香港的长征:从殖民地向民主过渡的持续步骤

Thomas S. Axworthy, H. Leonard
{"title":"香港的长征:从殖民地向民主过渡的持续步骤","authors":"Thomas S. Axworthy, H. Leonard","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.902380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hong Kong is in the midst of the most rapid political transition in China, and the success of this transition is crucial not only for the seven million residents of Hong Kong but also for the future of China itself. How the authorities in Beijing respond to democratic demands from Hong Kong, and how the government of Hong Kong treads a democratic pathway within the boundaries of the Basic Law, are two of the most important questions in international politics today. China’s decisions about Hong Kong will tell us much about the prospects of democratic transformation in China itself. Under British rule, Hong Kong developed what we term a strong “culture of liberty” – which by itself does not constitute or provide democracy, but which is a necessary foundation for any democratic institutions worthy of the name. What Britain did not attempt – at least until 1992, and, some would say, even thereafter – was any serious development of locally-based institutions of direct democracy. This meant that when Hong Kong was transferred to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, it had in place a novel, untested, and at best incomplete set of political institutions for democracy. In this paper, we describe the political system of Hong Kong and the series of reforms that have been undertaken since 1997, and suggest further steps that we believe would help to build a more effective democratic system. We outline a set of general principles about democratic governance, observing that any democratic system must provide mechanisms for authority (the ability to act), accountability (the requirement to provide information about accomplishments and to be held accountable for performance), and answerability (the requirement to provide information and answers to the public, media, and legislative authorities). We view Hong Kong’s institutions through this lens, providing comparisons to the British, Canadian, and American systems. Finally, we provide a series of suggestions about additional reforms that Hong Kong should consider, focusing mainly on devices to make party politics more robust, effective, and socially productive by giving parties a better-defined and more influential role in governance.","PeriodicalId":110014,"journal":{"name":"John F. Kennedy School of Government Faculty Research Working Paper Series","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Long March in Hong Kong: Continuing Steps in the Transition from Colony to Democracy\",\"authors\":\"Thomas S. Axworthy, H. Leonard\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.902380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Hong Kong is in the midst of the most rapid political transition in China, and the success of this transition is crucial not only for the seven million residents of Hong Kong but also for the future of China itself. How the authorities in Beijing respond to democratic demands from Hong Kong, and how the government of Hong Kong treads a democratic pathway within the boundaries of the Basic Law, are two of the most important questions in international politics today. China’s decisions about Hong Kong will tell us much about the prospects of democratic transformation in China itself. Under British rule, Hong Kong developed what we term a strong “culture of liberty” – which by itself does not constitute or provide democracy, but which is a necessary foundation for any democratic institutions worthy of the name. What Britain did not attempt – at least until 1992, and, some would say, even thereafter – was any serious development of locally-based institutions of direct democracy. This meant that when Hong Kong was transferred to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, it had in place a novel, untested, and at best incomplete set of political institutions for democracy. In this paper, we describe the political system of Hong Kong and the series of reforms that have been undertaken since 1997, and suggest further steps that we believe would help to build a more effective democratic system. We outline a set of general principles about democratic governance, observing that any democratic system must provide mechanisms for authority (the ability to act), accountability (the requirement to provide information about accomplishments and to be held accountable for performance), and answerability (the requirement to provide information and answers to the public, media, and legislative authorities). We view Hong Kong’s institutions through this lens, providing comparisons to the British, Canadian, and American systems. Finally, we provide a series of suggestions about additional reforms that Hong Kong should consider, focusing mainly on devices to make party politics more robust, effective, and socially productive by giving parties a better-defined and more influential role in governance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":110014,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"John F. Kennedy School of Government Faculty Research Working Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"John F. Kennedy School of Government Faculty Research Working Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.902380\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"John F. Kennedy School of Government Faculty Research Working Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.902380","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

香港正处于中国最迅速的政治过渡时期,这一过渡的成功不仅对700万香港居民至关重要,而且对中国本身的未来也至关重要。北京当局如何回应香港的民主要求,以及香港政府如何在《基本法》的范围内走民主道路,是当今国际政治中最重要的两个问题。中国对香港的决定将在很大程度上告诉我们中国自身民主转型的前景。在英国统治下,香港形成了我们所说的强大的“自由文化”——这种文化本身并不构成或提供民主,但它是任何名副其实的民主制度的必要基础。英国没有尝试的是——至少在1992年之前,有些人会说,甚至在1992年之后——认真发展以地方为基础的直接民主制度。这意味着,当香港在1997年主权移交给中国时,它已经有了一套新颖的、未经检验的、至多是不完整的民主政治制度。在本文中,我们描述了香港的政治制度和自1997年以来进行的一系列改革,并提出了我们认为有助于建立更有效的民主制度的进一步措施。我们概述了一套关于民主治理的一般原则,观察到任何民主制度都必须提供权威(行动的能力)、问责制(要求提供有关成就的信息并对绩效负责)和可回答性(要求向公众、媒体和立法机构提供信息和答案)的机制。我们从这个角度来看待香港的制度,并将其与英国、加拿大和美国的制度进行比较。最后,我们就香港应该考虑的其他改革提出了一系列建议,主要侧重于通过赋予政党在治理中更明确和更有影响力的角色,使政党政治更加强大、有效和社会生产力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Long March in Hong Kong: Continuing Steps in the Transition from Colony to Democracy
Hong Kong is in the midst of the most rapid political transition in China, and the success of this transition is crucial not only for the seven million residents of Hong Kong but also for the future of China itself. How the authorities in Beijing respond to democratic demands from Hong Kong, and how the government of Hong Kong treads a democratic pathway within the boundaries of the Basic Law, are two of the most important questions in international politics today. China’s decisions about Hong Kong will tell us much about the prospects of democratic transformation in China itself. Under British rule, Hong Kong developed what we term a strong “culture of liberty” – which by itself does not constitute or provide democracy, but which is a necessary foundation for any democratic institutions worthy of the name. What Britain did not attempt – at least until 1992, and, some would say, even thereafter – was any serious development of locally-based institutions of direct democracy. This meant that when Hong Kong was transferred to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, it had in place a novel, untested, and at best incomplete set of political institutions for democracy. In this paper, we describe the political system of Hong Kong and the series of reforms that have been undertaken since 1997, and suggest further steps that we believe would help to build a more effective democratic system. We outline a set of general principles about democratic governance, observing that any democratic system must provide mechanisms for authority (the ability to act), accountability (the requirement to provide information about accomplishments and to be held accountable for performance), and answerability (the requirement to provide information and answers to the public, media, and legislative authorities). We view Hong Kong’s institutions through this lens, providing comparisons to the British, Canadian, and American systems. Finally, we provide a series of suggestions about additional reforms that Hong Kong should consider, focusing mainly on devices to make party politics more robust, effective, and socially productive by giving parties a better-defined and more influential role in governance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信