2025年7月11日 周五
The research on government regulation of electric bicycle sharing in China
CSTR:
Author:
Clc Number:

D922.181

  • Article
  • | |
  • Metrics
  • |
  • Reference [32]
  • |
  • Related [20]
  • | | |
  • Comments
    Abstract:

    Electric bicycle sharing is an innovation that combines traditional electric bicycles with the "Internet+" technology, but it has been hampered everywhere. At the macro-control level, the government is implementing an industrial policy that does not encourage the development of electric bicycle sharing at present, and the formation of this policy is affected by the four factors of public safety, environmental pollution, national standards, and regulatory concepts. However, based on the protection of citizens' right to travel, the fulfillment of the responsibilities for survival and care, the development of sharing economy, and the need to accommodate prudential supervision, the government should implement industrial policies that encourage development. At the micro regulatory level, government regulation of electric bicycle sharing through administrative legislation and administrative law enforcement is facing the problem of insufficient legitimacy:the discouraging provisions are contrary to the Legislation Law, the enforcement measures violate the principle of public law and leaving unchecked is suspected as administrative inaction. There is no doubt that the operation of electric bicycle sharing requires effective government supervision. In order to promote the healthy development of electric bicycle sharing, a perfect supervision system should be constructed from four aspects, such as the basis of supervision, the subject of supervision, the principle of supervision and the measures of supervision.

    Reference
    [1] 卢国强.共享电动单车不符上牌标准,北京官方紧急叫停[EB/OL].(2017-02-18)[2018-08-31].http://news.sina.com.cn/o/2017-02-18/doc-ifyarrcc7799917.shtml.
    [2] 李荣华.深圳交警紧急叫停共享电单车[EB/OL].(2017-01-07)[2018-08-31].http://news.163.com/17/0107/07/CA5MATKG00018AOP.html.
    [3] 魏一骏.杭州叫停"共享电动车"[EB/OL].(2017-09-17)[2018-08-31].http://news.xinhuanet.com/2017-09/17/c_1121677260.htm.
    [4] 计思佳.海口叫停共享电动车[N].海南日报,2018-01-26(08).
    [5] 网易网.南京禁止共享单车投放:究竟为了什么?[EB/OL].(2017-08-07)[2018-08-31].http://news.163.com/17/0807/10/CR7RRQDV000197V6.html.
    [6] 中央人民政府网.交通运输部解读《关于鼓励和规范互联网租赁自行车发展的指导意见》[EB/OL].(2017-08-04)[2018-08-31].http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2017-08/04/content_5215971.htm.
    [7] 金姬.洗牌前夜的共享电单车[J].新民周刊,2017(22):14-15.
    [8] 邱本.经济法专论[M].北京:法律出版社,2014:590.
    [9] 贾锋.论公民出行权保障的国家义务[J].理论月刊,2013(6):105-107.
    [10] 毛雷尔.行政法学总论[M].高家伟,译.北京:法律出版社,2000:17.
    [11] 国家信息中心分享经济研究中心.中国共享经济发展年度报告2018[R/OL].(2017-09-17)[2018-08-31].http://www.sic.gov.cn/News/568/8873.htm.
    [12] 李万祥."分享经济"亟需纳入规范发展轨道[N].经济日报,2016-09-21(14).
    [13] 姜明安.行政法与行政诉讼法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2015:162.
    [14] 邓小平文选(第二卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1994:147.
    [15] 黄学贤.行政法中的信赖保护原则[J].法学,2002(5):21-23.
    [16] 翁岳生.行政法(上册)[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2009:166.
    [17] 李昌麒.经济法理念研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2009:190.
    [18] 崔卓兰,蔡立东.从压制型行政模式到回应型行政模式[J].法学研究,2002(4):65-67.
    [19] 刘风景.法不溯及既往原则的法治意义[J].新疆师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2013(2):18-19.
    [20] 李佳.西安市交委办督促落实共享电单车"退市令"[N].三秦都市报,2017-12-14(A07).
    [21] 张翔.财产权的社会义务[J].中国社会科学,2012(9):109-110.
    [22] 胡建淼.行政法学[M].北京:法律出版社,2010:55.
    [23] 陈家静.尽管春雨连绵共享电单车照样"上火"[N].江淮晨报,2018-03-20(A12).
    [24] 周佑勇.行政不作为构成要件的展开[J].中国法学,2001(5):64-66.
    [25] 余靖雯.教育投入、分权与经济增长[M].北京:中国经济出版社,2016:14.
    [26] 范一青.西方经济学概论[M].南京:南京大学出版社,2015:136.
    [27] 刘心.共享电单车亮相洛阳,2元能骑半小时[N].洛阳晚报,2017-12-05(A10).
    [28] 席涛.法律、监管与市场[J].政法论坛,2011(3):48-50.
    [29] 罗豪才.为了权利与权力的平衡——法治中国建设与软法之治[M].北京:五洲传播出版社,2016:225.
    [30] 施立栋,余凌云.电动自行车的治理[J].浙江学刊,2015(2):166-168.
    [31] 郭道晖.权力的多元化与社会化[J].法学研究,2001(1):3-5.
    [32] 尹少成."互联网+"与政府监管转型:机遇、挑战与对策[J].法学杂志,2016(6):56-58.
    Cited by
    Comments
    Comments
    分享到微博
    Submit
Get Citation

聂帅钧.共享电单车的政府监管研究[J].重庆大学学报社会科学版,2019,25(1):162~177

Copy
Share
Article Metrics
  • Abstract:1321
  • PDF: 1575
  • HTML: 1481
  • Cited by: 0
History
  • Revised:September 02,2018
  • Online: January 08,2019
Article QR Code