Doctoral Dissertation Research in Political Science: The Development of The Rule of Law in China

不可预测性是专制统治的有效手段。关于产权的开创性著作声称，民主的特点是法治和保护产权（North and Thomas 1973; North 1990）。然而，关于民主与法治关系的实证研究尚无定论。虽然一些学者确实发现民主国家更有可能保护财产权（Leblang 1996； Rigobon和Rodrik 2004），但其他人没有发现两者之间的关系。Barro（2000）认为，法治和产权保护既存在于民主国家，也存在于独裁国家。这个项目的动机是一个谜：为什么独裁者手中有镇压手段，却通过建立法治来让自己的行为变得可预测？本研究在次国家级的中国背景下解释了这一难题。本研究包括三个部分：案例研究、数据收集和调查研究。研究了三个案例。它们由中国的三个县组成。案例研究的主要目标是完善理论和测量方法。我们预计在这些县待8个月。在案例研究的第一阶段之后，我们将研究扩展到大n分析。大n分析的案例包括2004年北京大学当代中国研究中心实施的“中国法律改革制度化”调查中抽样的100个县。该调查是用来获得法治的一些主观指标。该研究具有重要的理论和实践意义。现有的法治衡量标准往往是主观的和跨国的，例如，世界银行透明国际和开发计划署的全球诚信。本研究将作出的一个重要贡献是创建一套衡量一个国家次国家级法治的数据集。最近，社会科学对中国法律的兴趣也有所复苏，特别是人们的法律行为和法律态度(例如Diamant， Lubman和O？布里恩2005;加拉格尔2006;迈克耳逊2007)。法学学者一直关注中国的法律制度（Lubman 1999; Peerenboom 2002），他们的分析擅长于描述，但往往缺乏因果分析。本研究通过衔接制度分析和行为研究填补了这一空白，为中国法治的发展提供了微观基础。这项研究还具有政策意义。中国正在加入几个重要的国际协议，包括世界贸易组织、京都议定书等等。在国家政府与国际社会签署协议后，之前的合规失败让人质疑地方政府执行这些法律法规的动机（Mertha 2005）。本研究为国内外政策制定者加强执法保障手段提供了理论依据。

Unpredictability is an effective means of autocratic rule. Seminal works on property rights claim that democracies are characterized by the rule of law and protection of property rights (North and Thomas 1973; North 1990). However, empirical studies on the correlation between democracy and the rule of law are inconclusive. While some scholars have indeed found that democracies are more likely to protect property rights (Leblang 1996; Rigobon and Rodrik 2004), others find no relationship. Barro (2000) argues that the rule of law and protection of property rights occur in both democracies and dictatorships. This project is motivated by one puzzle: Why are dictators, with the means of repression in their hands, induced to make their own behavior predictable by building the rule of law?This research explains this puzzle in the context of sub-national China. The research consists of three parts: case studies, data collection, and survey research. Three cases are examined. These consist of three Chinese counties.The major goal of case studies was to refine the theory and measurements. We expect to spend 8 months in these counties. After the first stage of case studies, we extend the study to a large-N analysis. Cases of the large-N analysis include the 100 counties that were sampled in the survey "Institutionalization of Legal Reform in China" which was implemented in 2004 by Peking University's Research Center for Contemporary China. The a survey is used to obtain some subjective measures of the rule of law. The research has important theoretical and practical implications. Existing measurement of rule of law is often subjective and cross-national, for example, World Banks Transparency International and UNDP's Global Integrity. One important contribution this study will make is to create a data set of measures of the rule of law at the sub-national level within a nation. There is also a recent resurgence of social science interest in Chinese law, especially people's legal behavior and legal attitudes (e.g. Diamant, Lubman and O?Brien 2005; Gallagher 2006; Michelson 2007). Legal scholars have been focused on China's legal institutions (Lubman 1999; Peerenboom 2002), their analyses are good at descriptions but often fall short of causal analysis. This research fills this gap by bridging institutional analysis and behavioral studies and offers a micro-foundation for the development of rule of law in China. The study also has policy implications. China is entering several important international protocols, including the WTO, Kyoto Protocol, et cetera. After the national government signs agreements with the international community, previous failures of compliance call into question local governments' incentive to enforce these laws and regulations (Mertha 2005). This research provides a theoretical foundation for policy makers both in China and abroad to enhance means to guarantee enforcement.