Affiliation:
1. University of Cologne, Germany
Abstract
China’s social credit system (SCS) formalizes reputational regulation, thereby challenging traditional remedial paths. It adds trust assessments and their dissemination to the regulatory repertoire of Chinese state agencies across all realms. This use of adverse publicity, however, entails the loss of the agency’s control over the scope and intensity of the punishment as the punitive action is realized by information recipients, rather than the agency itself. Traditional legal controls are not fit for shaming. We map how the SCS innovates public regulation by implementing a strategy for regulatory shaming from the central level. In a second step, we discuss its consequences, specifically, how undue damages are remedied. Legal remedies for social credit shaming measures are regularly denied, as their position in the law is unclear. Other existing remedial channels likewise do not consider the particularities of shame sanctions such as irreversibility. Social credit reputational regulation might best be controlled by formulating an agency practice that retains control over the scope of punishment.
Subject
Sociology and Political Science,History,Geography, Planning and Development
Reference144 articles.
1. Arsène Séverine (2019) “China’s social credit system: a chimera with real claws.” Ifri.org, Nov. 29. https://www.ifri.org/en/publications/notes-de-lifri/asie-visions/chinas-social-credit-system-chimera-real-claws.
2. Responsive Regulation
3. Beijing First Intermediate Court 北京市第一中级人民法院 (2019) “行政裁定书京01行终954号” (Administrative judgment no. 954). Oct. 9.
4. Beijing Municipal Bureau of Culture and Tourism 北京市文化和旅游局 (2020) “北京市旅游市场黑名单管理办法(试行)” (Beijing tourism market blacklist management draft measures). Dec. 9.
5. More Than You Wanted to Know
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献