正在确认阅读权限…
Recursive Legibility — Why Economic Transparency Requires Shared Cognitive Architecture
递归可读性：经济透明为何需要共享的认知架构
-
Transparency initiatives fail not from lack of data, but from mismatched mental models about causality, time horizons, and acceptable uncertainty ranges.透明度举措失败，并非因为缺乏数据，而是由于人们对因果关系、时间跨度和可接受的不确定性范围存在认知错位。
-
Central bank forward guidance loses traction when households interpret 'medium-term' as six months while markets treat it as five years.当家庭将央行‘中期’指引理解为六个月，而市场却视其为五年时，前瞻性指引便失去效力。
-
Fiscal impact statements remain opaque because they encode budgetary trade-offs using accounting conventions unfamiliar to non-specialist citizens.财政影响声明之所以晦涩难懂，是因为它用非专业人士不熟悉的会计惯例来编码预算权衡。
-
ESG disclosures report emissions intensity per revenue dollar—a metric that obscures absolute growth trajectories and sectoral displacement effects.ESG披露采用‘单位营收碳排放强度’这一指标，掩盖了绝对排放增长路径及行业转移效应。
-
When policymakers describe inflation as 'transitory', they invoke a statistical concept requiring specific model assumptions, yet public understanding relies on lived cost-of-living experience.政策制定者称通胀‘暂时性’时，援引的是依赖特定模型假设的统计概念，而公众理解则基于切身的生活成本体验。
-
Trade agreement texts use 'substantially all trade' as a threshold, but negotiators, lawyers, and exporters assign radically different weights to 'substantially' based on institutional memory.贸易协定文本以‘几乎所有贸易’为门槛，但谈判者、律师与出口商因机构记忆差异，对‘几乎’一词赋予截然不同的权重。
-
Algorithmic loan denial explanations cite 'insufficient credit history'—a phrase that conceals dataset gaps, feature engineering choices, and counterfactual baselines.算法贷款拒批解释中‘信用记录不足’一语，隐匿了数据集缺口、特征工程选择及反事实基准等深层因素。
-
Public trust erodes not from deception, but from the recursive opacity of translating technical precision into socially meaningful interpretation.公众信任的流失，并非源于欺骗，而是源于将技术精确性转化为社会可理解意义过程中的层层晦涩。
-
Economic legibility demands more than plain language—it requires co-developed frames for evaluating trade-offs, risks, and temporal scope.经济可理解性不仅需要平实语言，更需专家与公众共同构建评估权衡、风险与时间维度的认知框架。
-
Without shared cognitive scaffolding, even perfectly accurate data produces divergent policy conclusions across stakeholder groups.若缺乏共享的认知支架，即便数据完全准确，不同利益相关方仍会得出迥异的政策结论。
-
Legibility is relational: it exists only where measurement conventions, causal narratives, and normative weights align across domains.可理解性是关系性的：唯有当测量惯例、因果叙事与价值权重在各领域达成一致时，它才真正存在。
-
True transparency emerges not from disclosure volume, but from iterative calibration of meaning across expert and civic epistemologies.真正的透明度并非来自披露数量，而源于专家知识体系与公民认知体系之间持续的意义校准。