反腐的关键:规制行政裁量权

行政裁量权由于其可能导致肆意和专断,因而成为腐败的重灾区。因此,反腐的关键在于规制行政裁量权,保证行政裁量权在法治的轨道上运行。行政裁量权的规制属于复合规制模式,包括立法规制、行政规制、司法规制以及权利规制四种规制路径。然而规制模式有其内在的局限性,公众参与作为民主理论在行政过程的投射,其所具有的民意表达、利益协商、程序正义等功能和优势,可以实现对行政裁量权的有效规制。建立起公众参与的配套制度,并完善公众参与的程序设计,可以实现对行政裁量权的有效规制,促进反腐倡廉建设的健康发展。     

对重大行政决策过程中专家参与制度的再思考北大核心

目前,在我国重大行政决策过程中,专家参与制度本身的局限性使其陷入实践困境,因而需要对该制度进行深度考察。首先要对重大行政决策中专家角色重新解读,将专家角色定位为一种兼备公众与行政的双重属性,保持"中立性"和"独立性"的参与主体。此外,还需要对专家参与制度呈现的表现形态进行类型化分析,并从鼓励民间咨询机构发展、保障咨询专家独立性、全面推行政府法律顾问制度及建立专家责任追究制度等方面进行改进和完善。     

对重大行政决策过程中专家参与制度的再思考

目前,在我国重大行政决策过程中,专家参与制度本身的局限性使其陷入实践困境,因而需要对该制度进行深度考察。首先要对重大行政决策中专家角色重新解读,将专家角色定位为一种兼备公众与行政的双重属性,保持"中立性"和"独立性"的参与主体。此外,还需要对专家参与制度呈现的表现形态进行类型化分析,并从鼓励民间咨询机构发展、保障咨询专家独立性、全面推行政府法律顾问制度及建立专家责任追究制度等方面进行改进和完善。     

公共决策制度构建阶段公众参与问题探究

在公共决策民主化、法制化、程序化的进程中,公众参与的两种错误倾向——"怀疑"和"盲目放权",会造成公众参与不足或参与失控,最终导致公共决策失败的风险。为此,决策者必须明确公众参与的原则,把握好公众参与的若干个"平衡点",推进公共决策体系不断优化。     

价格决策中公众参与机制的反思与重构——以2014年北京市公共交通价格调整听证会为例

在价格决策中,听证会这一重要参与形式在经过多次重复上演后却正面临边际效用递减的窘境。通过北京市公共交通价格调整听证会的个案考察,发现制度与实践的割裂所带来的公众参与虚幻与乏力,是造成听证失灵与窘境的根本原因。要让价格听证走出困境,需要梳理现实问题,重新审视价格决策中公众参与机制构建。应客观定位听证会功能、转变政府理念、改变遴选机制、引入专家理性,从程序和实体两个维度来保障参与权的落实,制约决策权的恣意和专断,为行政决策提供正当化支持和民主化动力。     

公众参与是行政立法正当性的基础

行政立法虽然是当今世界社会发展的普遍现象,但是由于行政立法机关不是由民选代表组成,缺乏民意基础,因此需要公众参与行政立法促进行政立法的民主化,只有公众参与,行政立法才能获得民主正当性,行政立法程序才可能构成正当程序。公众参与必须符合自愿、平等、有效的实质要求。我国行政立法程序应当提高立法层次,强化公众参与制度,提高行政立法程序的民主化程度。     

公众参与科技决策的过程组织与方法效能

长久以来,科技决策一直是个专家统治的领域,不具备专门知识的公众,被认为无法了解科学的技术复杂性而被排除在政策参与过程之外。然而随着大科学时代的到来,科学技术发展所带来的效应直接进入社会生活领域“,科技民主”的理念打破了“专家”与“普通大众”之间的界限,认为,专家的意见只是社会总体决策的参考,公众应当具有参与科技决策的权力;公众参与技术评价方法被认为是针对现代社会中不确定、不平等问题的一种新的互动式解决途径;公众参与技术评价与决策在很多国家已经成为一种趋势;公众参与式技术评价被看作是在对现代技术风险管理过程中重新构建信任的一种方式。对公众参与科技决策的特征、方法与过程进行了研究。     

公众参与行政决策:必然、实然与应然

公众参与行政决策是行政决策合法性之所需,也是行政决策目标实现之所求.政府的政策宣示和公众的参与需求的契合,催生了我国丰富的公众参与行政决策的实践.然而公众参与行政决策实践的表面繁荣,却难以掩盖其实效的差强人意.我们应当深化行政决策者的公众参与意识,完善参与式行政法律制度,保障公众参与行政决策的实效.     

公众风险感知、政府信任与环境类邻避设施冲突参与意向

邻避冲突不仅与公众风险感知相关,还是多种心理因素在特定情境下综合作用的结果。基于湖北省多个环境类邻避设施周围公众的实地调研,探索公众风险感知、政府信任对邻避冲突参与意向的影响,并验证公众政府信任对其风险感知与环境类邻避设施冲突参与意向关系的调节效应。研究结果表明,公众对环境类邻避设施的健康和环境风险感知、政府行为信任是影响其冲突参与意向的最主要因素,政府信任对公众风险感知与邻避设施冲突参与意向关系存在显著的调节效应。为了达到"邻避冲突可免"的治理效果,必须加强邻避设施风险评估和运行监管,降低设施本身的负外部性,弱化公众的风险感知;地方政府应在"公众中心"的行政理念指导下,加大邻避设施相关决策信息的公开度,创新风险沟通方式,提高公众的政府信任度。     

城乡行政规划中的公众参与问题探论

我国近年来频发的"环保类群体事件"表明,城乡行政规划是一项综合性很强的系统工程。公众参与城乡行政规划是人民主权原则的必然要求,是维护公共利益,保障公民的知情权、参政权、监督权的需要。公众参与城乡行政规划,有助于聚集公民智慧,促进最佳城乡行政规划方案的形成,保证公益和私益的平衡,保障城乡行政规划目标正确导向,提升行政规划的社会认同度,从根本上防止群体性事件的发生。当前,一些地方政府对公众参与城乡行政规划的意义和价值缺乏足够认识,公众参与主体范围有限,配套制度尚不健全。因此,城乡行政规划部门应树立公众参与的法治观念,国家应当努力扩大公众参与主体的范围,逐步健全公众参与的相关制度。     

街政治理创新的公民参与机制——以北京市为例

随着社会转型和经济转轨速度的加快,我国城市街道事务管理的任务量和复杂性急剧增加,街政治理变革与创新势在必行。本文以公民参与和街道行政之间的生态互动关系为主线,依据"决策—实施—监督"的街政流程,对2007年北京市委社会工委成立以来街政治理的公民参与机制进行了案例分析。本研究发现,社区的公民参与及其组织形式塑造了街道公共决策的民主化机制,扮演着社区居民自组织服务或为其增能的角色,开辟了街政监督的公民社会路径,其在推动街政由低分权、封闭性、单向度管理,向开放式、参与型的公民治理转变的过程中,发挥着重要的作用。     

“放管服”改革的行政法意义及其完善

与先前行政审批制度改革相比,党的十八大以来大力推进的"放管服"改革更加强调权力调整的动态性、整体性、系统性,其对于优化政府职责、转变监管方式、深入推进国家治理体系和能力现代化具有明显的积极意义。但此轮"放管服"改革依然沿袭了行政审批制度改革的运动化、政策化思路,并不完全符合法治政府建设的基本要求。从职权法定、监管工具的动态调整、优化公共服务的基本法则三个方面,"放管服"改革的行政法意义和合法性风险可以得到更加清晰的呈现。要提升"放管服"改革的法治品性,需要以《行政许可法》的有效实施为核心,通过设立专门的社会化的"放管服"改革委员会、激活行政许可评价制度、引入更广泛的专家和社会参与、完善试验改革的授权制度、优化规制工具分析评价制度几个方面来实现。     

The political participation of disabled people in Europe: Rights,accessibility and activism

This paper provides the first systematic cross-national assessment of disabled people's electoral and political participation, based on research in the 28 Member States of the European Union and in the context of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. A mixed methods approach included policy analysis, information requests to national experts and secondary analysis of European survey data. The evidence populated indicators which suggest four lines of action: (a) lifting legal and administrative barriers; (b) raising awareness; (c) making political participation more accessible; (c) expanding participation opportunities in public life. Civil society organizations as well as public institutions have an important role to play as change agents in this regard.     

The policy science of democracy: The issues of methodology and citizen participation

There are continuing debates on methodological issues of policy science. On the one hand, the unprecedented advancement in research methods and technology has made it possible to formulate more precise, empirically driven models of scientific inquiries and thus has added credibility on positivist approach of policy science. On the other hand, social systems and subjective values have increasingly been emphasized in policy analyses and have served as impetus to postpositivist approach of policy science. In this essay, I discuss the role of democratization and citizen participation in policy science. While citizen participation is important to ensure democratization of the process of policymaking and to improve the quality of information provided to make appropriate policy decisions, how such citizen participation can be acquired has become another pressing issue. I explore community participation in light of assessing its effectiveness in policymaking and its coherence with the role of policy experts.     

Political Efficacy through Deliberative Participation in Urban China: A Case Study on Public Hearings

Since the early 2000s, local governments in China have been holding public hearings to solicit opinion from state, city and township residents about legal and administrative issues. Having begun with a relatively small participation rate, in the last 10 years public hearings have achieved sustainable growth in their frequency and visibility in mainstream and social media. Given that public hearings do not offer decision-making power, the increased participation rate reveals an influence not necessarily on public policy making, but on urban citizens’ attitudes towards available participatory and deliberative mechanisms. This article refers to three bodies of literature: political efficacy, deliberative democracy, and social movements. The literature on political efficacy reveals the link between political attitudes and behaviors. The literature on deliberative democracy is an important part of the analysis because Chinese public hearings are based on deliberative designs imported from North America and Western Europe. The literature on social movements complements the deliberative analysis undertaken in an authoritarian context by providing it with conceptual tools to adapt to this new setting. The public hearings held in Guiyang (Guizhou), Wuhan (Hubei) and Qingdao (Shandong) in 2010 and 2011 are used as case studies to demonstrate participation demographics and the impact of public hearing participation on city dwellers. This article investigates the impact of participation in public hearings on the political efficacy of Chinese citizens, and, based on the results, contends that such participation equips the participants with an increased level of political efficacy, and enables the development of political networks and citizen strategies that help to constrain local officials.     

2015年度中国公共政策研究现状与未来展望--基于对“四刊”公共政策类论文的分析

通过对2015年度“四刊”中公共政策类论文进行定量统计和定性分析,可以看到当前的公共政策研究以政策执行、政策网络、公民参与等为热点主题,以定性思辨分析、文献资料研究为主导方法,分布在理论与方法探讨、政策过程研究、工具与价值思考、创新与变迁研究、比较研究与借鉴等多个领域。结合目前的研究现状和实践背景,未来我国的公共政策研究应当向法治化、民主化、科学化、信息化、国际化的方向迈进,以创新理论研究成果,服务当前现实需要。     

Public Administration, Science, and Risk Assessment: A Case Study of the U.K. Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Crisis

The bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) outbreak in the United Kingdom is regarded as one of the worst public policy crises the British government has experienced during the postwar era. In material terms, it has led to the slaughter of 3.3 million cattle and estimated economic losses of £3.7 billion. In administrative terms, the crisis brought about the dissolution of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. This article examines the istitutional context in which decisions about the scientific evidence on BSE were made. The authors argue that a centralized system in which government agencies control science for government is inherently vulnerable to alliances of experts and interest groups that undermine the credible assessment of public health and safety risks. Specific societal conditions may encourage risk-opportunistic behavior among policy makers that is conducive to delays and inaction until such time as the evidence of a health risk becomes overwhelming.     

行政决策的功能定位与听证笔录的效力——基于商谈理论的视角

政府行政决策权的扩张,使得已有立法控制和司法救济机制对决策权的监督约束相形见绌,行政决策的合法性问题凸显。协商民主理论主张以公众交往权力制约行政决策权,从而提供了重要的约束途径。行政决策中引入听证的目的,在于发挥其重大行政决策合法性过滤器的功能;而听证笔录效力则提供了交往权力制约行政权力的通道;从立法上确立听证笔录的法律地位,建立政府对决策听证的回应机制,是推进和完善我国行政决策听证制度的一项重要的基础性工作。     

Administrative Justice in the Wake of I,Daniel Blake

This article argues that Ken Loach's film, I, Daniel Blake, invites deep reflection on the relationship between the individual and the state, and, more particularly, on the role of administrative justice in restoring a re‐imagined sense of citizenship. Drawing on earlier debates from the 1950s, as well as on more recent advocacy of the ‘connected society’, the article proposes that to meet such an ambition, administrative justice must be recognised as an overarching set of principles and values, rooted in a framework of human rights and with a reinvigorated public‐sector ombud‐institution at its centre. In this way, administrative justice might serve as an effective and restorative counterweight to more legalistic options for responding to public grievance, whether the result of routine encounters with the state or of a major breakdown in trust, such as that occasioned by ‘Grenfell Tower’.     

State and Democratization in Nigeria

The articles interrogates the relationship between democratization and people power in Nigeria. It argues that the broadening of the Nigerian public sphere has not led to reciprocal development of democratic principles and practice. As civilian rule reigns and economic growth is reported, Nigeria’s democratization is fraught with many challenges. Democratization remains questionable in Nigeria; it is rudimentary and distorted by irregularities. These have had implications for national development and human securities as the poverty level worsens and acclaimed economic growth and “democratic dividends” fail to enhance Nigerians’ quality of life. The trivialization of democratization raises critical questions about its state and relevance to Nigerians and the Nigerian state. Is Nigeria democratizing or de-democratizing? How does the democratization process bring the Nigerian people closer to state (power)? How has it helped their developmental quests? The article contends that Nigeria’s democratization process is indeed on trial. As Ake argues, Nigerian state democratization does not only trivialize the essence of democracy—it also continues to reverse the democratization process. Against this background, the article concludes that the democratization process in Nigeria requires elite political will and people’s consciousness to advance to the next stage for better democratic consolidated and economic development relevant to Nigerians.