公共政策评估多元模式的困境及其解决的哲学思考

通过对政策评估模式发展的历史考察,文章分析了政策评估模式由单一向多元转变的逻辑以及多元评估模式的困境。并以南水北调移民政策评估为例,解读了当今多元理性下的政策评估仍然存在的多元利益界定不准确、评估模式结构固化等诸多问题。要从根本上解决多元理性下政策评估模式的问题,必须实现政策评估哲学思维的进一步转变,而这一转变应遵循批判性政策分析理论、利益相关者理论以及理性选择理论的基本价值。     

走向全民健康保险:论中国医疗保障制度的转型

中国已经进入全民医保的时代,但医疗保障体系呈现碎片化的特征,其内部的若干制度安排之间出现了不协调。中国医疗保障体系亟待进一步转型,转型的重点和方向是将基本医疗保障体系从现行分散化、碎片化的社会医疗保险制度,改造为集中化、一体化的社会医疗保险制度,即全民健康保险。推进全民健保是"发展型社会政策"的体现,具有同时促进经济增长和社会发展的双重功效。从短期来看,这是一种简单易行而又可持续的减税计划,可以促进经济增长,有助于经济发展模式的转变;从长远来看,全民健保制度的建立标志着"社会性基础设施"的建设又迈上了一个新的台阶,这必将为中国福利国家的重建奠定基础。     

性别失衡下的中国农村养老及其政策启示

中国社会转型期性别失衡带来的男性婚姻挤压问题对农村养老的影响是中国人口社会可持续发展的重大问题之一。本文利用2008—2010年的三次农村人口专项抽样调查数据,从性别、年代、婚姻、区域、人口流动等多视角综合分析了性别失衡背景下农村居民的养老意愿、代际支持行为以及男性失婚对父母生活满意度的影响,并探讨了婚姻挤压对中国农村养老带来的挑战及政策建议。研究发现,男性婚姻挤压问题已经对农村养老产生了重要影响:大龄未婚男性成为打算依靠政府救济养老的主要人群;大龄未婚男性给予父母的代际支持较弱、父母的生活满意度较低。文章丰富和发展了养老研究的视角,初步识别了性别失衡给农村养老所带来的负面后果,研究有利于进一步认识性别失衡的人口社会后果,并为综合治理性别失衡问题提供现实依据。     

北京市科级公务员量化考核研究

量化考核是公务员考核的一个难点,也是目前我国基层政府公务员考核工作需认真面对并要切实加以解决的一个重点。本文对近些年北京市公务员管理部门和部分行政机关开展的科级公务员量化考核的实践做了一个初步的经验性总结,并试图在理论上对目前北京市公务员量化考核的不足和下一步应该改进的政策建议加以分析和说明,旨在推进北京市公务员量化考核的实践,进一步完善北京市公务员的考核制度。     

汉初三阶段:治、富、教

汉初六十多年可以大体分为三个阶段:刘邦夺取政权以后,采取一系列措施巩固政权。社会稳定以后,到文帝、景帝,发展生产,节约开支,社会达到极其富裕的程度。但富裕以后,汉初社会文明程度较差,暴露出许多问题,因此发展教育、提高文明程度,就成为社会的迫切问题。汉武帝立五经博士,大办学校,发展文化教育,独尊儒术,实现了物质与精神双富裕的盛世。     

公民参与公共政策的路径选择

公共政策是民主国家治理社会的主要工具,公民参与则是当今世界政治发展的基本趋势。我国公共政策公民参与面临＂内输入＂公共决策系统、＂附属物＂社会利益团体、＂官本位＂政治参与文化、＂残缺化＂制度保障机制、＂喉舌论＂大众传媒体系等问题,要改善我国公民参与公共政策,还需从还原利益团体的政治本色,构建以民为本的参与文化,增强大众传媒的公共话语权,完善公民参与的制度框架等方面着手。     

审视并反思我国高等教育潜在的四种危机——基于iPhone利益分配的视角

通过对iPhone的技术参数、定价、利润分配三个图表的分析,解读了iPhone的传奇现象,揭示了其背后的科技内涵。基于高等教育的科研职能,提出了我国高等教育在科研创新和成效推广中潜在的四种危机。旨在认识并理清它们之间的关系,反思我国目前的高等教育现状,以期对我国高等教育的发展起到启示和借鉴作用,进而加快我们由"中国制造"向"中国创造"迈进的步伐。     

POLICY TRANSFER IN IMMATURE POLICY ENVIRONMENTS: MOTIVES,SCOPE, ROLE MODELS AND AGENTS

The present study aims to contribute to the existing policy transfer research by examining the immature policy environments of post‐communist countries. To determine the main factors explaining the process of policy transfer, the establishment of probation systems in Estonia and Latvia is analyzed by applying a comparative case study design. The study demonstrates that timing is an important variable in the policy transfer in a transitional setting. A transitional context in itself is likely to lead to policy transfer because of urgent decision‐making needs, a shortage of domestic expertise and of financial resources. The process of policy transfer can be characterized as quite fortuitous: the choice of role models is limited to the existing or first contacts with foreign partners who are able to provide financial assistance. Improvement of administrative capacity is seen as a key factor in the shift from haphazard policy copying to responsible policy transfer. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Multiple Domains of Harmonisation: Politics,Policy, Process and Program

This article builds a taxonomy of the different functions performed by the term ‘harmonisation’ in contemporary policy debates. Four broad functions or domains of use are identified – political, policy, process and program – within each of which there are multiple different uses. Based on this classification, the article then develops a multi‐dimensional conceptual framework through which the term can be better understood and examined, its political uses identified and isolated, and harmonisation initiatives constructed, framed and analysed. The framework should prove useful for Ministers and government departments called upon to determine if, how and to what extent to harmonise regulations in a particular area; regulators called upon to administer and enforce harmonised regulatory regimes; and regulatees, practitioners and academics concerned to understand the impact of a harmonisation task.     

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.