【作者】 雍冀慧；

【导师】 关信平；

【作者基本信息】 南开大学 ， 社会学， 2010， 博士

【副题名】基于里斯本战略的研究

【摘要】 在产业结构加速调整,逐步向知识经济迈进的宏观背景下,探讨如何发挥中国职业教育与培训政策促进就业的功能是本文选题的出发点。由于在此过程中中国并没有现在的道路可循,而欧盟在过去20-30年已经经历并正在经历着中国未来将要面临的发展趋势,因此,本文选择欧盟作为研究对象,通过探讨欧盟在这方面的成功经验,以为中国职业教育与培训政策的未来发展服务。具体而言,本文侧重对欧盟这一超国家政治经济实体的职业教育与培训政策内容的研究。从其范围看,主要是2000年3月里斯本战略实施以后,为达致里斯本战略目标而形成的职业教育与培训政策,集中反映在欧盟与成员国专门针对职业教育与培训领域合作的哥本哈根进程之中。通过对欧盟职业教育与培训政策所要解决的政策问题、政策构成以及政策体系之所以能够实现政策目标的原理和特性进行研究,揭示欧盟职业教育与培训政策所蕴含的解决结构失业问题,从而适应和促进经济结构转型的经验和智慧。本文的基本假设在于把促进就业而不仅仅是对人的教化视为职业教育与培训的主要功能,由此出发,按照政策问题→政策构成→政策原理→政策特性→政策评价→政策借鉴的顺序展开论述,共分为8章。除第一章导论外：政策问题部分,包括第二、三章,对20世纪末欧盟的经济社会背景以及由此造成的结构性失业问题的特征和原因进行了分析。研究认为,产业结构不断调整,经济形态向知识经济过渡以及老龄化问题日益严重,是欧盟20世纪末面临的主要经济社会背景。虽然欧盟的就业形势不断改善,但长期结构性失业问题仍然十分突出,劳动力技能水平与市场需求的差距,以及职业和地理流动的不充分是造成结构性失业的主要原因。职业教育与培训由于其特有的劳动力市场指向性,使其成为促进就业的主要途径,受到各国政府的高度重视。政策构成部分,即第四章,对里斯本战略下欧盟职业教育与培训政策的形成过程和主要内容进行了介绍。为实现里斯本战略目标,欧盟和成员国在哥本哈根进程下展开了职业教育与培训领域新的合作,制定和发布了一系列共同政策,主要包括《欧洲终身学习关键能力参考框架》、《辩识和承认无正规、非正规学习欧洲共同原则》、《欧洲终身学习资质框架》、《欧洲职业教育与培训学分系统》和《欧洲职业教育与培训质量保证参考框架》等内容。政策原理部分,即第五章,对欧盟职业与培训政策如何实现政策目标的机理进行了研究。研究认为,由于受到辅助性原则、排除同一性原则的约束,欧盟职业教育与培训政策只能以促进劳动力跨国流动为主要目标。而欧盟职业教育与培训政策的设计原理,也就是政策体系间的逻辑关系,实质上是重新定义了职业资格的构成和取得条件,使得欧盟政策下职业资质的取得条件更加灵活,更加个性化,取得的过程也随着劳动力的跨国流动而具有了“流动性”。政策目标的实现,能够破除因各成员国间职业教育与培训体系的不透明、不匹配而造成的劳动力流动障碍,从而有助于解决结构性失业问题。政策特性部分,即六章,以欧盟政策对成员国的影响为视角,分析了欧盟职业教育与培训政策的作用机制。研究认为,为实现里斯本战略目标,欧盟期望按照从适用共同职业教育与培训政策到全面改革的逻辑进路对成员国职业教育与培训体系产生影响,而哥本哈根进程和欧盟职业教育与培训政策体系中恰恰隐含了保证这种影响能够实现的作用机制,即分别从政策的目标、过程和结果三个维度上对成员国产生约束。政策评价部分,即第七章,对欧盟职业教育与培训的特点、不足和未来发展进行了分析。研究认为,虽然欧盟职业教育与培训政策设计理念比较先进,但由于缺乏约束力、成员国执行意愿不强等因素,使政策的实际效果受到了影响。欧盟职业教育与培训政策自身仍需完善,并加强欧盟与成员国的合作。政策借鉴部分,即第八章,从产业结构调整视角出发,探讨了欧盟职业教育与培训政策对中国的启示意义。研究认为,中国正在加速的产业结构调整进程最终是向知识经济迈进。在此过程中,结构性失业必将进一步加剧,对职业教育与培训存在着巨大需求,中国职业教育与培训经过多年发展,为适应经济形态变革奠定了一定的基础。但中国与欧盟在职业教育与培训政策的政策问题、政策目标、政策效力、经济发展水平以及制度条件等多个要素上存在明显差异,应立足国情,从职业教育与培训体系自身和与就业直接相关的职业资格体系两个方面进行政策完善。更多还原

【Abstract】 Under the context of accelerated industrial structural adjustment and gradually paving to knowledge economy, discussing how to promote employment, the main function of China’s vocational education and training policy, is the starting point of this article. There is no ready-made road for China, but the EU has undergone and has been undergoing the future trend China will face, so this article chooses the EU as the researching object. It will serve for the future development of China’s vocational education and training system through studying EU’s successful experience in this respect.Specifically, this article dwells on the vocational education and training policies of European Union—a supranational political and economic entity. It refers to the vocational education and training policies that designed for achieving the Lisbon Goals after March 2000, promulgated in the Copenhagen Process in which the EU and member states launched a special cooperation in the field of vocational education and training. It aims to disclose the successful experience and wisdom that EU’s vocational education and training policies implicate in how to handle the structural unemployment and prompt the economic structural transformation, through the study of policy problem, makeup, rationale and mechanism inside the EU’s vocational education and training policies.The article bases on the presumption that promoting employment, not merely educating people, is the main function of vocational education and training. From this point, it processes with the thread of policy problem→policy makeup→policy rationale→policy trait→policy comment→policy reference. And it consists of eight chapters. Besides chapter one, it follows:The part of policy problem, including chapter two and three, studies the economic and social background of the EU in the end of 20th century and the characteristics and reasons of structural unemployment. The study shows that consistent industrial structural adjustment, the economic pattern transforming to knowledge economy, and the serious aging problem are the main economic and social background of EU in the end of 20th century. Although the employment situation in EU has been gradually improved, the long-term unemployment is still prominent. The skill gap between labor supply and market demand and the insufficient occupational and geographical mobility are the main reasons. For its unique trait of market-oriented, the vocational education and training policy is regarded as an effective way to promote employment and highly valued by the EU and member state governments.The part of policy makeup, chapter four, dwells on the process and contents of the EU’s vocational education and training policies. In order to fulfill the Lisbon Goals, the EU and member states launched a new around of cooperation under the Copenhagen Process, and promulgated a number of common policies, including<The European Framework of Key Competences>,<The Common European Principles for the identification and validation of non-formal and informal learning>,<The European Qualification Framework for lifelong learning>,<The European Credit system for Vocational Education and Training>,<The European Quality Assurance Reference framework for Vocational Education and Training> and etc.The part of policy rationale, chapter five, probes the ways that grantee the policy objectives attained. The study shows that the main objective of EU’s vocational education and training policies is mainly to facilitate the transnational mobility of labor workers, for the constriction of principles of subsidiary and excluding any harmonization of the laws and regulations of the member states. The policy rationale, the inherent logic of EU’s vocational education and training policy system, is to redefine the components and the applying conditions for vocational qualification. Under this EU-styled definition, the qualification application becomes more flexible and more personal and the application process becomes "mobile" with the transnational mobility of labor workers. Consequently, the structural unemployment will be slacked and the mobility obstacles resulted from the non-transparency and incomparability between different systems of vocational education and training will be dismissed as long as the policy objective fulfilled.The part of policy trait, chapter six, analyzes the mechanism hidden in the EU’s vocational education and training policy system, from the aspect of EU-member states’relationships. The study shows that in order to fulfill the Lisbon Goals, the EU intends to affect member states by such logic as from adapting common policies to all around reform of vocational education and training systems. And the Copenhagen Process as well as EU’s vocational education and training policies comprise such mechanism that could assure the logic, which refers to constrictions on member states from three dimensions of target, process and outcome.The part of policy comment, chapter seven, discusses the characteristics, shortcomings and future development of EU’s vocational education and training policies. The study shows that although EU’s vocational education and training policies are quite advanced, the factors such as lack of power, member states’ reluctance and so on undermine the effect. So the EU’s vocational education and training policies need to be polished and strengthen the cooperation with member states.The part of policy reference, chapter eight, analyzes what the EU’s vocational education and training policies mean to China from the aspect of industrial structural adjustment. The study shows that the accelerated industrial structural adjustment process China undergoing now is ultimately paving to knowledge economy. During this process, structural unemployment may be more serious, and the demand for vocational education and training will be tremendous. After many years’development, China’s vocational education and training system has some conditions to adapt to the economic transformation. For there are many prominent difference of vocational education and training policy system between China and the EU, such as policy problems, policy objectives, policy power, economic development level and institutional conditions, we should base ourselves on China’s practice, and improve the related policies both from the vocational education and training system itself and vocational qualification system.更多还原