本文關(guān)鍵詞： 公益類國(guó)有企業(yè) 公益性 界定 規(guī)制 治理模式　出處：《浙江大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：本文分四個(gè)部分探討了我國(guó)公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)的界定及治理模式的問(wèn)題。第一部分:我國(guó)公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)的界定。該部分內(nèi)容首先從我國(guó)國(guó)有企業(yè)概念出發(fā),通過(guò)對(duì)相關(guān)觀點(diǎn)的引述,引出公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)的概念。同時(shí),結(jié)合公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)改革的政策依據(jù),對(duì)我國(guó)公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)的概念進(jìn)行梳理;其次,通過(guò)對(duì)關(guān)于公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)的政策依據(jù)及觀點(diǎn)梳理,歸納出公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)的基本特征;再次,從行業(yè)界定入手,比照域外國(guó)有企業(yè)所屬行業(yè),考察國(guó)內(nèi)地方國(guó)有企業(yè)分類做法,嘗試對(duì)我國(guó)公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)所屬行業(yè)進(jìn)行具體羅列舉例。第二部分:我國(guó)對(duì)公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)治理的實(shí)踐及存在的問(wèn)題。該部分內(nèi)容從檢視我國(guó)現(xiàn)行立法出發(fā),提出我國(guó)現(xiàn)行關(guān)于國(guó)有企業(yè)的立法并沒(méi)有從功能上進(jìn)行分類規(guī)制的現(xiàn)狀及其弊害。并進(jìn)而從理論界有關(guān)功能區(qū)分的探討成果,政策層面的思路明確及實(shí)務(wù)需求,域外成功實(shí)踐的角度出發(fā),得出區(qū)分規(guī)制公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)與非公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)已勢(shì)在必行的結(jié)論。第三部分:域外法的經(jīng)驗(yàn)及對(duì)我國(guó)的借鑒。筆者在該部分內(nèi)容中選取了具有代表性的大陸法系的法國(guó)、德國(guó)、日本、韓國(guó)和英美法系的美國(guó)五個(gè)國(guó)家,整理了該五個(gè)國(guó)家關(guān)于國(guó)有企業(yè)的法律規(guī)制和治理模式現(xiàn)狀,并歸納出共性以供我國(guó)公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)治理借鑒之用。第四部分:我國(guó)公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)治理模式的思考。此部分內(nèi)容是筆者在本文中重點(diǎn)探討的內(nèi)容。筆者從現(xiàn)有政策對(duì)公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)治理模式的要求入手,結(jié)合在第三部分中提出的現(xiàn)存弊害逐一給出了相應(yīng)的細(xì)化建議,尤其著重關(guān)于董事會(huì)、監(jiān)事會(huì)、經(jīng)理層的組成,相互之間的獨(dú)立性,與其他組織機(jī)構(gòu)之間的關(guān)系,以及高管的選聘、激勵(lì),有針對(duì)性的績(jī)效考核體系的建立等治理模式核心問(wèn)題的探討�；诖�,再進(jìn)而對(duì)公益類國(guó)有企業(yè)的治理模式與普通的公司企業(yè)治理模式的區(qū)別進(jìn)行了概括論述。
[Abstract]:This paper discusses the definition and governance model of public interest state-owned enterprises in China in four parts. The first part: the definition of public welfare state-owned enterprises. This part begins with the concept of state-owned enterprises in China. By quoting the relevant viewpoints, the concept of public interest state-owned enterprises is introduced. At the same time, combining with the policy basis of the reform of public welfare state-owned enterprises, the concept of public welfare state-owned enterprises in our country is combed. Secondly, the basic characteristics of public interest state-owned enterprises are summarized by combing the policy basis and viewpoint of public interest state-owned enterprises. Thirdly, starting with the definition of the industry, comparing with the industries belonging to the foreign state-owned enterprises, this paper investigates the classification practices of the local state-owned enterprises in China. The second part: the practice and existing problems of the governance of public interest state-owned enterprises in China. This part of the content from the view of the current legislation of our country. This paper points out that the current legislation on state-owned enterprises in China has not functionally regulated the status quo and harm of classification, and then from the theoretical circles on the functional division of the research results, the policy level of thinking and practical needs. From the perspective of successful practice abroad. Draw the conclusion that it is imperative to distinguish the regulation and regulation of state-owned enterprises of public interest and non-public enterprises. Part three:. The experience of the extraterritorial law and its reference to our country. In this part, the author chooses the representative civil law system France. Germany, Japan, South Korea and the United States, Anglo-American legal system of five countries, collate the legal regulation and governance of state-owned enterprises in these five countries. And generality is summed up to be used for reference in the governance of public interest state-owned enterprises in China. Part 4th:. This part is the focus of the discussion in this paper. The author starts with the requirements of the existing policies on the governance model of public interest state-owned enterprises. Combined with the existing harm in the third part of the proposed one by one to give the corresponding detailed recommendations, especially on the board of directors, board of supervisors, the composition of managers, the independence of each other. The relationship with other organizations, as well as the selection and appointment of senior executives, incentives, the establishment of targeted performance appraisal system and other governance model core issues. Based on this. Then, the difference between the public enterprise governance model and the common corporate governance model is discussed.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：F276.1;F271

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 周娜;莊玲玲;;分類推進(jìn)國(guó)有企業(yè)改革研究[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2016年31期

2 白金亞;;全面深化改革背景下國(guó)有公共企業(yè)法律規(guī)制研究[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)界;2016年06期

3 劉瑛;;美國(guó)審計(jì)署國(guó)有企業(yè)審計(jì)情況及借鑒[J];中國(guó)內(nèi)部審計(jì);2016年07期

4 許寧舒;;法國(guó)審計(jì)法院國(guó)有企業(yè)審計(jì)情況與借鑒[J];審計(jì)研究;2016年03期

5 劉利;;中美國(guó)有企業(yè)信息披露比較研究及其對(duì)國(guó)有企業(yè)監(jiān)管的啟示[J];北京郵電大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2016年02期

6 王衛(wèi)中;;國(guó)有企業(yè)改革三個(gè)層面的框架設(shè)計(jì)[J];東岳論叢;2016年03期

7 譚秋霞;;日本國(guó)企改革的法律分析及對(duì)我國(guó)國(guó)企混改的啟示[J];法學(xué)論壇;2016年01期

8 肖林林;;法國(guó)政府對(duì)國(guó)有企業(yè)的管理模式對(duì)我國(guó)的啟示[J];經(jīng)營(yíng)與管理;2015年07期

9 劉戒驕;;從三個(gè)聯(lián)邦企業(yè)看美國(guó)的國(guó)有經(jīng)濟(jì)和壟斷行業(yè)[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)研究參考;2014年57期

10 姜影;;法國(guó)國(guó)有企業(yè)管理體制改革的歷程及成效[J];法學(xué);2014年06期

，

本文編號(hào)：1456045