“行政主体间性”——府际关系的渊源与基点

我国中央政府、地方政府和行政部门之间的关系错综复杂,使得府际争议的求解鲜有头绪。行政主体间性的提出基于行政主体范式和主体间性理念,应用于公共行政之府际关系领域。行政主体间性倡导理性、创制规则,尊重多元行政主体的独立性,破除行政级别窠臼以实现多元行政主体间的全方位交流和多元政府间良性互动。     

行政主体间性：府际关系研究的新理路

信息化时代的我国府际关系路径繁杂,种类多样,涉及多元跨层级、跨部门、跨领域的政府机关时尤为突出.行政主体彼此不理解、缺信任,是府际争议发生的根源.后现代语境下的府际治理从新方向寻求理路,促成多元行政主体的磨合与角色互换,实现行政主体间关系的良性互动,这正是行政主体间性的体现.行政主体间性的目标和网络型政府不谋而合,正是一张张行政主体网络,凝结成了更宽泛的行政生态环境;行政主体间性促成行政主体间精诚合作和协商对话.行政主体间性,基于宪政角度打破了上级政府的话语垄断,延展了治理主体的涵盖范围和实现了多元共治,维护了多元行政主体的公共利益,是行之有效的协调和弥合府际关系争议的新理路.     

法政时代的中国"斜向府际关系"探究——建构中央部委与地方政府之多元行政主体间关系

条块基础在网络时代日趋落伍,僵化的管理体制难以弥合纵横交错的动态府际争议.斜向府际关系倡导"能量场"的作用,打破上级政府自说自话的垄断地位;重视行政主体间协商对话和信息交换,破除政府间一对一反馈困境,实现回应的多多互动;培养政府与社团乃至个人的共生价值观念.实现多元主体间全方位协调发展.     

政府间伙伴关系的发展路向

政府间伙伴关系是多元政府出于共同目标联合行事,实现行政主体间的跨区域跨部门合作.当前多元地方政府、中央部委及垂直管理机构、地方部门之间交流不畅,阻滞了行政系统整体合力的发挥. 地方政府是管理区域行政事务的政府组织,可以作为合作主体与他者合作,不能因对方级别高低而忽略自身地位.只有突破官僚制思维束缚,吸纳地方政府作为合作主体,才能建构政府间伙伴关系.     

论政府信任的复合结构

政府信任是由知、情、意、行四种逻辑要素依次递进、相互融合而形成的复杂的心理结构,是一种和谐的政治关系.政府信任包括微观或个人层面的信任、中观或制度层面的信任与宏观或价值层面的信任,构成多元客体共存的复合性政府信任结构.不同层级政府在国家政治生活中的地位与角色构成不同,表现为不同的行政能力、行为作风、权威性、亲和力,导致产生一种非均衡性分布的“差序政府信任格局”.通过政府信任的解构性分析,可以较为深刻地把握政府信任的合法性来源,正确调整和评估政府的行政行为和政策,以为构建社会主义和谐社会奠定良好的政治基础.     

中国府际合作中的信任北大核心CSSCI

信任可以减少组织间和人际交往中的不确定性,信任在政府运作中是不可缺少的基础条件。中国有五个政府层级,纵向府际间存在必要的信任。地方政府间能否进行必要的合作,取决于相互间是否有足够的信任。纵向组织间信任包括不同层级政府整体间的信任和政府部门系统内不同层级之间的信任,这两类组织信任是相互的和双向的。纵向府际关系里的人际信任包括上下级官员之间和官员之间的信任,组织间信任是普遍信任,人际信任属于特殊信任。横向府际合作以相互信任为基础。横向府际信任包括双边信任和多边信任,多边合作形成了政府网络。官员间的人际信任对于横向府际合作具有特殊的作用。府际关系里存在信任程度不足的现象,提高府际信任的一个重要途径是形成政府间的伙伴关系,建立府际治理机制。     

政府间伙伴关系的发展路向

政府间伙伴关系是多元政府出于共同目标联合行事，实现行政主体间的跨区域跨部门合作。当前多元地方政府、中央部委及垂直管理机构、地方部门之间交流不畅，阻滞了行政系统整体合力的发挥。     

中国府际合作中的信任

信任可以减少组织间和人际交往中的不确定性,信任在政府运作中是不可缺少的基础条件。中国有五个政府层级,纵向府际间存在必要的信任。地方政府间能否进行必要的合作,取决于相互间是否有足够的信任。纵向组织间信任包括不同层级政府整体间的信任和政府部门系统内不同层级之间的信任,这两类组织信任是相互的和双向的。纵向府际关系里的人际信任包括上下级官员之间和官员之间的信任,组织间信任是普遍信任,人际信任属于特殊信任。横向府际合作以相互信任为基础。横向府际信任包括双边信任和多边信任,多边合作形成了政府网络。官员间的人际信任对于横向府际合作具有特殊的作用。府际关系里存在信任程度不足的现象,提高府际信任的一个重要途径是形成政府间的伙伴关系,建立府际治理机制。     

政府绩效评估的系统偏差与政策控制——基于整体性治理的分析框架

绩效评估政策执行是政府公共权力与资源配置的协同要义,以整体性治理为切入点实施政府绩效评估系统偏差的政策控制是评估政策执行过程的核心命题。协同机制是消解地方政府之间过度化竞争的逻辑前提,整合机制是破除政府治理"职责同构"层级绩效分割效应的规范要求,绩效评估结果偏差的控制路向体现整合机制与协调机制的双重契合。建构绩效评估系统偏差政策控制的整体性治理框架,充分信任与合作是绩效评估系统偏差的政策协调的价值前提,基于合理"空间"布局实现绩效评估治理府际间政策网络的协同优化,建构政府间一体化的信息资源共享与数据交换系统。     

政府信任适度下降的合理性研究

政府信任是政府与公众之间相互信任的结果,由于公众理性的进步、新媒体的快速发展和社会的急剧变革,政府信任水平的适度下降有其合理性和必然性。但对于转型期的中国而言,由于公众意识形态的多元和政府公共服务水平不足,政府信任的过度下降易增加社会的不稳定因素,政府的目标应该是在允许政府信任的适度下降与避免政府信任的过度下降之间寻求一种均衡——意识到政府信任的适度下降的必然性;从政府的单一主体管理转变为多元主体共治;加快体制改革;在整合政府职能的基础上改革政府结构和管理方式;建构一套符合现代社会要求的国民价值观体系。     

The Importance of Trust in Government for Public Administration: The Case of Zoning

Many scholars argue that citizens with higher levels of political trust are more likely to grant bureaucratic discretion to public administrators than citizens with lower levels of trust. Trust, therefore, can relieve the tension between managerial flexibility and political accountability in the modern administrative state. Unfortunately, there is little empirical evidence showing that trust is actually associated with citizens' willingness to cede policy-making power to government. This article tests theories about political trust and citizen competence using the case of zoning. Trust in local government is found to be an important predictor of support for zoning, but trust in state government and trust in national government have no effect. These findings suggest that trust affects policy choice and helps determine how much power citizens grant to local administrators.     

Social and Political Consequences of Administrative Corruption: A Study of Public Perceptions in Spain

Spain experienced an outbreak of public sector corruption—much of it related to the involvement of regional and local administrators and politicians in the country's urban development boom—that angered the public and sparked calls for government reform. Using data from a 2009 survey that followed these events, the authors examine the association between perceived corruption and the attitudes and behaviors of citizens, including satisfaction with government and democracy, social and institutional trust, and rule‐breaking behaviors. The findings suggest that perceptions of administrative as well as political corruption are associated with less satisfaction, lower levels of social and institutional trust, and a greater willingness to break rules. Although these survey results cannot prove causation, they are consistent with the notion that administrative and political corruption damages the legitimacy of government in the eyes of citizens and weakens the social fabric of democratic society.     

Managerial Quality,Administrative Performance and Trust in Governance: Can We Point to Causality?

The relationship between managerial quality, administrative performance and citizens' trust in government and in public administration systems is a field of study that so far has not received adequate scholarly attention. This article explores some interrelationships between these variables and empirically tests between causality, if it exists, between performance and trust. Applying a technique of structural equation modelling (SEM) with LISREL 8.3 the study examined a sample of 345 Israeli citizens and compared three alternative models. The second model that showed a quality → performance → trust relationship fitted the data best. However, the third model also had some advantages worthy of elaboration. Thus, we concluded that administrative performance may be treated as a precondition to trust in governance rather than trust serving as the precondition to performance. The article ends with further discussion of the findings and their meaning in light of the democratic, bureaucratic and new public management theory.     

States, Counties, and the Questions of Trust and Capacity

This study indicates that there is a high level of confidenceamong county representatives that state officials will be responsiveto local needs, but less confidence in state willingness toprovide fiscal support for programs. The preference for continuedfederal funding of programs is strongly evident. County representativesfeel that their policymaking and administrative responsibilitiesare increasing but that their fiscal (taxing and borrowing)capacities are not being expanded as quickly. The highest levelsof trust in state officials were found among those county representativeswho perceived the greatest increases in local government capacitiesto respond to local problems.     

Political Trust, Ideology, and Public Support for Government Spending

This article analyzes the relationship between political trust, ideology, and public support for government spending. We argue that the political trust heuristic is activated when individuals are asked to sacrifice ideological as well as material interests. Aggregate- and individual-level analysis shows that the effects of political trust on support for government spending are moderated by ideology. Consistent with the unbalanced ideological costs imposed by requests for increased government spending, we find that the effects of political trust are significantly more pronounced among conservatives than among liberals. The analysis further demonstrates that ideology conditions the effects of political trust on attitudes toward both distributive and redistributive spending. Our findings suggest that political trust has policy consequences across a much broader range of policy issues than previously thought.     

Democratizing the Administrative State: Connecting Neighborhood Councils and City Agencies

Citizen participation in government decision making, especially at the local level, has received heightened attention with regard to its promise for improved governance. The overarching administrative ethos of the administrative state creates barriers to citizen participation in governance. Developing and nurturing citizen participation in the presence of the administrative state is a significant challenge. Drawing on the literary tradition of public engagement and learning, this article models a developmental strategy of participation that offers one avenue for achieving meaningful partnerships between city agencies and neighborhood councils in a metropolitan environment. We present a model of citizen participation that brings neighborhood councils and city agencies together in a collaborative partnership. This model is based on the literature on citizen participation, which focuses on the significance of interactive processes in building trust among participants and creating mutual understanding and agreement.     

From Policy to Practice: From Ideas to Results,From Results to Trust

Few areas of public administration have been more discouraging, over a longer period of time, than the struggle to build public trust in government's work. However, new research suggests that public administrators can build trust by improving the results they produce for citizens. Practical, practicable steps can produce big improvements: improving government's focus on citizens' needs; engaging employees; focusing on fairness; and, especially, concentrating on the delivery of public services at the “retail” level. Citizens, research shows, can discriminate among levels of government, the administration of different programs in different functional areas, and the work of individual administrators. That provides strong hope for improving trust, in an era when too often government appears too untrustworthy.     

Issues of Federalism in Response to Terrorism

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, provoked, among other reactions, considerable commentary about the future of American federalism, particularly predictions of administrative centralization. To assess the potential impact of terrorism on U.S. intergovernmental relations and the ways the federal system should respond, members of the American Political Science Association's Section on Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations were surveyed in late 2001. Generally, these federalism scholars believe the September 11 terrorism will have little effect on intergovernmental relations or on the U.S. Supreme Court's state–friendly jurisprudence, and the surge in public trust and confidence in the federal government will be short–lived. The scholars tend to support a highly federalized response to terrorism, but with intergovernmental cooperation. Partisan differences among the scholars on policy options, however, mirror the party differences in Congress and the resurgence of "politics as usual" less than a year after September 11, 2001.