决策腐败及其基于决策过程控制的治理

任何政治与管理都可分解为决策、执行与监督三项基本活动，相应地，权力也可区分为决策权、执行权和监督权。基于这种经典的“政治三分”框架研究腐败现象，可以将腐败现象区分为决策腐败、执行腐败和监督腐败。决策腐败是指公共决策过程中公共权力非公共运作的一类腐败现象，它既在主观要素上与“决策失误”存在显著的差异，又在权限、效力等行为的客观表现上呈现出有别于执行腐败和监督腐败的特征。在“输入--输出”的系统分析框架下，现有决策系统的输入端、系统内、输出端存在权力制约监督机制的种种缺失，为自利性转化为现实的不当利益营造了制度空间，导致了决策腐败的产生。为此，应以公共利益为导向，建立健全与决策各环节相匹配的权力制约监督结构和运行机制，为公共利益输入到决策系统进而体现在决策结果中创设制度化的渠道，实现决策廉洁高效的过程治理。

Corruption in Decision-making and Its Governance Based on the Process Control of Decision-making

Any political or administrative activity can be separated into decision-making,execution and supervision,and correspondingly,power can be divided into the power of decision-making,the power of execution and the power of supervision.According to this classic framework of trisection,corruption falls into the corruption in decision-making,the corruption in execution and the corruption in supervision.Among them,the corruption in decision-making refers to the deviation of the exercise of public power from public interest in decision-making.Specifically,in the process of decision-making in law and/or policy,development planning,the selection and appointment of officials,public investment,and so on,the decision maker disobeys public interest or gains an unfair advantage for its own interest or for the stakeholders.It is not only distinguished from decision errors by its subjective factor,but also different in their objective performance from corruption in execution and supervision,such as authority and effectiveness.The current tough corruption issue faced by our party and government has much to do with those ″leaders″ who are mainly responsible for decision-making,indicating the lack of corruption control in China’s current decision-making system.Therefore,the effective control of corruption in decision-making is of great significance to solve the problem of party and government leaders’ corruption.Under the framework of In-Out system analysis,the absence of restriction and supervision mechanism at the input side,within-system and output side of the present decision-making system has left institutionalized space for the realization of improper self-interest and led to the corruption in decision.For this reason,the public-interest-oriented mechanism for power restriction and supervision should be established and strengthened because it can facilitate the constraint of decision-making power and form a complete chain of supervision in order to squeeze as much institutionalized space of self-service as possible.What is more important is to open up institutionalized channels for the public interest to merge into the decision-making system so as to maximize the public interest and to realize the clean and efficient governance of the decision-making process.To be more specific,at the input end,the expression mechanism of public interest should be improved to curb the interest groups’ control of the public policy agenda;within the decision-making system,a sound decision-making mechanism should be designed to integrate public interests and to prevent unauthorized access to private interests;and at the output end,especially in the choice of decisions,a democratic resolution mechanism should exert its full impact.This corruption governance,which is based on the control of the decision-making process,is an effective way to supervise the ″leaders″ in our current system.The position of the ″leaders ″ determines the difficulty of monitoring them.Controlling the decision-making process will transform the supervision of leaders(people) into the supervision of decision-making(things),thus transforming the focus on ″things″ to that on ″people.″ This is undoubtedly of great significance to the avoidance of the negative impact of supervision caused by authority.