政府与社会组织合作治理的形成机制

促进政府与社会组织的有效合作是推进国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的重要途径。已有研究表明，政府与社会组织的合作存在策略性特征，但尚未厘清达成合作的基本条件与形成机制。组织学理论普遍强调，组织间有关合作议题信息知觉的清晰性以及行为意向的一致性共同构成的“共识性认知”是实现合作目标的前提。温州市苍南县政府与当地印刷包装行业协会、印刷企业合作治理大气挥发性有机物（VOCs）的相关实践证明了上述理论推断。达成有效合作治理的条件在于，多元主体根据组织间有关合作议题的认知结果，自觉实现组织间规范结构和行为结构彼此嵌合、相互支撑。作为治理目标的利益相关方，合作行动过程中的多元主体通过秩序构建、意向生成、优势整合与行动调节四个机制，最终形成信息互通、知识互享、情感互融、行动互补、价值互惠的治理共同体。

The Formation Mechanism of Collaborative Governance Between Governmentand Social Organizations: An Analysis Framework for Inter-organizational Consensus Cognition Construction

Existing researches on the relationship between government and social organizations demonstrates that there have been strategic characteristics between government and social organizations cooperation. However, the fundamental condition and formation mechanisms of collaborative governance have not been clarified. The general theory of organization provides a new theoretical framework for answering the above questions, and relevant opinions can deduce the following hypotheses. Firstly, inter-organizational interaction for achieving collaborative governance objectives requires participating organizations to exert the attributes of an open system from the beginning. Secondly, the consensus cognition based on the clarity of informational perception about cooperation issues and the consistency of behavioral intentions is a necessary condition for collaborative governance actions among organizations. Thirdly, the agile adjustment and interlocking support of the normative structure and behavioral structure between cooperative organizations constitute the main content of cooperative governance actions. Finally, cooperative action will increase the uncertainty of the cooperative environment and the possibility of issue changes, thereby affecting the ultimate realization of cooperative governance goals. This paper analyzes the case of collaborative governance of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Cangnan County (in Wenzhou City, Zhejiang Province), a typical and successful practice of collaboration between government and social organizations. The process and outcome of practice in this case fully supports the hypotheses. The conclusions of case analysis can be summarized in the following aspects. First of all, consensus cognition of cooperative issues among organizations is the basic precondition for effective collaboration. Besides, clarity of informational perception and consistency of behavioral intentions are indispensable. Next, the construction and maintenance of consensus cognition is complicated and evolving, and it requires organizations to adjust cooperative action strategies consciously according to the cognitive results formed by the organizations. Again, integration and mutual support between normative structure and behavioral structure can be the main component to achieve effectiveness of collaborative governance. Finally, order construction, intention generation, advantage integration and action adjustment between multiple subjects are the formation mechanisms for achieving good collaborative governance effects. The essence of the good collaboration between government departments and social organizations is to establish and maintain a governance community pursuing common values and goals. “Consensus and cooperation” as basic elements of the social governance community have been clearly described and defined in the effective collaborative governance process between government and social organizations. The establishment of consensus in the social governance community requires multiple stakeholders with interests to achieve a high degree of consistency in information perception and behavioral intentions based on compatible cooperation goals and smooth communication channels. Effective community collaborative governance requires multiple entities to integrate resource advantages, adjust the pace of action, respond to changing issues, and achieve tangible governance effects. The conclusions not only address the conditions and mechanisms of collaborative governance between government and social organizations clearly, but also expand the literature on the relationship between government and social organizations from the perspective of institutions and actions. Moreover, this paper further clarifies that governance community should include the composite attributes and basic significance of information exchange, knowledge sharing, emotional integration, complementary actions, and mutual value.