信任组织法

IF 3.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Shawn Bayern
{"title":"信任组织法","authors":"Shawn Bayern","doi":"10.1111/rego.12616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Decentralized governance technologies like blockchains are often proposed as substitutes for private legal arrangements like those provided by company law or organizational law more generally. In established legal systems in developed countries, the costs of implementing such algorithmic mechanisms are likely to be greater than the agency or other costs that come from selecting and trusting an existing third party. But even if that were not true, attempting to achieve decentralized governance solely by algorithm is more complicated than it appears and incurs significant “formalism costs.” Such costs can be reduced by the wealth of experience represented by the operational processes of organizational law. Mixing those operational processes with algorithmic governance by “opting into” organizational law, thereby letting it govern the <i>interface</i> between the algorithms and the real-world legal rights associated with an organization, is likely to be a governance model superior to the use of algorithmic governance alone.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trusting organizational law\",\"authors\":\"Shawn Bayern\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/rego.12616\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Decentralized governance technologies like blockchains are often proposed as substitutes for private legal arrangements like those provided by company law or organizational law more generally. In established legal systems in developed countries, the costs of implementing such algorithmic mechanisms are likely to be greater than the agency or other costs that come from selecting and trusting an existing third party. But even if that were not true, attempting to achieve decentralized governance solely by algorithm is more complicated than it appears and incurs significant “formalism costs.” Such costs can be reduced by the wealth of experience represented by the operational processes of organizational law. Mixing those operational processes with algorithmic governance by “opting into” organizational law, thereby letting it govern the <i>interface</i> between the algorithms and the real-world legal rights associated with an organization, is likely to be a governance model superior to the use of algorithmic governance alone.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulation & Governance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regulation & Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12616\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation & Governance","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12616","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

像区块链这样的去中心化治理技术经常被提议用来替代私人法律安排,如公司法或更普遍的组织法所提供的法律安排。在发达国家既有的法律体系中,实施这种算法机制的成本很可能高于选择和信任现有第三方所带来的代理成本或其他成本。但即使不是这样,试图仅通过算法实现去中心化治理也比表面看起来要复杂得多,而且会产生巨大的 "形式主义成本"。组织法的运作流程所代表的丰富经验可以降低这种成本。通过 "选择加入 "组织法,将这些操作流程与算法治理混合起来,从而让组织法管理算法与现实世界中与组织相关的法律权利之间的接口,这很可能是一种优于单独使用算法治理的治理模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Trusting organizational law
Decentralized governance technologies like blockchains are often proposed as substitutes for private legal arrangements like those provided by company law or organizational law more generally. In established legal systems in developed countries, the costs of implementing such algorithmic mechanisms are likely to be greater than the agency or other costs that come from selecting and trusting an existing third party. But even if that were not true, attempting to achieve decentralized governance solely by algorithm is more complicated than it appears and incurs significant “formalism costs.” Such costs can be reduced by the wealth of experience represented by the operational processes of organizational law. Mixing those operational processes with algorithmic governance by “opting into” organizational law, thereby letting it govern the interface between the algorithms and the real-world legal rights associated with an organization, is likely to be a governance model superior to the use of algorithmic governance alone.
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
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Regulation & Governance serves as the leading platform for the study of regulation and governance by political scientists, lawyers, sociologists, historians, criminologists, psychologists, anthropologists, economists and others. Research on regulation and governance, once fragmented across various disciplines and subject areas, has emerged at the cutting edge of paradigmatic change in the social sciences. Through the peer-reviewed journal Regulation & Governance, we seek to advance discussions between various disciplines about regulation and governance, promote the development of new theoretical and empirical understanding, and serve the growing needs of practitioners for a useful academic reference.
×
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