【作者】 姜楠；

【导师】 曹现强；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 行政管理， 2024， 博士

【摘要】 国家治理体系与治理能力现代化是我国全面深化改革过程中的一项重要目标。一直以来,对于超大型国家治理而言,如何在一统体制和有效治理之间达成平衡,是决定治理是否有效的关键性因素。然而,在压力型体制的“制度迷思”之中,制度压力与创新实践之间形成了固有的张力。如何在承受制度压力的同时,推动政府创新的持续发生,并产生具有显著影响和可持续的制度创新成果,成为实现国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的关键所在。政策试点为化解这一矛盾,促进治理体系与治理能力现代化提供了切实可行的路径。政策试点为国家治理提供了在不确定性环境下进行试验性探索的机会。在应对全球化带来的复杂性时,政策试点可以在特定领域或区域内测试新政策的有效性,并积累经验,为在更大范围内推广提供依据。通过政策试点,政府可以在局部进行小规模创新,通过实际的治理实践探索有效的解决方案,从而提升整体治理体系的应对能力。正是这种“异乎常规”的政策制定模式,使中国能在不引进外国现成改革方案的情况下“内生性”地推动制度的演变和创新,又能避免因情况不明而导致的改革震荡。在众多政策试点实践中,倡议式试点是一种由中央政府发起,但在倡议发出之时并不设定具体的试点名单、不给地方政府配给过多资源、不过多发布具体的试点细则的政策试点类型,是我国政策试点实践的一种基本模式,也是府际互动的一种重要的实践样态。在政策试点执行过程中,不同层级政府往往拥有不同的治理资源,并依靠不同的试点规划。但就政府实践而言,试点城市以多样化的方式积极响应政策试点要求,主动参与到试点建设过程中,并产出多样化的试点创新成效,最终提升了我国政府在面临复杂情景与重点议题的治理韧性。因此,本文关注的研究问题是:作为国家治理过程中的一种重要的制度设计,政策试点本身具有何种性质,其运作特征是怎样的,又如何推动国家治理体系与治理能力的不断完善?更为具体的,对于倡议式试点这一基本的试点类型来说,试点城市如何在制度压力、治理资源、自身基础等具有松散关联的要素中权衡并进行选择,从而执行政策试点,并最终实现制度创新?两个更为具体的研究问题是:(1)在层级治理的背景下,地方政府如何将试点任务嵌入至自身议程之中,并达成试点执行的共识?(2)地方政府响应试点任务后,如何兼顾自身情况,将其转化为切实可行的试点方案,从而完成试点任务、产出制度创新,并最终回应试点建设要求?本文选择市域社会治理现代化试点为例证进行分析。首先基于栖居制度主义和适应性治理提出分析框架,进而选择S省下辖的A市作为代表性案例进行实证分析,利用过程追踪法探寻A市执行市域社会治理现代化试点的因果逻辑,从而提出一个“注意力配置-多目标匹配”的倡议式政策试点执行分析框架。之后,重点从试点势能转化与治理目标调适两个角度,对倡议式政策试点的触发与响应、实施与落实阶段进行实证分析。针对前者,使用2018-2023年间面向全国26个省份、169个地级市的“省级-城市”多层次面板数据集进行回归分析,探究省级政府试点注意力强度和优先度是否会对城市政府的试点倡议响应行为产生影响,并探究倡议响应受到何种因素调节;针对后者,基于访谈资料,针对A市下辖的三个区县案例进行多案例比较分析,从而探究地方政府落实倡议式政策试点的三种类型方式。基于针对倡议式政策试点过程的追踪研究、倡议式政策试点响应的量化研究和倡议式政策试点落实的质性研究,本文主要得出以下结论。首先,政策试点所具有的栖居适应特征是我国治理韧性的重要来源。栖居调适的政策试点执行特征反映出我国政府治理过程中的制度韧性或治理韧性,使得我国国家治理在面临复杂议题以及诸多不确定时具有治理有效性。一方面,就中央政府发起的试点项目而言,由于前期缺乏相应的实践经验,政策试点开始往往是模糊的。为了实现政策意图的有效转化、减少政策执行中的成本损失,中央政府通常采用“分步走”的方式赋予地方政府一定的自由裁量权,允许其通过多层级的协商参与和先行先试来解决不确定性问题。另一方面,在具体的基层政策执行中,栖居调适式执行在一定程度上促进了基层治理的韧性和灵活性,表现为制度创新并是随着地方政府和基层社会的种种灵活应对中逐渐形成的,并最终衍变为国家治理制度韧性。其次,倡议式政策试点是揭示政府运行特征的关键视角。在倡议式政策试点的执行过程中,不同层级政府因组织的资源处理能力与其所面临的治理情景需求不同,应对倡议式试点政策的方式也存在不同,从而形成了一个复杂的跨政府层级互动与博弈过程。具体来说,从中央到省级到市级层面更多地通过嵌入注意力响应倡议式政策试点。在这一过程中,省级政府凝聚了试点势能,从而将倡议性质的政策试点予以明确,推动市级政府在兼顾试点执行环境和社会治理基础等情况时,调适性地响应倡议式政策试点。从市级到区县到乡镇、街道层面更多地通过多目标匹配实现倡议的落实。在这一过程中,在地方政府释放试点势能的背景下,区县与乡镇、街道政府通过整合已有的治理任务与新增的试点倡议任务让试点落到实处。综合来看,从中央政府发出政策倡议,到基层政府积极执行与落实试点内容,多个层级政府共同发挥作用,保障倡议式政策试点执行。最后,倡议式政策试点的栖居调适式执行存在两重机制。(1)以试点势能转化推动倡议式政策试点的触发与响应,从而在多主体方面形成试点共识并将试点注意力嵌入至政府政策议程之中。具体来说,上级政策试点信号经过层级政府的筛选形成试点势能,推动试点城市积极响应试点任务。这一方面会使得试点城市对试点任务倾注更多的注意力,另一方面也会使得试点城市提升试点任务在当年工作中的优先级。此外,省级政府的注意力嵌入效应还受到试点城市的社会治理基础与试点执行环境的调节。对于治理基础较弱的试点城市而言,治理压力更多地集中在市域而非基层,因此其所面临的非常社会治理压力非常大。此类试点城市相比试点治理基础较好的城市,其推进市域社会治理的意愿更强,因此能够以更强的注意力配置力度响应政策试点,但在真正落实试点任务的过程中却未必能够提升试点任务的优先次序,进而呈现出“强响应、弱考量”这一追求表面化落实的倡议式政策试点执行样态。对于试点执行环境更好的城市而言,其经济发展速度更快、试点执行进程处于初始阶段,虽然未必会更多地响应政策试点,但在真正落实试点任务的过程中,有能力也有意愿能够提升试点任务的优先次序,进而呈现出“弱响应、强考量”这一追求实质化落实的倡议式政策试点执行样态。(2)以治理目标调适推动倡议式政策试点的实施与落实,使得基层政府能够在受到新的试点任务影响时兼顾属地任务目标和试点任务目标。具体来说,从倡议式政策试点实施的内部条件来看,目标整合基础和目标整合能力是两个观察维度,两两交叉后衍生出三种倡议式政策试点执行模式:目标重构型、目标借力型和目标应对型。这一类型划分表明地方政府在推进试点任务的过程中尽量选择成效可应用、风险可控制的试点治理目标和试点执行模式。基层试点执行经验经过层级政府汇总至中央政府层面,最终从宏观层面保证倡议式政策试点在全国范围内以动态、渐进、调控的方式落地。随着基层政府在政策试点执行过程中的层级联动水平和内外协同水平逐渐增强,基层政府执行倡议式政策试点的方式会发生类型变化。从倡议式政策试点实施的外部特征来看,在倡议式政策试点执行的初期阶段,试点任务仍然具有模糊性和不确定性,基层政府借助传统科层制导向下的常规式治理能够强化属地任务并夯实试点基础,从而为政策试点执行做好充分热身;在倡议式政策试点执行的攻坚阶段,基层政府借助运动式治理能够在倡议式政策试点执行中快速突破瓶颈,从而为政策试点执行做好全力冲刺。本文的研究贡献在于:第一,提供倡议式政策试点执行的中观理论分析框架。本研究在国家治理的宏观框架中系统考察政策试点的执行过程,不仅挖掘了政策试点执行的层级治理特征与机制,扩展了政策试点研究的理论维度。更进一步,本文从试点势能转化与治理目标调适两个方面提出地方政府府试点倡议响应有强弱之别、试点倡议落实有类型划分,丰富了从中央发出倡议到地方执行倡议的逻辑链条,从中观层面解释了地方政府如何执行倡议式政策试点,并如何产出制度创新。这种对政策试点执行与制度创新关系的解析,弥补了现有理论中对中观层面制度变迁机制的缺失,为进一步理解政策执行与制度创新的内在联系提供了理论依据。第二,倡议式政策试点的触发与响应研究拓展了政策采纳理论。本文重点从注意力强度和优先度两方面研究了层级政府的试点注意力配置,丰富了针对注意力概念的理论研究;同时使用机器学习的方式测量政府注意力强度和优先度,丰富了针对注意力概念的实证研究。基于回归分析所得结论,本文区分出具有“强响应、弱考量”特征的表面化响应模式,和具有“弱响应、强考量”特征的实质化响应模式。这与已有基于政策采纳理论的研究形成对话,强调试点响应和采纳具有重视程度和优先次序两个维度,解释了不同地方政府为何对于政策采纳的策略与力度存在差异,以及存在差异的原因是什么。第三,倡议式政策试点的实施与落实研究拓展了目标治理理论。本文重点关注了基层政府如何权衡多重任务并加以落实,包括基层政府是否接受试点任务,以及接受试点倡议的程度和方式等问题,提出了倡议式政策试点执行的三种模式。为更好地实现中央的政策试点倡议,基层政府推进倡议式政策试点执行更加需要权衡具有模糊性、非约束性的倡议式政策试点目标,从而选择适合自身情况的试点执行路径与模式。这回应了已有研究中对于政策试点执行结果评价仅关注好坏、成效等结果二分的不足,强调不同模式没有好坏之分,只有合适之别。更多还原

【Abstract】 One of the main objectives of China’s overall reform effort is the modernization of the country’s governance system and capabilities.Finding a balance between a unified system and efficient governance has always been crucial in assessing the effectiveness of governance in mega-countries.However,there is an inherent conflict between innovative behaviors and institutional pressure in the "institutional myth" of pressure-based institutions.Modernizing the national governance system and governance capability requires figuring out how to support ongoing government innovations while enduring institutional pressure and creating durable,impactful institutional innovations.To address this paradox and advance the modernization of the governance system and governance capacity,policy pilots offer a workable solution.Policy pilots give national governance the chance to experiment in an uncertain environment.They can test the efficacy of new policies in particular areas or regions and gain expertise to serve as a foundation for replication on a larger scale,which is helpful in navigating the complexity that comes with globalization.Governments can improve the entire governance system’s ability to cope by implementing small-scale innovations at the local level and investigating practical solutions through governance practices.Without importing pre-made foreign reform programs,China has been able to "endogenously" foster systemic evolution and innovation while avoiding reform shocks brought on by uncertainty thanks to this unnormal approach to governance.Initiative piloting,one of the many policy pilot practices,is one that is started by the central government but does not specify a list of pilots,give local governments excessive resources,or release a lot of information about the pilots.This is a fundamental mode of policy pilot practice in China and a significant pattern of intergovernmental interaction.Distinct governmental levels often have varying governance resources and depend on distinct pilot planning throughout the implementation of policy pilots.However,in terms of government practice,pilot cities have actively participated in the pilot construction process,produced a variety of pilot innovation results,and positively responded to the policy pilots’requirements in a variety of ways.All these actions have improved the government’s governance resilience in the face of complex scenarios and important issues.Thus,the following research questions are the main focus of this paper:what is the nature of the policy pilot itself,what are its operational characteristics,and how does it support the ongoing development of the national governance system and governance capacity?More precisely,how do pilot cities balance and select among loosely connected factors like governance resources,institutional pressures,and their own foundations to execute policy pilots and eventually achieve institutional innovation for the initiative pilot,the most basic type of pilot?Two additional topics are:(1)How do local governments integrate the pilot mandate into their own agendas and come to an agreement on pilot implementation in the framework of hierarchical governance?(2)After addressing the pilot mandate,how do local governments,considering their unique situation,convert it into a workable pilot program that satisfies the pilot mandate,generates institutional innovations,and eventually meets the pilot construction requirements?The municipal social governance modernization pilot is the example used for analysis in this study.To present an initiative-type policy pilot of "attention allocation-multi-objective matching" and an implementation analytical framework,it first suggests an analytical framework based on inhabited institutionalism and adaptive governance.Next,it chooses City A,which is under Province S’s jurisdiction,as a representative case for empirical analysis and uses the process tracing method to examine the causal logic of City A’s implementation of the municipal social governance modernization pilot.An "attention allocation-multi-objective matching" analytical framework is suggested for the pilot project’s execution.The pilot initiative policy’s trigger and reaction,implementation,and execution stages are then empirically examined from the standpoints of governance objective adaptation and pilot potential transformation.To find out whether the intensity and priority of provincial governments’ pilot attention affects city governments’ response behavior to the pilot initiative and what kinds of factors moderate the response to the initiative,a regression analysis is performed using the "provincial-city" multilevel panel dataset for 26 provinces and 169 prefectural-level cities in China from 2018 to 2023.For the latter,a multi-case comparison analysis is carried out using interview data for three counties and districts that fall under City A’s purview to investigate how the three different kinds of local governments implement initiative policy pilots.This paper primarily makes the following conclusions based on the tracking research on the initiative policy pilots’ procedure,the quantitative research on their reaction,and the qualitative research on their implementation.First,policy pilots’ inhabited-adapted traits are a significant source of China’s governance resilience.The institutional resilience or governance resilience of government’s governance process is reflected in the inhabited-adapted policy pilot implementation qualities,which make our national governance effective in the face of numerous uncertainties and complicated issues.On the one hand,policy pilots in central government-initiated pilot projects frequently begin unclearly because they lack relevant real-world experience in the early phases.The central government typically takes a "step-by-step" approach to grant local governments some discretionary power,enabling them to resolve uncertainties through multilevel consultation and participation as well as early and pilot implementation,to realize the effective transformation of policy intentions and lower the cost of policy implementation.However,the adaptive implementation of habitat has,to some degree,contributed to the resilience and flexibility of grass-roots governance in the implementation of grass-roots policies.This resilience has been reflected in institutional innovations and has developed over time because of the adaptable responses of local governments and grass-roots societies,ultimately culminating in the resilience of the national governance system.Second,initiative pilots serve as a crucial prism through which to view how government operates.A complex process of cross-government interaction and gaming resulted from the various levels of government’s responses to the initiative policy pilot during its implementation,which varied according to the organization’s ability to handle resources and the demands of the governance scenarios it encountered.In particular,the pilot initiative strategy was met with more embedded attention at the federal,provincial,and local levels.By increasing the pilot potential,the provincial government makes initiative-based policy pilots explicit and forces the municipal government to respond to them in a flexible manner while taking the social governance foundation and the pilot implementation environment into account.Multi-objective matching from the municipal level to the township,district,county,and street levels is more frequently used to accomplish projects.In this process,the local governments have released pilot potential,and the district,county,township,and street level governments have combined new pilot initiative tasks with existing governance jobs to make the pilots a reality.From the central government’s issue of the initiative to the grassroots government’s active execution and realization of the pilot content,all levels of government work together to ensure the pilot initiative policy is implemented.Lastly,initiative-based policy experiments can be implemented in an inhabited-adaptive manner using two different mechanisms.(1)The transformation of the pilot potential facilitates the initiation and response to the initiative policy pilots,establishing a pilot consensus among many actors and integrating the pilot’s focus into the government’s policy agenda.Specifically,pilot cities react favorably to the pilot tasks because the signal of higherlevel policy pilots is filtered through several governmental levels to create pilot potential.On the one hand,this will force the pilot cities to focus more on the pilot tasks;on the other hand,it will force the pilot cities to prioritize the pilot tasks in the work for the current year.Additionally,the pilot implementation environment and the social governance basis of the pilot cities regulate the embeddedness of provincial governments’ attention.Pilot cities with weaker governance foundations face very high extraordinary social governance pressures,as governance pressures are concentrated more at the municipal level than at the grass-roots level.Compared with cities with better governance foundations,such pilot cities have a stronger willingness to promote municipal social governance,so they can respond to the policy pilots with stronger attention allocation,but they may not be able to prioritize the pilot tasks in the process of implementing the pilot tasks,resulting in the pursuit of a shallow implementation of the initiative-type policy pilot implementation pattern,which is known as"strong response,weak consideration".Cities with stronger pilot implementation environments see faster economic development and are just in the early stages of the pilot implementation process.They have the skill and willingness to prioritize the pilot duties during the implementation phase,even though they might not be more receptive to the pilot policy.Because of this,policy pilots-an initiative aiming for substantive implementationare implemented using a "weak response,strong consideration" strategy.(2)When impacted by the new pilot mission,the grassroots government can balance the objectives of the territorial mission and the pilot mission thanks to governance goal adaptation,which facilitates the implementation and realization of the pilot initiative policy.In particular,the goal integration foundation and the goal integration capacity are the two observed dimensions from the perspective of the internal conditions for the implementation of the pilot initiative policy.The intersection of these two dimensions results in three different types of implementation modes of the pilot initiative policy:goal reconstruction,goal borrowing,and goal coping.According to this typology,local governments should try to select pilot governance goals and implementation strategies that are applicable in terms of efficacy and manageable in terms of risk when moving forward with pilot projects.From the viewpoint of the external characteristics of the pilot implementation of the initiative policy,in the initial stage of the pilot implementation of the initiative policy,the pilot tasks are still vague and uncertain,and the grass-roots government can strengthen the local tasks and consolidate the foundation of the pilot by means of the conventional governance under the traditional hierarchical orientation,so as to warm up well for the pilot implementation of the policy;In the offensive phase of the pilot implementation of the initiative policy,the grassroots government can quickly break through the bottleneck in the pilot implementation of the initiative policy by means of campaign governance,so as to prepare for the full sprint of the pilot implementation of the policy.The following constitute this paper’s research contribution.First,it offers a mesotheoretical analytical framework for initiative policy pilot implementation.In addition to exploring the hierarchical governance features and mechanisms of policy pilot implementation,this study expands the theoretical dimension of policy pilot research by methodically examining the implementation process of policy pilots within the macro framework of national governance.The logical chain from the central government’s initiative to the local government’s implementation of the initiative is further enhanced by this paper’s proposal that there are differences between strong and weak responses to local government pilot initiatives and types of implementations of pilot initiatives.It also explains,at the mesolevel,how local governments implement initiative-based policy pilots and how they generate institutional innovations.The lack of theories on the mechanism of institutional change at the meso-level is compensated for by this analysis of the relationship between policy pilot implementation and institutional innovation.It also offers a theoretical foundation for future research into the fundamental relationship between policy implementation and institutional innovation.Second,policy adoption theory is expanded through the trigger and response analysis of initiative-based policy pilots.In addition to using machine learning to measure the government’s attention intensity and priority,this paper focuses on the pilot attention allocation of hierarchical governments from the perspectives of attention intensity and priority,which enhances the theoretical research on the concept of attention.This study makes a distinction between a superficial response model,which is defined as "strong response and weak consideration",and a substantive response model,which is defined as "weak response and strong consideration",based on the results of regression analysis.This highlights the significance and priority aspects of pilot response and adoption,engages in a dialogue with existing research grounded in policy adoption theory,and clarifies the reasons behind the variations in the strategies and strengths of policy adoption among various local governments.Thirdly,the theory of targeted governance is extended by the study of initiative-based policy pilots’ operationalization and implementation.The study offers three models for the implementation of initiative-based policy pilots and focuses on how grassroots governments evaluate and carry out various tasks,including whether they accept the pilot tasks and how and to what extent they accept the pilot initiatives.Grassroots governments must consider the vague and non-binding goals of the initiative policy pilots to better implement the central government’s policy pilot programs.They must then select the pilot implementation methods and modes that are appropriate for their local circumstances.This highlights that there are no excellent or terrible models for policy pilots,but only appropriate ones.This addresses the shortcomings of previous research that just considers the binary of good,bad,and effective outcomes when assessing the success of pilot policy implementation.更多还原