Does the Network Centrality of Government Actors Matter? Examining the Role of Government Organizations in Aquaculture Partnerships

The growth in the use of collaborative governance arrangements has been accompanied by burgeoning scholarship in the field of public affairs that seeks to understand the benefits of engaging diverse stakeholders in common venues. However, few scholars have formally assessed the role of government actors in facilitating outcomes for individual participants in such efforts. Moreover, little work on collaborative governance examines how individual incentives and barriers to collective action are formed within the nested nature of these contexts. We contribute to the study of collaborative governance by formally investigating how the relative centrality of government actors in collaborative policy‐making venues affects individual relationship building and learning for participants therein. We find that government actor centrality is positively associated with relationship building and learning. However, in testing two different conceptualizations of “centrality,” we find that the definition of this construct clearly matters.     

Public Support for Climate Change Policy: Consistency in the Influence of Values and Attitudes Over Time and Across Specific Policy Alternatives

This study examines the factors that explain public preferences for a set of climate change policy alternatives. While scholarly work indicates a relationship between attitudes and values on views toward specific issues, the literature often examines general support for issues rather than specific policy proposals. Consequently, it is unclear the extent to which these attitudes and values affect specific policy considerations. This project examines public support for five climate change policy options in two national surveys taken three years apart. The empirical analysis reveals that time is a factor and that those who are liberal, have strong ecological values, report greater concern for climate change, and trust experts are consistently more supportive of the climate policy options considered here. The results shed new light on the nuanced views of the American public toward climate change.     

Disowning Fukushima: Managing the credibility of nuclear reliability assessment in the wake of disaster

This paper reflects on the credibility of nuclear risk assessment in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima meltdowns. In democratic states, policymaking around nuclear energy has long been premised on an understanding that experts can objectively and accurately calculate the probability of catastrophic accidents. Yet the Fukushima disaster lends credence to the substantial body of social science research that suggests such calculations are fundamentally unworkable. Nevertheless, the credibility of these assessments appears to have survived the disaster, just as it has resisted the evidence of previous nuclear accidents. This paper looks at why. It argues that public narratives of the Fukushima disaster invariably frame it in ways that allow risk‐assessment experts to “disown” it. It concludes that although these narratives are both rhetorically compelling and highly consequential to the governance of nuclear power, they are not entirely credible.     

Building European Union capacity to manage transboundary crises: Network or lead‐agency model?

In recent years, the European continent has witnessed a substantial number of “transboundary crises” – crises that cross geographical borders and affect multiple policy domains. Nation states find it hard to deal with such crises by themselves. International cooperation, thus, becomes increasingly important, but it is not clear what shape or form that cooperation should take. This article explores the growing role of the European Union (EU) in managing transboundary crises. More specifically, it reflects on the different ways in which the expanding contours of the EU's emerging crisis capacity can be organized. Using three “performative dimensions” – sense‐making, coordination, and legitimacy – the article discusses the possible advantages and disadvantages of a decentralized, network model and compares it with a more centralized, lead‐agency model. It concludes that the current network model is a logical outcome of the punctuated and fragmentary process through which EU crisis management capacities have been created. It also notes that the shortcomings of this model may necessitate elements of a lead‐agency model. Such “agencification” of networks for transboundary crisis management may well lead to a hybrid model that is uniquely suited for the peculiar organizational and political creature that the EU is.     

论治理体系现代化的科学内涵

当前,"治理"这个词成为全面深化改革的思维体系、话语体系和制度体系中的核心范畴;所谓"治理体系",是指国家对经济、政治、文化、社会、生态等方方面面进行综合治理的系统工程,它是在宪法和法律框架内,由政府主导、公民参与、社会协同的良性互动过程,在现代国家治理体系中,包括保障公民权利、规范政府行为、提高执政能力这三个最重要的治理系统,本文只阐述政府公共行为系统;所谓"制度现代化",就是一个社会从传统社会向现代社会转型过程中,其制度文明的萌生、成长和成熟的现代化过程。     

现代化转型中的城市社区治理新趋势——以成都实践为例

我国现代化转型中的城市社区治理正在朝向"三动三治"趋势发展和转变。居民自治更加主动的趋势、社会组织更加能动的趋势、政府与社会更加互动的趋势是社区治理现代化的基础和保障,多元参与的共同治理、党领导下的综合治理、制度规范的依法治理是社区治理的理想状态。     

大数据时代的社会治理创新

关于大数据的理解有信息说、技术说、价值说,但其共同点是大数据赋予了人们更加强大的认识世界和改造世界的能力。作为一种战略资源,大数据以其大容量、快速度、多样性、预测性等特征,为我们创新原有单一自下而上的管理方式,突破社会治理瓶颈,提供了思维、技术乃至制度的可能。探讨大数据与政府、社会(公众)、公共事务的互动关系,可得出可供期待的社会治理创新内容,但也不能忽视大数据对社会治理可能带来的问题和挑战。     

公立医院改革模式研究——以台北市立联合医院为案例

在新公共管理思想的影响之下,将市场绩效纳入公部门管理的方式已成为改革潮流。台湾公立医院的改革工作,也是围绕这个核心思想来进行的。台北市立联合医院的成立,是将台北市的十家公立医院进行合并,成为一家台湾规模最大的公立医院,旨在通过层级的治理模式,强调公部门监管的角色,利用资源整合互补,达到降低成本、提高绩效的目标,发挥规模经济的优势,同时加强公立医院的品质和竞争力。从台北市立联合医院的改革经验来看,改革成效的关键在于行政效能是否得以很好的发挥以及行政权力的使用。因此,公部门应体认本身角色的转变并且因应不同的需求,采取不同的治理模式,思考如何从制度和管理层面富有弹性地去因应,为公立医院的治理寻求一个更富有弹性和可行性的改革模式,发挥公部门善治的效能。     

国家治理中的软法之治

软法是在开放协商机制的基础上产生的,以其开放性、民主性在国家治理中发挥着独特的作用。与硬法不同,软法不以国家强制力为核心要素,主要依靠自我约束和一致行为等内在制约发挥作用,在充分理性协商的基础上实现多赢。在国家治理资源有限的情况下,软法下的多元治理成为国家治理理想的路径选择。软法作为新生的理论,对原有的法学理论有一定冲击,但其顺应了当前中国改革的大势,为法治国家建设、为国家治理体系及治理能力的现代化发挥着不可替代的作用。     

国企为何需要行政化的治理——一种被忽略的效率性解释

在中国,国企的行政化治理是一种必然现实,是国家作为企业股东以及国企作为公共企业的本质使然。行政化治理虽然一直被视为有碍国企商业化,但亦有其"效率性"的一面,它有助于国企得到更多商业资源和商业利益。而且,国企的行政化治理是一种世界现象,差别只在于其目标以及内容、手段和方式的不同。由此,国企面对的关键问题,就不是如何脱离行政化治理的问题,而是如何改进行政化的治理、进行何种行政化治理的问题,即如何跳出原有产权调控模式,从利润导向走向公共导向,提升治理的透明度,让国企为国家发展、为一般社会公众谋取福利。中国一直追求将国企打造成独立的商事主体,追求国企营利目标的实现,这显然背离了作为公共企业的国企本质。应当撩开国企的商事面罩,重新回到公共企业以及公共企业法的改革道路上——以特别企业法而非商事公司法的方式调整国企的设立、运营和监管。