公共治理结构:变迁方向与动力——社会治理结构的历史路向探析

社会治理结构大致可划分为四类:统治型结构、授权型结构、管理型结构、共治型结构。共治型结构作为社会治理结构演进的最后和最高阶段,体现着共和主义的价值理念。公民争取公共治理权利的斗争,构成了社会治理结构变迁的根本动力,推动着社会治理结构从统治型向共治型发展。我国社会治理结构应该顺应这一发展趋势,定位为中国特色社会主义公共治理结构,"党委领导、政府负责、社会协同、公众参与"的"四位一体"结构是其理性选择。     

“制度性风险”下的国家审计行为能力分析

利益性结构和职能性结构是社会结构的两个重要方面。一直以来,我国市场经济体制改革与发展更多关注的是利益性结构问题,即社会的经济制度、政治制度和意识形态,以致忽视了社会职能性结构的变革、调整与同步发展,从而加大了社会制度性风险。转型社会制度性风险治理应该是我国深入体制改革所面临的重要问题。我国国家审计作为国家治理的重要组成部分,其参与国家治理制度性风险的职能、能力及作用是由国家经济、政治体制及制度,政府行政目标和执政能力决定的。     

新时代公众参与社会治理的推进路径

公众参与是社会治理现代化的重要方面，也是推进社会共治的关键环节。着眼于防范化解社会风险和矛盾、完善社会治理共同体，可从动力、保障、组织三个维度推进新时代社会治理的公众参与，即以公共精神的培塑提升公众参与的内生动力，以信息技术的嵌入增强公众参与的质量保障，以自组织能力建设提高公众参与的组织化水平，从而激发人民群众的自主参与意识，提高其参与效能，提升社会治理的现代化水平。     

供给侧结构性改革背景下我国收入分配对策研究

在我国经济进入新常态的背景下,特别是为应对"十三五"期间社会深层次变革,谋求未来高效发展的全新动力的具体要求,必须加快完善收入分配和再分配体制的结构性改革。初次分配领域强调"迫切性",兼顾效率与公平,逐步提高劳动报酬占国民整体收入的比重,再分配领域重点将抑制收入差距和保障社会公平的目标具体化、微观化和定量化,从而有效推进国家治理体系和治理能力的现代化。     

正义的治理与公共的责任

正义的社会需要正义的治理,正义的治理必须是公共的治理,公共的治理则意味着公共的责任。在公共治理尤其是在中国的公共治理过程中,政府、政党、其他社会组织等等共同构成了公共治理的主体,只有在多元主体的协同治理中,转型的社会才能免于结构性断裂,公平正义才能得以充分体现。同时,社会正义的原则必须法定,即对治理的主体、治理的过程以及治理的结果的正义性予以法律保证。     

反思与借鉴:治理视野中的中国政党研究

在中国的政党研究领域,治理或善治理论的引入多少显得有些寂寥.治理所导致的失败、善治的意识形态色彩、治理结构与政党制度特征上的冲突以及治理社会基础的缺失,这四个方面影响了治理理论与中国政党政治研究的关联.实质上,治理并不必然导致失败,治理理论可在工具层面上运用,它并不与意识形态有内在的关联;治理结构与政党制度具有内在的适应性;同时,随着社会主义市场经济的深度拓展,治理所需的社会的主体性力量正在逐渐成长,其社会基础并不缺失.因而,治理理论和中国的政党问题研究具有强相关性.治理或善治理论可以成为中国政党制度理论研究的新的生长点.     

理顺关系与国家治理结构的塑造（英文）

在政府各类文件中,理顺关系往往与机构改革、转变职能放在一起表述。不理解关系及关系的理顺,就无法理解中国国家治理体系。理顺关系包括四个维度:政府与市场、中央与地方、经济与社会以及政府与社会,其理顺路径可以归纳为分开、保留与延迟。一方面,这三条路径的相互抵牾,影响了中国国家治理结构,并使其在闭合和开放中寻求平衡。另一方面,理顺关系的路径行程,根源又在于中国国家治理同时并存的总体性诉求和现代性诉求。可以说,理顺关系再塑了中国国家治理特质。在持续不断的理顺中,中国国家治理的一些重要要素也发生了关键变化。从理顺关系角度而言,未来对更大系统的"关系"的开放性吸纳,对中国国家治理的变革至关重要。     

社会变迁过程中的结构紧张

伴随着制度变迁进行的结构性调整与创新,带来了不同利益群体之间的矛盾与冲突,这种矛盾与冲突引发的许多问题可归结为＂结构紧张＂产生的张力所致,＂失范＂状态就是一种典型的结构性问题。以调查数据为依据,分析、检验结构紧张与失范之间的关系,发现社会地位结构、组织结构、角色结构、权力地位结构、收入水平与教育水平结构上的差异与分化确实导致了失范感受的产生。诸如个体的失范、不满意度、相对剥夺感、地位不一致等负面感受很大程度正是缘于客观的结构分化快于制度整合而引起的失衡与紧张。     

论诚信的价值:从"伦理"到"治理"

儒家的诚信伦理传统,在中国经济社会发展中,日益生发出新的意蕴,彰显出其伦理价值与治理功效.诚是人的内心态度,蕴涵着个人的心志专一、正心善意和公共意识.信是诚的外在表现,将主观的诚现之于外产生信的客观效果即为诚信.诚信有其个体价值,于单个个体的价值在于自信从而自成;有其人际价值,于两个并存的个体的价值在于互信从而互利;有其公共价值,于社会群体的价值在于公信从而公益.并且,在政府的主导下,将诚信由伦理规范发展为社会治理规范来管理社会,将产生维护社会秩序、保障社会安全、实现社会公正的和促进社会和谐等治理功效.     

当前农村乡规民约建设的突出问题及对策

乡规民约是一种内生于中国传统乡土社会的文化资源和社会规范,在当前国家治理现代化和社会治理的总体格局中,它又被赋予了现代化社会治理资源这一新的属性。如何将乡规民约更好地运用于当前农村社会治理过程中,切实发挥其非正式制度、社会资本、软法、社会粘合剂的作用,是一个值得探讨的话题。讨论当前乡规民约制定和施行过程中的三个重要问题：乡规民约的现代化改造、乡规民约的内容定位、乡规民约的效力保障,并从加强乡规民约的合法性审查及国家权力对乡规民约制定实施过程的适当介入、明确乡规民约相对于国法和村民自治章程的规范领域和功能定位以及规范乡规民约的民主制定程序以使其最大程度体现村庄成员的合意这三个方面提出相应对策。     

村庄善治：一种新型民主合作体制的建立

目前,我国村庄治理中面临着“两委矛盾”、村委与村民矛盾以及乡村矛盾的多重困境,从而使村庄难以实现有效治理,其主要原因是村庄治理中的体制不合理、利益主体多元化以及传统政治文化惯性与村民的公民意识欠缺。因此,发展草根组织,使村庄向理性公民社会靠拢,从而建立一种以草根组织为纽带的草根组织、村“两委”以及乡镇政权组织的民主合作体制,在一定程度上有助于村治困境的解决,以期实现村庄善治。     

改革深水区个体极端暴力事件应对与社会治理创新

中国改革进入深水区后个体极端暴力事件呈高发态势,暴露出的是政府与社会关系长期疏离致使社会进入转型期后一些社会个体境遇问题愈益突出和复杂,而基于传统管制思维的公共危机管理应对乏力。治本之策是立足“以人为本”,从国家治理体系和政府治理能力现代化层面推动创新社会管理向创新社会治理转变,构建善治意义上的治理服务型政府,通过改进社会治理方式解决公共安全问题,为民造福。     

建构具有中国特色社会主义的国家治理体系

自党的十八届三中全会后,“国家治理”这一概念正式进入当代中国的政治话语体系。准确深入地探讨国家治理的概念内涵,将建构现代国家治理体系与社会建设事业同步进行,不仅是我国克服社会转型发展问题的必然路径选择,更是我们在总结、借鉴国际经验与反思改革实践中不断实现自我超越,凝炼我国社会的公共价值共识、建设社会主义现代国家的内在要求。     

Partnership and participation: contradictions and tensions in the social policy space

Partnerships and participation seem to be the order of the day. Yet, for many community organisations, this way of ordering the social policy space is contradictory, creating practice tensions that increase the complexity of local service systems. Such changes impact community organisations in a politics that needs to be made visible if they are to be able to act in the interests of their members and service users. We therefore outline the social policy space currently constituted by four major discourses: neo‐liberalism, managerialism, new paternalism and network governance as they intersect and interact chaotically, reshaping participation and partnerships between government, community service organisations and local communities. We then examine how policy as a technology or set of mechanisms is discursively creating contradictions and practice tensions within which community organisations engage for social justice.     

National Governance Quotient: The Foundation of Big Data-based National Governance

A nation’s rise or fall hinges, to some extent, upon its national governance quotient. National governance quotient, or NGQ, is a quantitative indicator measuring the governance level of a country in quotient form. Its value is the ratio of the national governance system and capacity to national governance costs, and its nature is that of an amalgam of national governance ideas and techniques quantified on the basis of the figures. It is advanced because its inner core lies in logic and computation, and it is scientific because it is guaranteed by technology platforms such as big data and cloud computing. The formulation of NGQ provides technical support and a basis for the transformation from experiential or experimental governance to quantitative, scientific governance, and it thus has great theoretical and practical significance for the modernization of national governance system and capacity. As well as being used to provide quantitative management of national governance modernization, NGQ can also be used as a measurement standard and key symbol for evaluating the modernization of China’s national governance by 2020. Furthermore, it can be used to compile a World NGQ Report with the aim of taking hold of international governance discourse, as well as to compile China local NGQ reports to improve local governance in China.     

Legal Mechanisms for the Joint Governance of Public and Private Rights

Traditional jurisprudence has produced few studies at the level of institutional operation, resulting in a lack of knowledge about the structure, actors and symbols involved in the modernization of social governance. This is so much so that modernization of social governance is in practice misunderstood as the rule of law, informatization and adoption of technology. The core issue of social governance is the division of oversight and penalty costs between the state and individuals, but we need to call upon a statutory platform to facilitate cooperation between public and private rights. The modernization of social governance involves the use of legislation to provide techniques and statutory platforms for cooperation in an open society, ensuring the reasonable division of social governance information and penalty costs when public and private rights overlap. The social governance techniques that enable public and private rights to work together involve taking a group of observable symbols or organizations on which consensus has been reached as a statutory platform, with all sides bringing greater accountability to bear on this platform in order to maximize their interests and minimize their transaction costs, with no need to inquire further into its particular constitution.     

A National Governance Perspective on the Transformation of Rural Property Rights: The Chinese Experience*

Property rights have multiple attributes, and these are correlated with national governance. In the West, property rights have the economic function of maximizing efficiency and the political function of rights protection, but in China, they also have a strong social character. With the modernization of national governance, these functions interact with and transform each other. When the state’s ability to supply public goods is relatively weak, property rights take on more of a social character, meeting public demand for welfare at the grassroots level. When the state is better able to provide public goods, the social function of property rights lessens as their economic function grows. The social character of property rights was the institutional foundation for China, as a huge agrarian state, to realize “governance through inaction,” and at the same time was the secret key that could break the code to the millennial continuity of Chinese agrarian civilization. Reforms including the collectivization of rural property rights after 1949, the “separation of two rights” (to collective ownership and household contracted land, with a focus on the latter), and the “separation of three rights,” (to collective ownership, household contracts and revitalized land management). These changes constitute a process in which the economic function of property rights has been growing while their social character has lessened under conditions of national governance modernization.     

当前中国的主要民生问题分析

旨在通过对中国民生发展的历史背景和现实困境的系统考察,细致梳理中国民生问题产生的时代背景、发展过程和存在的问题。当前中国主要的民生领域存在着结构性矛盾。民生问题中存在的结构性矛盾是转型期经济社会发展失衡的社会后果。     

我国网络问政的主要形式及其发展策略

网络问政作为连接政府与公众的桥梁,正以其独特的影响力在我国政治社会生活中发挥着重要作用。当前,我国网络问政存在有序的自上而下、无序的自上而下、无序的自下而上和有序的自下而上四种形式。网络作为公民问政的新型载体,其开放性和平等性激发了公民的参与热情,大大降低了公民参与问政的成本,但也表现出代表性不足、参与的非理性、非规范性等弊端。今后,政府需要建立制度规范、提高网络问政领导能力,网民需要培育良好的网络道德、树立公民意识,并通过完善立法、提高技术水平和借鉴国外良好做法等途径来整体提高我国网络问政水平,更好地推动我国民主政治建设。