【作者】 杨华锋；

【导师】 张康之； 刘祖云；

【作者基本信息】 南京农业大学 ， 行政管理， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 农业社会、工业社会和后工业社会特征交织在一起的中国转型时期,既向我们展示出环境事务复杂性与不确定性的发展趋势,同时也向我们勾绘出社会治理模式的发展态势。现实中环境问题所造成的福利损失的普遍性与紧迫性,要求我们积极地探索有效治理策略。而管理型治理模式下,所形成的政府主导型、市场自决型与社区自治型等话语策略,在应对环境问题时,均存在着各自偏好与缺陷,从而导致治理体系集体失灵的局面。唯有在服务型治理模式引导下,积极推动环境领域合作化行为的实现,才能有效地缓解治理层面上的困顿。这一模式具体到后工业化的历史进程中,主要表现为环境协同治理的实践。本文中,我们选择“社会治理三部曲的总体性解释框架”作为理论分析的基础工具,结合“规模-权力”与“行动者-结构”的分析方法,在社会治理演进史的视角中把握环境问题及其治理的发展趋势,探讨环境协同治理发生与发展的轨迹。首先,环境协同治理的问世起源于对环境治理危机的根源分析。在人类社会行为所诱发的次生环境问题中,以及在解决这一问题的治理过程中,往往呈现为局部改善与整体恶化的困局,若要实现有效治理需仰赖于社会行动者之间的合作化行为。然而这种合作却难以实现,抑或即便发生,其合作层次与水平偏低,往往造就环境治理的新困境。影响这一合作行为发生的因素关乎制度、文化、组织与权力结构等方面,其中权力系统的封闭性与集中化趋势是其根源。权力系统的开放性水平,将在很大程度上影响着制度、文化与组织结构的变迁轨迹。就后工业化进程中的国家治理而言,中心-边缘结构模式下的官僚体系必然带来权力系统的封闭性与集中化趋势,从而造成控制系统与对象系统的结构失衡,治理绩效难彰。与这种强势的管理型治理模式相呼应的,是经济领域中资本的扩张性与主导性。究其内在动力源于极端现代主义的发展信仰,这种信仰不仅仅表现在生产者与消费者身上,更多时候也体现在地方政府行为的扩张之中,从而对自然环境造成直接的破坏。在此情势之下,造成消费主义的盛行与消费社会的形成;城市形成了所谓的消费型城市,农村则沦为城市环境问题的附庸。于是伴随现代化、城市化的高速发展步伐,社会所失去的是地方的自主性、多样性以及极富治理意义的地方性知识。这种自主性的消亡不仅仅使得本土文化受到极大冲击,同时也使得地方社会组织难以发展起来。因而市民社会发展的赢弱也就难以应对权力系统集中化的趋势,进而也就难以有效应对环境问题。其次,通过对权力集中化进程外部因素的考察,发现权力的封闭性与集中性源于工业文明体系下社会规模的扩张。随着社会规模的扩张,权力结构逐渐呈现集中化的趋势,这种政治权力集中化趋势根源于经济与财富权力的集中,当文化体系、制度、经济和社会扩展的很大时,随着权力的持续集中化趋势,环境问题也就迅速地变得无法控制。适度规模是环境问题得以有效治理的必要条件。然而,工业文明体系的消费型社会与城市化进程都使得社会规模不断膨胀,其确定性治理思维必然导向权力的单一化与集中化。后工业社会的提出恰恰就是对工业社会规模日益扩张的一种冷静的思考。可以说,“社会规模”是环境治理体系中的一个关键性变量,其规模的扩张决定着集中化的进程,从而也就形成环境危机与规模扩张相伴生的局面。如何在后工业化进程中消减社会规模加速扩张的势头,只有通过协同治理的体系建构,对地方性与多样性给予充分地关注,才能削减这种规模扩张对生态环境的威胁。复次,协同治理是后工业化进程中环境治理策略的现实选择。在环境治理策略的演变过程中,其本体论遵循着由市场到政府,再到社会的进化逻辑。市场与政府、政府与社会在功能性差异和复杂性背景中,逐步改善着国家与社会之间的互动关系,同时也在社区层面上勾绘着由非等级化的契约所构成的无压迫的、具有“神话”色彩的政治秩序。在这一历程中,可以总结出各自环境治理策略所遵循的内在逻辑,即其承认与建构的实体、对自然关系的描述、行动者系统的具体构成、行动者实施动机以及其话语策略中的隐喻等方面的具体内容。在经济理性主义的主导下,市场自决型治理策略模式中核心的是市场主体,这种主体可以是个人、企业、或作为个体存在的政府组织,其行动逻辑遵循竞争与个体理性主义；在行政干预主义视野下,强调的是一种从属关系的自然观,其致力于通过政府行为的积极介入实现生态危机的治理;在民主实用主义的视野下,如何通过参与或自治的方式实现公私利益的同构,来实现环境问题的有效治理,是该话语策略的意义所在。协同治理基于对以上三种策略优劣之势的分析,以合作主义的价值构想为理论依据,致力于寻找政府与公民、非政府组织等社会行动者之间的适度规模与相应的文化结构,以避免集体失灵的局面。再次,协同治理的初步构想得益于协同学理论核心思想的借鉴,这也是通过协同治理来解决环境问题的关键所在。在后工业化进程中,如何为合作治理做好组织、文化以及制度等方面的准备,是协同治理的题中之意。协同治理不同于协同政府、整体性治理等西方舶来的学术话语,它具有典型的区域性与本土化倾向。其运行结构可以划分成分别由地方区域和合作主义所伺服的两个序参阶段,二者集中关注于适度的治理规模以及文化制度领域的变迁过程,从而推动协同治理的实现。需要注意的是,作为一种理论话语的初步构想,相较于政府主导型、市场自决型和社区自治型的策略而言,它有着积极地优势与不可替代的作用,但是也存在潜在的风险和应用的局限。就其比较优势而言,主要表现为行动者系统的开放性、行动策略组合的多样性、文化制度结构的适应性、网络化组织的创新性以及协同机制的有效性。就其潜在风险而言一方面是体制吸纳对权力系统开放性的稀释；另一方面是自发秩序及其先在规则体系未必自动导向社会公平与正义。就其应用局限而言,如果无法形成全新的国际合作体系,那么定位于地方层面上的协同治理,将无力于应对全球环境危机;同时非政府组织发展薄弱的社区,亦不适宜于应用协同治理的策略。对此应有清醒的认识,方能为其实践领域中提供正确而适用的践行方略。最后,环境协同治理在实践层面上的思考,主要表现在合作主义对文化系统、组织结构、制度设计以及权力开放性的引导与塑造。其中.在生态主义与生态政治基础上发展而来的生态行政的理念对地方性的考虑、对平行权力体系的追求、对自然生态的呵护、对经济政策的低碳性调适,可以为公共生活的发生与健全提供必要的文化基础。在行动者与结构互动的逻辑进程中,政府与诸多行动者之间协同关系的展开,为合作制组织的培育与发展提供了良好的民主生态。同时基于对地方层面相关行动者生态行为的考虑,为扭转环境领域的“末端治理”趋势,以及避免地方政府“底线竞争”的扩大化,必须推动致力于分权于地方的制度化改进。质言之,多样性的文化结构、合作制组织的发展以及关注于地方区域的制度设计,同权力结构的开放性是相互建构、相互伴生、交织在一起的。其相互建构的不断深化,也就实现了规则的内化,从而逐步实现合作行为的制度化和合作关系的稳定化。总之,我们正处在后工业化进程的开始阶段,这是一个工业社会的意识形态式微和后工业社会合作理念逐步成长的历史过程。处于现实阶段的协同治理,其目的就在于探讨合作发生的机理,其未来的指向也就意味着一种合作治理形态的形成。其对参与性治理的调适,以及对合作治理的预演,有助于为后工业社会合作治理的实现提供必要的理论储备与经验积累。更多还原

【Abstract】 In the period of China’s transition, the characteristics of agricultural society, industrial society and post-industrial society are intertwined. It both shows us the complexity and uncertainty’s trend of environmental affairs, and draws developmental trend of social governance. The universality and pressure of environmental issue requires us to actively explore effective management strategies. However, under the governance model of management, the strategies. such as government-led. market-based and community-autonomous, are individual preferences and defects, resulting in a situation of collective failure in the system of governance. Only guided by the governance model of service, and actively actualizes cooperative behavior in the environmental field. Then. it can effectively avoid the failure of governance. In the process of post-industrialization:it is the practice of synergic governance. In this paper, we select the "interpretative framework of trilogy of social governance" as the basis of theoretical analysis. Also, we combined with the perspective of "scale-power" and "actors-structure". And. based on the real situation in development trend of environmental governance, we will discuss the track of occurrence and development in the field of synergic governance.Firstly, the advent of synergic governance originated in the roots of the crisis on the analysis of environmental governance. In the process of the environmental issue induced by human social behavior and solving this problem, it often appears as a local improvement and overall deterioration. It relies on the cooperation behavior between social actors to achieve effective governance. Induced in human social behavior in the secondary environment, and governance in the process of solving this problem often appears as a local improvement and overall deterioration of the difficulties and needs to achieve effective governance relies on the cooperation between social actors behavior. However, this cooperation is difficult to achieve. And even occurring, it often creates the new difficulty because of the lower level of cooperation. The cooperation of the factors relates to the structure of system, culture, organization and power. And it is root cause in which the closed nature of the power system and the trend of centralization. The level of the openness of the power system, will greatly affect the changing track of systems, culture and organization. In the process of post-industrialization, the system of power will be inevitably brought the trend of closure and centralization by the structure of "centre-edge" in bureaucracy of national governance. And it results the structural imbalance between the systems of object and control, which leads to the failure of governance. The expansion and domination of capital in economy is corresponding with the strong governance model of management. Its intrinsic motivation comes from the development faith of radical modernity. This belief is not only in the producers and consumers, but also reflected in the behavior of the expansion with local government. Thereby. it damages the environment directly. It led to the prevalence of consumerism and the consumer society formation in the background. It formed the so-called consumption-based city and rural area became a vassal for city. With the modernization and urbanization, the local autonomy, diversity and local knowledge which are significance with the governance have been losing. This is not only making a huge impact on local culture, but also makes it difficult to develop the local social organizations. And the weak civil society will difficultly deal with the trend of centralization, and then difficultly deal with environmental issues.Secondly, according to investigate the external factors with the process of concentration of power, we found it rooted from expansion of social scale in the industrial civilization. With the expansion, the trend of concentration of power structure is gradually showing itself, which rooted in concentration of power from economy and wealth. Besides, while culture system, institution, economy and society become huge, environmental issue is rapidly losing control. Proper scale is the prerequisite of effective governance. However, due to consuming society in industrial civilization system and process of urbanization, scale of society is being expanding. Meanwhile, the thinking of certainty governance inevitably leads to concentration and singularity of power. Comment of post-industrial society may be the very path to get rid of predicament. Scale of society is key element of environmental government system. Expansion of society scale obviously influences the process of concentration. For the sake of environment, constructing system of synergic governance and paying close attention to locality and variety ought to be the only way to prevent the trend of expansion in the process of post-industrialization.Thirdly, synergic governance is reality selection in the process of post-industrialization. In the evolution of environmental governance’s strategy, its ontology followed by the logic form market to government, and to society. In the background of functional differences and complexity which is government and market and between government and society, it improves gradually the interaction between state and society. And it is drawing political order which is a non-hierarchical and no oppression. In this course, we can sum up the internal logic of their environmental governance strategies. The main content is about its recognition and construction of the entity, a description of the natural relationship, the structure of actors in the system, the motivation of action and the metaphor in the strategy. Led by economic rationalism, market players are the core of market-based governance model. It can be an individual, business and governmental organization as individual. They all follow the logic of competition and individual rationalism. In the perspective of administrative rationalism, it emphasizes the subordinate relationship of nature, to achieve effective governance of ecological crisis by actively governmental action. In the perspective of democratic pragmatism, its meaning is to achieve effective governance of environmental issues by the participation and self-governance to mix the interests between public and private. Synergic governance based on the analysis of strengths and weaknesses of these three strategies. It commits itself to find the appropriate scale and structure of the corresponding culture which is between government and social actors, to avoid the situation of collective failure on the value of cooperation concept for the theoretical basis.Fourthly, the initial concept of synergic governance benefit from the core idea of the Synergetics. And this is pivotal to governance environmental issue. In the post-industrial process, how to prepare for the organization, culture and institution, is the most significance for cooperative governance. Synergic governance is different from collaborative government, holistic governance from Western academic discourse. It has the typical regional and localized tendencies. It can be divided into two stages of the order parameter by local area and corporatism. They focus on the moderate governance scale and the process of the changing cultural system to promote the realization of synergic governance. However, as a preliminary idea of theoretical discourse, compared to the strategies, such as government-led, market-based and community self-determination, there are positive advantages and irreplaceable role, but there are potential risks and limitations of application. On its comparative advantages, there are the openness of the actors’system, the diversity of strategy combination, the adaptability of institutional structure, innovation of networked organization and effectiveness of the synergic mechanism. In terms of its potential risks, on the one hand, it is the dilution of openness of power system by administrative absorption of politics, the other hand, spontaneous order and its system of rules may not be auto-oriented in social equity and justice. Limitations of their application, synergic governance which located in local area will be unable to cope with the global environmental crisis, without the new system of international cooperation. And the community with the weak non-governmental organizations is also not suitable for the application of synergic governance. Only is there a clear understanding, there will be the correct strategy for the practice.Finally, considering the practical aspect, environmental Synergic governance mainly shows the guidance and creation of Corporatist to cultural system, organization socialism structure, system design and power loosen. As the local considerations, the pursuit of parallel power system, the protection of natural, and accommodation to low carbon, Ecological administration which comes from Ecologism and ecological politics can provide necessary cultural basis to social life. In the interaction of actors and structure, the interaction between government and people will supply a good environment for cooperation. Meanwhile, considering the local actors, we must promote the institutionalization of decentralization in order to avoid the "end-treatment" trend of environmental governance and "bottom line competition" of the government. In the meantime, the diversity of cultural structure, the development of cooperative organization, the system design concerning local development, and the openness of the power structure are mutually constructive, mutually co-existed, and intertwined. With the deepening of their mutual construct rule internalization realized. Thus the institutionalization of cooperative behavior and the stabilization of cooperative relations can be achieved.In a word, we are beginning to move into the post-industrial society. It is a historical process with declining industrial ideology and intensive post-industrial cooperative conception. As the result, one purpose of synergic governance studying is to find the mechanism of cooperation, so as to form a cooperative society in the future. The accommodation of participatory governance, as well as the preview of cooperative governance, can help to reserve the necessary theory and experience, which to achieve cooperation governance in post-industrial society.更多还原