摘要
以激进式改革为基础的"休克疗法"和"华盛顿共识"与以渐进式改革为基础的"北京共识"形成了鲜明的对比。"休克疗法"和"华盛顿共识"失败的原因成为许多学者争论的焦点。从比较制度的视角来看,可得出如下结论。第一,其失败的直接原因是"华盛顿共识"引起的制度协调失败,这也是激进式改革产生严重后果的重要原因。第二,其失败的根本原因是共有信念决定的制度演化特征与激进式改革导致的制度集合未能完全有效实施之间的冲突。第三,"华盛顿共识"引发的制度变迁没有遵循制度学习的一般规律。由此而言,"北京共识"的借鉴与学习也需要在遵循制度学习与形成的一般规律下才会成功。
There is an apparent comparison between "shock therapy" and "Beijing Consensus",the former same as "Washington Consensus" based on radical reform and the latter based on evolutionary reform.Why "shock therapy" failed? Many scholars argued.Form the view of Comparative Institutional Analysis,firstly,the direct reason is the failure of institution coordination,which could lead radical reform produce severe result.Secondly,the essential reason is the conflict between institution evolvement characteristic decided by common belief and invalid institution congregation implementation caused by radical reform.Thirdly,the institution change initiated by "Washington Consensus" could not adapt to general rule of institution forming.Consequently,it is necessary to follow it in the process of "Beijing Consensus" study and development.
出处
《河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》
CSSCI
北大核心
2010年第6期46-49,共4页
Journal of Henan Normal University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)
关键词
“华盛顿共识”
“北京共识”
比较制度
Washington Consensus
Beijing Consensus
comparative institutional