大学社会捐赠机制研究
摘要
近年来,随着我国高等教育由精英化向大众化迈进,高校在校生人数激剧增加,大学圈地运动不断涌现,高校财务风险凸显,并不断恶化。如何拓宽资金来源,筹集更多资金,改善和提升办学条件,已成为各高校亟待解决的主要问题。
目前,随着高等教育管理体制改革的不断深入,各高校已经形成了多渠道筹集经费的格局。主要有三种来源:一是政府财政拨款。过去财政拨款在高校经费中占很大比重,但近年来呈下滑的趋势。从未来情况看,虽然国家对财政拨款的总量会有所增加,但投向的重点将是农村教育,尤其是农村义务教育,高等教育不可能有大的增加;二是学费。自上个世纪末我国高校并轨,实行交费上学以来,学费不断上涨,当前学费比1989年提高了25——50倍,学费占人均GDP的比例比日本还高出3倍,现在已经接近30%,超过专家论证的最高限度,社会各界对此也颇多微词。因此,可以说,大学今后以学费增收的潜力也很有限;三是校办产业和其他。我国校办企业大都集中在名校,一般普通高校没办企业,即使有,规模也小,且缺乏持续竞争力,高校概念股在遭受重创之后,其发展前景不容乐观。
综上所述,为化解债务危机,提升办学实力,高校在维持上述三种来源的基础上,有必要另辟蹊径,谋求社会捐赠。
然而,在高校里还弥漫着传统知识分子的清高和耻于言利的思想。一提起向社会募捐,不少人往往会不屑一顾,或嗤之以鼻,或难以启齿。他们认为募捐是乞讨,有失面子。多年来,这种观念尤如厚重的坚冰严严实实桎梏着人们的思想。可是,随着形势的变化,潜在于人们头脑中的面子观念,有时却恰恰成了国人心里痛苦的根源,正所谓是“死要面子活受罪”。向社会募捐绝不等于乞讨!因为,募捐而来的资金不是用于募捐者本人,而是用于大学的发展,用于神圣而崇高教育事业。实践证明:募捐不是示弱,而是高校实力的展现!
令人欣喜的是,在债务重压和开支剧增的煎熬下,自80年代暨南大学、安徽大学率先突出重围,公开向社会募捐以来,我国高校社会捐赠经过多年的发展,形势喜人,但后劲不足。具体表现在:我国有优良的捐赠传统,外部环境也得到了一定程度的改善,捐赠种类逐渐增多,捐赠规模缓慢扩大,高校募捐的意识也有所增强。但是宏观上,政策法规不配套,缺乏激励力度,政府引导和调控作用乏力;微观上,高校捐赠机构不健全,专业人员缺乏,内部管理不规范,监督渠道不畅通,主动募捐意识不强,募捐策略不科学,募捐理念落后等等。究其原因,关键在于政府不到位,高校主体地位不明确、主体作用未能充分发挥。因此,需要理清政府、高校、捐赠者之间角色和职能的关系。高校、捐赠者是主体,而政府是主体行为的引导者、调控者,三者相互作用,形成三位一体的结构框架。同时,构建激励机制、募捐机制、运作机制和监督机制,促使政府、高校、捐赠者之间良性互动,共同推动高校捐赠事业的持续、健康、有序发展,为我国高等教育作出重要贡献。
In recent years, with the development of higher education from elitism to popularization, and the number of school students is increasing rapidly. The enclosure movements of universities are continually emerging. So, these cause latent financial risk, debt question of universities have revealed day by day, and increasingly worsened. Some universities are overloaded; some even can't repay interests on loans. Therefore, how to widen fund origins, raise more funds and improve school conditions have been the emergent important problem for universities.
At present, with the deep development of management system of higher education, various universities have already formed fund-raising pattern of the multi-channels. Generally speaking there are three origins: First is government financial allocation, which accounts for a great proportion in the universities' funds. But, the average student' financial proportion has decreased continually in recent years, especially in some local universities it has decreased rapidly. From now on, the gross financial allocation may increase, but most of which will favor the rural compulsory education, it is impossible for higher education to get more funds. Second is tuition. Since the end of the last century, Chinese universities have implemented dual-track system. College students need to hand in tuition., and the tuition is increasing year by year, rising by 25-50 times than that of 1989.The ratio of tuition accounting for the per capita GDP is 3 times in comparison to that of Japan, and now it is close to 30%, it exceeds the highest level that experts demonstrated. In the meanwhile, people complain about it. So, there is little room for tuition increasing. Third is school-run enterprise. School-run enterprises most aggregate in those famous universities what ordinary universities don't have, even they have school-run enterprises that are small scale ones, which are lack of sustained competitive competence. As far as college concept stock suffers heavy losses its development outlook is not optimistic.
In summary, in order to resolve the debt crisis and improve universities' strength, colleges and universities have to seek social donation on the basis of keeping up the above three sources.
However, there are still filled with thoughts that traditional intellectuals in universities are ashamed to talk about money, when they mention to donation from society, many people tend to disregard, snort or be ashamed to open the mouth, they regard fund-raising as begging and they may lose face. For many years, this idea control people's thoughts tightly like thick ice. But as the situation changes,“face conception”in people's mind sometimes becomes the very root of suffering, as the proverb saying“face is important but it is suffered”. Fund-raising is not begging at all, because donations are not used for fund-raisers themselves but for the development of universities, for the sacred and noble education business. It is proved by practice that fund-raising is not a sign of weakness but the display of universities' strength.
Fortunately, under the press of debt and expenses soaring, in 1980s JiNan universities and AnHui universities firstly liberate mind, set up council to receive donations from the public. From then on, universities go on a long and difficult ice-breaking trip-----fund-raising from public.
Fund-raising has made great progress after many years' development, but it lacks stamina. For example, there is good tradition of donation, the environment of donation has been improved to some extent, kinds of donation have increased, its quantity also has enlarged and fund-raising awareness of universities has improved. However, from the macro level, policies and regulations don't match, government does not take incentive measures, and it is lack of government's guidance and regulation. From the micro level, fund-raising agencies in some universities are inadequate, there are lack of professional experts, the supervision channels are blocked, the awareness of active fund-raising is not strong, the ideas of fund-raising are backward and so on. There are some reasons for those that all levels of governments are not in place, the main body position of colleges and universities is ambiguous, and their main roles can't play fully. Therefore, it is necessary that definite roles and relations between government, universities and donators. Universities and donators should be main body while government is manager and regulator; they form a three-in ---one structural framework. In the meanwhile, it is important that we set up incentive mechanism, fund-raising mechanism, operation mechanism and supervision mechanism in order to prompt government; universities and donators interact, and jointly make fund-raising get a sustained, healthy and orderly development. These can contribute importantly to our county's higher education.
目前,随着高等教育管理体制改革的不断深入,各高校已经形成了多渠道筹集经费的格局。主要有三种来源:一是政府财政拨款。过去财政拨款在高校经费中占很大比重,但近年来呈下滑的趋势。从未来情况看,虽然国家对财政拨款的总量会有所增加,但投向的重点将是农村教育,尤其是农村义务教育,高等教育不可能有大的增加;二是学费。自上个世纪末我国高校并轨,实行交费上学以来,学费不断上涨,当前学费比1989年提高了25——50倍,学费占人均GDP的比例比日本还高出3倍,现在已经接近30%,超过专家论证的最高限度,社会各界对此也颇多微词。因此,可以说,大学今后以学费增收的潜力也很有限;三是校办产业和其他。我国校办企业大都集中在名校,一般普通高校没办企业,即使有,规模也小,且缺乏持续竞争力,高校概念股在遭受重创之后,其发展前景不容乐观。
综上所述,为化解债务危机,提升办学实力,高校在维持上述三种来源的基础上,有必要另辟蹊径,谋求社会捐赠。
然而,在高校里还弥漫着传统知识分子的清高和耻于言利的思想。一提起向社会募捐,不少人往往会不屑一顾,或嗤之以鼻,或难以启齿。他们认为募捐是乞讨,有失面子。多年来,这种观念尤如厚重的坚冰严严实实桎梏着人们的思想。可是,随着形势的变化,潜在于人们头脑中的面子观念,有时却恰恰成了国人心里痛苦的根源,正所谓是“死要面子活受罪”。向社会募捐绝不等于乞讨!因为,募捐而来的资金不是用于募捐者本人,而是用于大学的发展,用于神圣而崇高教育事业。实践证明:募捐不是示弱,而是高校实力的展现!
令人欣喜的是,在债务重压和开支剧增的煎熬下,自80年代暨南大学、安徽大学率先突出重围,公开向社会募捐以来,我国高校社会捐赠经过多年的发展,形势喜人,但后劲不足。具体表现在:我国有优良的捐赠传统,外部环境也得到了一定程度的改善,捐赠种类逐渐增多,捐赠规模缓慢扩大,高校募捐的意识也有所增强。但是宏观上,政策法规不配套,缺乏激励力度,政府引导和调控作用乏力;微观上,高校捐赠机构不健全,专业人员缺乏,内部管理不规范,监督渠道不畅通,主动募捐意识不强,募捐策略不科学,募捐理念落后等等。究其原因,关键在于政府不到位,高校主体地位不明确、主体作用未能充分发挥。因此,需要理清政府、高校、捐赠者之间角色和职能的关系。高校、捐赠者是主体,而政府是主体行为的引导者、调控者,三者相互作用,形成三位一体的结构框架。同时,构建激励机制、募捐机制、运作机制和监督机制,促使政府、高校、捐赠者之间良性互动,共同推动高校捐赠事业的持续、健康、有序发展,为我国高等教育作出重要贡献。
In recent years, with the development of higher education from elitism to popularization, and the number of school students is increasing rapidly. The enclosure movements of universities are continually emerging. So, these cause latent financial risk, debt question of universities have revealed day by day, and increasingly worsened. Some universities are overloaded; some even can't repay interests on loans. Therefore, how to widen fund origins, raise more funds and improve school conditions have been the emergent important problem for universities.
At present, with the deep development of management system of higher education, various universities have already formed fund-raising pattern of the multi-channels. Generally speaking there are three origins: First is government financial allocation, which accounts for a great proportion in the universities' funds. But, the average student' financial proportion has decreased continually in recent years, especially in some local universities it has decreased rapidly. From now on, the gross financial allocation may increase, but most of which will favor the rural compulsory education, it is impossible for higher education to get more funds. Second is tuition. Since the end of the last century, Chinese universities have implemented dual-track system. College students need to hand in tuition., and the tuition is increasing year by year, rising by 25-50 times than that of 1989.The ratio of tuition accounting for the per capita GDP is 3 times in comparison to that of Japan, and now it is close to 30%, it exceeds the highest level that experts demonstrated. In the meanwhile, people complain about it. So, there is little room for tuition increasing. Third is school-run enterprise. School-run enterprises most aggregate in those famous universities what ordinary universities don't have, even they have school-run enterprises that are small scale ones, which are lack of sustained competitive competence. As far as college concept stock suffers heavy losses its development outlook is not optimistic.
In summary, in order to resolve the debt crisis and improve universities' strength, colleges and universities have to seek social donation on the basis of keeping up the above three sources.
However, there are still filled with thoughts that traditional intellectuals in universities are ashamed to talk about money, when they mention to donation from society, many people tend to disregard, snort or be ashamed to open the mouth, they regard fund-raising as begging and they may lose face. For many years, this idea control people's thoughts tightly like thick ice. But as the situation changes,“face conception”in people's mind sometimes becomes the very root of suffering, as the proverb saying“face is important but it is suffered”. Fund-raising is not begging at all, because donations are not used for fund-raisers themselves but for the development of universities, for the sacred and noble education business. It is proved by practice that fund-raising is not a sign of weakness but the display of universities' strength.
Fortunately, under the press of debt and expenses soaring, in 1980s JiNan universities and AnHui universities firstly liberate mind, set up council to receive donations from the public. From then on, universities go on a long and difficult ice-breaking trip-----fund-raising from public.
Fund-raising has made great progress after many years' development, but it lacks stamina. For example, there is good tradition of donation, the environment of donation has been improved to some extent, kinds of donation have increased, its quantity also has enlarged and fund-raising awareness of universities has improved. However, from the macro level, policies and regulations don't match, government does not take incentive measures, and it is lack of government's guidance and regulation. From the micro level, fund-raising agencies in some universities are inadequate, there are lack of professional experts, the supervision channels are blocked, the awareness of active fund-raising is not strong, the ideas of fund-raising are backward and so on. There are some reasons for those that all levels of governments are not in place, the main body position of colleges and universities is ambiguous, and their main roles can't play fully. Therefore, it is necessary that definite roles and relations between government, universities and donators. Universities and donators should be main body while government is manager and regulator; they form a three-in ---one structural framework. In the meanwhile, it is important that we set up incentive mechanism, fund-raising mechanism, operation mechanism and supervision mechanism in order to prompt government; universities and donators interact, and jointly make fund-raising get a sustained, healthy and orderly development. These can contribute importantly to our county's higher education.
引文
①吴东民,董西明《非营利组织管理》北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003
②马伊里,杨团《公司与社会公益》.北京:华夏出版社,2002.
③Bremner,R.H. American Philanthropy[M].Chica-go: University of Chicago Press, 1987.
①罗公利,刘惠明《我国高校社会捐赠影响捐赠者决策的因素研究》《哈尔滨工业大学学报(社会科学版)》2005年第 05 期P80-85
① 姚俭建,JanetCollins《美国慈善事业的现状分析 : 一种比较视角《上海交通大学学报( 哲学社会科学版)》,2003,(1).
②王名编著《非营利组织管理概论》中国人民大学出版社,2002 年 7 月第 1 版,P205—206
①郭国庆《国外非营利机构筹资模式及启示》《.经济理论与经济管理》,2001,(12):22227.
②D·布鲁斯·约翰斯通《高等教育成本分担中的财政与政治》.新华文摘,2002,(5):1752177.
③詹德赫亚拉·B·G 提拉克.《亚太地区的高等教育与社会发展》.新华文摘,2003,(9):1722178.,
①P.green,rmccleland. Taxes and charitable giving [J].National Tax Journal, 1999,(3):4332453.
② Msmcpherson,Moschapiro.Financingundergrad2uateeducation:designingnationalpolicies[J].NationalTaxJournal,1997,(3):50.
①蒋建华《大学是以志愿求公益的社会非营利组织》《中国教育报》2005201221.
① Bruce Johnstone.A political culture of giving and the philanthropic support of public higher educationininternationalperspective[EB/0L].http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/IntHigherEdFinance/Philanthropy.2005-3-22/2005-4-20.
①Ranking of Participating Institutions by Total Market Value as of FYE 2002, NACUBO
①FinanceBill2002.http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/consultations_and_legislation/finance_bill_2002/consult_finance_index2002.cfm.
②Tax Guide 2002 for Individuals, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury,75. 165.
③Tax Guide 2002 for Companies, Internal Revenue Service Department of the Treasury. 17.
④Willam Gale & Joel Slemrod: Resurrecting the EstateTax ;Policy Briefing, The Broking Institution, June 2000, 2. 6.
①陈国良《教育财政国际比较》北京:高等教育出版社,2002,P41
①http://www.pkuef.org/data/detail.php?id=464 2006-05-31
② 见北京大学教育基金会 2004 年度捐赠名单
③http://education.163.com 2005-11-15 11:55:38 中国青年报(北京)原春琳
①Kelly, Jim.Taxchange to boost university endowment’, Financial Times[J].London(UK):Dec2,1996:6.
②Tax Guide 2002 for Individuals, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury,75. 165.
③Tax Guide 2002 for Companies, Internal Revenue Service Department of the Treasury. 17.
①Willam Gale & Joel Slemrod: Resurrecting the Estate Tax;Policy Briefing, The Broking Institution, June 2000, 2. 6.
(1)朱小梅《教育捐赠行为的伦理探析》《教育发展研究》2003 年 12 期
(2)朱小梅《略论教育捐赠与学术自由的关系》《江苏高教》2002 年 1 期
(3)李巧针《美国大学的捐赠收入停滞不前》《世界教育信息》2004 年 6 期
(4)徐玲《美国高等教育经费捐赠的特点及启示》《阴山学刊》2002 年 1 期
(5)孙萍,吕志娟《慈善事业发展中的政府角色定位》《中州学刊》2006 年 2期
(6)田凯《非协调约束与组织运作——一个研究中国慈善组织与政府关系的理论框架》《中国行政管理》2004 年 5 期
(7)王绽蕊《美国高等教育巨额匿名捐赠现象浅析》《比较教育研究》2004 年11 期
(8)詹志斌《美国高等教育捐赠筹资新特点及对我国的启示》《世界教育信息》2005 年 9 期
(9)张云《美国加州大学系统捐赠基金运作实践及启示》《比较教育研究》2004年 6 期
(10)孟东军,张美凤,俞锋华《社会捐赠在我国高考成本分担中的现状分析》《高等教育研究》2002 年 6 期
(11)罗公利,李怀祖《试论高校社会捐赠》《东岳论丛》2005 年 6 期
(12)蒋国河《推进高等教育捐赠事业:价值和制度创新》《江苏高教》2005 年第 6 期
(13)何酉宁,何莎莎《企业教育捐赠的公益行为分析》《乐山师范学院》2005年第 4 期
(14)程术希《美国佛罗里达大学捐赠发展管理与启示》《技术经济与管理研究》2005 年第 2 期
(15)罗公利,刘惠明《我国高校社会捐赠影响捐赠者决策的因素研究》《哈尔滨工业大学学报(社会科学版)》2005 年第 3 期
(16)罗公利,孙在东《高校社会捐赠的博弈分析》《化工高等教育》2005 年第02 期
(17)程介明《大学筹款与捐赠文化》《上海教育》2005 年第 7A 期
(18)王福友,段君莉《大学的捐赠基金研究》《大学教育科学》2005 年第 03期
(19)王任达,刘春生《发展大学基金会,促进大学教育捐赠》《内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版)》2005 年 11 期
(20)罗公利《高教成本分担制度中的社会捐赠》《中国海洋大学学报(社会科学版)》2004 年第 03 期
(21)左成慈《高等院校的募捐战略》《南通师范学院学报(社科版)》2002 年第02 期
(22)李承先《高校捐赠融资经常化工作探微》《交通高教研究》2003 年第 06期
(23)朱小梅《教育捐赠面临的道德困惑及其规范对策》《江苏高教》2004 年第02 期
(25)吴东民,董西明编《非营利组织管理》北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003
(26)史密斯—巴克林协会著,孙志伟,罗陈霞译《非营利管理》(第 2 版)北京:中信出版社,2004
(27)[美]詹姆斯 P 盖拉特著,邓国胜译《21 世纪非营利组织管理》北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003
(28)王名著《非营利组织管理概论》北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002
②马伊里,杨团《公司与社会公益》.北京:华夏出版社,2002.
③Bremner,R.H. American Philanthropy[M].Chica-go: University of Chicago Press, 1987.
①罗公利,刘惠明《我国高校社会捐赠影响捐赠者决策的因素研究》《哈尔滨工业大学学报(社会科学版)》2005年第 05 期P80-85
① 姚俭建,JanetCollins《美国慈善事业的现状分析 : 一种比较视角《上海交通大学学报( 哲学社会科学版)》,2003,(1).
②王名编著《非营利组织管理概论》中国人民大学出版社,2002 年 7 月第 1 版,P205—206
①郭国庆《国外非营利机构筹资模式及启示》《.经济理论与经济管理》,2001,(12):22227.
②D·布鲁斯·约翰斯通《高等教育成本分担中的财政与政治》.新华文摘,2002,(5):1752177.
③詹德赫亚拉·B·G 提拉克.《亚太地区的高等教育与社会发展》.新华文摘,2003,(9):1722178.,
①P.green,rmccleland. Taxes and charitable giving [J].National Tax Journal, 1999,(3):4332453.
② Msmcpherson,Moschapiro.Financingundergrad2uateeducation:designingnationalpolicies[J].NationalTaxJournal,1997,(3):50.
①蒋建华《大学是以志愿求公益的社会非营利组织》《中国教育报》2005201221.
① Bruce Johnstone.A political culture of giving and the philanthropic support of public higher educationininternationalperspective[EB/0L].http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/IntHigherEdFinance/Philanthropy.2005-3-22/2005-4-20.
①Ranking of Participating Institutions by Total Market Value as of FYE 2002, NACUBO
①FinanceBill2002.http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/consultations_and_legislation/finance_bill_2002/consult_finance_index2002.cfm.
②Tax Guide 2002 for Individuals, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury,75. 165.
③Tax Guide 2002 for Companies, Internal Revenue Service Department of the Treasury. 17.
④Willam Gale & Joel Slemrod: Resurrecting the EstateTax ;Policy Briefing, The Broking Institution, June 2000, 2. 6.
①陈国良《教育财政国际比较》北京:高等教育出版社,2002,P41
①http://www.pkuef.org/data/detail.php?id=464 2006-05-31
② 见北京大学教育基金会 2004 年度捐赠名单
③http://education.163.com 2005-11-15 11:55:38 中国青年报(北京)原春琳
①Kelly, Jim.Taxchange to boost university endowment’, Financial Times[J].London(UK):Dec2,1996:6.
②Tax Guide 2002 for Individuals, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury,75. 165.
③Tax Guide 2002 for Companies, Internal Revenue Service Department of the Treasury. 17.
①Willam Gale & Joel Slemrod: Resurrecting the Estate Tax;Policy Briefing, The Broking Institution, June 2000, 2. 6.
(1)朱小梅《教育捐赠行为的伦理探析》《教育发展研究》2003 年 12 期
(2)朱小梅《略论教育捐赠与学术自由的关系》《江苏高教》2002 年 1 期
(3)李巧针《美国大学的捐赠收入停滞不前》《世界教育信息》2004 年 6 期
(4)徐玲《美国高等教育经费捐赠的特点及启示》《阴山学刊》2002 年 1 期
(5)孙萍,吕志娟《慈善事业发展中的政府角色定位》《中州学刊》2006 年 2期
(6)田凯《非协调约束与组织运作——一个研究中国慈善组织与政府关系的理论框架》《中国行政管理》2004 年 5 期
(7)王绽蕊《美国高等教育巨额匿名捐赠现象浅析》《比较教育研究》2004 年11 期
(8)詹志斌《美国高等教育捐赠筹资新特点及对我国的启示》《世界教育信息》2005 年 9 期
(9)张云《美国加州大学系统捐赠基金运作实践及启示》《比较教育研究》2004年 6 期
(10)孟东军,张美凤,俞锋华《社会捐赠在我国高考成本分担中的现状分析》《高等教育研究》2002 年 6 期
(11)罗公利,李怀祖《试论高校社会捐赠》《东岳论丛》2005 年 6 期
(12)蒋国河《推进高等教育捐赠事业:价值和制度创新》《江苏高教》2005 年第 6 期
(13)何酉宁,何莎莎《企业教育捐赠的公益行为分析》《乐山师范学院》2005年第 4 期
(14)程术希《美国佛罗里达大学捐赠发展管理与启示》《技术经济与管理研究》2005 年第 2 期
(15)罗公利,刘惠明《我国高校社会捐赠影响捐赠者决策的因素研究》《哈尔滨工业大学学报(社会科学版)》2005 年第 3 期
(16)罗公利,孙在东《高校社会捐赠的博弈分析》《化工高等教育》2005 年第02 期
(17)程介明《大学筹款与捐赠文化》《上海教育》2005 年第 7A 期
(18)王福友,段君莉《大学的捐赠基金研究》《大学教育科学》2005 年第 03期
(19)王任达,刘春生《发展大学基金会,促进大学教育捐赠》《内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版)》2005 年 11 期
(20)罗公利《高教成本分担制度中的社会捐赠》《中国海洋大学学报(社会科学版)》2004 年第 03 期
(21)左成慈《高等院校的募捐战略》《南通师范学院学报(社科版)》2002 年第02 期
(22)李承先《高校捐赠融资经常化工作探微》《交通高教研究》2003 年第 06期
(23)朱小梅《教育捐赠面临的道德困惑及其规范对策》《江苏高教》2004 年第02 期
(25)吴东民,董西明编《非营利组织管理》北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003
(26)史密斯—巴克林协会著,孙志伟,罗陈霞译《非营利管理》(第 2 版)北京:中信出版社,2004
(27)[美]詹姆斯 P 盖拉特著,邓国胜译《21 世纪非营利组织管理》北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003
(28)王名著《非营利组织管理概论》北京:中国人民大学出版社,2002