保障性住房法律制度研究

The Legal System of Social House

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属学者:

胡川宁

作者:

胡川宁

导师:

刘俊

学位:

硕士

语种:

中文

关键词:

保障性住房法律制度;直接资助;间接资助;限价房;经济适用房;廉租房;公积金;住房补贴

摘要:

经过三十多年的改革开放的实践,我国已经基本建立了一套市场化的住房体制。但是市场化的住房体制在提供优质的住房商品的同时,也使得相当多的民众,特别是低收入群体的住房问题越发困难。可见深入的住房市场化并没有带来住房的社会公平,从而住房市场化本身的正当性也在不停的被质疑。我国的住房制度改革实际上是从为了满足大多数民众的住房需求着手的,造成现在群众对住房负担怨声载道的结果,绝非政策指定者当初的本意。如此我们非常有必要重新回顾一下我国自改革开放以来的住房制度改革的发展历程,找出我国住房制度改革的症结所在。其次境外发达国家和地区,特别是台湾地区、德国和美国,经过多年的摸索实践也都发展出了具有各自特色的住房保障制度,并基本达到了调和住房市场化和住房公平化之间矛盾的目的。因此他们的经验和教训也值得我们研究和学习。此外通过梳理上述发达国家的保障性住房的发展历程,使得我认识到在任何国家,其住房制度都是要兼顾社会公平和市场效率的,并都需要通过国家的干预来解决住房市场化所带来的民众住房负担过高的问题,从而都有各自保障性住房法律制度建立的必要。而且通过比较境外保障性住房法律制度和回顾我国的住房体制改革的历程证明了我国现今的保障性住房体制也已经完全不能适应市场化条件下所产生民众住房公平问题。而这主要是由于我国过分依赖以国家直接干预为理念的直接资助手段而忽视间接资助手段的结果。因此有必要通过直接资助方式的缩减和间接资助方式的扩张两方面对现行的保障性住房法律制度进行深入的改革。并且市场化的住房体制要求政府有比计划经济时代更高超和智慧的管理手段,而不能固守计划经济时代那种以行政命令为主要方式的调控手段。最后建设社会主义法治国家已经成为我国党和政府的治国理念,其应在国家的各项制度当中予以体现,保障性住房法律制度自然也不能例外。保障性住房法律制度应主要贯彻法治原则中的民主原则、依法行政原则和法律明确性原则,即首先应充分的保证民众通过人民代表大会或其他手段切实地参与到保障性住房政策的制定过程中,通过集中全社会的智慧和力量力求保障性住房法律制度的合理性和合法性;其次行政机关在执行保障性住房法律制度时应恪守法律的授权和法律的规定,不越权也不应不作为,切实将保障性住房法律制度贯彻到位;最后保障性住房法律制度政策法规本身不能含糊不清,超出一般人的认识能力,尽量使用统一的法律术语,从而保证规范解释的统一和合理,使得保障性住房法律制度真正能够得到良性运转。

学科:

宪法学与行政法学; 区域经济学

提交日期

2018-01-11

引用参考

胡川宁. 保障性住房法律制度研究[D]. 西南政法大学,2010.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 保障性住房法律制度研究
  • dc.title
  • The Legal System of Social House
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20070301050245
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 胡川宁
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2010
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 刘俊
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 保障性住房法律制度;;直接资助;;间接资助;;限价房;;经济适用房;;廉租房;;公积金;;住房补贴
  • dc.subject
  • The Legal System of Social House;; Direct Investments;; Indirect Investments;; Price-controled House;; Affordable House;; Low-rent House;; House Fund;; Housing Subsidies
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 经过三十多年的改革开放的实践,我国已经基本建立了一套市场化的住房体制。但是市场化的住房体制在提供优质的住房商品的同时,也使得相当多的民众,特别是低收入群体的住房问题越发困难。可见深入的住房市场化并没有带来住房的社会公平,从而住房市场化本身的正当性也在不停的被质疑。我国的住房制度改革实际上是从为了满足大多数民众的住房需求着手的,造成现在群众对住房负担怨声载道的结果,绝非政策指定者当初的本意。如此我们非常有必要重新回顾一下我国自改革开放以来的住房制度改革的发展历程,找出我国住房制度改革的症结所在。其次境外发达国家和地区,特别是台湾地区、德国和美国,经过多年的摸索实践也都发展出了具有各自特色的住房保障制度,并基本达到了调和住房市场化和住房公平化之间矛盾的目的。因此他们的经验和教训也值得我们研究和学习。此外通过梳理上述发达国家的保障性住房的发展历程,使得我认识到在任何国家,其住房制度都是要兼顾社会公平和市场效率的,并都需要通过国家的干预来解决住房市场化所带来的民众住房负担过高的问题,从而都有各自保障性住房法律制度建立的必要。而且通过比较境外保障性住房法律制度和回顾我国的住房体制改革的历程证明了我国现今的保障性住房体制也已经完全不能适应市场化条件下所产生民众住房公平问题。而这主要是由于我国过分依赖以国家直接干预为理念的直接资助手段而忽视间接资助手段的结果。因此有必要通过直接资助方式的缩减和间接资助方式的扩张两方面对现行的保障性住房法律制度进行深入的改革。并且市场化的住房体制要求政府有比计划经济时代更高超和智慧的管理手段,而不能固守计划经济时代那种以行政命令为主要方式的调控手段。最后建设社会主义法治国家已经成为我国党和政府的治国理念,其应在国家的各项制度当中予以体现,保障性住房法律制度自然也不能例外。保障性住房法律制度应主要贯彻法治原则中的民主原则、依法行政原则和法律明确性原则,即首先应充分的保证民众通过人民代表大会或其他手段切实地参与到保障性住房政策的制定过程中,通过集中全社会的智慧和力量力求保障性住房法律制度的合理性和合法性;其次行政机关在执行保障性住房法律制度时应恪守法律的授权和法律的规定,不越权也不应不作为,切实将保障性住房法律制度贯彻到位;最后保障性住房法律制度政策法规本身不能含糊不清,超出一般人的认识能力,尽量使用统一的法律术语,从而保证规范解释的统一和合理,使得保障性住房法律制度真正能够得到良性运转。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • After 30 years of reform and opening up, China has basically established a market-oriented housing system. But the market-oriented housing system in the provision of quality housing products, while also making a considerable number of people, especially the housing problems of low-income groups more difficult. Can be seen in-depth housing market has not brought home the social equity, and thus the legitimacy of the housing market itself has also been questioned non-stop. China's housing reform is in fact in order to meet the housing needs of the majority of people start, the cause of the current burden of housing the people complaining the result of the policy not the original intention of the original assignee. So we very much need to re-look at since the reform and opening up of China's housing reform since the development process of China's housing system to identify the crux of the reform. Second, developed countries and regions abroad, especially in Taiwan, Germany and the United States, after years of exploration have also developed a practice has its own characteristics, housing security system, and basically met to reconcile the housing market and housing, the conflict between fairness. So their experience is worth our study and learning. Developed by combing the above-mentioned protective housing development process, allows us to recognize that in any country, its housing system is to take into account social equity and market efficiency, and the need by state intervention to solve the housing market brought about by The problem of excessively high burden on public housing, which has its own Social House, legal system, establish necessary. By comparing the outside legal system of Social House and review the course of China's housing reform that our present system of Social House has been completely unable to meet under the conditions arising from the public housing equity. This is mainly due to China's excessive reliance on direct state intervention means of the concept of direct funding to the neglect of the results of an indirect means of financing. Is therefore necessary to adopt a reduction in Direct Investments and Indirect Investments to the expansion of two aspects of the existing legal system of Social House in-depth reform. And market-oriented housing system requires the Government to a higher than the planned economy era, and the wisdom of ultra-management tools, not the kind of stick to the planned economy era of an administrative order as the main mode of control means. In addition, building a socialist country ruled by law has become China's party and the government's governing ideas, his country should be reflected among the various systems, protective housing, the legal system is naturally no exception. Protective housing, the legal system should be mainly implement the rule of law in democratic principles, a principle of administration according to law and legal certainty principle that the first shelter to protect the legal system should be sufficient guarantee of the people through the People's Congress or other means to guarantee the effective participation of housing policy the development process, by focusing on the strength of the whole society sought to protect the legal system of housing policies and regulations of the rationality and legitimacy; followed by the executive authorities in the implementation of safeguards should abide by the law legal system, the housing authority and the law, not ultra vires is also should not fail to act effectively to protect the nature of the legal system and implementing shelter in place; the final guarantee of the legal system of housing policies and regulations can not by itself unclear, beyond the cognitive ability of ordinary people to make use of a uniform legal terminology in order to ensure a unified and rational norms to explain , making the legal system to protect the true nature of the housing can be a benign operation.
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D922.182.1;F293.3
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2010-03-20
回到顶部