【作者】 耿国阶；

【导师】 孙萍；

【作者基本信息】 东北大学 ， 行政管理， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 改革开放以来,我国逐步实现由传统治理向现代治理的转变,过去30年的治理变革已经取得了巨大的成绩,主要体现为五个方面：从一元治理到多元治理,从集权到分权,从人治到法治,从管制型政府到服务型政府,从党内民主到社会民主。成绩固然不容忽视,但基于中国社会进一步发展的现实需要,继续推进传统治理向现代治理的转变,并实现某种形式的治理变革突破已成为时代发展的迫切任务。本文以治理理论为基础,以本土化的政党治理-政府治理-社会治理的治理分析为框架,阐析了中国治理变革的过程与模式。中国30年的治理变革虽然取得了巨大成绩,但仍然面临一系列深层次问题：官-民两极治理结构在一定程度上的强化和制度性紧张；党的转型与宪政发展之间的内在制度性紧张逐渐凸显；权力-权力、权力-权利、权利-权利之间基本制度安排的不合理日益凸出；非制度化博弈存在低层次徘徊；地方庇护网政治、既得利益政治、结构性腐败、权力-资本的非良性联姻等政治肿瘤尾大难掉；治理变革战略选择上长期合理性与短期合理性处于两难。现阶段的两极治理模式不仅不利于解决上述深层次问题,而且其本身就是上述深层次问题产生的主要根源。不仅如此,中国30年治理变革所遵循的“技术性渐进变革模式”已经日渐凸显其局限性,难以有效解决上述深层次问题。而学术界诸多治理变革模式的设计,或者偏离“党的领导、人民当家作主与依法治国有机统一”的基本原则,或者未实现我国国情与现代治理基本价值创造性结合,或者不具有理论彻底性和实践可行性,均难以满足指导治理变革实践的需要。为了寻求一个理想的治理变革模式,本文首先从纵向和横向两个方面分析了中国深化治理变革所立足的基础环境,纵向上传统治理向现代治理的转变是历史发展的必然,横向上多层面贫困的并存和交织注定了治理变革进程的复杂和艰难。随后,本文界定并分析了中国治理变革的核心问题,本文认为党的现代转型与宪政发展的关系是困扰中国治理变革长远发展的核心问题。沿袭“全能型政党”建设的思路难以实现两者的良性互动,政党多元化的思路既不现实也不合理。本文在“全能型政党”建设和政党多元化两种思路之外,提出了第三种思路：执政党的现代转型及其合法性重构,并认为党的现代转型与宪政发展之间良性互动的发展是完全可能的。本文对中国治理变革的模式进行了重构,提出应该扬弃“官(政党-政府)-民(社会)”两极治理模式,抛弃治理变革的“技术性渐进变革模式”,建立“政党治理-政府治理-社会治理”三极互动的治理模式,政党、政府与社会三极良性互动既是治理变革的路径,也是理想的现代治理状态；与此相应,中国共产党应该实现由“全能型政党”向“功能型政党”的现代转变。唯此,才能够促进政党彻底转型,实现政党权威在治理变革过程中以及在现代治理结构中的合法性重构,较好的保证治理变革过程的有序性和结果的彻底性,并最终实现传统治理向现代治理质的飞跃。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since the reform & opening policy was implemented, our country has gradually transformed from traditional governance to modern governance. We have achieved great progress in this direction, which includes five aspects:from unitary governance to pluralistic governance, from centralization to decentralization, from rule by men to rule of law, from regulation government to service government, from intra-party democracy to social democracy. Success is great, but for further progress of Chinese society, we should advance the transformation process from traditional governance to modern governance further, and at this time some kind of major breakthrough is needed to challenge us to press on in this direction.With the "party governance----civil society governance" analysis frame, this paper reviews the governance transformation history from 1978 systemically and analyzes the present governance pattern and the transformation pattern inherent in the past 30 years. The author argues that we have made substantial success, but we are still being haunted by some engrained problems which includes:the substantial intensification of "the bipolar governance structure of bureaucracy vs. civilian" with increasing conflicts; the deepening structure intension between the transition of CCP and the development of rule of constitution in China; the inner institutional relation’s tension of power vs. power, power vs. rights, rights vs. rights; the low-level interaction and repetition of non-institutional game practices; the local patronage politics, structural corruption, the political influence of vested interest and the distorted combination between power and capital which gradually becomes a cancer of the healthy transformation process. At last, it is difficult to balance between long-term rationality and short-term rationality in governance transformation strategy. These problems wrest with each other and contribute to the dilemma of present-day governance transformation. Contemporary bipolar governance pattern (bureaucracy vs. civilian) cannot solve the dilemma fundamentally, on the contrary, it contributes these problems and the dilemma chiefly. Furthermore, the transformation pattern inherent in the past 30 years is so limited that it cannot meet the requirements of time and resolve these difficult problems effectively. And there are some oriented mistakes in the alternative patterns of governance transformation which were designed by scholars which include:to stray away from the fundamental principle of governance transformation, which be fixed as "the organic combination among leadership of CCP, popular sovereignty and rule of law"; deviation of the fundamental circumstances of our country or deviation of the essential value of modern governance, lack of creative combination of both; lack of theoretical insight or lack of practical feasibility; so, they cannot meet the essential requirements of future governance transformation. In order to find a proper pattern, this paper analyses the fundamental circumstances of China’s governance transformation, and the author argues that China will transform from traditional governance to modern governance inevitably as a historical trend, but the fundamental circumstances of China doom the process of governance transformation will be complicated and formidable. Subsequently, this paper ascertains and analyses the core problem that obsesses the long-term governance transformation of China. The author argues that the core problem is how to deal with the relation between transition of CCP and the development of rule of constitution in China. The author does not argue that if the CCP insists the totalitarian party building route, the creative combination and well-orientated interaction of both will be impossible and pluralistic party politics route has enough rationality nor has practical feasibility at present China. The author puts forward the third choice:transforming the leadership of CCP, and he argues that the creative combination and well-orientated interaction of both will be possible.Finally, this paper restructures the pattern of governance transformation in China. The author suggests that we should transform the bipolar governance pattern (bureaucracy vs. civilian) into tripolar governance pattern (bureaucracy vs. civilian, and CCP as the intermediary), and desert the traditional transformation pattern inherent in the past 30 years. Well interaction among bureaucracy, civilian societyt and the CCP is the governance transformation route and the ultimate modern governance pattern. Accordingly, the CCP should transform from an unlimited totalitarian party into a limited functional party. By that, we can advance the complete transition of CCP, remake the authority legitimacy of CCP both in the transformation process and in the ultimate modern governance structure, make sure the orderly transformation process and the achievement of our ultimate pursuit, and realize the real transformation from traditional governance to modern governance.更多还原