| 85 | 0 | 51 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
当今,世界百年未有之大变局加速演进,我国发展进入战略机遇和风险挑战并存、不确定难预料因素增多的时期,快速发展的一批新技术、新行业、新平台,催生了线上线下交互、形式形态各异、地区跨度极广、犯罪链条扩展迅速、打击处理困难的大量社会治理难题。这倒逼公安机关必须把大数据、人工智能等科技手段与公共安全治理深度融合,推动公共安全治理的精准化与科学化。传统治理模式以政府为主导,着重事后应对,存在对风险识别不充分、协同配合度不高等局限。“数治”通过将数据驱动、技术创新、协同治理、风险防控等与公共安全治理融合,优化治理体系与治理格局,但也面临着技术瓶颈、制度制约及伦理冲突等挑战。这就需要强化辩证思维、创新思维及系统思维,聚焦关键要素,构建高效、精准、协同的公共安全治理新局面。
Abstract:Changes unseen in a century are unfolding across the world at a faster pace. China has entered a period of development in which strategic opportunities, risks, and challenges are concurrent and uncertainties and unforeseen factors are rising. The rapid emergence of a range of new technologies, industries, and platforms has given rise to a plethora of social governance challenges characterized by online-offline interaction, diverse forms and patterns, extensive geographical reach, rapidly expanding criminal chains, and difficulties in investigation and enforcement. This situation compels public security organs to deeply integrate big data, artificial intelligence, and other technological means with public security governance, thereby promoting its precision and scientific advancement in governance. The traditional governance model is government-led and focuses on post-incident response. It is often characterized by inadequate risk identification and low levels of coordination among stakeholders. Data-enabled governance can optimize the governance system and structure by integrating data-driven approaches, technological innovation, collaborative governance, and risk prevention and control into public security governance. However, it also faces challenges including technological bottlenecks, institutional constraints, and ethical conflicts. Addressing these requires greater emphasis on dialectical, innovative, and systems thinking, so as to focus on key elements to build a new paradigm of public security governance that is efficient, precise, and collaborative.
[1]王锡锌.数治与法治:数字行政的法治约束[J].中国人民大学学报,2022,36(6):17-34.
[2]王秉,史志勇.大数据时代的公共安全风险治理新范式:《数据驱动的公共安全风险治理》荐读[J].情报科学,2025,43(1):199-201.
[3]马永坤.公共危机事件治理存在不足及其解决路径研究:以自组织理论为视角[J].四川警察学院学报,2024,36(4):84-96.
[4]马成龙,陶鲁.智慧公安背景下公共安全视频图像信息系统安装范围规范建构[J].中国人民警察大学学报,2025,41(4):48-54.
[5]邓世仑.社会风险预警与防控机制建设:一个社会燃烧理论的框架[J].中国人民警察大学学报,2024,40(3):31-37.
[6]吕志奎,易雅婷.数据驱动的城市公共安全风险协同治理机制探析[J].中国高校社会科学,2023,37(1):143-153.
[7]杨山林.重大公共危机治理中的应急警务:价值、困境与出路[J].中国人民警察大学学报,2023,39(5):50-56.
[8]宋慧宇.协作共治视角下公共安全网状治理结构研究[J].社会科学战线,2021,45(10):204-211.
[9]孙雪,孙宗国.重庆市公共安全治理的实践新困境与优化路径[J].重庆行政,2021,22(1):56-58.
[10]张梦茜,王超.大数据驱动的重大公共安全风险治理:内在逻辑与模式构建[J].甘肃行政学院学报,2020,18(4):37-45.
[11]吴玉霞,刘欢.数治幻觉:基层数字化治理中的效能悖论与生成机制:基于B市的案例研究[J].公共管理学报,2025,22(2):36-48.
[12]王昊,吴霞,杨抗抗.塑造人民导向的超大城市治理体系:北京接诉即办改革的价值呈现、逻辑机理与理论结晶[J].治理现代化研究,2025,41(3):41-47.
[13]朱婉菁,高小平.区块链技术驱动下的城市公共安全韧性治理:一种理论诠释[J].行政论坛,2023,30(2):101-110.
基本信息:
中图分类号:TP399;D63
引用信息:
[1]马永坤.“数治”视域下公共安全治理体系优化路径[J].中国人民警察大学学报,2026,42(02):38-45.
2026-02-25
2026-02-25