整体性治理与农民工子女的社会融入

农民工随迁子女实际上是城市第二代移民,他们能否融入城市社会是公共管理的重大议题,但当前政府应对这一问题的举措过于碎片化。本文系统地分析了农民工子女融入城市社会的主要障碍,并基于整体性治理的思路,提出具有可操作性的政策建议:首先,必须建立跨部门合作的机制和平台;其次,帮助农民工子女克服升学和就业瓶颈;再次,要积极鼓励社会组织参与合作治理,为农民工子女提供教育和社会服务;第四,少先队、共青团组织应当加强对农民工子女的关怀和吸纳;最后,以社区和学校为主要平台促进农民工子女社会融合。     

社会组织管理体制:地方政府的创新实践

本文从中央与地方这一空间维度审视地方政府创新实践及其对我国社会组织管理体制改革的推动作用。在当前中央社会组织管理体制改革的进展背后,存在一轮如火如荼、方兴未艾的地方政府创新实践,这些地方实践各有特色,并经过相互竞争和学习,在管理目的、理念、主体等方面形成一些共同取向。对创新的动力进行分析发现,各地的创新探索既非社会需求自下而上的压力驱动,亦非源自中央自上而下的指示和动员,而是地方党政领导思想解放、主动创新的结果。本文认为地方创新有力地推动了中央层次的社会组织管理体制改革进程,具体而言有三种机制,即改革预期包围、改革意志传递和改革备选政策供给。     

构建政府主导型水环境综合治理机制——以云南滇池治理为例

论文基于利益博弈分析,论证了水环境治理有必要强化政府管制,单纯的市场机制和自主治理都不具有可持续性;与"自下而上"或"自上而下"机制相比较,政府主导型综合治理机制在效率和降低交易成本上更具有优势。近年来,云南滇池治理取得积极进展的经验表明,建立政府主导型综合性治理机制对提升水环境治理成效具有显著贡献。     

公共事务复合治理的载体、实践及其走势分析——以杭州运河综保工程为例

以跨部门的复合治理方式取代碎片化的单一治理方式已成为公共事务治道变革的主要趋向。社会复合主体作为杭州首创的公共事务新型治理载体,因其良好的治理绩效而受到国内学界的较大关注。本文基于复合治理理论诠释了社会复合主体的生成及其意义,对杭州运河综保工程的复合治理实践进行个案剖析,并在反思个案运行困境的基础上,对社会复合主体发展的主客观条件及其走势作了讨论和展望。     

以服务型政府建设推动社会管理创新

从全球范围内经济、政治形势的变化和持续的行政改革中可以看到,西方发达国家正处在一个从工业社会向后工业社会转变的历史过程中,世界各国都在积极探索如何建立一个能够适应后工业化要求的治理体系的问题。在中国社会双重转型的历史背景下,社会管理创新的提出是对政府管理模式和社会治理关系进行反思的一个结果,是服务型政府建设在新阶段的一个重要内容。正视理论和现实中存在的问题,以服务型政府建设为契机,构建新型的、合作型信任关系达致合作治理,使政府控制和管理社会的观念让位于调控、引导、服务和整合社会的观念,在创新社会管理中具有重要意义。     

COMRADES OR CULPRITS? DONOR ENGAGEMENT AND BUDGET TRANSPARENCY IN AID‐DEPENDENT COUNTRIES

Budget transparency has come to be considered a key aspect of governance. Over the past decade, donors have invested increasing resources in strengthening processes through which budget transparency in developing countries can be enhanced. According to the 2008 Open Budget Index (OBI) Report, however, aid dependency and budget transparency appear to be inversely correlated. This article looks at the role of donor agencies in promoting or preventing budget transparency in aid‐dependent countries. It looks at significant correlations across the whole sample of 84 countries covered in the 2008 OBI, and analyzes more specific data for a sub‐sample of 16 aid‐dependent countries, before selecting six countries for which more detailed findings are then presented. All of these countries have implemented reforms aimed at enhancing budget transparency, with substantial donor support. These, however, often had only limited success, partly because they were not well adapted to the local context, and partly because donors put limited emphasis on improving public access to budget information. Donor efforts were also often offset by other characteristics of donor interventions, namely their fragmentation, lack of transparency, and limited use of programme aid modalities such as budget support and pooled sector funding. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

THE LOGICAL LIMITS OF BEST PRACTICE ADMINISTRATIVE SOLUTIONS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

Developing countries are pressured to adopt administrative solutions that the international community considers best practice. Some claim that these practices do not fit such contexts. How could one assess the fit or relevance of a best practice? This article suggests a basic answer: Look at the degree of difference between the proposed adoption context and the context in which such practice emerged as ‘best’. This answer emerges from a discussion on the basis of the new institutional ideas about change and diffusion. An empirical analysis of public financial management reform in African countries suggests support for this answer: Good practices are most evident in countries least different to the developed nations where practices originated and least evident in countries most different to these developed nations. The article contributes to a literature on best practice and yields fundamental messages for development, including the point that best practices are limited as administrative solutions in many developing countries. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Evidence Based Policy: Principles of Transparency and Accountability

This article provides a practical guide for improving the quality of evidence‐based policy. Rather than adopting an approach that gives priority to particular types of research methodologies, this paper argues that evidence drawn from any methodology will improve if standards of transparency and accountability are followed in the process of gathering, analysing, interpreting, and presenting evidence for policy. The papers details what these standards of transparency and accountability mean in practice, how these standards can be achieved, and possible limits to their adoption.     

The Quest for a United Nations Specialised Agency for the Environment

Abstract

Recent years have seen intense intergovernmental deliberations on issues concerning governance in the field of environment. Their aim has been to address the role of the institutions that provide platforms for international environmental cooperation. There are two main lines of enquiry: the role of regime-specific institutions that cater to sectoral regulatory frameworks (popularly known as multilateral environmental agreements, or MEAs); and the role of institutions that are established to follow up on global environmental conferences or a specific environmental task. Most of these institutions reflect intergovernmental consensual process. However, there are concerns about their proliferation and there is a growing cacophony of calls to ‘bring coherence to the fragmented landscape of MEAs, intergovernmental bodies, UN system entities and other international organizations’ (Sha Zukang (2011) ‘Legal and policy dimensions of sustainable development: expected contribution of Rio + 20’, Environmental Policy and Law, 41(6), pp. 244–246, at p. 245). In fact the need to bring order to environmental governance has assumed great importance and urgency if environmental cooperation is to be achieved. This paper explores, in particular, the role of the United Nations Environment Programme and its potential for conversion to a specialised agency of the UN.     

Fractured International Environmental Governance and the Potential Role of the Commonwealth in Biodiversity and Climate Change

Abstract

This paper begins by examining the reasons behind most failures of governance, including fault lines in institutional and professional specialisation, and in ideology. These three, forever competing within and between themselves, frustrate attempts to find solutions to some of the world's most pressing challenges. Not least among these are environmental challenges, where preferences and priorities that are geographically, professionally or ideologically narrow inevitably fail to achieve solutions for the greater good. What role can the Commonwealth play in addressing the fracture lines that bedevil solutions for climate change and biodiversity? It may help to stimulate global action on these issues if it can encourage agreement across multidimensional global boundaries. We know the Commonwealth is not a leading global force for controlling climate change or biodiversity loss; but if it had the political will it could be an exemplar of how, between a group of vastly diverse countries across the globe—and on the global political stage—binding agreement and positive action on climate change and biodiversity could be promoted and perhaps achieved. One of the strongest features of the Commonwealth is the generation of long-standing legal and ethical norms whose appeal is obvious even if their implementation is lacking. These norms should not be limited to the rule of law, democracy and human rights, but should include environmental norms because these too are fundamental to a satisfactory human condition.