殡葬改革中的公众“消极响应”现象研究——基于动员过程的跟踪分析

Research on the Public“Negative Response”Phenomenon in Funeral Reform:Based on the Tracking Analysis of the Mobilization Process

【问题】地方政府动员治理中存在公众“消极响应”的现象,影响动员治理的预期效果。已有研究集中于“权威体制”的解释,缺乏对动员治理中微观社会公众的讨论。如何在地方政府与微观公众的“对话”中理解和解释这种公众“消极响应”现象?【方法】以J市殡葬改革动员治理过程为例,通过实地调查和访谈等方法收集资料,运用框架联合分析视角,在殡葬改革动员治理过程的跟踪分析中对公众“消极响应”现象进行深入探究。【发现】地方政府以政策动员、控制动员和理性动员等方式启动动员治理,在公众“消极响应”的影响下进入了以曲线式动员和构建价值共同体为表现的动员推进阶段,该阶段未转变公众价值理念和动员潜在参与者,依然存在“消极响应”现象,最终地方政府采取变通动员策略与社会公众达成临时性的妥协。这种临时性妥协并不意味着动员治理的失败,而是地方政府动员治理中参与者价值同步的过程体现。实质上,这种动员治理中的“消极响应”是利益不协调、价值不公正、政治不信任状态下的地方政府和社会公众的共识弱势。【贡献】本文强调将地方政府与微观公众纳入同一行动框架中,指出了动员治理过程中公众“消极响应”现象的本质。因此,需要关注地方政府动员治理过程中不同主体间共识关系的构建,这也为倡导自主动员的现代动员治理实践提供相应参考。

Motivation: The public’s "negative response"to local government mobilization affects governance. Although the existing research seeks to explain the "authority system",it does not discuss the mobilization of the micro-social public in governance. What explains the public’s "negative response"during "dialogue"between local government and the micro-social public?Methodology: This research used the analytical perspective of frame alignment,examined the process of mobilization governance in funeral reforms in J City,collected data through field investigations and interviews,and then further explored the public’s"negative response"in follow-up analyses of local mobilization governance.Findings: Local governments typically begin mobilization governance through policy mobilization,control mobilization,and rational mobilization actions. However,in the face of the public’s "negative response",one local government turned to the promotion phase,a curvilinear type of mobilization,and the construction of a value community.Public value was not realized. The transformation and the mobilization of potential participants still elicited a "negative response ". Through flexible mobilization,local governments and the public can reach a temporary compromise. This does not mean mobilization governance failed,but rather the values of the participants and the local government were not synchronized. The essence of this "negative response"is a weak consensus between local governments and the public because of uncoordinated interests,unfair values,and political distrust.Contribution: This paper emphasizes the integration of local governments and the micro-public into the same action framework. And, it points out the nature of the"negative response " phenomenon in mobilization governance. Therefore, local mobilization governance should construct consensus relationships between different subjects in order to provide a corresponding reference for governance practices that advocate self-initiated mobilization.