公众参与实践差异性研究——以珠三角城市公共服务政策公众评议活动为例

Variations of Public Participation Practices:A Study Based on the Public Policy Evaluation Programs in the Pearl-river Delta Area

近年来,各地方政府主导的公众参与实践蓬勃兴起,吸引了各界的广泛关注。不同地区的公众参与实践呈现出各异的特点,产生了不同的治理效果。形态各异的公众参与实践引发了两个值得思考的问题:第一,不同地区政府部门主导的公众参与实践存在着什么差别;第二,为什么地方政府部门采取了不同的策略吸纳公众参与。在广东省社会工作委员会的组织下,广东一些城市开展了公共服务政策公众评议活动。根据公众参与的程度和参与水平,这些城市的公众参与模式可以分为四种类型的公众参与模式:咨询式、点评式、商议式、协商式。根据价值取向、行动目标与组织结构的三维分析框架进行分析,可以发现,社工委领导对于参与价值的认可程度决定了他们对公众评议的接纳程度,各地社工委设定的公众评议活动的行动目标影响了公众的参与方式和参与程度,社工委所处的组织环境是影响公众评议活动能否有效落实的重要原因。

In recent years,there are growing public participation practices led by local governments in China,which attract great attention from the academic circles.Public participation practices across different localities present various characteristics and lead to different outcomes. The great variations beg two questions. First,what are the differences between public participation practices initiated by various local governments？ Second,why do different governmental departments develop various strategies to implement public participation practices？ Under the guidance of Social Affairs Committee in Guangdong Province,several cities have initiated public participation practices in policy evaluation.Based on the degrees and approaches of participation,the study categorizes the cases into four models of public participation,which are consultative participation,commentary participation,negotiatory participation and deliberative participation. It finds out that the values of leaders in local Social Affairs Committees impact on their tolerance and empathy for public participation; different policy goals across localities lead to different approaches that they use to integrate public opinions; and finally,the organizational structures determine whether the local Social Affairs Committees can turn their strategies and plans of public participation into effects.