【作者】 李艳；

【导师】 杨龙；

【作者基本信息】 南开大学 ， 政治学理论， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 本文以新制度主义为分析视角从产权制度、政府行为、意识形态三个方面研究中国体制转型中的适应性调整问题。从总体而言,中国的体制转型是一场大规模的制度变迁,涉及到经济、政治、社会、文化等各个领域,由于中国体制转型的复杂性,使得转型中出现许多新制度主义理论所不能涵盖的特征,本文称其为“相机抉择性”特征,具体表现为：制度变迁主体角色适时转换；“诱致性”与“强制性”相伴而生的制度变迁方式；制度变迁路径的过渡性与适应性；意识形态的适应性调整。影响体制转型的主要因素除了行为主体的利益目标外,还包括宪法秩序、意识形态、中央放权改革、市场化进程等不断变化的制度环境以及利益集团与权力分配等因素。在中国体制转型中,产权制度、政府行为与意识形态随制度环境的变化而进行适应性调整并呈现出规律性特点,这些构成了中国体制转型的总体画卷。其中,产权制度是重中之重。依据新制度主义的经济绩效观评价中国产权制度改革既不符合制度绩效的一般标准,也不符合中国的特殊国情。本文构建了一个包括形式绩效与实质绩效、静态绩效与动态绩效相结合的多维绩效观取代原有的仅包含经济绩效标准的单一绩效观,并以此来评价中国体制转型中的企业产权制度改革绩效。本文通过实证分析指出,从形式绩效的动态角度而言,体制转型中国有企业与民营企业的产权制度调整均具有一定的“适应性效率”,即其各阶段的产权制度具有相对效率与动态适应性特点。但是从形式绩效的静态角度而言,还存在产权制度与外部竞争机制、内部治理结构的非耦合,以及制度供求不协调,相关制度安排配套改革不到位等问题。同时,在实质绩效方面,国有企业自改革以来其经济绩效显著,而公平绩效却存在很大不足。关于政府行为变迁,本文认为无论是中央政府行为还是地方政府行为的演化均是在自身趋利动机下根据制度环境所进行的适应性调整,只不过对二者形成约束的目标函数和面临的制度环境不完全相同。中央政府针对环境变化而进行的适应性调整主要体现在其放权行为(包括行政性放权、经济性放权、财政分权、政治放权)中。中央政府的放权行为与我国各个阶段的经济制度相适应,其放权进程主要受制于当时的宏观经济制度框架与官方意识形态。总体而言,中央政府的放权行为呈现出中央政府主导下市场导向性特征,通过中央政府对改革的主导性和对市场化的适应,使得中国形成了一种政治上相对集中与经济上相对自主的独特的政治经济结构。本文从苏南模式和温州模式中政府演化规律推导出地方政府行为调整的一般性轨迹,即地方政府行为经历从“直接介入”到“间接推动”再到“外围提供服务”三个阶段的转变。“直接介入”阶段的政府行为特点主要表现为直接介入、大包大揽和很强的资源动员、支配能力,政府行为影响企业经济活动的全过程,并主导企业的经济行为。“间接推动”阶段的政府行为特点与“直接接入”阶段大包大揽的政府有很大不同,政府由于客观制度环境而“被动”地从“主导者”转向“推动者”。政府充当“企业经纪人”角色,即政府通过各种方式主动将企业推向市场,政府从对企业的具体经济管理角色中退出。“外围提供服务”阶段的政府,由于政府与企业间关系由政府经济人、企业经纪人转为政府与企业间的互助或互惠关系,这时的政府不再对企业直接管理和经营,而是致力于营造本地区更好的市场环境、加强对企业的宏观指导。地方政府行为特点的演化是地方政府根据制度环境所进行的适应性调整的结果,影响地方政府行为调整的环境因素主要包括市场化进程、宏观制度环境与微观制度环境、政策环境、意识形态约束等。中央政府行为与地方政府行为调整的效应具有双重性,既推动又阻碍了经济社会的发展,从而形成了“政府行为悖论”,这是一种不完全等同于“诺斯悖论”的“制度性悖论”,即体制转型中的政府行为悖论更主要源于政府行为背后的制度因素,主要源于意识形态以及相关制度没有及时针对变化的经济基础及制度环境进行适应性调整。制度与行为均离不开观念的引导,在体制转型中对产权制度与政府行为构成最大约束条件的则是官方意识形态,产权制度与政府行为的调整必然伴随着官方意识形态的调整。在中国体制转型过程中,官方意识形态其实已是正式制度的重要组成部分,体现在国家政策文件以及宪法与相关法律体系中,对个体和团体的行为选择和国家制度变迁具有刚性约束作用,因此常被作为制度环境的重要构成部分。在意识形态因素中对当前中国体制转型影响最大的是：关于计划与市场关系、所有制性质以及公有制经济与非公有制经济的关系、分配领域的效率与公平的关系等的认识。中国体制转型中意识形态的调整呈现出官方意识形态与传统文化价值观念并行、意识形态与其他制度安排及制度环境的双向适应性、稳定性与灵活性相统一、渗透着实践理性的实用主义等特征。同时,体制转型中意识形态的影响效应呈从中心到边际递减趋势。并且,地方政府不同的意识形态偏好在一定程度上决定了本地区经济发展路径和经济模式,如苏南模式与温州模式的形成很大原因在于地方政府的意识形态差异。在肯定意识形态与观念调整的积极作用的同时,我们也应该看到其滞后性的一面,如导致对国有企业改革中的认知时滞、发明时滞与启动时滞；无法解释产权制度变迁与分配制度变迁中的现实问题；也没有针对市场经济建立起对寻利行为合理规约的意识形态,以至于无法发挥其淡化机会主义行为的功能。还体现为传统文化与价值观念与市场经济不协调,等等。中国体制转型所取得的巨大成就主要源于产权制度、政府行为与意识形态上的适应性调整。但是,我们也要应充分认识到,在这三大领域的调整中还存在很多问题,有些问题甚至已经严重影响到我国改革的绩效与进程。适应性调整的未来趋向首先要解决这些问题。在企业产权制度上,就是要通过一系列相关配套制度的改革,在深化企业产权制度改革的基础上,继续完善企业治理结构,并健全外部竞争机制；合理确定国有企业的社会目标与市场目标；健全与完善其他相关政治、经济与法律制度的配套改革：在政府行为上,就是要通过相关制度的完善与健全来正确处理中央政府、地方政府、企业之间的关系；通过转变政府行为理念、构建公共财政体制并改革政府绩效评估标准来促使公共服务型政府的建立；通过完善地方政府权力制衡机制来约束地方政府行为悖论；在意识形态与观念上,就是要一方面根据主导性与包容性并存；继承性与创新性兼顾；适应性与灵活性；有效性与实用性等原则继续发展与完善主流意识形态,另一方面还需要着力于构建与社会主义市场经济体制相适应的文化基础和价值观念体系,以更好地指导与规范人们的市场行为。总之,中国的体制转型向纵深处发展必须重点解决两方面的问题,一个是深入进行相关配套制度的改革,最主要的是政治制度与经济制度的配套改革；另一个是继续推进意识形态与观念的适时调整,使之既能很好地对转型成果作出合理说明,又能成为体制继续进行适应性调整的指南。更多还原

【Abstract】 This paper concentrates on the adaptability adjustment of institutional transformation in China in the three aspects of the system of property rights, government behavior and ideology from the perspective of new institutionalism. Overall, the institutional transformation in China is a large-scale institutional change related to all fields of economic, political, social and cultural. Due to the complexity of the institutional transformation, the transition takes on a lot of features which new institutionalism theory can not cover and is called features of "discretionary" in the paper. It is shown in the following ways:timely conversion of main roles of institutional change, the pattern of institutional change with attendant "induced" and "mandatory", transition and adaptability of the path of institutional change and the adaptability adjustment of ideological form. The main factors that affects institutional transformation includes not only the interest goals of actors, but also other factors of the changing institutional environment, as the constitutional order, ideology, decentralization reform of the central government and the process of market-oriented, interest groups and the distribution of power.In the institutional transformation in China, the system of property rights, government actions and ideology make the adaptability adjustment with the changes in the institutional showing regularity characteristics, which constitute the overall picture of the institutional transformation. Among them, the system of property rights is a priority. If we evaluate the reform of property rights in China based on the view of economic performance of new institutionalism, this is not only inconsistent with the general standard of system performance, and not in line with China’s specific national conditions. We build the view of multidimensional performance combining procedural performance and real performance, static performance and dynamic performance to replace the view of single performance only containing the economic performance criteria in order to evaluate the performance of reform of the enterprise property right system in Chinese institutional transformation. Throughout the empirical analysis, this paper points out that in the institutional transformation the adjustment of property rights system of state-owned enterprises and private enterprises has certain "adaptive efficiency", that is, the property right systems in various stages have the characteristics of relative efficiency and dynamic adaptability. But from the point of static view of procedural performance, there exists the non-coupling of system of property rights, external competition mechanism and the internal governance structure, as well as the inharmony of the system of supply and demand and the lack of related supporting reforms of institutional arrangements. Meanwhile, in the aspect of real performance, state-owned enterprises have achieved significant economic performance since the reform, but there is a great lack in the fair performance.Referring to the changes of government behavior, the paper argues that whether the evolution of the behavior of the central government or that of local government behavior itself is the adaptability adjustment under the motives of seeking profit according to the institutional environment, only that the objective function and the institutional environment which they face is not exactly the same. The adaptability adjustment conducted by the central government for environmental change is mainly reflected in its decentralization acts including administrative decentralization, economic decentralization, fiscal decentralization and political decentralization. The decentralization of the central government behavior is in accordance to China’s economic system in various stages, whose process of decentralization is mainly limited by the the macroeconomic institutional framework and the official ideology. Overall, the decentralization of the central government acts shows the market-oriented characteristics under the auspices of the central government. China forms a kind of unique political and economic structure of the relative concentration in politics and relative autonomy in economics by adapting to the leading of central government and market-oriented reforms.Due to the rule of the government evolution of Sunan Model and Wenzhou Model, this paper concludes the general trajectory of the adjustment of the behavior of local governments, i.e. the behavior of local governments experience changes in three stages from "directly accede" to "indirectly promote" and then to "provide peripheral services". The characteristics of government behavior in the stage of the "directly accede" mainly includes direct intervention, taking on everything and a strong resource for mobilization and disposable capacity. In this stage, government actions affect the whole process of the enterprise economic activity and dominate economic behavior of firms. The characteristics of government behavior in the stage of "indirectly promote" is very different from taking on everything of the stage of "direct accede". In this stage, the government steers "passively" from the "leader" to "facilitator" under the objective institutional environment. The government acts as the role of a "corporate broker" i.e. the government pushes the enterprises into the market through various way actively and the government exits from the role of managing specific economic enterprises. Due to the change of the relationship from business brokers to mutual aid or reciprocality between government and enterprises, the government in the stage of "provide peripheral services" no longer directly manages and operates on the enterprise, but commits to creating a better market environment in the region and strengthening macro guidance of the enterprise. The evolution of the behavior characteristics of is the result of the adaptability adjustment of the local government according to the internal and external environment. The environmental factors which affect the behavior adjustment of local governments mainly includes the process of market-oriented, institutional environment including macro-system environment and micro-system environment, policy environment and ideological constraints.The effect of the adjustment of the behavior of the central government and local government has a dual nature. It both promotes and hinders economic and social development and forms the "paradox of government behavior", which is not a complete equivalent to the "North Paradox" and "institutional paradox". The paradox of the behavior of the Chinese government in the institutional transformation is mainly due to institutional factors behind the behavior of the government i.e. mainly due to that the ideology and the related system has not made adaptability adjustment timely for the changed economic base and the institutional environment.System and behavior are inseparable from the guide of the concept. The greatest constraints posing for the system of property rights and government action in the. institutional transformation is the official ideology as the adjustment of the property system and the government action must be accompanied by adjustment of the official ideology. In the process of institutional transformation in China, the official ideology in fact is an important part of the formal system. Reflecting in national policy documents as well as the Constitution and legal system, the official ideology has rigid constraints on the behavior of individuals and groups and national institutional change so is often as important components of the institutional environment. The most important ideological factors that impact the current Chinese institutional transformation is the relationship between planning and the market, the nature of ownership, the relationship between the public sector of the economy and the non-public economy as well as the relationship between efficiency and fairness in the the field of distribution. The ideological adjustment in institutional transformation in China shows the characteristics of the paralleling of the official ideology and the traditional cultural values, the bidirectional adaptability of the ideology and other institutional arrangements and institutional environment, the unity of stability and flexibility and pragmatism permeated with the practical rationality, etc. At the same time, the effect in ideological institutional transformation shows a decreasing trend from the center to the margin. And different ideological preferences of local governments determines to some extent the path of economic development and the economic model of the region just like the case of that the formation of Sunan Model and Wenzhou Model is due to the local government’s ideological differences. While we are sure of the positive role of ideology and adjustment of concept, we should also see its lacks which exists in cognitive, invention and starting delays in the reform of state-owned enterprises, inability in explaining the problems in the reality in the changes of property rights and distribution system, the failure to establish the ideology for the market economy and to a reasonable Seeking Profits behavior, that they can not play the function of diluting the opportunistic behavior and also in inharmony of traditional culture and values of the market economy, and so on.The great achievement in Chinese institutional transformation is mainly owing to the adaptability adjustment of property rights, government behavior and ideology. However, we should also be fully aware of that there are still many problems in the adjustment of these three areas, and some of them become so serious that even have affected the performance and process of China’s reformation. This is a question of the first importance we have to solve in the future tends of the adaptability adjustment. In the matter of thesystem of enterprise property rights supported to introduce a series of related supporting reforms to continue to improve the corporate governance structure and external competition mechanism on the basis of the deepening of enterprise reform of property rights, to reasonably set social goals and the target market of the state-owned enterprises, to improve the supporting reforms of related political, economic and legal systems.In terms of government behavior,that is to properly deal with the relationship between the central government, local and enterprise,to promote the establishment of public service-oriented government by changing the philosophy of government action, building a system of public finance and reforming the evaluation standards of government performance, to constrain the paradox for behavior of the local government by improving checks and balances mechanism of the local government. In ideology and concept, that is to develop and improve the mainstream ideology under the principle of making coexisting dominance and inclusiveness, to taking into account the inheritance and innovation; adaptability and flexibility, effectiveness and practicality and to build cultural foundation and values system compatible with the socialist market economic system in order to better guide and standardize people’s market behavior.To sum up, there are two crucial issues need to be solved in the deep development of institutional transformation. In the first place, the related system must be reformed, especially the political system and economic system. In the second place, it will continue to promote the adjustment of ideology and ideas keep pace with the times. Not only because that ideology and ideas can make a reasonable description of the results of the transformation, but also it could guide the system to continues to adaptability adjustment.更多还原