论行政伦理的价值与建构——基于公共危机治理中自由裁量权合理运用的分析

转型期我国社会利益分化加剧,突发性公共危机成为当前公共治理中无法回避、常态化、尖锐而复杂的难题.行政自由裁量权的合理应用,是突发性公共危机有效治理不可或缺的重要手段,行政自由裁量必须以公共利益为逻辑起点,方有价值正当性与合法性基础,也才有积极效用性可言.因此,在公共危机频发的当今时代,围绕公共危机治理的主题,建构自由裁量权合理应用的行政伦理就有了重大的时代意义与价值.     

提升公共行政伦理精神与政治体制改革

公共行政伦理精神是政治体制的“内蕴”和“灵魂”。要顺势把握新的发展预期，通过全面提升公共行政伦理精神这一软实力，来扩大公民有序政治参与、提高公共治理主体的伦理素质、因应中国特色社会主义“善治”之道，推进并深化政治体制和行政管理体制改革。     

公共危机:政府信用建设的拐点

目前我国正处于社会转型的关键时期，各种矛盾容易诱发公共危机事件。近年来日益频繁爆发的公共危机对政府能否有效履行其公共责任提出了新的挑战，成为影响政府信用的一个重要因素。一方面，公共危机造成的大量资源损失会破坏政府信用的物质基础；危机治理的不足也将降低公众对政府政治合法性的信仰、对政府制度政策的公正性、合理性的认可程度，削弱政府信用的意识形态基础；危机处理中信息公开的缺陷还会降低政府信用的资信基础。另一方面，公共危机也会为政府制度向更加科学合理的方向完善提供外部动力，促进政府制度信用的提高；并推动政府从全能型向有限性、从权力型向责任型转变；改进政府的组织信用；还能通过感官等各种刺激激发行政人的伦理自觉和责任意识，增强行政人信用。     

我党加强公共危机治理能力建设的进程及经验

加强公共危机治理能力建设是党应对执政考验、风险社会挑战和构建和谐社会的需要。我党加强公共危机治理能力建设,经历了一个提出、形成和完善的过程,并取得了明显成效。我党加强公共危机治理能力建设的基本经验是:公共危机治理能力建设必须增强系统性和战略性,必须与加强党的执政能力建设相结合,必须与加强法制建设相结合,必须与深化行政管理体制改革、进一步转变政府职能相结合,必须与运用现代科学技术手段相结合。     

危机管理中政策制定的行政伦理建设研究

行政伦理建设是危机管理中政策制定研究的重要组成部分,行政伦理的建设情况直接关系到危机管理中政策制定的效率和质量,从而影响应对危机的成败。在危机管理的政策制定中,加强行政伦理建设将有利于维护危机中公民和国家的利益,提高政府制定政策的效率,促进危机管理中政策制定的目标实现,以及巩固危机管理中政府的权威和提高政府的公信力,因此,研究政策制定的行政伦理建设对危机管理具有深远的意义。     

以社会主义核心价值体系引领公共危机管理中的行政精神建设

公共危机突发事件对公共行政管理是一个巨大的挑战，公共危机的管理需要政府行政精神的支撑，因为行政精神是公共行政管理的灵魂和核心。要塑造有强大支撑力的行政精神又必须以社会主义核心价值体系为指导，作为我国社会价值体系中的核心，社会主义核心价值体系以其广泛的适用性和包容性以及强大的整合力和引领力，决定着公共危机管理中的行政精神的价值目标。     

公共伦理视角下的中国公务员行政人格塑造

公务员是公共管理的主体、社会公共利益的代表者,塑造与服务型政府相适应的行政人格,不仅是政府改革的价值诉求,而且是提高政府公共治理能力的现实选择。本文立足于我国服务型政府构建的背景,从公共伦理的视角出发,探讨公务员行政人格的内涵,梳理不同社会治理模式下行政人格的主要特征及我国公务员行政人格的现状与成因,进而提出和阐述了公务员行政人格塑造的途径。     

现代性叙事下的行政责任伦理阐释

现代性作为西方公共行政的宏大叙事背景,与行政责任伦理的诞生有着直接关联。以工具理性为特质的现代性框定了公共行政思维与实践走向,使其走上技术化、工具化、非人格化的道路。在此背景下,一种强调价值性、主体性与责任性的行政责任伦理被提出。行政责任伦理是行政主体即各级行政组织与行政人员对社会公共需求的积极回应以及对自身行为后果的伦理担当,它具有个体与公共、自律与他律、实然与应然相统一的特质。从对现代性危机的反思与应对的视角来看,行政责任伦理理性回应了行政的现代性危机,充分彰显了行政的价值理性和有力地改变了行政与道德无涉的状况。     

公共危机管理中的政府公信力重塑研究

面对公共危机,政府在危机管理中的理念、行为和效率都会影响其公信力。因此,政府在危机治理中,需要在行政理念、公共政策运作机制、干部人事管理体制、政府法制建设与管理、政府组织与运作、国际沟通与协调机制等方面积极创新,提升其公信力。     

公共危机协同治理的路径选择

近几年来,我国公共危机事件频发,建立一个全面整合的公共危机管理体系,提升社会整体的危机管理能力,是当前公共危机管理面临的最大挑战。因此,急需调动整合广泛的社会资源,要求政府、非政府组织、企业、社会公众的共同参与。基于协同治理的角度,阐述公共危机协同治理的内容框架,即内涵、价值导向和治理结构,并结合我国实际提出公共危机协同治理的路径选择。     

Statesmanship and Ethics: The Case of Thomas Jefferson's Dirty Hands

The topic of statesmanship has been largely neglected by public administration scholars. This article underscores the moral dilemmas and implications that arise when statesmen abandon their principles for the good of the state, as was the case when Thomas Jefferson purchased the Louisiana Territory from France without congressional consent. This example draws our attention to the important connections between statesmanship and administrative ethics. Jefferson's decision to abandon his strict constructionist principles to acquire Louisiana illustrates the ethical complexities of public administration, public management, and the democratic governance process.     

地方政府创新与治理变迁——中国地方政府创新案例的比较研究

经验表明,20世纪90年代以来,社会转型带来的权威危机和管理性危机对中国地方政府公共权力结构与功能等方面形成了严峻的挑战。面对危机情势,各级地方政府在公共管理的权力结构、制度与技术安排上进行了多项治理创新,通过对地方政府的治理创新的比较分析,笔者认为,中国地方政府的创新实践推动了地方治理变迁,地方治理正趋于取代地方管理。但是,这种可选择性替代路径仍然是地方政府主导型的,最终起作用的仍然是地方政府。地方政府的创新符合整体性改革的发展方向,并将有力地推动改革向纵深发展。     

Organizing for Crisis Management: Building Governance Capacity and Legitimacy

What makes a well‐functioning governmental crisis management system, and how can this be studied using an organization theory–based approach? A core argument is that such a system needs both governance capacity and governance legitimacy. Organizational arrangements as well as the legitimacy of government authorities will affect crisis management performance. A central argument is that both structural features and cultural context matter, as does the nature of the crisis. Is it a transboundary crisis? How unique is it, and how much uncertainty is associated with it? The arguments are substantiated with empirical examples and supported by a literature synthesis, focusing on public administration research. A main conclusion is that there is no optimal formula for harmonizing competing interests and tensions or for overcoming uncertainty and ambiguous government structures. Flexibility and adaptation are key assets, which are constrained by the political, administrative, and situational context. Furthermore, a future research agenda is indicated.     

Governance Reform in Thailand: Questionable Assumptions, Uncertain Outcomes

This article examines the nature of governance reform in Thailand. The argument is that Thai citizens are not especially benefiting from the public reform initiatives of Thai governments because government reformers made fourquestionable assumptions about reform which have in turn produced uncertain outcomes and provided the opportunity for government reformers to avoid responsibility for their reform choices. First, the reformers support the belief that a global reform paradigm with ready-made reform packages exists which can be easily transplanted in the Thai public sector. Second, the reformers prefer to define success largely as reform output rather than reform outcomes or long term reform consequences. Third, Thai government reformers have overemphasized the efficiency aspects of the new public management at the expense of other governance goals. Fourth, governance reform in Thailand has been portrayed as a managerial problem instead of a political one. The author supports his arguments by drawing on theoretical debates in the international literature on administrative reform, and relating these debates to the Thai case. Governance reform in Thailand is still at an early stage, but the role of unintended consequences is important to administrative reform. Furthermore, the Thai case may reflect governance reform in other countries as well.     

行政冲突的价值分析--公共管理新模式探索

公共领域的冲突或危机管理模式是价值观、信仰以及稀少的地位、权力和资源分配上的斗争,具有一定的负功能;关注公共领域中的冲突管理或危机管理并不是涉及双方行政关系的基础,不是核心价值的冲突,而是民主性质的公共规则控制下的冲突,是公共领域可以承受,并对公共管理结构的整合提供动力的冲突,使人们能够运用冲突的危机探索并接近解决的可能性的冲突,因而是具有正功能的冲突.认为,虽然冲突管理或危机管理也具有反功能,有一定风险,但影响是有限的,因此,危机管理或冲突管理的正功能成为研究的重点.     

A Response to "Building Administrative Capacity for the Age of Rapid Globalization: A Modest Prescription for the Twenty-First Century"

Professor Ali Farazmand's thought-provoking article advances the argument that the "administrative capacity to manage" governance and economic systems in the new age of "rapid change, hyper-complexity, and globalization" needs to be designed at both the macro and the micro levels. There is no doubt that traditional models of governance and public administration are no match for the challenges of the new chaotic environment, particularly in the aftermath of the outbreak of the global financial crisis that has largely discredited a world economic order founded on Anglo-American financial capitalism. Building administrative capacity worldwide is an imperative of our time.     

National cyber crisis management: Different European approaches

Cyber crises, as new forms of transboundary crises, pose serious risks to societies. This article investigates how different models of public–private partnerships shape cyber crisis management in four European countries: the Netherlands, Denmark, Estonia, and the Czech Republic. Using Provan and Kenis's modes of network governance, an initial taxonomy of cyber governance structures is provided. The Netherlands have created a participant‐governed network, characterized by trust and equality. The Czech and Estonian models resemble a network administrative organization, with an enforcement role for their national cyber security centers. Denmark has adopted a lead‐agency model. The article concludes that countries face two binary choices when organizing cyber defense and crisis management. First, national computer emergency response teams/computer security incident response teams can be embedded inside or outside the intelligence community. Second, cyber capacity can be centralized in one unit or spread across different sectors. These decisions fundamentally shape information‐sharing arrangements and potential roles during cyber crises.