比较地方政务官与事务官对民主参与的评价:以挪威和瑞典为例

Comparing local politicians’ and bureaucrats’ assessments of democratic participation: the cases of Norway and Sweden

鉴于人们越来越强调地方政府的合法性来源于供应和输出,一方面公民传统上通过输入的渠道影响政府,另一方面政府的输出和绩效影响公共服务。政务官和事务官如何看待二者之间的关系?本文比较了挪威和瑞典的地方高层政务官和事务官对这些问题的态度。本文分析使用的数据来自挪威和瑞典地方政府中的政治与行政领导层。我们也比较了两个公共服务部门,其中一个部门公共管理改革很广泛(养老),另一个以管制和法律执行为主(规划和建设)。分析表明,尽管政务官比事务官更加重视公民影响政府的输入渠道和能力,政务官和事务官的态度之间仍然有显著的相似性。对实践工作者的启示公共管理改革为民众提供了直接影响公共服务的新渠道,即通过公共服务的提供者,而非传统的政治途径影响公共服务。本文以挪威和瑞典自治市的地方政务官与事务官为研究对象,研究他们如何评价民众影响服务供应的传统渠道和新兴渠道。我们也比较了两个公共服务部门,其中一个部门的渠道选择非常广泛,而另一个部门的选择受限颇多。总体而言,我们发现政务官更青睐民众影响政府的传统政治渠道,而事务官对民众参与地方政府的行政事务更为积极。

Given the increasing emphasis on delivery and output as a source of legitimacy for local government,how do politicians and civil servants perceive conventional,input-based channels for citizens’ influence on government in relationship to performance and output-oriented opportunities to influence public service?This article compares the attitudes of senior local politicians and civil servants in Norwegian and Swedish local authorities on these issues.The analysis draws on a data set collected among political and administrative leaders in Norwegian and Swedish local authorities.We also compare a service sector where public management reform has been extensive(care of the elderly)with a service sector where regulation and law enforcement dominates(planning and construction).The analysis suggests that there is a significant similarity between politicians’ and bureaucrats’ attitudes,although politicians accord greater importance to input-based channels of influence and to throughput than do bureaucrats.Points for practitioners Public management reform provides a new channel for clients to influence public service directly through the providers of those services and not through conventional political channels.This article studies how politicians and public servants in Norwegian and Swedish municipalities evaluate conventional and new channels for clients to influence service delivery.We also compare service sectors where such choice is extensive with areas where choice is much more constrained.Overall,we find that politicians tend to favor conventional political channels for clients’ influence whereas public servants take a more positive view of clients approaching the executive side of the local authority.