The Rule Of Provisions

In today’s China, a lack of social integrity has been a general phenomenon and the mainfactor that influences people’s normal life. Furthermore, as integrity is no longer a moral issue,it is not applicable to limit the study on the predicament that whether law can regulatemorality. However, integrity must concern the rule of law, because it is not only the demandof times, but also the appeal of integrity itself. This paper focuses on seeking and constructinga perfect mechanism--the social integrity system to govern the lack of integrity, from theperspective of rules.In the present study, the social integrity system does not attempt to follow the hot spots;instead, it provides a theoretical path to control social order during the social transformationperiod. In particular, the rules included in the social integrity system should take a certainplace in the innovation of the social management mode, which is a collection of formal andinformal rules. In today’s China, it is necessary to construct two rule-based systems because itdraws on foreign experience and absorbs local resources. Only when the rule-based systemsfit the practical situation in China can they truly reflect and solve realistic problems in orderto improve the efficiency of social integrity management.In terms of the organization of the dissertation, it is divided into six chapters except forthe introduction. The main line of this dissertation is very clear, because it follows theproblem solving cycle of “problems---countermeasures”. In the process of demonstration, theauthors follow and display the trail of concept development firstly, and then make clear thepopular notion that the “social integrity system” just is equivalent to the “social credit system”.Hence, a judgment has been made that the essence of the social integrity system is arule-based system. Secondly, this paper summarizes two factors of the western social integritymanagement, namely market and law, by the way of carding the practicing situation of thewestern social integrity system. Besides, this foreign experience is indispensable for China toconstruct its social integrity system. Nevertheless, the foundation and the basis of the socialintegrity construction are the true situations of social credit loss. Generally speaking, thesplitting of the integrity ideas, the types and the reasons of social credit loss, and the currentsituation of China’s social integrity system construction, especially the practical experience ofprovincial administrative divisions, are all unavoidable matters in the research process. Fromabove, this paper puts forward the ideas of constructing “integrity nomocracy” and cultivating “rules outside the law”.The introduction of this paper summarizes the foreign and domestic research status. Theresearch emphasizes on displaying the limitations of the existing research and the difficultiesin the research process. Currently, there are less special research findings in the field of“social integrity system” both home and abroad. Foreign studies are mainly conducted in thefields of economy, scientific research and nomocracy. However, these studies usually focus onsome trivial and specific issues, and there are few concerns on the theme of the socialintegrity system. As for the domestic studies, many research findings concern integrity, someof which even date back to the “integrity record” of Ming Dynasty. Nevertheless, studies onthe integrity system in our country start relatively late and may be somehow premature.Besides, the lack of consensus on some basic concepts presents a state of confusion.Therefore, both the lack of research data and ambiguous concepts are the research difficulties.Chapter One briefly explains and differentiates some relevant concepts of the socialintegrity system. The theoretical premise of the research is to clearly define the category ofrelevant concepts, and to take this theory as a foundation to derive the “order” purpose of thesocial integrity system research.“Integrity”,“social integrity”,“social integrity system” and“social credit system” are the key concepts that should be paid special attention to in theresearch. The connotation of integrity is not single;“honesty”,“performance”,“belief” and“trust” constitute the original meaning pedigree of integrity. According to the analysis above,the present study points out that the meaning of social integrity depends mainly on theexplanation of the social boundary. As for society in broader terms, the essence of socialintegrity is an order predicament of integrity, which includes political integrity, economiccredit and legal integrity. However, social integrity system should be the rule-based system tomaintain and guarantee social integrity, so it goes far beyond the extension of social creditsystem which regards maintaining economic credit as a purpose. In the scope of generalizedsociety, the objective and purpose of social integrity system is to construct a sound publicorder.Chapter Two is related to a comparison among countries about western social integritymanagement. Around the globe, some European and American countries have alreadycomparatively developed social integrity systems. Such systems usually become benchmarksand samples for other countries’ integrity construction. In addition, the systems have profoundbases, such as theoretical foundations, governance models as well as key factors and so on and so forth. The theoretical foundation of the western social integrity system has two logics,which are public logics and private logics. The rational supporting behind integrity behaviorsof public organizations and social subjects can be found in the theoretical systems of “socialcontract”,“principal-agent theory” and “game theory”. Upon this, there are two modes of thesocial integrity management in both European countries and the United States: they are thestate-driven mode and the market-driven mode. Although the status between the countrysubject and the market subject is different, there are indeed many common grounds deservingto be studied. The subject that is maintained by the two modes is economic credit; however,the market is closer to the connotation that is declared by “social integrity system” in ChapterOne, and is a label between the two integrity management modes. In the form of regulation,law constitutes a dominant role and is the leading force in adjusting the social integrityrelationships. In addition, the industry norm also plays an important part in regulating theresources of the western social integrity system. From this we can certainly infer that:although the western social integrity system involves the power system’s integrity, the socialintegrity system is more accurate; although the formal rules like the law constitute a dominantrole in the rule-based system, we cannot neglect the meaning of informal rules in the socialintegrity construction.Chapter Three concerns the value and the problem of fission: the vicissitude of integrityidea and the phenomenon of social integrity loss. This chapter switches its focus to thedomestic research, of which the reality of China’s integrity and integrity loss are the startingpoints of the social integrity system construction. During the social transformation period inChinese society, under the social division of labor, population mobility, individualismideological trend as well as the authority and uniformity of the broken traditional moralintegrity, law has become a major demand for integrity management. Also, the factors abovecause the fragmentation of traditional integrity’s pattern of difference sequence, which leadsto the high frequency of social integrity loss. Whether from the areas and subjects of integrityloss, or from subjective faults and happening media, both perspectives can conclude a seriestypes of integrity loss. Among them, social structure transformation, interest appeal, tacticalchoice and system absence are all factors that cannot be avoided. The invalidation of lawregulation is related to the incompletion of nomocracy system and the lack of social identity.All in all, these are the difficulties that need to be faced and solved in the process of socialintegrity construction. Chapter Four is related to the credit practice: the situation of domestic social integritysystem construction and some reflections. Facing the loss of social integrity, the state powersystem responds accordingly in the governance level. There are significant changes in theintegrity ideas in the level of central authorities, from the “moral slogan” or the “politicaldeclaration” to the “nomocracy planning” and the “national strategy”. In terms of practice,local governments especially some provincial governments are in the forefront of the socialintegrity system construction, not to mention the fact that31provincial districts are exploringhow to construct social integrity. In the exploration process, Zhejiang, Shanghai and Shenzhenhave formed their own unique modes and become the typical representatives of local practices.Moreover, regulatory documents like the laws are main rules for the integrity loss of the localgovernments. Through the empirical analysis, the authors have found something needed to berethought profoundly about in terms of the local integrity system modes. For example, thescope of the social integrity construction is too narrow, because it mainly focuses on theeconomic filed just as “social integrity system”’ deficiency of macro-environmentconstruction, lacking of strong and unified coordinating organizations and authoritative legalbasis, and so on and so forth. Therefore, the conflicts and turmoil among the laws,administrative regulations, department rules and other regulatory documents should beeliminated, which can promote the integrity of market, especially the integrity of public areasthrough a unified and perfect system.Chapter Five is discussed from the state’s standpoint: governance strategy and practiceessence of integrity nomocracy. This is the main body of the dissertation in which the law isput forward as the formal rule and main form of social integrity system construction from thestate’s standpoint. Hence,“integrity nomocracy” is sufficient to become the main strategy ofthe governance of social integrity loss. To construct integrity nomocracy, it must takegovernment integrity and judicatory public integrity as its focus, and consider the concretesystems such as the information openness and the case guiding as its leverage to support themain framework of integrity nomocracy. Thus, the intention of integrity nomocracy is morethan constructing a static rule-based system about its own integrity, and more importantly is toconstruct a series code of conduct for social subjects and representatives of public power. Onone hand, it can limit the public power of state or government to set benchmarks in abiding byintegrity; on the other hand, citizen’s right of privacy and rights of social organizations canalso obtain the corresponding safeguard, and the boundary that defined by law releases a space for society’s integrity autonomy through some informal rules. Even on a deeper level,integrity nomocracy breaks through institutional integrity which is established depending onthe law. Fulfilling nomocracy is to follow moral integrity; there is a transition about the moralintegrity of laws taking place after the legalization of moral integrity. Maybe in the process ofChina’s nomocracy construction can achieve the dream of China’s social integrity.This chapter is also related to “the rules outside the law”. Social integrity does notentirely belong to the legal category; it is also involved in some informal rules such as theconstitution and regulations of the CPC, the industry regulations, the articles of incorporationas well as the customs and morals. Under the time background of the socialization of publicservice，the subject of social governance is now moving towards the multi-center anddecentralized direction, so the governance of integrity loss cannot completely continue relyingon one subject alone. In practice, social subjects are not only the supervisors of the socialintegrity construction, but also the builder of the social integrity system. Some organizations,especially the rating agencies, the financial institutions and the communication serviceorganizations have significant impacts on the social integrity system construction.Therefore,rules outside the law such as social autonomy are forces to be reckoned with.Generally speaking, in the social integrity construction process, both the law and “therules outside the law” are indispensable safeguard norms. The regulatory system of integritythat constitutes by formal and informal rules is exactly the connotation of the social integritysystem. Under this background,“integrity China” becomes the derived hope and dreams, butin the deep, it reflects the recognition for the rule-based system’s construction of order. Socialintegrity system should be the thoroughfare of human happiness and social harmony.