公职与非公职人员经济犯罪比较研究

发布时间：2018-07-10 01:17

  本文选题：公职人员 + 非公职人员　； 参考：《太原科技大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：经济犯罪作为社会进步的巨大毒瘤，时刻威胁着经济和社会的健康发展。公职人员作为国家职权的重要执行者，掌握和拥有大量的公共资源和相对的控制权，其经济犯罪严重影响着干群关系和执政党的地位。民营企业家作为社会经济发展过程中的领军人物，其经济犯罪不仅造成巨大的经济损失，影响员工就业，而且破坏正常的经济秩序。大量案例表明，两者的经济犯罪大多都是以经济利益为主要目标，并且均不同程度的存在官商勾结、权钱交易的现象，虽有显著差异，，但也存在一定的联系。因此，本文以对比的视角对两者的经济犯罪进行研究，得出以下结论。 （1）通过搜集整理近年来部分经济犯罪的案例，对个体和犯罪属性的多个指标进行描述性统计分析，得出目前我国公职人员和以民营企业家为代表的非公职人员经济犯罪特征：官商勾结现象严重，尤其在公职人员经济犯罪中更常见；公职人员的经济犯罪类型主要为受贿，多发于政府机关和国土城建等权力和资源集中的垄断部门，而非公职人员的犯罪则主要集中在房地产和金融业，案发原因多是融资和企业经营，体现了公职人员权力缺乏监督滥用权力获利，而非公职人员则由于管理缺失、弄虚作假、非法经营牟取暴利等特征。 （2）在对四个公职与非公职人员经济犯罪典型案例分析的基础上，结合行为管理科学的理论成果得出不法人员经济犯罪的行为机理；根据经济犯罪行为机理和目前对公职与非公职人员经济犯罪研究现状的总结和概括，从宏观、中观、微观三个层面对两者经济犯罪的影响因素进行全面的对比分析；最后将公职人员可观测的六个个体属性指标和犯罪类型进行Logistics回归，结果表明：成长环境、受教育程度、年龄、级别以及公职类型会影响公职人员的受贿犯罪类型，影响力大小依次为：级别、受教育程度、成长环境、年龄和公职类型。 （3）基于前景理论对两者的经济犯罪决策过程进行对比分析，结果显示：两者的经济犯罪是风险追求的结果，且非公职人员比公职人员更冒险，参考点更高，犯罪金额更多；在特定的损失厌恶系数和监督惩罚条件下，增加公职人员既有财产和未来收益，对于减少腐败和和降低其危害更加有效，但不总是有效的；只有加强监督惩罚机制，才能从根本上抑制两者的经济犯罪；损失厌恶系数是影响两者经济犯罪的共同因素，但控制公职人员的损失厌恶系数更可行。 （4）在分析了房地产洗钱风险和房地产开发、交易两环节的主要洗钱手段之后，对公职和非公职人员的洗钱行为进行对比和原因分析，结果显示：不法公职人员注重安全效用，常常选取能在短时间内完成的房地产交易活动洗钱，具有较强的隐蔽性；而非公职人员注重则注重收益最大化的效用，主要通过将非法资金注入企业经营，通过虚假报账的方式进行洗钱，具有较强的欺骗性。 最后针对两者经济犯罪的共同特征和各自不同的犯罪特征提出对策建议，希望可以为相关部门预防和减少经济犯罪提供决策支持。
[Abstract]:As an important performer of social progress , economic crime threatens the healthy development of economy and society . As an important performer in the development of society , public officials have a lot of public resources and relative control , and their economic crimes have a serious impact on the relationship between cadres and groups and the status of the ruling party .

( 1 ) By collecting and arranging some cases of economic crimes in recent years , a descriptive statistical analysis of multiple indexes of individual and crime attributes is carried out , and it is concluded that the phenomenon of economic crime of non - public officials represented by public officials and private entrepreneurs in our country is serious , especially in public official economic crimes ;
The types of economic crimes of public officials are mainly passive bribery . The crimes of non - public officials mainly focus on real estate and finance , and the reasons for non - public officials are mainly in real estate and finance industry .

( 2 ) Based on the analysis of the typical cases of four official and non - public official economic crimes , the author derives the behavioral mechanism of illegal personnel economic crime based on the theoretical results of behavioral management science .
According to the mechanism of economic crimes and the current research situation of public and non - public official economic crimes , a comprehensive comparative analysis is made on the factors of economic crime from macro , meso and microcosmic levels .
Finally , six individual attribute indexes and types of crime can be observed by public officials . The results show that : the growth environment , the degree of education , the age , the level and the type of public service can influence the types of bribery crime of public officials . The size of influence is in turn : level , degree of education , growth environment , age and public service type .

( 3 ) Based on the comparative analysis of the economic crime decision - making process of the two , the results show that the economic crime is the result of the risk pursuit , and the non - public officer is more risk - taking than the public officer , the reference point is higher and the crime amount is more ;
Increasing the existing property and future earnings of public officials under specific loss aversion and supervisory penalties is not always effective in reducing corruption and reducing its harm ;
Only by strengthening the supervision and punishment mechanism can the economic crime of the two can be fundamentally suppressed ;
Loss aversion coefficient is a common factor affecting both economic crimes , but it is more feasible to control the loss aversion coefficient of public officials .

( 4 ) After analyzing the risk of real estate money laundering and the main money laundering in real estate development and transaction , the author compares and analyzes the money laundering behavior of public and non - public officials .
Non - public officials pay attention to the utility of maximization of earnings , mainly by injecting illegal funds into enterprises , and carrying out money - laundering through false accounting .

Finally , the author puts forward some suggestions on the common characteristics of the two economic crimes and the different characteristics of the crime , and hopes that the decision - making support can be provided for the prevention and reduction of economic crime in the relevant departments .
【学位授予单位】：太原科技大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D630.9

【参考文献】

中国期刊全文数据库 前10条

1 黄友;张腾文;;双重预算约束下的消费者最优选择[J];财政研究;2007年08期

2 魏景柱,关开澄,李春华;效用现值模型及其在反腐败行为中的应用[J];大庆石油学院学报;2004年02期

3 张涛;;政府高官受贿腐败的特征——基于76个受贿罪案的实证研究[J];当代中国政治研究报告;2011年00期

4 谢端纯;;房地产行业反洗钱可疑资金监测模型研究[J];南方金融;2010年01期

5 左运光;;建立房地产行业反洗钱监测和管理机制的实务性研究[J];南方金融;2011年09期

6 龙朝阳;田银华;;腐败行为及其治理选择——基于前景理论的研究[J];公共管理学报;2008年04期

7 严立新;;中国反洗钱战略(2013～2018)的升级转型及其实施机制的建立[J];管理世界;2013年09期

8 吴航;;房地产领域经济犯罪现状透析[J];公安研究;2008年08期

9 张亚明;黄梅丽;;基于公共选择理论的腐败治理制度研究[J];内蒙古社会科学(汉文版);2011年03期

10 刘利利;薛耀文;;高低级别公职人员经济犯罪隐蔽性比较研究[J];经济与管理;2012年09期

中国博士学位论文全文数据库 前1条

1 李勇;当代中国腐败问题研究[D];东北大学;2008年

本文编号：2111453