21世纪的美国行政法(中英文)

《21世纪的美国行政法(中英文)》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《21世纪的美国行政法(中英文)（8页珍藏版）》请在装配图网上搜索。

1、二十一世纪的美国行政法理查德 B. 斯图尔特行政法在一个自由民主的社会里，行政法规本身亦要受到行政法的规制。行 政法确立了行政机关在整个政治体制中的构架地位； 设定了行政机关做出决定时 所必须遵循的程序要求； 规定了可以被独立的司法机关予以审查的行政行为的可 能性及范围。它给行政管理和行政法规中的各个关键领域提供了普遍性的原则和 程序规定。传统上，行政法的要义主要集中于如何通过使行政机关按照公平无偏 的程序，在法定的授权范围内且是尊重私人权利这样行为的方法来确保法治、 保 护自由。在此，行政法的功能主要是消极意义上的( negative )，即旨在防止具 有强制性的行政权针对私人个体的非法使用

2、或滥用。在最近十年，美国行政法也担负起了一些积极的使命。通过新的程序要求和 新的司法审查途径， 它确保行政机关要以一种合理的且是充分考虑了那些因它的 决定而会在经济和社会利益上受到影响的广泛的相关人的利益 (包括该规定的受 益人和受该规定约束和制裁的人)的方式，才可以做出政策决定。目前美国行政管理的现状：法规管理的疲软( Fatigue )今天，我们面临着 日益严重的行政管理疲软这一尖锐问题。 公众需要越来越高的法律保护， 但行政 管理机构却似乎越来越不能以一种有效而且高效的方式提供这种保护了。 一般说 来，制定和采用一个新的法规需要花费很长时间， 执行这一法规亦相当费时。 管 理的结果常常是

3、不仅不能达到预期目标， 反而还衍生出了更多麻烦。 我认为， 出 现这种困境的主要原因在于我们过分依赖命令控制的行政模式。在过去 50 年中，这一模式的运用曾使我们实现了既定目标。 但在一个大且多民族的国度里， 这一模式仍企图通过命令来规制处于一个急剧变化且纷繁复杂的经济社会环境 中的成千上万的人的行为， 那势必会使其固有弊端暴露无遗， 尤其是在通过联邦 法规将管理统一化的时候。 由于管理的强化， 上述问题也就越发越严重了。 联邦 行政机关所制定的详细行动规划由于缺乏灵活性而且易过时( obsolescence )， 因而既增加了负担，又降低了效率。除了对行政管理的效率有影响外，僵化的、 单方性

4、控制( unresponsive Controls )的扩张也影响了其合法性，而且不利于 责任的承担。这些问题随着针对公共需要而致的联邦命令性管理的扩张和加剧就 更加严重了。我们现在所依赖的两种主要是针对行政机关制定法规和政策的自由载量权 进行规制的行政法模式并不能解决上述固有弊病。 事实上，它们反而会使问题变 得更遭，即加剧行政管理的疲软。由法律人推动的( Lawyer-driven )利益代表 模式程序将会使行政管理过程过分迟延。 大多数法规至少要花上 5 年时间才能被 通过。司法审查也有费时的问题， 而且假如法院认定行政法规无效的话， 行政机 构还可以重新作一个规定。这样就会造成法规制定

5、程序的“僵化” ( ossification )。预算和管理局的法规分析和其它对审查有影响的管理方法也 会因分析而造成管理的瘫痪( paralysis by analysis )。因而行政机关越来越倾 向于采用不太正规的， 且又不负说明责任的不透明的法规政策模式了。 对此，有 观点认为， 应当在联邦层面解除行政控制。 这种观点认为， 比起市场本身的问题 和存在于州和地方层面的管理问题来讲，联邦行政管理的失败更加严重。虽然， 这种认识有一定依据， 即在联邦层面中对市场的规制有着严重问题， 但我们的疑 问是如何去解决问题？新管理方法。 答案在于运用新的管理方法和手段去化解过去因过分依赖命令 控制模

6、式而带来的问题。 在行政管理实践中， 有两种新模式开始出现， 即政 府利益相关人网络构架( government-stakeholder network structures ) 和经济激励制度( economy incentive systems )。为了避免由上而下( top-down )的命令型管理以及行政法所要求的正式化程 序所生的缺陷，作为一种新型解决之道的行政机关利益相关人网络模式正多 种形式得以发展。 不同于过去的那种企图单方决定被管理者行为的方法， 行政机 关在制定和执行行政规章中业已创造了多种策略以赢得包括商业企业和非赢利 团体在内的各种政府和非政府组织的支持。 下面就是几个

7、例证： 行政机关在行政 法的法规制定正式程序之外制定法规时， 通过与来自实业界、 公众及州和地方政 府代表的协商而相互达成一致； 行政机构在提供市政服务和行政医疗保健方面与 政府和非政府实体的协作安排；针对濒临灭绝物种保护法 ( Endangered species Act )的严格规定，被联邦自然资源管理机关划定的保护区内的居民、 土地所有者、 开发商及地方政府之间的协商。 在上述例子中， 联邦行政机关主动 出击，从而在这个程序中占据了主导地位， 其结果便是在协商的基础上与各参加 者达成一种准合同性质的关系， 进而解决行政管理中所存在的问题。 不同于集中 化的批量生产方法( centrali

8、zed massproduction )，这一方法信奉后工业时代 法规制定的策略。 它的主要特点在于其行为方式富于灵活性、 创新性， 具有基准 程序性( benchmarking )、透明性，并且可以使相互之间知情。在欧盟，这一方 法在协商公开法( OpenMethod of Coordination )项下被广泛用以执行在成 员国中的社会服务管理方案。 行政机构似乎也有许多理由来采用这一策略从而推 动其目标的实现： 减少因更正式程序而致的办事成本； 确保选民的合作以支持而 不是阻碍行政机关目标的实现； 充分利用选民的知识和经验， 并确保其更有效地 参与到政策的执行中来。非政府的选民( Non

9、governmental constituencies )也 有足够动力来参与这一过程。 去研究参加者的相互激励以及通过何种方式可以使 不同的制度设计能被广泛认同都是极其重要的课题。有些网络管理方法甚至与命令模式大相径庭， 它使行政机关从与相对人直接 的实质 联系 中抽 身而 以 一种 远距 离式 的策略 来管理( government at a distanee )。比如环保局(EPA的有毒物质排放目录(TRI)要求信息的发布者 要监督、报告并且公布各个设施所排放的空气污染物。 由于来自信息公开的非官 方压力，从而极大降低了污染物的排放。 基于信息之上的方法也被用于促进包括 健康医疗领域管理

10、在内的目标的实现。 其他的例子还包括政府对企业主动跟踪和 改善污染行为的环境管理和监管制度的鼓励，以及环保局和能源部(EnergyDepartme nt )与业界在降低能源消耗和二氧化碳排放方面所自愿达成的合作协 议。在这些被称为“反身法” (reflexive law )的方法中，政府通过提供参照标 准和交流途径来促进非政府实体的自我管理。 在证券、广播、电影领域的自我管 理规则是这一策略的另一种典型。第二，针对管理疲软问题而正在出现的另外一个完全不同的方法是使用经济 激励制度。比如，允许征收污染税、基础建设及环境保护费。不同于以往对人们 的行为直接做出命令，这种方法利用价格杠杆(如对排污单

11、位征税) ，这一形式 来使人们的行为符合既定目标； 但同时也留给被管理者以选择成本最低的方式行 为的灵活性。 污染税制度也激励私人部门去研发和采用污染少的生产方式。 逻辑 上讲，经济激励法是超越于现行的管理预算局程序的一种进步。 它并不是使用经 济手段去规制被授权的管理者， 而是以此来减少授权管理并运用经济手段重新恢 复市场本身对实现管理目标的作用力。 不要误解， 这并不是说要回到自由放任的 状态( Liaissez-faire )。为使这一方法行之有效，必须密切监视和严格实施这 些制度以防止欺骗。 相对于传统的命令型管理， 这一制度的合理设计和实施可以 同时实现降低污染物排放和大量节约成本(

12、可达 50%或更多)的双重功效。为了赢得更广泛的认可，新管理方法必须提供更好的管理成果。它们同时也 必定会遇到法律责任和政策合法性的难题。 网络管理策略故意以联合协作的形式 模糊传统意义上公和私的区别。 这一方法的前提是它的代表资格必须与该管理问 题所涉领域相匹配， 而这一点正日益与司法权限相交叉。 针对某个管理问题， 网 络参加人组成一个具有专门知识与经验的团队， 但这些参加者所代表的是不同的 政府、社会阶层和经济部门的利益和视角。 这些特征会使刚刚出现的管理政策要 费上很长时间才能奏效。 然而网络管理方法却故意减损正式的法规制定和执行行 为的作用。但像我们所知道的那样，这却是行政法的核心所

13、在。依“反身法”的 观点，政府就如同柴郡猫(Cheshire Cat)它是几乎不用现身的。当一个重要的 决定被转为由非政府部门参与的非正式程序而做出时， 法律又如何去防止权力被 部分人所滥用？又如何去约束专家的暴政( tyranny of expertise )？又如何来 确保最后的结论是考虑了公众的利益了的呢？包括如何确保分配的公平？ 这种网络管理并不是一个负有法律上的说明责任的实体。但在很多情况下， 网络管理程序最终可以产生涉及政府授权、 互谅备忘录、 发放许可证， 甚至是正 式的法规在内的正式法律安排。 因而，当这一权力的运用明显违反了宪法、 法律 的限制时，就要受到司法审查。 许多参与

14、这一过程的政府单位， 无论是哪个级别， 都要受到相关法院的审查。 即使这是消极被动的， 但行政法的权力制衡功能却可 以被成功地保持。 很难讲，基于规范决策作出的正式法律程序之上的利益代表模 式如何才能被成功地运用于网络管理。 另外，如何让网络决定模式能成功地受到 基于管理和预算局模式上的法规分析机制的审查也是相当成问题的。网络模式的拥护者们争辩道， 公开透明的公告和交换机制为其提供了安全保 障，也为程序审查留出了余地。 但这一方法仍未被阐述清楚。 联邦政府将在制定 基准程序和确保对管理行为的恰当监管和报告中起主要作用。 因为这可以加强政 策的能见度 (visibility )和管理方法上的说明

15、义务。 但就如同行政法的其它方 法一样，在这一方法中效率和说明义务两者是此消彼长的( tradeoffs )。经济激励制度也缩小了行政法的效力范围，通过委托市场主体(Marketactors )，经过价格信号的作用来执行政府机关依照要受司法审查的，且多少有 些正式的程序而作出的决定。结果会因私人部门的执行决定而产生一些不利影 响，例如，有关不同地区污染费的征收标准，可能只能受到有限的法律调整。因 而，在确保法规平等地适用时就有可能存在诸多问题。 但是， 不同于网络策略经 济激励制度在管理和被管理者之间保持了一个固定的距离， 并且由此而划清了责 任的分担。行政机关作出的有关激励制度的目标和设计的

16、决定要受到法规制定程 序的调整和普通程序上的司法审查。 通过大量减少政府所做出的决定， 经济激励 制度会促进政策上的说明义务的履行。例如，在有偿排污或征收污染税制度下， 政府决定的目标旨在激励整体环境的改善 (如在许可证制度下， 整个范围内的排 污许可)，而不是去做大量应由企业来做的细节工作。Administrative Law of the United States the twenty-first centuryRichard B. StewartAdministrative law in a free and democratic society, its own administra

17、tive rules and regulations will be subject to administrative regulations. Administrative law established executive in the entire political system in the framework of status; set to take a decision that the executive must follow the procedural requirements; provides for an independent judiciary may b

18、e to review the possibility of administrative acts and scope. It to the administration and the administrative regulations of the various key areas in the provision of the universal principles and procedural requirements. Traditionally, the essence of administrative law focuses on how the executive a

19、uthorities in accordancewith the fair and unbiased process,The statutory mandate and to respect the private rights of way to such acts to ensure the rule of law, protection of freedom. Here, the functions of administrative law is a negative sense of the (negative), that is designed to prevent the ex

20、ecutive power with a mandatory private individuals for the illegal use or misuse.In the last decade, the United States administrative law is also some positive take on the mission. Adoption of new procedural requirements and judicial review of a new channel through which the executive authorities to

21、 ensure that a reasonable and thorough consideration of those decisions because it will be in the economic and social interests affected by a wide range of related interests ( including the provisions of the beneficiaries and be bound by the provisions and sanctions of the person) the way, we can ma

22、ke policy decisions.The current status of the U.S. administration: the management of weak laws and regulations (Fatigue) Today, we face a growing weakness in the administration of this acute problem. Increasing the public needs the protection of the law, but it seems more and more administrative bod

23、ies can not be an effective and efficient way of providing such protection. Generally speaking, the development and adoption of a new law takes a very long time, the implementation of this law is also very time-consuming. The outcome of managementis often not only fail to achieve the desired objecti

24、ves, but also led to more trouble. In my opinion,The main reason for this predicament is that we rely too much on command - control of the administrative model. In the past 50 years, the use of this model has enabled us to achieve the agreed objectives are met. However, in a large and multi-ethnic c

25、ountry where this model is still an attempt to regulate the system through the command in a rapidly changing and complex economic and social environment in the conduct of tens of thousands of people, it is bound to expose its inherent drawbacks exhaustive, especially in the adoption of uniform feder

26、al laws and regulations of the management time. As a result of intensive management, these issues will become increasingly more serious. Federal executive authorities developed a detailed action plan due to the lack of flexibility and easy to outdated(Obsolescence), and thus not only add to the burd

27、en and inefficiency. In addition to affecting the efficiency of administration, the rigid, unilateral control(unresponsive Controls) also affected the expansion of its legitimacy, and not conducive to accountability. With these questions need for public order due to management of federal expansion a

28、nd intensification of the more serious.We now rely on two main organs for the development of administrative regulations and policies contained in the volume of the free right to the administrative law model of regulation will not solve the inherent drawbacks of the above. In fact, they are doing so

29、they will become even worse, that is exacerbated by weak administration. Driven by the legal person (Lawyer-driven) models represent the interests of the administration process will delay the process too much. Spend the majority of laws and regulations at least 5 years to be passed. Judicial review

30、is also time-consuming, but if the court finds that administrative regulations invalid, the executive body can also make a requirement.Of course, some basis for this understanding, that is, at the federal level in the regulation of the market has a serious problem, but our question is how to solve t

31、he problem?New management practices. The answer lies in the use of new management methods and means to resolve the past due to over-reliance on command - to control the problems brought about by the model. Practice in the administration, there are two new models began to appear that the Government -

32、 the network of stakeholders in the framework of (government-stakeholder network structures) and economic incentive systems (economy incentive systems).In order to avoid top-down (top-down) order management, as well as the required administrative procedures of the formal defects in children born as

33、a new type of solution of the executive authorities - the network of stakeholders in various forms mode is to develop. Unlike past attempts to unilaterally decide the kind of behavior by managers, the executive authorities in the formulation and implementation of administrative regulations have been

34、 created in a variety of strategies to win, including commercial enterprises and non-profit groups, various government and non-governmental organizations support. Here are a few examples: the executive authorities in the establishment of formal administrative procedures and regulations to develop le

35、gislation,From the business with the public and representatives of state and local governments to reach agreement in consultation with each other; the administrative institutions in the provision of municipal services and administrative aspects of health care and governmental and non-governmental en

36、tities, collaborative arrangements; for Endangered Species Protection Act (Endangered species Act) of the strict rules governing the management of natural resources by the Federal agencies designated to protect local residents, land owners, developers and local government consultations between. In t

37、he above example, the federal executive authorities take the initiative in this process in order to occupy a dominant position, the result is the basis of consultations with the participants to reach a quasi -The contractual nature of the relationship between the administration and then to solve the

38、 problems. Production method is different from the centralized (centralized mass production), this approach believes in the development of post-industrial era strategies and regulations. The main features of its behavior in its wealth to the flexibility, innovation, with the benchmark procedure (ben

39、chmarking), transparency, and can make each other informed. In the EU, this approach in the public law consensus (Open Method of Coordination) is widely used under implementation in the Member States in the management of social services programs. Administrative agencies seem to have many reasons to

40、adopt this strategy so as to promote the achievement of its objectives: to reduce the result of a more formal procedures for the cost of doing business; to ensure the cooperation of the voters to support rather than hinder the achievement of the objectives of the executive authorities; take full adv

41、antage of voter knowledge and experience, and to ensure that their more effective participation in the implementation of the policy to. Non-governmental voters (Nongovernmental constituencies) have sufficient power to participate in this process. To study the interaction of participants as well as t

42、hrough the manner in which incentives can be designed so that different systems are widely recognized to be an extremely important issue.Some network management methods and even different from the command mode, which allows the executive directly from the substanceof the relative links and a long-ra

43、nge exit strategy to manage the (government at a distance). For example, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) list of toxic substancesemissions (TRI) information required to publisher monitoring, reporting and publication of various facilities by the emission of air pollutants. As a result of i

44、nformation disclosure from non-official pressure,thereby greatly reducing the emission of pollutants. Based on the method has been used to promote the field of health management, health care goals.Other examples include the Government-to-business initiative to track and improve the environmental man

45、agement of pollution and regulatory system to encourage, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy (Energy Department) with the industry in reducing energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions by the voluntary cooperation agreement. These were referred to as the

46、 anti-shenfa (reflexive law) approach, the Government through the provision of means of reference standards and the exchange of non-governmental entities to promote self-management. In the securities, broadcasting, film the area of rules of self-management of this strategy is another classic.Secondl

47、y, the weak against the management of emerging issues and a completely different approach is the use of economic incentive systems. For example, allow the collection of pollution taxes, infrastructure and environmental protection costs. Unlike the past, peoples behavior to make an order directly, th

48、e use of price leverage this approach (such as taxes on emissions units), this form so that peoples behavior in accordance with established goals; but at the same time was left to managers to select the cost act the way the minimum flexibility. Pollution tax system to stimulate private sector R &

49、; D and the use of less polluting modes of production. Logically,Economic incentives is beyond the management of the existing budget process a step forward. It is not the use of economic instruments to regulate the system administrators have been authorized, but in order to reduce the authorized use

50、 of economic means to manage and re-market itself to the achievement of management objectives of the force. Do not misunderstand, this does not mean that state to go back to laissez-faire (Liaissez-faire). To make this approach effective, must be closely monitored and strict implementation of these

51、systems in order to prevent deception. With respect to the traditional command-based management,this system can be a reasonable design and implementation to reduce pollutant emissions while achieving substantial savings and costs (up to 50% or more) of double effect.In order to win wider recognition

52、, the new management methods to provide better management results. They will also encounter the legitimacy of legal liability and policy issues. Network management strategy intended to form a joint collaboration of the vague traditional sense of the distinction between public and private. The premis

53、e of this approach is that it must be consistent with the representation of the management of the areas covered by the match, which is increasingly cross-jurisdictional phase. In response to a management network to participate in the formation of a person with expertise and experience of the team, b

54、ut these participants represent different social strata and economic sectors, the interests and perspectives.These features make the management of emerging policies will have to spend a long time to work on. However, network management has deliberately detract from the formal laws and regulations to

55、 develop and implement behavior. However, as we know, this is the core of administrative law. In accordance with anti-shenfa point of view, the Government is like the Cheshire Cat (Cheshire Cat) It is almost not coming out of. When an important decision was to participation by non-governmental secto

56、r to the informal procedures, the law and how to prevent power from being abused by some people? How can we bound by the tyranny of experts (tyranny of expertise)? How to ensure that the final conclusion is that taking into account the interests of the public ones? Including how to ensure a fair dis

57、tribution?This is not a network management has the legal accountability of the entity. However, in many cases, network management procedures relating to government eventually could have authorized a memorandum of mutual understanding, licensing, and even the official rules and regulations, including

58、 the formal legal arrangements. Thus, when the use of this power in clear violation of the Constitution, the law limits that they are subject to judicial review. Many involved in the process of government, no matter what level, should be reviewed by the relevant court. Even if it is passive, but the

59、 administrative function of the power of checks and balances can be maintained successfully. It is hard to tell,Decision-making based on the norms of the formal legal process on how to represent the interests of model can be successfully applied to network management. In addition, the decision how t

60、o make the network model can be successfully based on the mode of management and budget analysis of the mechanism on the review of legislation is quite problematic.Network model advocates argue that open and transparent notice and the clearing-house mechanism to provide a security guarantee, as well

61、 as procedures for review of a room to stay. However, this method has not been clearly explained. The federal government will be the benchmark in the formulation of procedures and management practices to ensure that the appropriate monitoring and reporting play a major role. Because it can enhance t

62、he visibility of the policy (visibility) and management obligations on the note. However, like other methods of administrative law, as in the efficiency of this method and that is the shift in the obligations of both (tradeoffs).The system of economic incentives to reduce the effectiveness of a rang

63、e of administrative law, the main market through commission (Market actors), the role of price signals through to the implementation of government agencies are subject to judicial review in accordance with, and that formal procedures somewhat and make decisions. The results of the private sector due

64、 to the implementation of the decision of some adverse effects, such as pollution of the different regions of the standard fees may be limited only by the law. Thus, in the equal application of laws and regulations to ensure that when there are many problems that may exist. However, the strategy is

65、different from the network system of economic incentives in the managementand between managers maintained a fixed distance,And thus to draw a shared responsibility. Made by the executive authorities of the incentive system design goals and the decision-making process is subject to the adjustment of

66、laws and regulations and the general procedures of judicial review. Through a significant reduction in the Governments decision will be economic incentive systems that promote the policy obligations. For example, in the sewage or charges paid under the system of pollution taxes, the Government has decided to boost the overall goal of improving the environment (such as in the permit system, the sewage of the whol