風險社會視角下的災害損失補償體系研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-09-10 17:41
【摘要】：災害損失補償是一個古老的話題。政治經(jīng)濟學家們從“文明和福利”責任的視角,研究政府對災害損失所應承擔的職責,而市場經(jīng)濟學家們從風險損失轉移和分散的視角,對災害損失融資機制進行不斷創(chuàng)新。但是,現(xiàn)代化社會的時代特征是“風險社會”,與工業(yè)化、全球化、技術革新等相伴而生的災害風險呈現(xiàn)出越來越頻發(fā)的趨勢,災害風險所帶來的經(jīng)濟、社會和人口損失也在不斷“放大”。風險社會不僅改變了人類所面臨災害風險的形態(tài),也改變了災害損失補償機制所依賴的傳統(tǒng)法則。本文試圖圍繞災害風險的這些改變,探討災害損失補償在政府和市場的博弈關系上應做出的新選擇,以構建一個災害損失補償?shù)男麦w系。 風險社會改變了人類面臨的災害風險的性質(zhì)和狀態(tài),使得災害風險呈現(xiàn)出突變性、彌散性、模糊性和巨損性的新特征,小概率的巨災風險越來越多地發(fā)生,自然災害與工業(yè)災害、環(huán)境災害、恐怖襲擊等社會性災害交織發(fā)生,界限越來越模糊,災害在區(qū)際間、在國際范圍內(nèi)的擴散也呈趨勢。這些突出的新特征使傳統(tǒng)意義上的政府職責顯得乏力,也使傳統(tǒng)意義上的風險轉移和分攤機制失效。我們重新審視災害風險的性質(zhì),將災害定義為不可抗力造成對相當大的一部分人口范圍(公共體)構成嚴重剝奪的過程和現(xiàn)象。當災害造成“公共體”共同面臨的巨額損失時,不可能用完全的私人市場機制來分擔風險損失,因此我們提出建立一個公共部門(P)-市場(M)-公眾(P)為一體的災害損失補償模式,這也是一個將災害風險的可保性極大延展的災害損失融資模式。 提出這種設想的依據(jù)是災害風險是一種公共風險,這種公共風險不僅有著私人的影響,更有著對國家安全和政府公信力的影響。災害是對“公共體”的嚴重剝奪,這種剝奪不僅是資源的剝奪,還是資源配置關系(主要表現(xiàn)為交換權利關系)的剝奪,因此災害的本質(zhì)是對資源及資源配置機制的破壞。那么當剝奪發(fā)生之后,既要對災害承受公共體的資源進行修復,也要對公共體資源配置關系進行重置,這就是我們所要研究的災害損失補償?shù)娜蝿铡Ｋ且粋�廣義的概念,不僅是對被破壞的公共體進行損失度量和經(jīng)濟補償,對原有資源被剝奪后形成的洼地進行填平,更重要的是實施一系列的經(jīng)濟、政治、環(huán)境、人文措施,恢復政府和社會組織的市場主體功能,重建經(jīng)濟運行的機制,重構資源配置機能。災害損失補償不僅要實現(xiàn)效率和公平的目標,還要實現(xiàn)系統(tǒng)補償?shù)哪繕?即對資源環(huán)境系統(tǒng)的損失補償。 從國家安全的角度考慮,針對災害風險的變化趨勢,以及災害本身所具有的公共風險性質(zhì),建立新的災害風險管理制度,已是國家經(jīng)濟社會發(fā)展必須解決、不宜久拖的重要事情。我們主張重新認識風險可保性和大數(shù)法則這些災害損失補償?shù)膫鹘y(tǒng)法則,以現(xiàn)代技術和現(xiàn)代思維的變革延展可保風險和大數(shù)法則,實現(xiàn)災害損失補償?shù)募軜嬙O置。在這種設置里,政府將不僅是充當管理者的職能,而且充當災害風險的“最終保險人”的角色,并以擴展的市場法則參與到保險、再保險以及整個資本市場,形成一個宏觀、開放的保險公共體。 在這個一體化的公共體里：從公眾的角度來看,公眾是私人產(chǎn)品的需求者,也是私人風險的承擔者,政府與公眾的聯(lián)系,以公眾的參與為紐帶,而公眾與市場的聯(lián)系,則是以風險合同為紐帶；從市場的角度來看,市場是公眾風險的集合機制,是一個以保險合同為紐帶集結起來的公共體；從政府的角度來看,政府是公眾的另一種集合機制,它是以法律和倫理(社會契約)為紐帶建立起來公共體。政府可以而且應該在應對災害風險這樣非私人風險時,為公眾提供公共產(chǎn)品,這是公共選擇的需要,也是政府系統(tǒng)形成的本源。政府可以以保險、再保險、災害風險基金、巨災債券等方式介入市場,成為損失融資的市場主體。 這里面臨的一個問題是,政府的角色是雙重的,即政府不僅是制度的提供者,是市場的監(jiān)管者,是“裁判員”,同時也是某些保險產(chǎn)品、擔保產(chǎn)品、債券產(chǎn)品的供給者,是市場的主體,是“運動員”。政府同時承擔著裁判員與運動員的雙重角色,身份不明確,職責不清楚,往往會使其該履行的職責沒有履行,而不該干預的事情又過多地干預。但是,這并非政府作為兩種主體而必然產(chǎn)生的矛盾,而恰恰是政府兩類主體的角色不明晰所帶來的矛盾。 論文可能的創(chuàng)新之處和不足 1、對災害損失補償?shù)难芯?通常是從保險學的角度研究損失融資機制在市場上的運用,公共管理學也從政府管理的視角研究災害性公共危機的應急,而本文以具有前瞻性的風險社會理論考察災害的時代特征,并從國家風險管理層面來考慮構建政府與市場一體化的災害損失補償體系； 2、經(jīng)濟學意義上的災害損失補償通常以對自然災害的研究為主,本文則著力描述在風險社會的背景下,自然災害與社會性災害的模糊性加強,因而主張不對災害的自然性和社會性進行嚴格區(qū)分,而將災害損失補償定義為對包括工業(yè)災害、環(huán)境災害等在內(nèi)的各種現(xiàn)代化災害風險的損失補償。 3、傳統(tǒng)意義上的災害損失補償主要關注對災害直接經(jīng)濟損失的補償,本文將災害損失定義為“公共體”資源剝奪以及資源配置關系的破壞,將災害損失補償?shù)膬?nèi)涵從經(jīng)濟損失補償拓展到系統(tǒng)“恢復力”的層面,并試圖建立一個系統(tǒng)的、兼顧公平和效率的損失補償模型。 但是,由于本人學術能力和識見的局限,上述一體化災害損失補償模型僅從框架上進行了界定和定性的分析,沒有用計量的方法進行充分論證和分析；P-M-P模式在實際操作中如何實現(xiàn)系統(tǒng)化的補償,特別是應用到中國所面臨的地震、臺風、洪水、干旱等頻發(fā)災害風險,如何實現(xiàn)方案的量化設計,還有待進一步明確。這些問題尚需進一步的研究,在今后的工作和學習中,我將繼續(xù)不斷修正、完善本文的一些想法。
[Abstract]:Compensation for disaster losses is an old topic. Political economists study the government's responsibility for disaster losses from the perspective of "civilization and welfare" responsibility, while market economists innovate the financing mechanism for disaster losses from the perspective of risk loss transfer and decentralization. As a "risk society", the disaster risks accompanied by industrialization, globalization and technological innovation are becoming more and more frequent. The economic, social and demographic losses caused by the disaster risks are constantly "magnified". The risk society not only changes the form of disaster risks faced by human beings, but also changes the disaster loss compensation machine. This paper tries to discuss the new choice of disaster loss compensation in the game relationship between government and market around these changes of disaster risk, so as to construct a new system of disaster loss compensation.
Risk society has changed the nature and state of disaster risk that human beings are facing, and made the disaster risk present new characteristics of catastrophe, dispersion, fuzziness and huge damage. Small probability of catastrophe risk occurs more and more. Natural disasters interweave with industrial disasters, environmental disasters, terrorist attacks and other social disasters, and the boundaries become increasingly blurred. These prominent new features make the traditional sense of government responsibility weak, and also make the traditional sense of risk transfer and allocation mechanism invalid. We re-examine the nature of disaster risk, and define disaster as force majeure caused a considerable part of the population model. Surrounding (public) constitutes a process and phenomenon of severe deprivation. When disasters cause huge losses faced by the "public" together, it is impossible to share the risk losses with a complete private market mechanism. Therefore, we propose to establish a disaster loss compensation model integrating the public sector (P) - market (M) - public (P), which is also a disaster. The insurable nature of risk is a highly extended mode of disaster loss financing.
This assumption is based on the fact that disaster risk is a public risk, which not only has a private impact, but also has an impact on national security and the credibility of the government. So the essence of disaster is to destroy the mechanism of resources and resources allocation. When the deprivation happens, we should not only restore the resources of the public bodies that bear disasters, but also reset the relationship of resources allocation of the public bodies. This is the task of disaster loss compensation that we want to study. It is a measure of loss and economic compensation for the damaged public bodies, a reclamation of the depressions formed after the deprivation of the original resources, and more importantly, a series of economic, political, environmental and human measures should be implemented to restore the main market functions of the government and social organizations, rebuild the mechanism of economic operation, and reconstruct the function of resource allocation. Compensation is not only to achieve the goal of efficiency and fairness, but also to achieve the goal of system compensation, that is, compensation for the loss of the resources and environment system.
Considering the changing trend of disaster risk and the public risk nature of disaster itself, it is an important matter for the national economic and social development to establish a new disaster risk management system. The traditional law of compensation extends the insurable risk and the law of large numbers with the change of modern technology and modern thinking, and realizes the framework of disaster loss compensation. Insurance and the entire capital market form a macro open insurance public body.
In this integrated public body: from the public point of view, the public is the demander of private products, but also the bearer of private risks, the relationship between the government and the public, the public participation as a link, and the public and the market contact, is a risk contract as a link; from the market point of view, the market is a gathering machine of public risks The system is a public body linked by insurance contracts; from the government's point of view, the government is another collective mechanism of the public, it is a public body linked by law and ethics (social contract). Government can intervene in the market by means of insurance, reinsurance, disaster risk fund, catastrophe bond and become the main body of the loss financing market.
The problem is that the role of the government is twofold, that is, the government is not only the provider of the system, the regulator of the market, the "referee", but also the supplier of some insurance products, guaranteed products and bond products, the main body of the market and the "athlete". However, this is not an inevitable contradiction between the government as two main bodies, but a contradiction caused by the unclear roles of the two main bodies.
Possible innovations and shortcomings of the paper
1. The study of compensation for disaster loss usually studies the application of loss financing mechanism in the market from the perspective of insurance. Public management studies the emergency of disaster public crisis from the perspective of government management. This paper examines the characteristics of disaster era from the perspective of national risk management with a forward-looking risk society theory. Considering the integration of the government and the market, the compensation system for disaster losses will be built.
2. In the sense of economics, the compensation for disaster losses is usually based on the study of natural disasters. In this paper, the fuzziness of natural disasters and social disasters is strengthened under the background of risk society. Therefore, it is advocated that the natural and social nature of disasters should not be strictly distinguished, and the compensation for disaster losses should be defined as including industrial disasters. Loss compensation for various modern disaster risks, including environmental hazards.
3. Traditionally, the compensation for disaster losses mainly focuses on the compensation for direct economic losses caused by disasters. In this paper, disaster losses are defined as the deprivation of resources by "public bodies" and the destruction of the relationship between resources allocation. The connotation of disaster losses compensation is extended from the compensation for economic losses to the level of "resilience" of the system and a systematic attempt is made to establish a system. A loss compensation model considering fairness and efficiency.
However, due to the limitation of my academic ability and insight, the above-mentioned integrated disaster loss compensation model has only been defined and analyzed qualitatively from the framework, and has not been fully demonstrated and analyzed by the method of measurement. Wind, flood, drought and other frequent disaster risks, how to achieve the quantitative design of the program, still need to be further clarified. These problems need further study, in the future work and learning, I will continue to revise, improve some of the ideas in this paper.
【學位授予單位】：武漢大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：F840.64
本文編號：2235151
[Abstract]:Compensation for disaster losses is an old topic. Political economists study the government's responsibility for disaster losses from the perspective of "civilization and welfare" responsibility, while market economists innovate the financing mechanism for disaster losses from the perspective of risk loss transfer and decentralization. As a "risk society", the disaster risks accompanied by industrialization, globalization and technological innovation are becoming more and more frequent. The economic, social and demographic losses caused by the disaster risks are constantly "magnified". The risk society not only changes the form of disaster risks faced by human beings, but also changes the disaster loss compensation machine. This paper tries to discuss the new choice of disaster loss compensation in the game relationship between government and market around these changes of disaster risk, so as to construct a new system of disaster loss compensation.
Risk society has changed the nature and state of disaster risk that human beings are facing, and made the disaster risk present new characteristics of catastrophe, dispersion, fuzziness and huge damage. Small probability of catastrophe risk occurs more and more. Natural disasters interweave with industrial disasters, environmental disasters, terrorist attacks and other social disasters, and the boundaries become increasingly blurred. These prominent new features make the traditional sense of government responsibility weak, and also make the traditional sense of risk transfer and allocation mechanism invalid. We re-examine the nature of disaster risk, and define disaster as force majeure caused a considerable part of the population model. Surrounding (public) constitutes a process and phenomenon of severe deprivation. When disasters cause huge losses faced by the "public" together, it is impossible to share the risk losses with a complete private market mechanism. Therefore, we propose to establish a disaster loss compensation model integrating the public sector (P) - market (M) - public (P), which is also a disaster. The insurable nature of risk is a highly extended mode of disaster loss financing.
This assumption is based on the fact that disaster risk is a public risk, which not only has a private impact, but also has an impact on national security and the credibility of the government. So the essence of disaster is to destroy the mechanism of resources and resources allocation. When the deprivation happens, we should not only restore the resources of the public bodies that bear disasters, but also reset the relationship of resources allocation of the public bodies. This is the task of disaster loss compensation that we want to study. It is a measure of loss and economic compensation for the damaged public bodies, a reclamation of the depressions formed after the deprivation of the original resources, and more importantly, a series of economic, political, environmental and human measures should be implemented to restore the main market functions of the government and social organizations, rebuild the mechanism of economic operation, and reconstruct the function of resource allocation. Compensation is not only to achieve the goal of efficiency and fairness, but also to achieve the goal of system compensation, that is, compensation for the loss of the resources and environment system.
Considering the changing trend of disaster risk and the public risk nature of disaster itself, it is an important matter for the national economic and social development to establish a new disaster risk management system. The traditional law of compensation extends the insurable risk and the law of large numbers with the change of modern technology and modern thinking, and realizes the framework of disaster loss compensation. Insurance and the entire capital market form a macro open insurance public body.
In this integrated public body: from the public point of view, the public is the demander of private products, but also the bearer of private risks, the relationship between the government and the public, the public participation as a link, and the public and the market contact, is a risk contract as a link; from the market point of view, the market is a gathering machine of public risks The system is a public body linked by insurance contracts; from the government's point of view, the government is another collective mechanism of the public, it is a public body linked by law and ethics (social contract). Government can intervene in the market by means of insurance, reinsurance, disaster risk fund, catastrophe bond and become the main body of the loss financing market.
The problem is that the role of the government is twofold, that is, the government is not only the provider of the system, the regulator of the market, the "referee", but also the supplier of some insurance products, guaranteed products and bond products, the main body of the market and the "athlete". However, this is not an inevitable contradiction between the government as two main bodies, but a contradiction caused by the unclear roles of the two main bodies.
Possible innovations and shortcomings of the paper
1. The study of compensation for disaster loss usually studies the application of loss financing mechanism in the market from the perspective of insurance. Public management studies the emergency of disaster public crisis from the perspective of government management. This paper examines the characteristics of disaster era from the perspective of national risk management with a forward-looking risk society theory. Considering the integration of the government and the market, the compensation system for disaster losses will be built.
2. In the sense of economics, the compensation for disaster losses is usually based on the study of natural disasters. In this paper, the fuzziness of natural disasters and social disasters is strengthened under the background of risk society. Therefore, it is advocated that the natural and social nature of disasters should not be strictly distinguished, and the compensation for disaster losses should be defined as including industrial disasters. Loss compensation for various modern disaster risks, including environmental hazards.
3. Traditionally, the compensation for disaster losses mainly focuses on the compensation for direct economic losses caused by disasters. In this paper, disaster losses are defined as the deprivation of resources by "public bodies" and the destruction of the relationship between resources allocation. The connotation of disaster losses compensation is extended from the compensation for economic losses to the level of "resilience" of the system and a systematic attempt is made to establish a system. A loss compensation model considering fairness and efficiency.
However, due to the limitation of my academic ability and insight, the above-mentioned integrated disaster loss compensation model has only been defined and analyzed qualitatively from the framework, and has not been fully demonstrated and analyzed by the method of measurement. Wind, flood, drought and other frequent disaster risks, how to achieve the quantitative design of the program, still need to be further clarified. These problems need further study, in the future work and learning, I will continue to revise, improve some of the ideas in this paper.
【學位授予單位】：武漢大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：F840.64
【參考文獻】
相關期刊論文 前10條
1 魏華林;向飛;洪文婷;;中國南方雪災損失與保險補償問題研究[J];保險研究;2008年03期
2 魏華林;李文娟;;歷史緯度上的大地震風險分析與保險責任辨析[J];保險研究;2008年09期
3 劉誼,劉星;公共風險的經(jīng)濟學意義及防范[J];財經(jīng)科學;2003年06期
4 酒井泰弘,劉昌黎;風險經(jīng)濟學:現(xiàn)狀與課題[J];財經(jīng)問題研究;2004年05期
5 黃良文;風險經(jīng)濟學引論[J];東南學術;1999年06期
6 張海波;;風險社會與公共危機[J];江海學刊;2006年02期
7 烏爾里希·貝克,郗衛(wèi)東;風險社會再思考[J];馬克思主義與現(xiàn)實;2002年04期
8 章國鋒;;反思的現(xiàn)代化與風險社會——烏爾里�！へ惪藢ξ鞣浆F(xiàn)代化理論的研究[J];馬克思主義與現(xiàn)實;2006年01期
9 魏華林;皮曙初;;“風險社會”保險業(yè)的功能定位[J];武漢大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2008年04期
10 程新英;柴淑芹;;風險社會及現(xiàn)代發(fā)展中的風險——烏爾利�！へ惪孙L險社會思想述評[J];學術論壇;2006年02期
，本文編號：2235151
本文鏈接：http://www.lk138.cn/jingjilunwen/bxjjlw/2235151.html
最近更新
教材專著
