非均衡:当前中国公民社会影响政策过程的主要特征

在公民社会的选择性政策参与取向、政策过程的开放程度和制度资源配置的不均衡等三个因素的影响下,中国公民社会影响政策过程的"非均衡"特征比较凸显:实际参与和影响政策过程的范围不均衡;官办组织与草根组织影响政策过程的方式选择不均衡;影响政策过程的效能不均衡。这种非均衡特征的存在,不但会影响公民社会政策认同功能的提升,而且易破坏政策过程民主化的进程。但在中国公民社会的产生与发展均与国家主动让渡的空间密切相关的生发逻辑下,随着中国公民社会的日臻成熟和民主政治发展的日渐深入,以上影响因素都将随着国家与社会间合作共赢关系的逐渐形成而被破解。由此,由"非均衡"走向"均衡",将成为中国公民社会影响政策过程的基本趋向。     

中国公民社会参与政策过程的消极影响

中国的公民社会可以界定为民间组织和公共舆论两个层面.中国公民社会参与政策过程具有必然性.中国公民社会参与政策过程的消极影响主要有四个方面:加大达成政策共识的难度,增加社会冲突;使政策偏向于强势群体,损害弱势群体和普通大众的利益;增加政策过程中的矛盾冲突,降低政策过程的效率;损害政策的科学性,增加政策过程的非理性因素.     

非均衡性:当前中国公民社会影响政策过程的主要特征

在公民社会的选择性政策参与取向、政策过程的开放程度和制度资源配置的不均衡等三个因素的影响下,中国公民社会影响政策过程的非均衡特征比较凸显:实际参与和影响政策过程的范围不均衡;官办组织与草根组织影响政策过程的方式选择不均衡;影响政策过程的效能不均衡.这种非均衡特征的存在,不但会影响公民社会政策认同功能的提升,而且易破坏政策过程民主化的进程.但在中国公民社会的产生与发展均与国家主动让渡的空间密切相关的生发逻辑下,随着中国公民社会的日臻成熟和民主政治发展的日渐深入.以上影响因素都将随着国家与社会间合作共赢关系的逐渐形成而被破解.由此,由非均衡走向均衡,将成为中国公民社会影响政策过程的基本趋向.     

公民社会影响政策过程的特点

作为沟通政府与不同社会群体之间的一种纽带或双向传送带，日益勃兴的中国公民社会为公民参与政策过程提供了最直接和最有效的组织化的和公共话语化的双重渠道：组织化渠道聚集、凝练整合了分散无序的个体潜在影响力，提高了公众参与政策过程的能力；公共活语渠道引导、培养了社会公众的理性意识和公共精神，     

制度环境:中国公民社会政策参与的制约因素

改革开放后中国公民社会政策参与的日益活跃和扩大化,直接得益于制度环境的改善。但是,目前的制度环境仍包含诸多障碍因素,主要是:制度环境的控制与限制取向制约了民间组织实力和规模的壮大;监管体制缺陷导致民间组织行政化和营利化;参与渠道不畅,非制度化参与呈扩大趋势。     

中国公民社会参与政策执行的动因和方式

结合中国实际,公民社会可以界定为民间组织和公共舆论两个层面。改革开放时期逐渐兴起的中国公民社会有着强烈的参与政府政策过程的愿望和要求,政府也有接纳公民社会参与的动机和需要,两方面的结合成为中国公民社会参与政策执行的基本动因。中国公民社会参与政策执行的方式主要可以分为辅助执行、受托执行和监督执行三种。当前在这三种方式中辅助执行最为常见,受托执行逐渐增多,监督执行作用日益增大。     

转型期中国公民社会的建构探析

改革开放以来,中国开始了由计划经济向市场经济的转型,但是转型进程中,我们发现,政治国家的力量大大超越了公民社会的力量,公民社会一直被政治国家所湮没,因此,如何构建一个成熟的公民社会就成为当代中国社会转型的轴心,并将影响着中国现代化的进程与前景。本文基于当代中国公民社会现状提出：建构一个成熟的公民社会是中国社会转型的必由之路,而在当代中国公民社会的构建进程中,市场经济的建立和完善是基础,现代公司的塑造是核心,社会组织的发展是关键,宪政民主制度的确立是保障。     

浅议中国公民社会和公民道德建设及意义

本文通过对公民社会和公民道德概念的廓清来论证中国公民社会和公民道德的独特特点，并试图从中国公民社会和公民道德的具体情况出发来寻求解决中国公民道德建设中一些问题的方法以及其对构建和谐社会的意义。     

社会资本影响制度发展的作用机理探究

社会资本理论以嵌入性关系为核心,提供了研究制度与文化互动关系的整合视角,新制度主义对制度概念的扩展与此呼应。从信任资本、规范资本和网络资本的制度发展助力与阻滞机理审思出发,重点考量社会资本影响制度发展表现的作用特征,透析其中的社会网络的制度空间压制、社会规范的累积性迟滞以及社会结构的失衡弱化制度创新动能等根源性牵制。因此,若想充分发挥社会资本的制度发展功能,需要积极培育社会资本运行环境,以为社会资本整体助推公共制度现代化构建丰富资源。     

转型中国公民社会发展的意义分析

转型中国一个相对独立的公民社会正在迅速成长和壮大,它的发展状况直接影响中国社会政治、法制、经济、文化和国际关系各个层面的发展,对促进整个中国社会系统的发展有举足轻重的意义.     

Contrasting Visions of Global Civil Society for Organization and Policy

Books reviewed in this article: Mary Kaldor, Helmut Anheier, and Marlies Glasius, eds., Global Civil Society Yearbook 2003 John Keane, Global Civil Society? Lester M. Salamon, Helmut K. Anheier, Regina List, Stefan Toepler, S. Wojcieh Sokolowski, and associates, Global Civil Society: Dimensions of the Nonprofit Sector     

Collective Action,Civil Society,and Public Policy in Turkey

Abstract

Understanding policy change mechanisms has been a key question for scholars of public policy and collective action. However, policy scholarship mostly ignores civil society-based explanations of policy processes. In order to address this gap, this study combines the Advocacy Coalition Framework with networked collective action perspectives and analyzes a successful case of mobilization of women’s rights organizations in Turkey to reverse a bill on child marriage. Study findings suggest that advocacy coalitions are not static entities. When different issues in a policy subsystem are invoked, the structure of inter-coalition networks can change substantially and these variations in inter-coalition interactions may have consequences for influencing policy change. Moreover, this paper argues that extensive street protests and online campaigns by civil society organizations have the capacity to boost the bargaining power of minority coalitions, especially in contexts that lack multiple formal venues for making policy claims.     

论公民社会的组织特征

在公民社会里，基于市场经济的炼造，组织具有一定的自主性和自主性利益；基于积极公民的活动，组织的界限趋向水平联系上的模糊化。以“自主性”和“界限趋向水平联系上的模糊化”两个指标来分析中国社会的组织特征发现，中国社会虽有向公民社会发育的迹象，但总体上仍处于成权社会，而不是公民社会。     

和谐社会与民事合意性纠纷解决机制

民事合意性纠纷解决机制有助于社会的和谐稳定,但是,透视我国民事合意性纠纷解决的现状,却严重地存在着与社会和谐稳定的目标不相符合的地方:一些现有的合意性纠纷解决制度并不具有当然的法律效力,实践中大量存在的合意性纠纷解决制度并不为法律所认可。在构建和谐社会的条件下,应从立法上明确规定诉讼和解与执行和解的法律效力,并赋予其强制执行力,对于协议不起诉、协议撤诉、协议不上诉等合意性制度的效力应当获得法律的认可。此外,对两大法系明文规定的其他一些民事合意性纠纷解决制度,也要合理地吸收。     

Civil Society Actors and EU Fundamental Rights Policy: Opportunities and Challenges

This paper examines how civil society actors in the EU utilize the political and legal opportunities provided by the EU’s fundamental rights policy to mobilize against discrimination, notably racism, and xenophobia. It emphasizes the multiple enabling roles that this policy provides to civil society associations engaged in judicial activism, political advocacy, and service delivery both at the EU and Member State levels, and assesses their effectiveness. It describes several factors that hinder the implementation of EU fundamental rights policy and reviews the strategies of civil society to overcome them. It highlights the reluctance of parts of public opinion to combat ethnic prejudice, considers reactions against what at a time of crisis is perceived as a costly project of social regulation, and examines civil society responses. The data sources consist of interviews with bureaucratic and civil society actors at EU level.     

The Challenge of Strengthening Nonprofits and Civil Society

The Winter Commission Report was centrally concerned with improving the performance of state and local governments. Since the issuance of the commission’s report in 1993, the delivery of services by state and local government has been substantially changed by the growing role of nonprofit organizations in providing public services and representing citizen interests. As a result, state and local governments and nonprofit agencies are faced with complex governance challenges. The central argument of this paper is that despite the dramatic changes in the relationship between government and nonprofit organizations in recent years, the key tenets of the Winter Commission report—the need for improved training and education, greater transparency and accountability, more emphasis on performance, and improved citizen engagement—remain deeply relevant in improving the governance of the public services in an increasingly complex policy process and service delivery system at the state and local levels.     

我国政策执行中的目标扭曲研究——对我国四次公务员工资改革的考察

运用案例研究的方法分析了我国四次公务员工资改革的政策执行,基于2008年和2009年的一线调研,试图运用政策执行的理论评估在公共管理文献中很重要、但被忽略的工资管理事项.回顾了我国四次公务人员工资改革的特点和问题.在此基础上,重点分析了工资管理中的欠薪问题、工资统发和激励机制问题.结论是,有依赖关系的多部门执行是政策执行走样的原因之一.另外,工资管理中给一线执行人员的自主权也过于有限.从更大的层面来分析,本文提出一个今后研究公共政策可以深入探讨的问题:成功的执行应以政策文件所表述的内容为基础,还是以公共利益为基础.提出一些政策建议:从工资管理权来看,要改变工资管理多家分享的局面; 从决策过程来看,工资改革要吸收基层公务员的意见;最后,工资作为一项人力资源管理手段,要注意内部公平和奖优罚劣的双重功能.     

The Monitoring Capacity of Civil Society Networks: A Social Network Analysis in the Case of Gender Equality Policy

The role of civil society organizations (CSOs) as a watchdog in the implementation process is widely acknowledged. However, little is known about what determines their capacity to monitor EU policy implementation and how it differs across member states. This article accounts for social capital as well as human and financial capital to determine the monitoring capacity of CSOs. To capture sources of social capital, a network analysis is applied in a comparative case article on the monitoring networks of national platforms of the European Women’s Lobby across eight EU member states. The analysis reveals that CSOs in western member states are rich in human, financial and social capital, while CSOs in CEE member states compensate for this lack of resources by linking up with the Commission.     

Unveiling Nepal's Civil Society

The main purpose of this paper is to provide information about Nepal's civil society as far as possible, as the same has become much contested in recent years. The article looks into the different traditions (from traditional to post-modern) of civil society in Nepal as an endeavour to take stock of where it stands vis-à-vis with various factors in the context of economy, polity, and society. The paper argues that, although Nepal has a very long tradition of civil society, the extant one is highly politicized. Part of the problem with politicization lies with perpetual political instability and part with the way civil society has come to be understood. In the context of Nepal, there are yet no clear tools developed to map the civil society. It concludes that one cannot have water-tight compartmentalization of civil society and other societies as they are interdependent, but when civil society groups lose the civility factor, they are bound to face legitimacy questions—which perhaps is the case in Nepal.