论政府机关思想政治工作的基准点

对政府官员的思想政治工作搞了几十年何以成效甚微,一个重要的原因是对政府官员本质身份的定位不准确所致.政府官员同其他千千万万不同职业和自然人一样,也属于追逐自身利益的经济人的范畴,只有把握这一基准点,才能在制度建设、道德规范和思想教育等方面取得预期成效.     

Trust in government increased during the Covid-19 pandemic in Australia and New Zealand

Using an online panel, we surveyed a representative sample of 500 each in Australia and New Zealand during July 2020, in the middle of the Covid-19 pandemic. We find trust in government has increased dramatically, with around 80% of respondents agreeing government was generally trustworthy. Around three quarters agreed management of the pandemic had increased their trust in government. Over 85% of respondents have confidence that public health scientists work in the public interest. Testing four hypotheses, we find that income and education predict trust in government and confidence in public health scientists, as does voting for the political party in government. Trust in government and confidence in public health scientists strongly predict Covid-19 phone application use, largely through convincing people the App is beneficial. Trust in government then is both an outcome and antecedent of government effectiveness. Building trust is important for governments implementing difficult policy responses during a crisis.     

Analyzing Greens in power: Setting the agenda

Abstract.  What are the key questions that political scientists investigating Green parties in government have to address? What are the possible contributions of a variety of theories and approaches to the explanation of the Green governmental experience, in a cross-national context? The international experience with Green party governmental participation is reviewed, followed by a discussion of past work and future challenges to explain Green parties' entry into government, their performance in government, the impact of government on them, and the conditions for their survival in or exit from government.     

Government and Science: A Troubled, Critical Relationship and What Can Be Done about It

The U.S. government–science relationship, which helped win World War II, put a man on the moon, unravel the human genome, and nurture economic growth, is troubled. Money is one reason. However, far more than funding, the tensions between government and science are about politics and policy management. Many scientists and their allies argue that the Bush administration has crossed the line separating appropriate control of information from political interference. That is, there has been a "politicization of science." This essay examines the current debate about politicization in historical context; discusses the tensions among scientists, politicians, and administrators; and suggests possible ways to strengthen the government–science partnership in the future.     

Introduction to Jesse Burkhead Symposium

Government budgeting is one of the major processes by which the use of public resources is planned and controlled. To the extent that this is done well, governmental programs are brought increasingly to the service of its citizens, enhancing their material and cultural status.
The study of government budgeting is a study in applied economics—in the allocation of scarce resources. This study must look at operations and begin with organization and procedure, the routines which have been established for decision–making in government. It should extend to an examination of the influences, governmental and nongovernmental, that come to bear on the decision-making process.
Ours is both an organized society and a society of organizations. The significance of organization is nowhere more evident than in the public sector. Here organizational arrangements bring together the learning of all social scientists. The patterns for decision-making do not provide separate compartments for economic knowledge, for political knowledge, for social knowledge. These are merged in the organizational arrangements which have been established for the conduct of governmental affairs.1     

“Selling out” and the sociology of knowledge

Personal experience suggests that it is a great oversimplification to assume that those analysts or scientists who work on government sponsored contracts are forced by their personal economic and power interests to make their work conform to the ideology of the military-industrial establishment. The sociology of knowledge on which this assumption is based must be supplemented by a culturology of knowledge. In terms of the latter an important obstacle to good policy analysis for government comes from the fact that most analysts are heavily influenced by a rather narrow academic and intellectual subculture that makes it difficult for them to understand with sufficient balance the problems that face decisionmakers in the real world.     

The evolution of consciousness: identity and personality in historical perspective

The development of language in human evolution made possible complex social relations. This development led to cultural diversity rather than to uniformity. An important part of such diversity is different ways of constructing and specifying persons as social agents. ‘Consciousness’ is defined as the capacity to construct and narrate courses of action. Different forms of personality, therefore, affect capacities for action. The paper considers such capacities by examining circumstances in which hitherto alien cultures and societies clash. It concentrates on the example of the Spanish conquest of Mexico in the early sixteenth century, and argues that cultural differences and different modes of construction of persons as social actors were a major factor in facilitating the conquest. It is neither concerned to defend the Conquistadoresnor to claim that greater praxeologial effectiveness conferred on their actions superior moral worth, quite the contrary. The Spanish conquest is used to illustrate the phenomenon of distinct societies modes of specifying persons through and as culture.     

Professional styles in government: Touchstones for the new policy scientist

New kinds of policy analysts and policy scientists are being trained in university graduate programs but the outlines of this new profession remain fuzzy. A comparative analysis of other professionals in government advisory roles may provide touchstones by which to develop the new profession. The article reports interviews with urban planners, lawyers, economists and political scientists about their experience in government. Propositions are developed about characteristic modes of thought and problem-solving styles of each profession and conclusions drawn about the relative effectiveness of each set of professional skills in a policymaking process. It is then suggested that the new policy scientist profession should develop some of the positive skills of the other fields in order to enhance effectiveness.     

Nonprofits and Civic Engagement

There are approximately 800,000 501(c)(3) nonprofits large enough to register with the federal government. Add churches, foundations, and nonprofits too small to register, and the number is far higher than that. The potential for nonprofits to engage their clients and members in community affairs and public policy making is, in theory, enormous. Yet, perversely, nonprofits are regulated by the federal government in such a way that discourages the involvement of their followers in the public policymaking process. This is a problem, not simply because we social scientists believe civic engagement is a good thing, but because these regulatory standards sharply skew public participation. Although middle- and upper-class individuals have many organizations that engage and mobilize them, nonprofits usually are the only organizations that work on behalf of the poor, those without health insurance, immigrants, the disabled, and most other marginalized constituencies. Put bluntly, federal law works against the participation of the most disadvantaged in society.     

SCIENCE IN A PUBLIC SERVICE ENVIRONMENT: ARE STATUTORY AUTHORITIES THE ANSWER?*

Abstract: The Royal Commission on Australian Government Administration reported evidence of widespread morale problems among government scientists. A major contributing cause was seen as the environment under which science is conducted within a departmental structure. One solution which has been advocated by many scientists, although rejected by the RCAGA, is to transfer government scientific laboratories into statutory authorities.     

Banality in Politics: Margaret Thatcher and the Biographers

There are numerous biographies of Margaret Thatcher, but as yet no full-length study has been written by a political scientist. This is a disappointing omission from the literature, and reflects a general tendency to undervalue biographical studies. One result has been the production of scholarly work on the Conservative party between 1975 and 1990 which is unduly abstract and often misleading. Equally, although some excellent biographies have been produced – and Thatcher's memoirs are among the best of their genre – the unique perspectives of political science can yield some fascinating insights into her career, her party and the changing nature of British government. This article traces some of the crucial interactions which influenced Thatcher – her family background, her experiences within the Conservative party, her electioneering and her conduct of government. It concludes that although Thatcher's personality developed as a result of these encounters, as an adult she affected institutions far more than they affected her. This raises interesting, but not insuperable challenges for political scientists. Individuals do matter, and their influence can be appraised within a broader context. Ironically, it seems that complex characters conform more readily to generalisable norms of political conduct; Thatcher, by contrast, broke many of the accepted rules precisely because her personality was so banal.     

Community Narratives of Disaster Risk and Resilience: Implications for Government Policy

The paper explores how subjective risk perception intersects with government disaster management policy that is premised on an objective approach to risk assessment and mitigation. It finds that the presumption of objective risk management underpinning government policy is fundamentally at odds with community risk perceptions. This paper applies the techniques of ethnographic study to explore how communities understand and frame risk narratives. Using qualitative methods, the paper constructs the risk narratives of residents of Rocklea, Brisbane, following their experience with the 2011 Brisbane Flood. These risk narratives are considered in light of the Australian National Strategy for Disaster Resilience and recommendations are accordingly made for government disaster management policy.     

How Large‐Scale Research Facilities Connect to Global Research

Policies for large‐scale research facilities (LSRFs) often highlight their spillovers to industrial innovation and their contribution to the external connectivity of the regional innovation system hosting them. Arguably, the particular institutional features of LSRFs are conducive for collaborative research. However, based on data on publications produced in 2006–2009 at the Neutron Science Directorate of Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee (United States), we find that internationalization of its collaborative research is restrained by coordination costs similar to those characterizing other institutional settings. Policies mandating LSRFs should consider that research prioritized on the basis of technological relevance limits the international reach of collaborations. Additionally, the propensity for international collaboration is lower for resident scientists than for those affiliated with domestic universities or government laboratories. Policies conceiving LSRFs as “knowledge attractors” therefore should consider the complementarities between research at a LSRF and in its academic context at a regional or national level.     

The Fulfillment of Parties’ Election Pledges: A Comparative Study on the Impact of Power Sharing

Why are some parties more likely than others to keep the promises they made during previous election campaigns? This study provides the first large‐scale comparative analysis of pledge fulfillment with common definitions. We study the fulfillment of over 20,000 pledges made in 57 election campaigns in 12 countries, and our findings challenge the common view of parties as promise breakers. Many parties that enter government executives are highly likely to fulfill their pledges, and significantly more so than parties that do not enter government executives. We explain variation in the fulfillment of governing parties’ pledges by the extent to which parties share power in government. Parties in single‐party executives, both with and without legislative majorities, have the highest fulfillment rates. Within coalition governments, the likelihood of pledge fulfillment is highest when the party receives the chief executive post and when another governing party made a similar pledge.     

The programme to policy linkage: The fulfilment of election pledges on socio-economic policy in the Netherlands, 1986–1998

To what extent are the contents of party election programmes congruent with subsequent government policy actions? Existing research on the fulfilment of pre-election pledges focuses on systems of government in which executives formed by a single parties are the norm. This study extends this research to coalition systems of government. Specific policy proposals made by the main Dutch parties in their recent election programmes are identified and compared with subsequent government policy actions. Hypotheses about the conditions under which pledges are more likely to be acted upon are formulated and tested. Although clear linkages between election programmes and subsequent policies are found, pledges made by prospective coalition parties in the Netherlands are less likely to be acted upon than those made by prospective governing parties in the United Kingdom. Prominent features of cabinet government, such as the allocation of ministerial portfolios and the coalition policy agreement, are found to influence the likelihood of pledges being fulfilled. In addition, consensus between parties is also found to increase the likelihood of government actions responding to election pledges.

     

The programme to policy linkage: The fulfilment of election pledges on socio–economic policy in The Netherlands, 1986–1998

To what extent are the contents of party election programmes congruent with subsequent government policy actions? Existing research on the fulfilment of pre–election pledges focuses on systems of government in which executives formed by a single parties are the norm. This study extends this research to coalition systems of government. Specific policy proposals made by the main Dutch parties in their recent election programmes are identified and compared with subsequent government policy actions. Hypotheses about the conditions under which pledges are more likely to be acted upon are formulated and tested. Although clear linkages between election programmes and subsequent policies are found, pledges made by prospective coalition parties in the Netherlands are less likely to be acted upon than those made by prospective governing parties in the United Kingdom. Prominent features of cabinet government, such as the allocation of ministerial portfolios and the coalition policy agreement, are found to influence the likelihood of pledges being fulfilled. In addition, consensus between parties is also found to increase the likelihood of government actions responding to election pledges.     

REINTERPRETING THE DEBATE ON AUTONOMY IN PUBLIC SERVICE SCIENCE*

Abstract: The report of the Science Task Force of the Royal Commission on Australian Government Administration rekindled an old debate on autonomy versus accountability for government scientists. The rationale given there for allowing the natural science community great discretion in managing its own affairs while in receipt of very considerable public funds did not get much support in the debate. Unfortunately, the debate did little to illuminate the problems facing those charged with producing creative, but relevant research in public institutions. A more productive way of tackling the question of autonomy and accountability is to see whose interests are promoted by different stances on the issue. Some critics represent the quest for autonomy as simple power-seeking by professional elites. Yet the institutional setting for many supposedly autonomous scientists involved in successful innovation in industry often involves extensive interaction with non-scientists. User groups — such as the agricultural commodities research committees — influence scientists through a loosely coordinated network. In this situation a form of accountability exists, although it is not exerted through formal parliamentary mechanisms. The arrangements have some elements of corporatism. Autonomy is not prominent within this setting except elusively as a rationale used to blunt temporarily the impact of particular interest group demands that threaten the continuity required to realize investments in long-term research projects. In this case, autonomy is essentially a myth. However, to the extent that it allows scientific institutions to combine interaction in the practical world that their research must serve with some insulation from short-term political or interest group pressures, it may be valuable for successful research management. Science administrators sometimes regulate the research of their juniors quite closely, indicating that even individual “scientific autonomy” can be a very limited form of freedom. None the less, it can be managed in such a way as to allow creative talent to flourish within an accountable structure albeit one that departs from the conventional norms of responsible government.     

Embracing the Tension Between Ethnic Identity and Academic Identity: An Analysis of Challenges to Chinese American Political Scientists’ Presentation of Knowledge

An increasing number of foreign-born Chinese political scientists teach and engage in research at colleges and universities in North America. Like other foreign-born scholars, these Chinese American political scientists must manage the tension between their ethnic identities and academic identities. What is the ethnic identity of Chinese American political scientists? What do their ethnic identities have to do with the objects of their critical inquiries? What challenges will they face on their way to reaching an epistemological middle ground between professional judgment and subjective perception? By using survey, discourse analysis, and ethnography, this essay analyzes the influence of ethnic identity on the work of Chinese American political scientists. Rather than comment on their individual scholarship, this essay examines the impact of ethnic identity on the effectiveness and quality of their presentation of scholarship to the public.     

Estimates and public policy: The politics of numbers

Abstract

Estimates of the number of homeless persons in the United States are frequently said to range from 250,000 to three million. In fact, the latter number is an invalid guesstimate that developed staying power for political reasons. National estimates of homeless persons based on explainable methodologies actually range from 230,000 to 736,000, with the most likely estimates around the half‐million mark. Despite the confrontational politics surrounding the numbers issue in the 1980s, a consensus is developing in the 1990s among private groups, including some major advocacy organizations, and all levels of government regarding policy direction in assistance programs for the homeless. There is widespread recognition that the goal should be to end homelessness, not simply to provide emergency assistance. Permanent housing solutions for special populations are needed in the context of renewed efforts to combat poverty.

In the public debate about the policy implications of divergent national estimates of the numbers of homeless persons, a common assumption is that the estimates vary widely and inexplicably—anywhere from a few hundred thousand to three million or more. Those who do try to explain the odd discrepancy between the extremes seem to assume that any count is politically motivated. They say that it depends on how one defines homelessness and who is counting. In other words, the implication is that numbers derive from policy and politics, rather than the other way around.

Given such perceptions, it is not surprising that some who have neither the time nor, perhaps, the resources to judge the accuracy of estimates begin to feel that the truth must be somewhere in between, as if a mathematical average were equivalent to a political compromise. Others will believe the message if they like the messenger. In a recent book on homelessness, for example, the author confesses that he trusts estimates “made by people who live where ‘the rubber meets the road’… rather more than the bright theorists tucked away in ivory towers.”¹ Although many statistics are politically controversial, it is probably safe to say that the debate on homelessness during the past decade represents the apogee of political numerology. It is worth reviewing just how this came to pass.     

Partisanship,attribution and approval in a public health shock

Political scientists have long agreed that partisanship can bias how voters evaluate government performance and attribute responsibility. However, less is known about how – and to what extent – these biases work across different types of voters, or how they respond to positive or non-partisan policy outcomes. In this research note we address these questions, focusing on how voters respond to a positive, non-partisan public health shock: the successful early rollout of Covid-19 vaccinations in England. Through a pre-registered information experiment embedded in the British Election Study (N > 6000), we test how voters respond to claims that the quasi-independent National Health Service, rather than the government, deserved credit for the success of the programme. On average, subjects do attribute less responsibility to government, but this has no downstream effect on general approval. Exploratory heterogeneity analyses suggest that government and opposition supporters, as well as historic swing voters, respond homogeneously to our intervention. Our findings are not fully explained by rational or selective frameworks of responsibility attribution, and add nuance to existing experimental work on the political effects of the pandemic.