中国的社会信用体系在西方臭名昭著，其被刻板印象化为一个用于极权控制的无所不能的数字评分项目——尽管国内民众实际上很少感受到它的存在或实际影响。
China’s social credit system, stereotypically imagined as an all-powerful numerical scoring project for authoritarian control, has gained notoriety in the West – although people inside the country actually feel little of its presence or practical influence.
然而，在一项政府资助的研究中，中国的一名法学学者警告称，部署人工智能（AI）可能会将这一评级系统变成一个“大规模监控工具”。该论文于上个月发表在《四川师范大学学报》上。
In a government-funded study, however, a Chinese legal scholar warned that deploying artificial intelligence (AI) risked turning the rating system into a “large-scale surveillance tool”. The paper was published in the Journal of Sichuan Normal University last month.
作者林建兴指出，利用大数据和算法将公民活动转化为可量化指标的社会评级，可能会“强化政府机关的风险评估和自动化监管能力”。
Author Lin Jianxing noted that social rating, which uses big data and algorithms to translate citizens’ activities into quantifiable metrics, could “strengthen the risk assessment and automated regulatory capabilities of government agencies”.
林建兴是四川大学法学院的博士生，他表达了对以风险评估为代表的此类算法治理的担忧，认为这“可能引发不透明、大规模监控和歧视等问题”。该研究由四川省社会治理模式与制度创新实证研究项目资助。
Lin, a doctoral candidate at Sichuan University’s Law School, expressed concern that such algorithmic administration, typified by risk assessment, “could trigger issues such as opacity, large-scale surveillance and discrimination”. The research was funded by a project on empirical studies of social governance models and institutional innovation in Sichuan province.
根据林建兴的定义，社会评级是指行政机关利用大数据挖掘和预测算法，将人们的线上和线下活动转化为可量化分数。
According to Lin’s definition, social rating refers to administrative bodies using big data mining and predictive algorithms to convert people’s online and offline activities into quantifiable scores.
此举旨在预测个人的潜在行为和风险，从而对该个人做出重要决策。
This aims to predict an individual’s potential actions and risks, thereby making important decisions regarding that person.
研究人员指出，虽然高分或低分表面上似乎不会直接影响个人的权利和义务，但在现实中，它会影响他们在医疗、金融信贷和政府服务等领域受到的对待。
The researcher pointed out that while a high or low score might not appear to directly affect an individual’s rights and obligations on the surface, in reality, it influences the treatment they receive in areas such as healthcare, financial lending and government services.
研究中检视的“社会评级系统”属于中国更广为人知且备受争议的社会信用体系的更广泛框架之下。
The “social rating system” examined in the study falls under the broader framework of China’s better-known – and controversial – social credit system.
根据斯坦福大学网站去年发布的一篇文章摘录，中国的社会信用框架包含由不同机构运行的多项试验，而非单一的统一网络。
According to an article excerpt posted on Stanford University’s website last year, China’s social credit framework includes multiple experiments run by different agencies, rather than a single unified network.
文章称，这些可以分为四类，包括针对严重违法行为的黑名单和金融征信系统。
These can be categorised into four types, including blacklists for serious legal violations and a financial credit reporting system, according to the article.
另一类涉及由市政府运行的系统，这些系统收集行为数据并将奖励与惩罚结合起来——这呼应了林建兴讨论的机制。北京一直在推进人工智能在社会治理中的应用。
Another category involves municipal government-run systems that collect behavioural data and combine rewards with punishments – echoing the mechanisms discussed by Lin. Beijing has been advancing the application of AI in social governance.
国务院去年发布的一项行动计划呼吁在政府部门安全、稳妥、有序地推进人工智能，旨在打造一个“精准识别需求、主动规划服务、提供全智能处理”的公共服务新模式。例如，中部安徽省开发了一个动态社会救助监测平台。
An action plan released by the State Council last year called for the safe, steady and orderly advancement of AI in government sectors, aiming to create a new model of public service that “accurately identifies needs, proactively plans services and offers fully intelligent processing”. For instance, the central province of Anhui has developed a dynamic social assistance monitoring platform.
通过建立低收入人口信息数据库并促进各政府部门之间的数据共享，该平台旨在提升社会服务。
By building an information database of low-income populations and promoting data sharing among various government departments, it aims to boost social services.
然而，林建兴警告称，在信用体系中采用人工智能可能会带来某些风险。风险之一是算法的可靠性，它可能会受到所收集的个人数据质量和模型设计等因素的影响。
However, Lin warned that adopting AI within the credit system could entail certain risks. One risk is the reliability of the algorithms, which could be affected by factors such as the quality of collected individual data and model design.
他说，在缺乏严格的数据合规法规和监督机制的情况下，利用公民留下的各种数据足迹来创建精确的个人画像，可能会导致该机制“从风险管理工具演变为行为监控手段”。
In the absence of strict data compliance regulations and oversight mechanisms, using the diverse data footprints left by citizens to create precise profiles could cause the mechanism to “evolve from a risk management tool into a means of behavioural surveillance”, he said.
研究人员指出，评级系统为政府精准识别公民需求、预测风险和分配行政资源奠定了基础。
The researcher pointed out that the rating system lays the foundation for the government to accurately identify citizens’ needs, predict risks and allocate administrative resources.
不过林建兴指出，其有效运行很大程度上取决于两个因素：数据和评分算法的质量，以及行政机关行为的规范化。
Yet Lin noted that effective operation relied heavily on two factors: the quality of the data and scoring algorithms, and the standardisation of administrative organs’ behaviour.
中国的社会信用体系经常被描绘成一个单一的、可怕的工具，普通人的行为受到监视和评级，其方式影响到他们生活的方方面面。但斯坦福大学的文章对这些说法提出了异议。
China’s social credit system has often been portrayed as a uniform, frightening tool, where ordinary people’s behaviour is watched and rated in ways that affect all aspects of their lives. But the Stanford article challenged these narratives.
文章指出，中国只有极少数城市拥有此类地方系统，且该框架对政府雇员的奖励和监视比对普通公民更严厉，这反映了国家“整顿公众和自身代理人”的努力。
It pointed out that only a small fraction of cities in China had such local systems, and the framework rewarded and surveilled government employees more intensely than ordinary citizens, reflecting the state’s effort to “discipline both the public and its own agents”.
DOI: 10.13734/j.cnki.1000-5315.2026.0313
Doi: 10.13734/j.cnki.1000-5315.2026.0313 By Dannie Peng