超大城市基层治理“大联动”机制研究——以上海市闵行区为例

论文总字数：25755字

目 录

1序言····················································1

1.1研究意义··································································1

1.2国内外文献综述····························································1

1.3核心概念界定······························································2

1.4相关理论基础······························································3

2超大城市基层治理机制存在的问题分析······················4

2.1城市基层治理机制“条块”矛盾明显，资源难以整合···························5

2.2城市基层治理事件案件的总量逐年增加·······································5

2.3传统的应急式被动式管理机制弊端显露·······································5

2.4城市管理的隐患数量在膨胀·················································6

2.5城市基层治理的社会环境日趋复杂···········································6

2.6城市基层治理的效果不太理想···············································6

3上海市闵行区“大联动”机制案例分析······················6

3.1研究方法··································································6

3.2“大联动”机制的概念·······················································7

3.3闵行区开展“大联动”机制的背景原因········································7

3.4闵行区“大联动”机制的运行实践············································8

3.5闵行区“大联动”机制模型构建·············································10

3.6闵行区“大联动”机制的特点················································10

3.7闵行区“大联动”机制的成效···············································12

4超大城市基层综合治理“大联动”机制的改革路径···········14

4.1治理流程逐渐趋向扁平化···················································14

4.2治理理念随环境不断更新···················································14

4.3治理模式随环境不断变革···················································14

4.4治理方式多元结合优化·····················································15

4.5治理技术紧密联系科学技术·················································15

5结语···················································15

参考文献·················································16

致谢·····················································18

超大城市基层治理“大联动”机制研究

——以上海市闵行区为例

李晓

，China

Abstract：As one of the main ways of governance, grass roots governance is also an important foundation of national governance. Now it is playing a more and more important role in the process of urban development, and it is also closely related to the life of ordinary people. Today，grassroots governance , whether in academia or government departments, has become a hot issue. Shanghai as a typical representative of the megacities, in recent years, in terms of grassroots governance made relatively good attempts, the districts of Shanghai city streets according to the characteristics of their own to explore the suitable for Shanghai's scientific development of grassroots governance mechanism and path can not only improve the approaches of scientific planning of urban grassroots governance, but also to improve the scientific level of grassroots governance of mega cities. In this paper, we will take Minhang District city of Shanghai as an example to explore the "big linkage" mechanism of the megacities urban governance, analysis of "linkage" mechanism of merit, for large urban grassroots governance mechanism innovation to provide experience and technical support.

key word: megacities grass roots governance governance mechanism large linkage mechanism

1序言

1.1研究意义

改革开放以来，经济文化科技发展迅速，城市化进程也加速推进，城市基层治理也渐渐成为我国出新的改革和改善，完善基层治理的结构和功能。超大城市由于其本身的特有属性，一直以来，基层综合治理问题都是我国城市化发展进程中，所必须要解决和面对的一个重要难点和挑战。一直以来，我国城市基层治理主要沿用以行政管理为主，条块分割的治理体制，随着社会整体大环境的变化，新环境新形势要求基层治理机制必须作普通城市来说又有其不同与难点。本文将以上海市闵行区为例，通过上海市闵行区来认识和了解超大城市基层治理所面临的难题和亟待解决的问题，探索超大城市基层治理的“大联动”机制，一方面为我国超大城市基层治理机制提供第一手的丰富资料，带了经验和技术支持，另一方面，通过探索“大联动”机制，进而完善“大联动”机制，提高城市治理的整体治理能力，深化超大城市基层治理的整体水平，完善超大城市基层综合治理的结构体系，为广大民众营造美好舒适和谐的城市公共环境。

1.2国内外研究综述

1.2.1国外研究综述

二十世纪七十年代末，传统的官僚体制的各种弊端，例如政府机构的冗员、物资财力的浪费、政府处理事情缓慢迟钝、政府处理事物的效率低下等问题渐渐显露出来。在西方骨架，兴起了以“政府再造”为主要内容的运动，称之为新公共管理运动，其中以马丁·米诺格为首的学者发现在公共行政改革中增加竞争机制，导致了部门之间的不协调与相互牵制，影响了部门之间的合作，以至于“碎片化”的政府制度结构的出现形成。

二十一世纪初期，新公共管理的弊端逐渐显露出来，针对这些弊端，很多学者提出了自己的观点看法，在这之中，整体性治理理论脱颖而出并逐渐进入大家的视野。在2002年，佩里·希克斯第一次提出了整体性治理，并具体阐释了整体性治理的概念，希克斯指出，整体性治理简单来讲，就是在政府内部，各部门机构组织相互之间，通过充分的交流沟通进一步合作治理，从而可以有效的协调整合各机构组织的资源和行动，使各组织各部门步伐上整齐一致，朝一个共同的目标方向努力，其间要保证各组织之间的连续性，彼此之间的手段相互贯通，最终的效果要使治理行为成为一种亲密无间的公共行动。学者帕特里克·登力维所认为的整体性治理是要建立在公众需要的基础上，登力维站在信息技术对政府治理模式提出的新要求的角度，他认为要不仅要简化，而且还要改革和完善政府组织和其服务人员之间的各种关系，而另一位学者波利特认为，整体性治理理论是通过两方面来协调的，要结合不通过的思维模式，通过纵向思维和横向思维这两种不同的思考方式，站在不同的角度上来协调，统一各组织机构之间的思想和行动，消除政策矛盾，从而为各种不同的利益主体提供充分的服务，实现政府最终的目标。

我们可以看出，整体性治理理论的提出，很明显就是西方学者对“碎片化”政府的一种反思，借以改善和调整政府的思维方式，整体性治理理论强调的是各种多元主体之间的充分交流沟通以及项目执行中的合作，通过多元主体彼此之间的有效协调和整合，使大家的政策目标可以做到连续性和一致性，政策手段之间可以彼此贯通和强化，整体性治理归根结底是一种公共治理行动，其治理行动的最终目的是达到亲密无间的合作。虽然整体性治理理论是西方学者提出来的，但是在我国城市化整体加速推进的过程中，其对我国城市基层综合治理体制也有着重要的启迪和理论意义。

剩余内容已隐藏，请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：25755字

相关图片展示：