论文部分内容阅读
政府绩效管理(GPM)的四个试点单位起点相同而结果迥然相异。现有的GPM理论不能充分解释我们在实践中所观察到的现象。基于政策倡议联盟框架和公共一致性理论,我们提供四个发现;第一,GPM试点工作结果因高层决策者与中层决策者之间态度不同而形成差异,为此,我们提出了一个分析视角;第二,试点工作走向主要是由决策者个人而非制度决定的;第三,建立在公共利益的基础上,以维护公共利益为导向,还是建立在官场禁忌的基础上,以维护部门或私人利益为导向,成为公共一致性的分水岭;第四,当高层决策者与中层决策者意见不一致时,政策方案至少形式上符合高层决策者的要求。
The four pilot units of the Government Performance Management (GPM) have the same starting point but very different results. Existing GPM theories do not adequately explain what we observe in practice. Based on the Policy Initiative Coalition framework and the public consensus theory, we provide four findings. First, the results of the GPM pilot work are different due to different attitudes of top and middle level decision makers. Therefore, we propose an analytical perspective. Second, the direction of the pilot work is mainly determined by the individual rather than the system of policymakers. Thirdly, the public interest should be based on the public interest or be guided by the public interest, or be based on official taboos in order to safeguard departmental or private Interest-oriented and become the watershed of public consistency. Fourthly, when the opinions of senior and middle level decision-makers are not consistent, the policy proposal at least formally meets the requirements of senior decision-makers.