"Workshop on Law and Interdisciplinarity for Young People at Shanghai Jiao Tong University
From June 10th to 11th, 2023, the "Workshop on "Na": Law and Interdisciplinary Youth Workshop" was held in Conference Room 206 of China Academy of Law and Society, North Quad Building, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The workshop was hosted by the Institute of Chinese Law and Society of Shanghai Jiao Tong University and organized by the Center for Empirical Legal Research of Shanghai Jiao Tong University Kai Yuan Law School. "The workshop was co-sponsored by Prof. Cheng Jinhua of SJTU, Prof. Hou Mang of Renmin University of China, and Associate Prof. Chen Hangping, Associate Prof. Yu Xiaohong and Associate Prof. Chen Tianhao of Tsinghua University. The workshop attracted the participation of young scholars from home and abroad, and after careful selection, 14 papers were selected for presentation, and more than 20 contributors and young scholars participated in the paper presentations and exchanges. In addition to the five initiators, the workshop also invited a number of experts and scholars from Peking University, Jilin University, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Fudan University, East China Normal University, Shanghai University of Science and Technology, Nanchang University, and the editorial office of Exploration and Controversy to be the reviewers.
As the initiator and host of this workshop, Prof. Cheng Jinhua of Shanghai Jiao Tong University Kai Yuan Law School announced the opening of the workshop. On behalf of the Institute of Chinese Law and Society of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Cheng Jinhua welcomed all the young scholars and reviewers. At the same time, Cheng Jinhua also emphasized the inevitability and importance of law and cross-disciplinary research by taking the example of convergence research in the field of engineering, and highly affirmed the selected papers, saying that he was very much looking forward to the next paper presentations and exchange discussions.
Afterwards, Associate Professor Yu Xiaohong from School of Social Sciences, Tsinghua University and Associate Professor Chen Tianhao from School of Public Administration, Tsinghua University delivered speeches for this workshop. Ms. Yu Xiaohong expressed her gratitude to the China Academy of Law and Society of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, and introduced the original purpose of the workshop, which is to promote dialog and cooperation among young scholars of law and interdisciplinary disciplines based on the concern for the community of law and interdisciplinary academics, and to bring new perspectives and ideas to the development of jurisprudence. Chen Tianhao further pointed out that the original intention of the workshop is to build a communication platform for young scholars of law and interdisciplinary studies, and he used the metaphor of "boomerang" to put forward the problems that law and interdisciplinary studies must face, that is, law and interdisciplinary studies should not only stand outside of the law to look at the law, but also return to promote the development of law. Finally, the two speakers jointly expressed their expectations for this workshop and hoped that all young scholars could make full use of this opportunity to continue to promote law and interdisciplinary research.
Phase I
The presentation and deliberation of the first phase was moderated by Cheng Jinhua, Professor of Shanghai Jiaotong University Kaiyuan Law School. In this phase, Zhang Xiangyu, Associate Researcher of the School of International Financial Law of East China University of Political Science and Law, Wang Ziyu, Doctoral Candidate of the School of Law of Renmin University of China, Chen Yueou, Doctoral Candidate of the School of Law of Jilin University, and Dai Wei, Doctoral Candidate of the School of Law of Renmin University of China, reported their papers in turn.
Zhang Xiangyu presented his paper on Judicial Entrepreneurship in China: How Did Wenzhou Promote Bankruptcy Law, which utilized qualitative research methods to examine the trial situation and changes of bankruptcy cases in Wenzhou, providing empirical evidence for "Judicial Entrepreneurship". "provides empirical evidence. To this end, Zhang Xiangyu defines "judicial entrepreneurs" as local court leaders who implement policies by mobilizing judicial resources, political authority, and social resources. The paper notes that since the onset of the private lending crisis in 2011, "judicial entrepreneurs" have been active in handling socially significant pilot cases and adapting national laws to the local context, receiving much political attention, while also taking more comprehensive measures to regularize bankruptcy procedures. Finally, the paper analyzes the reasons behind the above behaviors of the "judicial entrepreneurs": firstly, the consideration of promotion and political career, and secondly, their own knowledge, experience and courage.
Renmin University of China Law School professor Hou Meng and master's student Gao Kaiming, and Zhejiang University Guanghua Law School associate professor Feng Yang commented on Zhang Xiangyu's paper. According to Hou and Gao, the paper utilizes the theory of entrepreneurship to explain the role of court presidents in promoting the rule of law reform in China, which provides an example of dynamic justice and is conducive to enriching the academic community's understanding of the judicial system and the role of court leaders. In addition, Hou Mang and Gao Kaiming also put forward some suggestions for the paper, such as enriching the analysis of the limitations of "judicial entrepreneurship" from the perspectives of economy and hierarchical relationship between the courts, strengthening the analysis of the motives of "judicial entrepreneurship", and further exploring the impact of judicial reform on "judicial entrepreneurship". The impact of judicial reform on "judicial entrepreneurship" is further explored. On the basis of fully recognizing the topic selection, literature review, research methodology and narrative paradigm of the paper, Feng Yang pointed out several suggestions to improve the paper, including: whether the practice of Wenzhou District Court can fully cover the theme of "judicial entrepreneurship"; whether the reasons behind "judicial entrepreneurship" are not only professional and professional, but also the reasons for "judicial entrepreneurship"; and the reasons for "judicial entrepreneurship" are not only professional and professional, but also the reasons for "judicial reform". The reasons behind "judicial entrepreneurship" include: whether the theme of "judicial entrepreneurship" can be fully covered by the practical implications of the Wenzhou District Court; whether there are other factors behind "judicial entrepreneurship" besides career development considerations; and Feng Yang also put forward some suggestions on the structure of the dissertation and the accounting of the information from interviews.
The topic of the paper reported by Wang Ziyu is "The Court Organization System under Multiple Institutional Logic: Cutting from the Reform of Intellectual Property Trial System". The paper reviewed the reform of China's intellectual property adjudication system: in terms of structure, intellectual property adjudication tribunals and specialized intellectual property courts have been set up successively; in terms of means, the effective operation of courts has been achieved through the vertical "leap litigation" and hierarchical jurisdiction, as well as the horizontal "triple instance" adjudication model. The paper analyzes the effective operation of the courts as reflected in the course of this journey. The thesis analyzes the multiple institutional logics of the reform of the court organization system reflected in this history - political logic, efficiency logic, and professional logic: the political logic embodies the national ideology and policy value orientation, and determines how the court organization establishes the reform goals, responds to the deployment of the central government's judicial reform plan, and adjusts the direction of specific reforms to meet the core needs of the political environment. The core needs of the political environment. The logic of efficiency aims at obtaining greater benefits, and determines how the court organization integrates its functions and improves the overall trial quality and efficiency through institutional settings and optimization. The logic of specialization, based on the laws and principles of judicial trial, determines what specific means of reform can be adopted by the court organization to meet the need for specialized trials of complex issues. The court organization is oriented to internal and external needs, and follows different institutional logics to reform the court organization system.
Chen Tianhao, Associate Professor of School of Public Administration, Tsinghua University, and He Chengchen, PhD student of School of Law, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, commented on Ziyu's paper. Chen Tianhao pointed out the problems in the paper: the research questions are not clear enough and focused, and the fieldwork is not sufficient; the definitions of the concepts of "politics", "efficiency", and "professionalism" are not clear enough, and it is suggested to focus more on the concepts of "politics", "efficiency", and "professionalism". The definitions of concepts such as "politics", "efficiency" and "professionalism" used in the thesis need to be further clarified, and it is suggested to focus on smaller issues. Mr. He thought that the thesis had many highlights, and that the thesis was clear and balanced between depth and breadth. However, the writing structure of the thesis is not quite in line with the norms of social science thesis, and it is suggested to further set out the research questions, add background analysis, and add chapters to explain the research methodology in the revision of the thesis.
Chen Yueou reported his thesis on the topic of Professional Judges' Minutes: Transformation of the Supreme People's Court's Judicial Rule Supply Mode. The paper points out that the minutes of professional judges have both legal procedure attributes and organizational structure attributes, which makes the minutes of professional judges as a judicial product different from the previous forms of judicial rules supply such as judicial interpretation, guiding cases, and general court minutes, indicating the transformation of the Supreme People's Court's mode of judicial rules supply. The thesis distinguishes between the power-exporting judicial rule supply mode and the authority-generating judicial rule supply mode, and further points out that the new judicial rule supply mode has changed the previous rule supply mode of endorsing the judicial rules by the will of judicial power and emphasizing the binding force of the judicial rules on the judges, and embedded the supply of the judicial rules in the adjudication process of individual cases in an attempt to bring into play the significance of the judicial rules as the holistic reference of the trial's intellectual resources, and no longer relies on the distillation of the main points of adjudication. It no longer relies on the trial management means reflecting the logic of power to realize the sufficient supply of judicial rules and the unity of legal application, such as refining the gist of decisions and setting the level of effectiveness of cases. The article argues that the transformation of the Supreme People's Court's judicial rule supply mode is still in progress, and its development direction and final shape depend on the adjustment of the function orientation of the supreme judiciary.
Chen Zhaoxin, a lecturer at East China Normal University School of Law, and Shi Lei, a postdoctoral fellow at Shanghai Jiaotong University Kaiyuan Law School, commented on Chen Yueou's paper. Chen Zhaoxin affirmed the significance of the selected topic and the research highlights of the thesis, such as the absorption of legal procedures by organizational structure and the introduction of judicial accountability system. At the same time, Mr. Chen also pointed out the problems of the thesis: need to further strengthen the argumentation to what extent the minutes are a kind of judicial rule supply mode transformation; the object of criticism in the critical part of the article is not clear enough and so on. Shi Lei affirmed the significance of using "transformation" as the keyword in the paper, but also pointed out that the paper did not clearly explain the reasons behind the "transformation", which may lead to some problems, such as the misalignment of the material and the argument, and the lack of practical perspective in the textual analysis.
The topic of the paper reported by Dai Wei is "How to become a "small court"? Dai Wei reported on his paper entitled "How does the filing court become a "small court"? The thesis firstly introduces the research problem, which is empirical, i.e., the behavioral logic of the court to cope with the large number of cases and the small number of people, and theoretical, i.e., the thesis tries to show the complex relationship of system, procedure, organization, and actors in the work of the court through the case of the case of the filing division, and describes the practical logic of the court's organization, so as to provide more analytical factors for the research of countermeasures in the field of judiciary. Adopting an actor perspective, the thesis finds that the court system, through the governance of indicators, has made easing the pressure of cases an important task of the filing division, mobilized the grassroots courts to concentrate the trial resources to the filing division in terms of organizational structure, and with the shift of judicial concepts and the application of legal procedural technologies by the judges and other actors, the filing division of the grassroots courts has been able to successfully integrate the organization, procedures, and actors into an efficiently functioning network of actors. Finally, the paper argues that the role of actors in judicial practice deserves attention, and that future judicial research should pay more attention to the logic of actor-centered practice.
Yang Fan, a professor at the Law School of Jilin University, and Ren Ting, a doctoral student at the Law School of Yunnan University, commented on Dai Wei's paper. Yang Fan firstly affirmed the research's problematic awareness and perspective innovation, and then proposed several modifications to the paper: the need to strengthen the standardization of social science and add a methodology section; the need to further clarify the concepts of "organization" and "actor"; the theoretical choices of the paper need to be further discussed; and the need to improve the methodology of the paper. The choice of theories in the paper should be further discussed, and the relevance of theories and empirical materials should be strengthened. Ren Ting thinks that the thesis has the advantages of a tightly logical text, but the title of the chapter and the abstract of the thesis do not match the content of the thesis. In addition, the core of the thesis needs to be expanded, and the relationship between the four elements of policy, procedure, judicial concept and technology needs to be further clarified.
In the free discussion stage, the four presenters responded to the questions raised by the reviewers one by one. At the same time, the participating teachers and students also had a full discussion on how to use foreign theories to explain China's judicial practice, how to strengthen the social science standardization of law and interdisciplinary research, and how to evaluate law and interdisciplinary research. Finally, the moderator, Prof. Cheng Jinhua, pointed out that disciplinary intersection includes the intersection of three dimensions: theory, method, and framework, and that the current law and interdisciplinary research should pay more attention to the training of method, and hoped that the young scholars could make efforts to master the method of social science and learn from more cutting-edge researches.
Second Stage
The presentation and deliberation of the second stage was moderated by Yu Xiaohong, Associate Professor, School of Social Sciences, Tsinghua University. In this stage, Feng Yang, Associate Professor of Guanghua Law School of Zhejiang University, He Chengchen, PhD student of the School of Law of The Chinese University of Hong Kong, and Lu Shenghua, Post-doctoral Fellow of the Faculty of Law of The University of Hong Kong, presented their papers in turn.
Feng Yang's paper was entitled Battered Wives Who Kill in China: Unequal Marital Power, Weak External Intervention and Conservative Judicial Response, which was based on 162 criminal cases of intentional homicides committed by battered women who killed their husbands over the past 10 years. The thesis takes 162 criminal judgments of intentional homicide of battered women who killed their husbands in the past 10 years as an empirical sample. Based on the theory of family power relations, the thesis explores the influence of variables such as the characteristics of the defendant and the intervention of external public power subjects on the court's sentencing by means of an econometric analysis method, and then finds out the discrepancy between the normative requirements and the collective experience of the judges, in order to provide suggestions for the improvement of the policies and legislations. After elaborating on the representativeness and validity of the sample, Feng Yang et al. found that: statistical analysis of defendants' characteristics indicates that defendants are often in a weak position in family power relations; and that the intervention of third-party subjects such as the police, village committees, and women's associations can significantly reduce defendants' sentencing. A more detailed look reveals that, for sentence reduction, seeking relief from the police was effective before the husband's murder, while seeking relief from the village committee or the women's association did not show such effectiveness; on the contrary, after the husband's murder, seeking the intervention of the women's association was significantly associated with a lower sentence, while seeking the intervention of the police and the village committee was not so significant. Nonetheless, overall, the proportion of defendants seeking third-party external intervention remains low. Courts only recognized the defendant's defensive element in a few cases and did not recognize the reporter as committing self-defense in any case, showing a rather cautious adjudicative stance. In response to the research findings and related interpretations, the paper concludes with suggestions for improvement at the policy and legislative levels.
Tang Yingmao, a professor at Fudan University Law School, and Zhang Xiangyu, an associate researcher at East China University of Political Science and Law's School of International Finance and Law, commented on Feng Yang's report. Tang Yingmao affirmed the research methodology and writing specification of the paper, and thought that the arguments presented and the data used in the paper were well combined, and also put forward several suggestions: first, each of the three elements remains to be further explored, and consideration could be given to specifically highlighting the issue of external intervention to enhance the article's impact on the readers; second, there are contradictory and conflicting points in the individual expressions of the paper; and third, the research using the The information provided by the judgment documents is still limited, and it is recommended to supplement the materials or dig into other scenarios to do an in-depth research. Zhang Xiangyu thinks that the writing style of the thesis is profound and simple, which is worth learning, and provides possible directions for improvement: firstly, in data analysis, whether to make a fitting Poisson distribution curve; secondly, the research can also dig out other potential factors besides third-party interventions.
The topic of the paper reported by He Chengchen is Selective Adaptation of the RNR Model in China's Juvenile Criminal Justice System: Balancing Rehabilitation and State Control. the paper uses the RNR model as an analytical framework and utilizes participant observation, participatory observation, and the RNR model as the analysis framework. Using the RNR model as a framework for analysis and data from participant observation, semi-structured interviews, and archival analyses, the thesis provides an in-depth exploration of the adaptation of the RNR model by Chinese social workers in the juvenile criminal justice system, and analyzes the differences from the original version. The study concludes that selective adaptation of the RNR model in the Chinese context achieves the function of maintaining national risk control while realizing the educational salvation of minors.
Tian Lei, a professor at East China Normal University School of Law, and Wu Wanqiang, a doctoral student at Shanghai Jiaotong University Kaiyuan Law School, commented on He Chengchen's paper. Tian Lei firstly recognized the solid field work in the study. At the same time, Tian Lei also pointed out the deficiencies in the thesis, such as the lack of rigorous wording and insufficient analysis. Wu Wanqiang firstly affirmed the problem awareness of the thesis, he pointed out the problems in the thesis in terms of the reference basis for the prosecutors to make decisions, the value basis of the provisions on the criminal responsibility of minors, and the factors constraining the prosecutor's discretion, and put forward suggestions such as the possibility of incorporating more prosecutor's data.
Shenghua Lu presented a paper on Urbanization and Discrimination in Criminal Sentencing in China, which examined the differences in sentencing outcomes for foreigners in Chinese criminal sentencing through an analysis of burglary judgments. It finds that, controlling for other factors held constant, foreigners receive harsher sentences and are less likely to receive suspended sentences. These differences are even more pronounced when the amount stolen is higher. The paper further analyzes that this phenomenon is closely related to China's urbanization process. Differences in sentencing are more pronounced when foreigners move from less developed provinces to more developed ones. The thesis argues that the reason for this discrepancy is likely to be the rational choice of judges to maintain social stability, which is usually an acute problem in societies in transition.
Yu Xiaohong, an associate professor at the Department of Political Science, School of Social Sciences, Tsinghua University, and Lin Xinbo, a doctoral student at Shanghai Jiaotong University's Kaiyuan Law School, commented on Lu Shenghua's paper. Yu Xiaohong firstly affirmed that the paper has the advantages of standardized writing and concise style, but also pointed out the problems of the paper: firstly, the paper still lacks in theoretical construction, and many key issues still need to be further elaborated, and the choice of theoretical framework is still open to question; secondly, the literature review of the paper is not enough, and it has not dialogued with the literature and theories; thirdly, there are still deficiencies in research methodology, such as the textual analysis part, which is still not enough. Thirdly, the dissertation is still deficient in research methodology, for example, the text analysis part is not rigorous enough. Lin Xinbo firstly affirmed the research value of the thesis, and then pointed out several aspects of the thesis that may need to be improved: firstly, sorting out and dialoguing with the relevant literature on the reasons and mechanisms behind the unequal treatment of the foreign population in different fields; secondly, the selection of control variables and the heterogeneity test model needs to be further optimized, and the coefficients of some of the models need to be verified; lastly, the conclusion needs to echo the theme and the theory of the thesis. Theme and theory are echoed.
During the free discussion stage, the three reporters responded to the questions raised by the reviewers one by one. Participating teachers and students had in-depth exchanges and discussions on the limitations of the research on adjudication documents, the procedural reasons for the differences in sentencing of migrant people, and the concept of "roving crimes" in criminal law.
Third Stage
The third phase of the paper presentation and deliberation was chaired by Tang Yingmao, a professor at the Law School of Fudan University. In this stage, Jin Shangjun, an undergraduate student of Renmin University of China Law School, Ren Ting, a doctoral student of Yunnan University Law School, and Dai Liang, an associate professor of Antai College of Economics and Management of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, reported their papers in turn.
Jin Shangjun's paper was titled "Creating Bulk Litigation: The Generation of Counterfeit Trademark Infringement Cases by Small Traders Driven by Profit". The paper focuses on the "bulk cases" in the field of intellectual property, which are filed by the same plaintiff with the same cause of action. By examining the process of generating such cases, the author finds that it is not the plaintiffs, who are the trademark right holders, but the legal consulting firms, which are highly specialized in the field of trademarks, that are leading such litigation. The article analyzes the legal policy and social environment in the field of intellectual property, and then further analyzes how the legal consulting firms create such bulk lawsuits, and how the judges are restricted by the judicial policy, the rules of evidence review, and the established rules of adjudication in the courts when deciding the cases. The thesis concludes that legal consulting firms, driven by commercial interests and utilizing their knowledge and experience in trademark litigation, create bulk litigation for trademark infringement, which not only makes it difficult to achieve the purpose of judicial protection of intellectual property rights, but also negatively affects the credibility and social image of the courts.
Wang Yuya, a postdoctoral fellow at Peking University Law School, and Xu Kaiyue, a doctoral student at Shandong University's Graduate School of Economics, commented on Jin Shangjun's paper. Wang considered that the paper was well written and complete, but also pointed out some problems with the paper: first, the research question was not clear enough, and the conflict between "generation" in the title and "role" in the abstract made the nature of the paper not clear enough; second, the paper was not clear enough in dealing with the question of "how to develop the experience"; and second, the paper was not clear enough in dealing with the question of "how to develop the experience". Secondly, the paper is not mature enough in dealing with "how to develop experience into problems", and it is recommended to continue to study "how to resort to regulation" and "why law firms fail"; thirdly, the methodology is not detailed enough, and the qualitative analysis is not clear enough. Thirdly, the description of the methodology in the paper is not detailed enough, and the treatment of qualitative materials needs to be further standardized. Xu Kaiyue found the paper very inspiring, but there are still some shortcomings: first, there are many questions that need to be further explored in the paper, such as whether small merchants will be held hostage by legal consulting firms and how small merchants can join together to fight class-action lawsuits, etc.; second, many expressions in the paper need to be further standardized, and the length of the paper should be appropriately reduced.
The research paper reported by Ren Ting is "The Practice Mechanism of Traffic Enforcement and Its Effects". The paper focuses on the question of whether daily traffic law enforcement practices actually affect people's behavior. Through the method of fieldwork, the authors found that in daily traffic law enforcement, traffic police have formed three types of practices: routine law enforcement, special law enforcement, and time-sensitive law enforcement in order to achieve multiple law enforcement goals. With the natural change of working hours, law enforcement swings back and forth like a pendulum between routine and specialized enforcement, and combines with time-limited enforcement to balance and sustain the achievement of law enforcement goals and the continuous operation of law enforcement. The article further points out that in the interactive process of law enforcement, people respond to the corresponding law enforcement methods with evasive compliance, active compliance and cooperative compliance, and their compliance behaviors are also characterized by the pendulum. The "pendulum" compliance behavior is actually swinging between "compliance and non-compliance", to a large extent, weakening people's will to comply with the law, and thus weakening the effect of law enforcement.
Professor Liu Zhong of Fudan University Law School and Assistant Researcher Tan Jun of Shanghai Jiao Tong University's China Law and Society Research Institute commented on Ren Ting's paper. Liu Zhong highly praised Ren Ting's research, saying that she had analyzed a small but special problem in a rather delicate way. At the same time, Liu Zhong further pointed out that the traffic police detachment of the public security bureau is a special organization, which is managed by the Municipal Public Security Bureau and is not under the pressure of "fine performance", so there is a lot of room for discretion, but deviation is also within the acceptable range. Tan Jun that the article is very readable, the line is very logical, with law enforcement as an entry point is very innovative. Later, Tan Jun also pointed out the areas for further improvement, such as the specific operation mode of time enforcement and the position of time enforcement in the law enforcement mode system; the title of the article is open to question, and the language expression can be more rigorous; and it is suggested to supplement the literature review section in order to better reflect the innovation and breakthrough of the article.
Dai Liang reported his paper on Organizations and Spontaneous Order in Mitigating Strategic Uncertainty, which examines and compares two sources of social order, organizations and spontaneous order, from the perspective of mitigating strategic uncertainty among individuals. The paper finds that by forcing its members to act collectively, an organization not only mitigates strategic uncertainty among its members, but also further endogenously mitigates strategic uncertainty between its members and individuals who do not belong to the organization, resulting in a Pareto improvement, which is more true the larger the organization is, contrary to Hayek's conclusion that organizations are inferior to spontaneous order from the perspective of efficiently utilizing individuals' private information. However, there is a limit to this type of Pareto improvement, i.e., when the organization is large enough to completely eliminate all the strategic uncertainty faced by its members, its members will be subordinate to each other to enforce collective action, and the resulting conflict of interest will disintegrate the organization.
Chen Jie, Associate Professor at the School of Entrepreneurship and Management, Shanghai University of Science and Technology, and Zeng Yu, Associate Professor at the School of International and Public Affairs, Shanghai Jiaotong University, commented on Dai Liang's paper. Chen Jie believes that the paper is scientific and rigorous, and that it has deepened the explanation of economic issues such as "how organizations are formed" and "how to achieve efficiency improvement". Zeng Yu finds the paper ambitious and well modeled, but also raises five possible questions, namely: whether the assumption that the unity of action of an organization is determined by its median voter is too strong, whether the manipulation of information within an organization has an impact on equilibrium, whether the impact of different decision-making processes within an organization should be taken into account in modeling, whether the members of an organization have the right to withdraw, and whether the upper limit of the organization's size is necessarily related to the preference heterogeneity of the members of society. necessarily be linearly related to the preference heterogeneity of society's members.
During the free discussion stage, the three presenters responded to the questions raised by the reviewers one by one. Students and faculty members had a lively and thorough discussion on the subjective tendency in qualitative research and how to code, generalize and typify qualitative materials.
Phase IV
The fourth phase of the presentation and deliberation was moderated by Prof. Chen Tianhao of the School of Public Administration, Tsinghua University. In this stage, Luo Changchen, Assistant Editor of Sun Yat-sen University Press, Wen Yima, undergraduate student of Law School of South China Normal University, Wu Wanqiang, doctoral student of Shanghai Jiaotong University, and Xu Kaiyue, doctoral student of Economics Research Institute of Shandong University, presented their papers in turn.
Luo Changchen's paper was titled "The Mutual Help of Rites and Teachings--A Class Action Lawsuit in the Ming Jiajing Period". The thesis focuses on the role of rituals and teachings in evoking mutual help and solidarity in the mobile social conditions of the mid-Ming Dynasty in rural governance. Through reviewing the county records and genealogies of various surnames, comparing the actual situation of Huliao's terrain, cultivated land, mountains and forests, and then physically visiting and researching the historical and current locations of various surnames, the study finds that the essence of a "class action lawsuit" during the Jiajing period of the Ming Dynasty was that various surnames downstream of the water stream were united by marriage and mentorship, and ultimately formed the "Class Action Lawsuit" of more than one hundred people. More than a hundred people sued the scale of the upper reaches of the three mountains is "six societies in common" as the reason, sued the upper reaches of the He clan "delusion of the first reclamation, attempting to seal the plant," "investment in logging, inciting furnace patents," and other crimes, in order to balance the natural location of the geographical location of the residence. In order to balance the problem of uneven distribution of production and living resources caused by natural differences in geographic location. The origin, appeal, and resolution of this collective dispute reflect the mutual assistance of rituals and religions in rural governance during the Jiajing period.
Yu Xiaohong, Associate Professor of the Department of Political Science, School of Social Sciences, Tsinghua University, and Sun Guanhao, Law Editor of Exploration and Controversy, commented on Luo Changchen's paper. Yu Xiaohong pointed out that: firstly, the theoretical construction could be further strengthened by elaborating in greater depth the reasons for the occurrence of aiding and abetting relationships in litigation, focusing on why litigation occurs and why aiding and abetting relationships are formed in litigation in order to fight against the pattern of propriety; and secondly, the article could be further compared with similar historical events in other regions during the same period of time in order to assist the argumentation of the article. Sun Guanhao thinks that the article is an excellent legal history thesis with solid examination of individual cases; at the same time, the case is not strong enough to argue for the conclusion, and the argument can be strengthened by combining more cases of the same period, reinforcing the theoretical construction, or further combining the sociological perspectives; moreover, the significance of the conclusions for the governance of the modern Chinese society can be added in the article to supplement the contemporary significance of the research.
Wen Yima reported his paper entitled "The Discussion of "Avoiding the Importance of the Less Important": A Study of Prosecution Preferences in Environmental Administrative Public Interest Litigation". The thesis focuses on the question of whether the prosecutor's office has a preference for selecting cases for prosecution. Taking the governance actions of the prosecutor's office and its rational choices as the perspective, the thesis utilizes the judgments retrieved from China Judgement and Documentation Network (CJDN) to encode the information of individual cases into twenty variables, which are then extracted into the following categories of "environmental factual factors", "degree of environmental damage", and "environmental damage degree" through categorical principal components analysis "degree of environmental damage" and other seven indicators, and K-means cluster analysis was used to summarize "fine preference", "simple preference", "common preference", "realistic preference", "environmental damage", and so on. The K-means clustering analysis was used to summarize the four types of prosecution choices, namely, "fine preference", "simple preference", "common preference", and "realistic preference". In the data analysis, the natural environment, industrial structure and policy background of each province and city are used as control variables, and then multiple logistic regression is used to calculate the direction and intensity of the influence of each case indicator on the prosecution choice, and ultimately it is inferred that there exists a paradoxical logic of "avoiding the heavy and avoiding the heavy" and "avoiding the light and avoiding the heavy" in the preference. and "avoiding the lesser and the greater" contradictory logics. The thesis further analyzes the action logic of the Prosecutor's Office, and finds that the strength of cooperative relationship and organizational strength are the two main dimensions of the action strategy, and that a good cooperative relationship is the key guarantee for solving the problem of prosecution, while a highly efficient organizational form can only be a favorable condition. The conclusion of the paper suggests that the logic behind the conflicting preferences is the question of whether the governance capacity of the prosecutor's office meets the governance needs, and that future litigation practice should pay more attention to the formation of cooperative relationships.
Song Weizhi, a lecturer at Nanchang University School of Law, and Chen Yueou, a doctoral student at Jilin University School of Law, commented on Wen Yima's paper. According to Song Weizhi, the reasons for the occurrence of "campaign governance" can be further discussed beyond the rationality of the state and the rationality of individuals, for example, the influence of political factors can be taken into account; the selection of variables can be discussed in more detail, and attention can be paid to the standardization and credibility of quantitative research; and the correlation between the analysis of the data and the conclusions can be strengthened. Chen Yueou believes that the title of the article does not fully cover the research question; the core concept of the article is open to question, and the meaning of the concept of "campaign governance" used by the author needs to be further clarified; some empirical research content in the article is not linked to the findings of the study; in addition, the article needs to pay attention to the reader's experience of the article.
Wu Wanqiang's paper on Quarantined Power Expansion: China's Procuratorial Reforms within and beyond Criminal Justice takes two reporting scenarios as examples and reviews the academic debate on the concept of "procuratorial centrism" and "procurator-centrism". Using two examples of whistleblowing scenarios, the report reviews the academic discussion on "prosecutorial centrism" and "prosecutorial dominance model", and raises the question of how the prosecuting authority can become a dominant authority. Using the concepts of "delimitation" and "exchange" in ecological theory, the thesis reinterprets the history of the reform of the procuratorate, and finds that the procuratorate has been striving to expand its jurisdiction in criminal, civil, administrative and public interest litigation, and has been expanding its functions beyond criminal litigation through public interest litigation. its functions beyond criminal prosecution. The thesis contributes to ecological theory by refining the dimensional boundary theory and further demonstrating the distinction between demarcation and conjunction, on the one hand, and on the other hand, through the study of China's Procuratorate, it also reveals that ecological theory can well explain the evolution of the role of China's Procuratorate, and explores the potential significance of this in the context of China's further institutional reforms.
Chen Tianhao, Associate Professor, School of Public Administration, Tsinghua University, and Lu Shenghua, Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Law, University of Hong Kong, commented on Wu Wanqiang's paper. Chen Tianhao argues that the boundary theory can be supplemented with the theory of the relationship between political organizations to strengthen the persuasiveness of the argument; the reasons for the choice of the explanatory object should be further clarified by explaining the whys; and in discussing the reasons for the occurrence of the reform of procuratorate, the relationship of the interaction of power boundaries between other state organs, especially between the courts and the procuratorate, can be further discussed, instead of being limited to the supervisory and procuratorate organs. According to Lu Shenghua, the structure and content of the article can be set according to the journal's preference; the argumentation of the causal relationship between the reform of the supervisory system and the reform of the procuratorial organs can be strengthened; the concept of the power of the procuratorial organs can be clarified, and the relationship between the responsible matters and the power can be clarified.
The topic of the paper reported by Kaiyue Xu is "Selective Copyright Protection Behavior of Algorithms in Short Video Network Platforms". The thesis explores the platform's copyright protection tendency by observing how the algorithm treats secondary creative works within the platform. Under the safe harbor rule, online platforms gain private regulatory power to govern copyright infringement, while algorithms, which are at the core of the platform's power, determine where information is distributed and the channels available. The researcher searches for movie works from 2014 to 2018 as keywords on short video website platforms, and analyzes the ranking of search results of user uploaded works and its influencing factors based on the data of the search results, and finds that: in order to maximize the interests, online platforms do have selective copyright protection behaviors. On the one hand, the platform will recommend the secondary creative works of movie and television works that have the possibility of infringement to the users; however, on the other hand, when the platform owns the broadcasting right of the movie and television works, it will hide the alternative secondary creative works by lowering the search weight, so as to give priority to the platform's copyrighted works to be selected and consumed. The paper concludes that selective copyright protection behavior focuses on platform interests and ignores governance responsibilities, and should clarify the responsibility of platform-related personalized recommendation algorithm behavior and make the platform responsible for it.
Cheng Jinhua, a professor at Shanghai Jiaotong University's Kaiyuan Law School, and Wang, a postdoctoral fellow at Peking University Law School, also commented on Xu Kaiyue's paper. Cheng Jinhua believes that the empirical research on algorithmic discrimination in the paper is very useful for legal research; at the same time, the problem needs to be further clarified, and a choice should be made between copyright protection and algorithmic neutrality, and the structure of the paper should be adjusted accordingly; the hypothesis should be put forward in a way that is more in line with the requirements of the research, and the way of choice can be further discussed after it is clear that the choice exists. Wang also believes that the paper should pay attention to the argumentation relationship between legal issues and empirical research; it can focus on the argumentation of hypotheses, for example, whether works based on user-generated content constitute infringement of other people's copyrights; it can be further researched on variable settings and empirical methods; and it can be more in line with the legal research in order to make suggestions.
During the free discussion stage, the reporters responded to the reviewers' questions one by one. Participating teachers and students fully discussed and exchanged views on the logic behind the selection of cases by the prosecutor's office in the environmental public interest litigation, the concepts of "dimensional boundaries" in the ecological theory, and whether the theory can explain the evolution of the function of the prosecutor's office and the competition of the jurisdiction of the judiciary, etc., and further explored issues such as the themes, methods and development directions of the research on the law and cross-disciplinary research. The topics, methods and development directions of law and interdisciplinary research were further discussed.
Summarization Stage
At the end of this workshop, Prof. Hou Mang of Renmin University of China Law School, Associate Researcher Zhang Xiangyu of East China University of Political Science and Law, and Prof. Cheng Jinhua of Shanghai Jiaotong University Kaiyuan Law School summarized the meeting.
Hou Mang firstly reviewed the process of this workshop from the selection of reports to the formal reporting and exchange, and he believed that the collective presentation of this workshop has many highlights, which can fully reflect the problems faced by law and interdisciplinary research. First, both qualitative and quantitative legal research present their own problems. Qualitative research is seriously lacking in terms of research frameworks and accounting for social science methods, while quantitative research also lacks an understanding of the actual situation of legal texts and legal operations. Secondly, regarding the sense of dialogue, Hou Mang believes that Chinese studies do face the limitation of being difficult to dialogue with the theories of the English-speaking world, but at the same time, it is also important to realize that we should establish a Chinese social science tradition of law, and therefore pay attention to the classical and cutting-edge studies of the English-speaking world as well as to the studies of a group of Chinese scholars, such as Fei Xiaotong, Qu Tongzhu, and even Su Li, Ji Weidong, Bai Jianjun, and so on. Therefore, the significance of this workshop is to enable each participant to "start from the beginning of reflection", and to try to complement each other's strengths and weaknesses, both qualitatively and quantitatively.
Mr. Zhang Xiangyu expressed his gratitude to the workshop for providing such an opportunity, and combined with his own research experience after studying abroad and returning to China, he expressed two points of experience. First, as a backward wave, we still need to learn from the previous scholars, especially the problem awareness, so that we can find our own position and make satisfactory results. Second, the historical mission of the new generation of young scholars is how to tell a good Chinese story. When I studied abroad, I often felt a sense of separation, not agreeing with the established ideas of foreign countries, but also a sense of frustration after returning to China, because I couldn't find an audience interested in my own research problems when I wrote my thesis. Mr. Zhang Xiangyu pointed out that the complexity of human motivation is very important in social sciences, but how to deal with this complexity in research needs to be further pondered, citing the Chinese and foreign linguistic gaps in the word "sentiment" as an example. Finally, Ms. Zhang expressed her hope that she could bring her work to the next workshop.
Cheng Jinhua expressed his thanks for the success of this workshop. He believed that a good workshop should have the three characteristics of "talkative", "competitive" and "rewarding", so this workshop was organized as much as possible to limit the number of presentations, the number of participants, and the number of participants in the workshop. He believed that a good workshop should have the three characteristics of "talk," "compete," and "get something out of it," so this workshop tried to limit the number of presenters and extend the presenters' time in order to realize this purpose. On this basis, Cheng Jinhua pointed out that this is both a good and a bad time for young scholars. On the one hand, young scholars nowadays have more advantages in terms of economic conditions, language ability, etc., and have stronger internal drive; but on the other hand, the current era is also extremely challenging, as the expectation of society on young scholars is no longer to introduce foreign theories and methods, but rather to require young scholars to be able to engage in a dialog with the rest of the world. Therefore, Cheng Jinhua expressed his expectations for young scholars, hoping that the younger generation will continue to work hard, not only need to extensively study foreign literature and understand theories, but also should be based on national conditions and tell the Chinese story.