论文部分内容阅读
布雷顿森林机构一直被视为国际金融体系的象征,在国际金融事务中发挥举足轻重的作用。但是,本轮金融危机的爆发凸显了机构保护金融稳定的不得力,使其再次遭受合法性赤字的指责。国际社会对布雷顿森林机构的批判主要集中在三个方面:组织程序的民主性、决策内容的公正性和问责路径的有效性,进而否定布雷顿森林机构管理行为的合法性。然而,在对合法性判断标准进行较为深入的分析后可以发现,布雷顿森林机构的合法性并非想象的那么脆弱,国际社会对它们某些方面的质疑过于片面。但不可否认的是,布雷顿森林机构仍存在一定程度的合法性赤字,需要采取相应措施加以完善,如增加发展中国家在机构中的代表性,提高决策机制的透明度和参与度,将机构规则具体化、法典化,填补布雷顿森林机构治理与成员国内部治理之间的断层,设立私人—国际金融机构争端解决机制。
The Bretton Woods institutions have long been regarded as a symbol of the international financial system and have played a pivotal role in international financial affairs. However, the outbreak of the current financial crisis has highlighted the institution’s ineffectiveness in protecting financial stability and the accusation that it has again suffered a legal deficit. The critique of the Bretton Woods institutions by the international community mainly focuses on three aspects: the democratization of organizational procedures, the fairness of the decision-making content and the validity of the accountability pathways, which in turn negate the legitimacy of the Bretton Woods institutions management. However, a more in-depth analysis of the criterion of legality shows that the legitimacy of the Bretton Woods institutions is not so weak as imagined and the international community has questioned some aspects of them in an overly one-sided manner. However, it is undeniable that there is still a certain degree of legitimacy deficit in the Bretton Woods institutions that needs to be corrected. For example, it can increase the representation of developing countries in their institutions and enhance the transparency and participation of decision-making mechanisms. Specific and codified to fill the gap between the governance of Bretton Woods institutions and the internal governance of Member States and the establishment of a private-international dispute settlement mechanism for international financial institutions.