【作者】 黄静；

【导师】 邓可祝；

【作者基本信息】 安徽工业大学 ， 社会政策与社会法， 2024， 硕士

【摘要】 不断革新的科学技术使得人类社会经历了沧海桑田的变化,人们在享受着丰富物质资源、醉心于高效生活节奏的同时,也开始对技术所伴随的不确定性后果加以戒备。其中,行政性风险规制活动因其预防性、快速性特征在管控技术风险与社会风险、兼顾国民安全与经济发展方面具有显著优势。作为风险规制活动的起点和中枢环节,风险决策得以广泛运用,这顺应了政府扩张安全保障职能、管控技术风险的需求,但“决策于未知”也让行政实践与传统法治理念产生冲突。行政法的核心使命是为行政活动提供一种合法性的评价与理解框架。面对引发社会争论的科技成果,政府一方面要构建行之有效的规范程序,降低技术应用给风险承受者带来的法益折损,另一方面须得考量技术进步对整体社会风险的消减,避免过度干预以致侵蚀科技解决社会问题的能力。科学上的不确定性、利益主体的多元化和利益诉求的复杂化,使行政机关的风险决策面临众多争议,需要构建相应制度来把握风险决策界限、规制风险决策行为。现有问题在于,行政行为形式论不能容纳“风险决策”这一概念,仅仅以“形式合法性”来规范决策难以满足人们对良好行政的期待。这种期待不再局限于权力来源合法、行使程序正当等形式法治的基本要求,也蕴含对科学理性与过程开放的评价。在新行政法理念的指导下,将“行政过程论”作为分析工具,消解行政决策在法律规范体系中面临的身份危机。针对“形式合法性”的不足,运用“复合正当性”评判系统,并从法律规则、行政程序、司法审查等多个角度出发,对政府部门关涉科技的风险决策予以规制。详言之,通过选择能够履行决策活动的最佳组织体、发挥专门立法与技术标准的优势,从实体层面为科技风险决策提供形式合法性渊源;通过构建议题形成、风险评估、风险交流、风险管理等程序,为决策注入科技理性与民主价值,突出过程性规制的重要作用;在关注行政系统内部监督机制的同时,积极转变司法审查方式,加强对决策的问责与引导。更多还原

【Abstract】 The constantly evolving science and technology have brought about tremendous changes in human society.While enjoying abundant material resources and indulging in an efficient pace of life,people have also begun to be wary of the uncertain consequences associated with technology.Among them,administrative risk regulation activities have significant advantages in controlling technical and social risks,balancing national security and economic development due to their preventive and rapid characteristics.As the starting point and central link of risk regulation activities,risk decision-making has been widely applied,which meets the needs of the government to expand its security protection functions and control technological risks.However,"decision-making in the unknown"also conflicts with traditional legal concepts in administrative practice.The core mission of administrative law is to provide a framework for evaluating and understanding the legitimacy of administrative activities.Faced with technological achievements that have sparked social debate,the government needs to establish effective regulatory procedures to reduce the legal benefits and losses that technology applications bring to risk bearers.On the other hand,it needs to consider the reduction of overall social risks caused by technological progress,and avoid excessive intervention that may erode the ability of technology to solve social problems.The uncertainty in science,the diversification of stakeholders,and the complexity of interest demands have led to numerous controversies in the risk decision-making of administrative agencies.It is necessary to establish corresponding systems to grasp the boundaries of risk decision-making and regulate risk decision-making behavior.The existing problem is that the formalism of administrative behavior cannot accommodate the concept of"risk decision-making",and it is difficult to meet people’s expectations for good administration by solely regulating decision-making based on"formal legitimacy".This expectation is no longer limited to the basic requirements of the rule of law in the form of legitimate sources of power and legitimate exercise procedures,but also contains an evaluation of scientific rationality and process openness.Under the guidance of the new administrative law concept,using"administrative process theory"as an analytical tool to resolve the identity crisis faced by administrative decision-making in the legal regulatory system.In response to the shortcomings of"formal legitimacy",a"composite legitimacy"evaluation system is applied to regulate the risk decisions of government departments related to technology from multiple perspectives such as legal rules,administrative procedures,and judicial review.In detail,by selecting the best organizational structure capable of fulfilling decision-making activities and leveraging the advantages of specialized legislation and technical standards,formal legitimacy sources are provided for scientific and technological risk decision-making at the substantive level;By constructing procedures such as topic formation,risk assessment,risk communication,and risk management,we inject technological rationality and democratic values into decision-making,highlighting the important role of procedural regulation;While paying attention to the internal supervision mechanism of the administrative system,actively transforming the mode of judicial review,and strengthening accountability and guidance for decision-making.更多还原