风险行政的行为法构造

陈越峰

PDF
Cite
Share

facebook

twitter

google

linkedin

June 2020

Article Contents

Citation: Yuefeng CHEN. Regulating Risk Administration from the Perspective of the Law of Administrative Action[J]. Academic Monthly, 2020, 52(6): 98-110, 97. shu

Regulating Risk Administration from the Perspective of the Law of Administrative Action

Yuefeng CHEN

Abstract

Site selection for major risk facilities involves hazard defense, space shaping, benefit balance, and risk allocation. In the existing research, the discourse of “Not in My Backyard” (NIMBY) and its analytical framework are inadmissible. The risk decision of the project site is based on the uncertainty. However, the risk description of the risk assessment, which contains value judgment and morphological structure of danger, risk, and residual risk, is a normative decision. The risk decision of the project site selection is future-oriented space shaping activities. Multiple benefits have been substantively constructed in the administrative process. The process of project site selection is also the process of risk allocation. The risk allocation process has multi-level dynamic means. The basis of participation is no longer limited to subjective public rights, but includes multiple interests, risk knowledge and even risk tolerance to establish a “discourse-construction” deliberative democracy and cooperative decision-making structure.
- risk administration,
- risk assessment,
- administrative discretion,
- benefit balance,
- administrative procedure
References
Access
1. [1]
  XU Guochong . “Evaluative State” ： New Trends of the Administrative State in 21st Century. Academic Monthly, 2023, 55(12): 73-85.
2. [2]
  Zhang Shufang . . Academic Monthly, 2018, 50(5): 88-100.
3. [3]
  LIU Daosheng . The Grassroots Administration and Officialgentry Relationship of Huizhou in Early Qing Dynasty. Academic Monthly, 2023, 55(7): 190-203.
4. [4]
  Xuefeng HE , Hua GUI . Administrative Incentives and the Logic of Rural Governance. Academic Monthly, 2022, 54(7): 126-137.
5. [5]
  Huan WU . From Governance Officers for the People to Administration for the People: Discovering Administrative Jurisprudence in China. Academic Monthly, 2022, 54(12): 106-116.
6. [6]
  . . Academic Monthly, 2016, 48(12): 86-94.
7. [7]
  ZHANG Zhiyuan . Theoretical Consensus on the Compilation of the Administrative Basic Code in China. Academic Monthly, 2023, 55(12): 86-98.
8. [8]
  . . Academic Monthly, 2016, 48(12): 102-110.
9. [9]
  . . Academic Monthly, 2017, 49(04): 73-82.
10. [10]
  Ji ZHAO . Complexity and the Reconstruction of Public Administration. Academic Monthly, 2023, 55(2): 80-91.
11. [11]
  CHEN Jiajian . Between Administration and Autonomy: The Dual Attributes of Community Finance and Its Governance Mechanism. Academic Monthly, 2023, 55(5): 120-130.
12. [12]
  Liangbo LUO . The Evolution of Administrative Rationality: Tradition, Reality and Future. Academic Monthly, 2019, 51(5): 58-71.
13. [13]
  . . Academic Monthly, 2016, 48(12): 95-101.
14. [14]
  Xia Yiran , Lu Ming . . Academic Monthly, 2018, 50(5): 45-55.
15. [15]
  Shaoqing HUANG , Yi WANG , Li ZHAO . Administrative Examination and Approval Reform, Rule of Law and Enterprises’ Innovation Performance. Academic Monthly, 2020, 52(6): 57-70.
16. [16]
  Tao GUO . Newly-discovered Bamboo Slips and the Spatial Structure of Local Administrative Operations in the Qin and Han Dynasties. Academic Monthly, 2023, 55(4): 170-180.
17. [17]
  Taofu ZHANG , Hua JIANG . Risk Cognitive Bias and the Media in Risk Context. Academic Monthly, 2020, 52(9): 150-158.
18. [18]
  Yi ZHAI . The Transition of Relationship and Value between the Administrative Subject as Franchisor and the Object of Franchisee. Academic Monthly, 2019, 51(6): 78-93.
19. [19]
  ZHANG Xiang . . Academic Monthly, 2018, 50(6): 67-77.
20. [20]
  Kangzhi ZHANG . Questioning Participatory Decision-making by Risk Society. Academic Monthly, 2022, 54(5): 71-81.

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Entire Issue PDF

Article Metrics

Article views: 1884 Times PDF downloads: 12 Times Cited by: 0 Times

Metrics

PDF Downloads(12)
Abstract views(1884)
HTML views(438)

Latest
Most Read
Most Cited

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

1.
沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院沈阳 110142

Regulating Risk Administration from the Perspective of the Law of Administrative Action

Yuefeng CHEN

Abstract: Site selection for major risk facilities involves hazard defense, space shaping, benefit balance, and risk allocation. In the existing research, the discourse of “Not in My Backyard” (NIMBY) and its analytical framework are inadmissible. The risk decision of the project site is based on the uncertainty. However, the risk description of the risk assessment, which contains value judgment and morphological structure of danger, risk, and residual risk, is a normative decision. The risk decision of the project site selection is future-oriented space shaping activities. Multiple benefits have been substantively constructed in the administrative process. The process of project site selection is also the process of risk allocation. The risk allocation process has multi-level dynamic means. The basis of participation is no longer limited to subjective public rights, but includes multiple interests, risk knowledge and even risk tolerance to establish a “discourse-construction” deliberative democracy and cooperative decision-making structure.

HTML

Relative (20)

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Return

Regulating Risk Administration from the Perspective of the Law of Administrative Action

Abstract

References

Access

Article Metrics

Metrics

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Regulating Risk Administration from the Perspective of the Law of Administrative Action

HTML

目录