【作者】 王雪丽；

【导师】 朱光磊；

【作者基本信息】 南开大学 ， 行政管理， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 自20世纪90年代开始,以浙江省为代表的一些省区陆续推行以“强县扩权”、“扩权强县”、“县财省管”等为主要内容的“省直管县”系列改革。2005年以来,中央也连续出台了一系列专门针对这一改革的政策文件。2010年,中编办在全国选择了8个省区作为试点,正式启动行政“省直管县”体制改革试点工作。可以说,“省直管县”体制改革已经成为中国地方政府改革中的一项重要内容。对这一问题的关注和探讨,是一项十分紧迫而且具有长远意义的理论工作。“省直管县”体制改革不是简单地替代“市管县”体制,在纵向政府间形成新的权力隶属关系,而是要按照市场经济发展的客观规律,淡化权力归属意识,树立“域”的观念,在理顺政府与市场、国家与社会、行政区与经济区、政府系统内部纵向和横向关系的基础上,建构一套“以域代属、按需定责”的区域治理体系。尽管“省直管县”体制在全国绝大多数地区的试点情况总体良好,但在调研中发现,在一些地方,比如广东顺德,省直管后县域经济反而出现了“倒退”的情况,这说明“省直管县”体制并不是适合所有地区的“万金油”,在政府系统的纵向体制上并不存在一个放之四海而皆准的普遍模式。“省直管县”体制改革需要一定的基础和条件。其中,改革基础包括：必要的经济基础、有限的政府责任和有效的管理幅度;改革条件包括：市县关联度、地级市经济实力、县域经济发达程度、省级政府统筹协调能力、地域空间条件、人口规模与分布密度、交通与信息技术条件、管理者的能力、社会自治程度、改革共识与政策支持等。‘‘省直管县”体制改革仍然处在探索阶段,随着这一体制改革逐渐步入深水区,各种伴随改革而来的体制机制问题也将揭开冰山一角,逐渐显露出来。能否有效破解各种改革难题,为改革继续前行扫清障碍,事关整个改革的成败。当前,各地“省直管县”体制改革实践中之所以会频繁遭遇瓶颈问题,与“区划导向”的改革思路有关。这一思路认为区域经济发展遭遇行政阻隔的问题只有通过调整行政区划,改变层级隶属关系才能得到解决。从短期来看,“区划导向”的改革在一定程度上的确有助于冲破行政区对经济区的发展束缚；然而,从长远来看,市场经济条件下,经济区始终处于不断向外拓展的发展态势,行政区永远不可能完全满足经济区的扩张需求。如果不能跳出“区划导向”的改革思路,那么,从“市管县”到“省直管县”,只能是权宜之计,终将陷入行政层级反复调整的循环怪圈。“省直管县”体制改革是一项系统工程,仅仅从区划的角度来考虑问题是不够的,改革要取得实质性突破与进展,有赖于多方面措施的综合推进。因此,在改革中,需要超越“区划导向”,转而从重塑地方政府间利益格局、超越“级别”与“权力”的对等关系、重构地方政权体系、理顺条块关系、创新权力制衡机制等方面寻求问题的解决。当前在“省直管县”体制改革实践中,还存在一些误区,需要及时澄清,否则会把改革引向歧途。比如,财政“省直管县”与行政“省直管县”宜同步推进；“权力下放”要有节有度；谨慎调整县及其主要负责人的行政级别；审慎调整行政区划和隶属关系；客观看待试点经验；避免设定“时间表”；“省直管县”与“市管县”可以共存等。同时,在“省直管县”体制改革向纵深推进过程中,还需要适时启动相关配套改革。具体包括加快转变政府职能、理顺省以下政府间财权与事权关系、推进省以下分税制改革以及市制和县制改革等。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since the1990s, the reform on the "County Directly Under the Jurisdiction of Province", composed of a series of reforms like "Expanding the Strong County’s Power","Strengthening Counties by Expanding Counties’Power" and "Province Directly Managing County in the Fiscal Sector", has been carried out by Zhejiang province and some other provinces. From2005till now, the Chinese central government has promulgated multiple codes concerning this reform. Since2010, the State Commission Office for Public Sector Reform has selected eight provinces as the pilot areas, and officially launched the reform on "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" in the administrative system. It is safe to say the reform on "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" has played an important part in the local government reform in China. Concerning for and studying on this issue is an urgent task with long-term significance.Instead of a simple alternative to the "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of City" system, the "County Directly Under the Jurisdiction of Province" system is not to form a new affiliation in the longitudinal intergovernmental relations, but to dilute the belonging sense of power and to establish the concept of "domain" according to the objective laws of the Market Economy. Hence, by means of rationalizing the relationships between government and society, country and market, administrative region and economic region, the horizontal governments and longitudinal governments, a regional governance system characterized by "domain in place of affiliation" and "governance needs determining responsibilities" will be constructed.The "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" system is generally running well in most pilot areas of the country, but problems still exist. For example, in Shunde District of Guangdong Province, the county economy even appeared signs of depression after implementing this system. It shows that the "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" system is not suitable for all regions, and there is not a universally applicable mode in the longitudinal relations. The reform on "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" calls for certain bases and conditions. The bases include necessary economic foundation, limited government responsibility and effective range of management. The conditions include the degree of relativity between cities and counties, the urban economic strength, the level of the county’s economy development, overall plan and coordination capacity of provincial government, geographical space conditions, population and distribution density, transportation and IT conditions, ability of managers, the degree of social autonomy, reform consensus and policy support, and so on.The reform on "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" is still in the exploratory stage. As this reform deepens, various institutional mechanism issues brought about by the reform will be gradually revealed. Whether or not the issues can be effectively solved to pave the way for the reform is decisive to the success of the entire reform. Currently, the bottlenecks frequently encountered in the reform practice result from the "zoning-oriented" reform concept. According to this concept, the problem that regional economic development suffers from the administrative barrier can only be solved through adjusting the administrative divisions and changing the affiliation. In the short term, the "zoning-oriented" reform facilitates the economic development free from the fetters of administrative region. In the long run, however, administrative region will never meet the demand for the expansion of economic development as the economic region constantly expands in the market economy. If we couldn’t go beyond the "zoning-oriented" reform concept, the reform from "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of City" to "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" would be a temporary means, and the reform will eventually fall into a strange cycle in which the administrative levels are repeatedly adjusted. Since the reform on "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" is a systematic project, it is far from enough to consider the issues only from the zoning angle. The substantial breakthrough and progress of this reform relies on a series of supporting reforms. Therefore, we should go beyond the "zoning-oriented" concept and solve the problems by reshaping the structure of interests among the local governments, surpassing the relationship between the "level" and "power", reconstructing the local government system, rationalizing the relationship between the vertical management departments and local governments, and innovating the supervisory system.Currently, some misconceptions need to be clarified in the practice of the "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" reform; otherwise the reform will be led astray. For example,"Province Directly Managing County in the Fiscal Sector" and "Province Directly Managing County in the Administrative System" should be pushed forward simultaneously, and empowerment to the county should be temperate and limited. Such measures should be taken as cautiously adjusting the level of county and county head as well as the administrative divisions and affilation, objectively examining the experience of the pilot, avoiding setting a "timetable", and keeping the "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" and "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of City" coexistent. As the "County Directly under the Jurisdiction of Province" reform is deepened, the supporting reforms will be initiated at the due time, including those of accelerating the transformation of government functions, rationalizing the relationship between the financial power and government responsibility among local governments, pushing forward the Tax System Reform between provincial governments and local governments, and starting the City System Reform and the County System Reform.更多还原