从“官吏分途”到“群体三分”:中国地方治理的人事结构转换及其政治效应 对周雪光《从“官吏分途”到“层级分流”:帝国逻辑下的中国官僚人事制度》一文的一个补充

From Stratification between Officials and Staff to Three Group Divisions:Personnel Management Structure Change and Its Political Impact in Chinese Local Governance——A Complement to Xueguang Zhou's “Between ‘Officials’ and ‘Local Staff’ :The Logic of

官吏分途作为古代中国国家治理的人事制度安排,依然具有其延续性和再生性。中国地方和基层治理中官僚群体、派生群体和雇佣群体的三分,与官吏分途有着异曲同工之妙。本文作为对周雪光《从"官吏分途"到"层级分流":帝国逻辑下的中国官僚人事制度》一文的一个补充,提出群体三分是更接近官吏分途的延续者与变异者。层级分流与群体三分,共同构成了地方和基层治理的主干。官吏之间在数量和规模上的不对称与目前官僚群体、派生群体和雇佣群体在数量和规模上的不对称是相通的。雇佣群体是影响地方和基层治理绩效的重要因素。进入层级分流的精英群体或干部群体,除了具有经济学和社会学意义上的理性之外,还拥有政党所赋予的使命。使命政治是对晋升锦标赛政治的一个补充,它是解释中国的巨变和崛起的重要视角之一。

The institutionalized stratification between officials and staff in imperial China has its continuity and transformation in modern Chinese state bureaucracy. One example is the compartmentalization of three groups in Chinese bureaucracy： bureaucrats, derivative staff, and employed staff. This ＂three-group＂ structure is more in the same spirit with ＂stratification between officials and staff＂ than ＂stratification at different levels＂, the two cornerstones of imperial local and grassroots governance as discussed in Xueguang Zhou＇s works. Under the inflexible ＂personnel quota＂ system, bureaucrats and derived staff are a constant in the structure while employed staff is a changeable variable. The difference among three groups resembles the difference between officials and staff in imperial China. The bureaucrats and derivative staff are elites or cadres sorted through the system of stratification at different levels and they are the key players in local governance in today＇s China. In addition to its historical root, this ＂three-group＂ structure is a result of the interaction between the ＂visible hand＂ of the state and the ＂invisible hand＂ of market. People who belong to the first two group are not only ＂rational men＂ but also men driven by their political mission and commitment. This explains the phenomenon of ＂mobile officials＂ and ＂immobile staff＂, thus is a complement both to Zhou＇s ＂stratification at different levels＂ and to the so-called ＂tournament model＂. We hope this study provides an important theoretical perspective for understanding contemporary China＇s transition and rise.