小微权力配置与网格化管理:基于社会治理体系的村级宅基地协管制度创新

Small and micro power allocation and grid-based management:Innovation of village-level homestead management assistance system on the basis of social governance system

乡村治理体系现代化是国家治理体系现代化的重要组成部分,网格化社会治理机制是创新社会治理体系的重要举措。常州市武进区的探索为网格化社会治理与村民自治相融合共同推进宅基地制度改革提供了崭新样本,因此本文笔者对常州市武进区农村社区网格化管理进行了“区—镇—村”三级调研,并就创设村级宅基地协管员的必要性与可行性也做了同步调研。调查结果表明:(1)从宅基地管理职责看,创设村级宅基地协管员对优化行政村的小微权力是非常必要的;(2)从“网格+”社会治理融合趋势和现有资源条件两个方面看,宅基地管理纳入网格化社会治理体系具有可行性;(3)武进区小微权力清单化与基层治理网格化多功能叠加融合,网格员与协管员两位一体赋权赋能,走出了一条网格化管理技术和村级宅基地协管融合的道路。在此基础上形成的总体判断是,从武进区经验的推广价值看,我国农村已形成网格化社会治理的制度基础,网格化社会治理做好“网格+”的融合工作可以为当前农村宅基地制度改革提供重要抓手。村民自治与小微权力配置,是基于社会治理体系的村级宅基地协管制度创新的关键,同时也是农村社区治理能力建设的关键。但是,农村社区小微权力配置在“一竿子插到底”的治理路径下呈现出行政化倾向,网格化管理所具有的整合条线资源任务落地优势进一步地固化了基层对行政权力下沉的依赖性。结果导致了网格化管理过度行政化主导与社会治理的多元化主体共治的矛盾,造成了村民自治事项与政府委托事项难以区分的冲突。总之,今后探索“网格+”宅基地协管的制度创新,既要充分利用网格化管理所具有的整合条线资源任务落地优势,又要考虑到行政化影响村民自治的不利因素。从具体场景看,注重协管员专职与兼职相结合,加强条线与网格之间的协同联动;长远来看,立法规范村民自治事项与政府委托事项,科学合理配置小微权力是目标,推动从“管治融合”到“两治融合”治理转型,实现行政限权与乡治分权相结合。

The modernization of the rural governance system is an important part of the modernization of the national governance system,and the grid-based social governance mechanism is an important initiative to innovate the social governance system.The exploration of Wujin District in Changzhou City has provided a new sample for the integration of grid-based social governance and self-governance by villagers to jointly promote the reform of the homestead system.Based on a“district-town-village”multi-level survey,it finds that:(1)from the perspective of homestead management responsibilities at the village level,it is very necessary to create village-level homestead management assistance for better allocation of small and micro power;(2)from the trend of integration of“grid+”social governance and the existing resources,it is feasible to incorporate homestead management into the grid-based social governance system;(3)the multi-functional overlay and fusion of the list of powers and the grid-based grassroots governance,and the empowerment of both grid members and coordinators,have led to a path of integration of grid-based management technology and village-level homestead management.The overall judgment is that the institutional foundation of grid-based social governance has been formed in rural areas in China,based on Wujin s practice and experience.Grid-based social governance and the integration of“grid+”can provide an important starting point for the current rural homestead system reform.The key to the innovation of the village-level homestead management assistance system based on the social governance system is villagers autonomy and the allocation of small and micro power,which are also the key to the governance capacity of rural communities.However,the allocation of small and micro power in rural communities shows an administrative tendency under the governance path of“one pole to the bottom”.The grid-based management has the advantage of integrating the resources and tasks from government departments,which further solidifies the grassroots dependence on the sinking of administrative power.Consequently,there is a contradiction between the excessive administrative dominance of grid-based management and the co-governance of multiple subjects in social governance,resulting in a conflict that is indistinguishable between villagers self-governance matters and government-entrusted matters.In conclusion,to explore the institutional innovation of“grid+”homestead management assistance in the future,it is necessary to make full use of the grid-based management s advantages of integrating line resources and tasks,and to take into account the unfavorable factors that administrative affects villagers self-governance.From the perspective of specific scenarios,focus on the combination of full-time and part-time assistants,and the linkage between collaborative lines and grids;in the long run,legislation is the goal to regulate villager self-government matters and government-entrusted matters,scientific and rational allocation of small and micro power.Promoting the transformation of governance from“integration of management and governance”to“integration of two governance”should be enacted for the combination of administrative limitation and decentralization of rural governance.