力向社区放权和转移,寻求国家和社会共担的责任模式。在影响制度变迁的原因方面带来的启示主要有模式的选择与社会背景相对应、模式的转变与社会需求相对应,观念影响模式选择。除了域外的经验外,还要借鉴我国传统社会的丰富经验。我国未来社会救助国家责任模式选择要在克服现有不足的基础上,确立国家责任为主和社会责任为辅的社会救助责任模式,应选择发展被救助者可行能力的救助模式,应建立综合式的社会救助模式,应从“输血式”模式向“造血式”模式转换,国家救助责任应向“社区合作”模式转移。更多还原

【Abstract】 The social assistance responsibility model needs to be proper location under the current systemic poverty background. How to compare the social assistance responsibility models to different level of development countries from the worldwide perspective and find the common experiences to benefits us is very important.The developed countries, such as the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, and Sweden had all experienced the national un-liability phase of the charity model to the country’s limited liability of residual mode, to the strong national liability phase of the Keynes-Beveridge model, and the last multiple main liability phase of the state and society in shared mode. These types of mode changed had profound reasons. They not only had a common social background but also had the different theoretical impacts in different stages of development. The common social reasons are the economic crisis with the industrialization process, the large-scale outbreak of the workers’movements, the formation of the socialist camp, and the growth of the welfare dependency phenomenon. The theoretical reasons, respectively, due to the different stages of. In the un-liability phase, the mainly reasons were the personal factors on the cause of poverty, solidarity thinking, the "neighborhood watch" thought. In state limited liability stage, the main reasons were the Institutional Change Theory, and The Negative Income Tax theory. In the strong liability phase, the main reasons are the inequality of the social system, the impact of the new German historical school and the Keynesian, welfare economics, the new Cambridge school, Fabian socialism, social security basic theory development, etc.In the Stage of the multiple responsibility stage,the main reasons are the economic liberalism, the theory of market failure and government failure, the social risk-sharing theory and the "rational egoism" theory, the theory of the poverty trap, welfare fraud and welfare dependence, the impact from the social-democratic of the "third way" thinking.South Africa, Latin America, Russia and China as the typical developing countries, they have some common characteristics in the level of the economic development and in the institutional models. Before reform, they basically implement the universal coverage models and the select subsidies social assistance program. In the process of democratic reform, thanks to the United Nations to promote the theory of Amartya Sen’s "practicable capability" which used in the domestic social assistance reform, change from the past simply living assistance to the development the rescuer’s "practicable capability", has resolved the tension between the constraints of the social assistance level and the economic development level. Accountability, in addition to emphasis the national’s responsibility, but also began to stress the common responsibility of the rescuers and social. Some relief projects have privatization reform. It aims to give full play the effectiveness of social forces and social capital in the social assistance project.Observing the changing course of social assistance responsibility model of China, we found the main reasons were the theories of Confucian heritage, social structure concept of poverty, social assistance order cybernetics, social assistance of economic impact, Marxism’s view of the state and the people’s interests,historical Materialism applied to the social assistance system, welfare dependency ideological, social exclusion theory.From the changes of the social assistance state responsibility and from the reasons for the comparison, it shows that the changes of the pattern is closely linked with the social background.It must correspond to the social needs.The model choice is been affected by the concept. It is better to develop the poor practicable capability,the main step is to increase the educational relief efforts to improve the poor’s ability of learn, created the job opportunities to improve the poor’s employment growth. The mode selection is better to transfer to the four-in-one mode, to change from the Transfusion-style to the Hematopoietic style, to transfer from the relying on the government and units to relying on the community cooperation model.更多还原