以信任为导向的算法解释机制:电商平台价格算法风险的治理研究
A Trust-Oriented Algorithm Explanation Mechanism: A Governance Study on Price Algorithm Risks of E-Commerce Platforms
摘要: 电子商务平台利用价格算法提高运作效率的同时,也带来了价格形成机制不透明、价格波动过快、“杀熟”现象与歧视性定价等风险。这些风险可归纳为规则隐匿、用户意思自治被剥夺以及平台责任真空三重表现,其背后动因来自于电子商务平台过度追逐利润的效率导向,进而导致了正常交易的异化及信任破裂。作为信任裂缝弥补措施的价格算法透明面临信任悖论、部分不可透明的技术壁垒以及透明假设的对抗性消失等困境,因此应当转向以信任为导向的价格算法解释。以信任重塑为目的,通过行业协会自治与平台内部规制的融合、全生命周期场景化算法解释机制的构建、走出全有或全无规制误区的解释边界,具体落实电子商务平台的价格算法解释。
Abstract: While e-commerce platforms use pricing algorithms to improve operational efficiency, they are also accompanied by risks such as opaque pricing mechanisms, excessively rapid price fluctuations, “big data price discrimination against returning customers” (shashu), and discriminatory pricing. The risks brought by e-commerce platforms in using pricing algorithms can be summarized in three manifestations: hidden rules, the deprivation of user autonomy, and a vacuum of platform responsibility. The underlying drivers of these issues stem from the platforms’ efficiency orientation driven by excessive profit-seeking, which leads to the alienation of normal transactions and the breakdown of trust. The transparency of pricing algorithms, as a remedy for trust gaps, faces dilemmas including the trust paradox, partial technical barriers to transparency, and the adversarial disappearance of transparency assumptions. Therefore, it is necessary to shift toward trust-oriented explanations of pricing algorithms. With the goal of rebuilding trust, the explanation of pricing algorithms on e-commerce platforms can be concretely implemented through the integration of self-regulation by industry associations and internal platform regulation, the construction of a full lifecycle scenario-based algorithm explanation mechanism, and avoiding the regulatory pitfall of all-or-nothing approaches to define clear explanatory boundaries.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
李勇坚, 夏杰长, 刘悦欣. 数字经济平台垄断问题: 表现与对策[J]. 企业经济, 2020, 39(7): 20-26.
|
|
[2]
|
孙庆春, 贾焕银. 算法治理与治理算法[J/OL]. 重庆大学学报(社会科学版): 1-10. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/50.1023.C.20191207.1044.002, 2026-05-13.
|
|
[3]
|
杨志航. 算法透明实现的另一种可能: 可解释人工智能[J]. 行政法学研究, 2024(3): 154-163.
|
|
[4]
|
张艳. 关系契约理论对意思自治的价值超越[J]. 现代法学, 2014, 36(2): 73-79.
|
|
[5]
|
饶传平. 数据交易信任机制的法律困境与制度重塑[J]. 中州学刊, 2025(2): 73-80.
|
|
[6]
|
周翔. 算法可解释性: 一个技术概念的规范研究价值[J]. 比较法研究, 2023(3): 188-200.
|
|
[7]
|
张欣. 算法解释权与算法治理路径研究[J]. 中外法学, 2019, 31(6): 1425-1445.
|
|
[8]
|
刘利平. 平台企业数据匿名化背后的“算法宰制”及治理进路——基于法经济学的分析视角[J]. 现代经济探讨, 2026(3): 120-132.
|
|
[9]
|
张明悦. 平台经济中算法透明度对消费者信任与交易效率的影响研究[J]. 消费与品牌传播, 2025(22): 5-8.
|
|
[10]
|
沈伟伟. 算法透明原则的迷思——算法规制理论的批判[J]. 环球法律评论, 2019, 41(6): 20-39.
|
|
[11]
|
许可, 程华. 算法悖论与制度因应——基于用户算法应用感知的实证研究[J]. 山东大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2022(6): 84-96.
|
|
[12]
|
宋晓兵, 何夏楠. 人工智能定价对消费者价格公平感知的影响[J]. 管理科学, 2020, 33(5): 3-16.
|
|
[13]
|
苏宇. 优化算法可解释性及透明度义务之诠释与展开[J]. 法律科学(西北政法大学学报), 2022, 40(1): 133-141.
|
|
[14]
|
戴维, 王锡锌. 算法透明机制的局限性及其克服[J]. 华东政法大学学报, 2025, 28(1): 33-44.
|
|
[15]
|
邱遥堃. 生成式人工智能的规制挑战与体系应对[J]. 南大法学, 2025(2): 131-145.
|
|
[16]
|
王治国. 从工具客体到关系主体: 基于算法法律地位的本体论重构[J]. 比较法研究, 2025(5): 140-159.
|
|
[17]
|
丁晓东. 基于信任的自动化决策: 算法解释权的原理反思与制度重构[J]. 中国法学, 2022(1): 99-118.
|
|
[18]
|
夏杰长. 基于双边市场理论的电商平台定价策略[J]. 企业经济, 2023, 42(8): 5-13+2.
|
|
[19]
|
许可. 驯服算法: 算法治理的历史展开与当代体系[J]. 华东政法大学学报, 2022, 25(1): 99-113.
|