Why must public governance undergo a new transformation?

Abstract: China is undergoing the transformation of old and new governance, and governance transition is actually a global reform movement. The global governance transition since 1980s is the inevitable trend and result of the development of human society. Various theoretical and practical models emerged in the global governance transition process provide some enlightenment for China to explore and establish a more effective "governance" model of public affairs and realize the transformation from public governance to "good governance".

Keywords: governance; Transformation; Global change

Over the past 30 years of reform and opening up, the rapid economic and social development in China has not only brought about profound changes in China's social structure and economic structure, but also fundamentally changed the government's management from concept and system to structure and mode, and the governance of China has also changed from the old to the new. Moving towards new governance is the inevitable result of contemporary governance transition. Governance transition is a systematic, large-scale and fundamental reform process in the field of public governance, and it is a global movement triggered by many factors. Since the 1980s, a vigorous global reform movement has been launched in the field of public administration, with the focus on strengthening government capacity and meeting citizens' wishes. As a result, public administration has changed from government management to public administration. Exploring more effective "governance" mode of public affairs has also become the core field of public management research since the 1980s. This exploration will provide some experiences and theories for the public management research in China and the ongoing public governance transition.

I. Background: Global public management reform and governance transition.

/kloc-"Governance", which began to be used at the end of 0/4, is associated with government activities such as government and management, and is mainly used for political activities and management activities related to national public affairs. Today, more and more public management researchers begin to agree with the new explanation of the concept of "governance": governance is a process in which many subjects, including the government, various non-governmental organizations and even private institutions, work together to deal with public affairs in order to meet public needs and maximize public interests. This definition is mainly used in the sense of "public governance". It means: (1) Governance or public governance is different from government management, and the subject is not unique, but various public and private institutions including the government; (2) The application of governance authority is not a single top-down mandatory administrative order like government management, but a way of interaction, mutual consultation and cooperation; (3) Governance is a network cooperative management of public affairs, which is "multi-centered" and has diversified goals, but the ultimate goal is to meet the needs of the public to the greatest extent at the lowest cost and maximize public interests.

Traditional governance is challenged by the development of human society, and the western countries have long been transformed into "new" governance. However, governance has been widely valued by the international community, and it has its special background, that is, the rise of the global public management reform movement, after the 1980s. The contemporary global public management reform movement originated in western countries and began in the 1980s. In 1980s, western countries started public administration reform, which originated from two basic reasons: increasing financial pressure and citizens' general dissatisfaction with the public services provided by the government. The purpose of the reform is "to form savings (economy) in public expenditure, improve the quality of public services, make the government's operation more efficient, and increase the chances of making the selected and implemented policies effective". In order to achieve this goal, the basic contents of western public management reform include three aspects: (1) social and market management and the optimization of government functions; (2) Utilize social forces to socialize public services; (3) the reform of the internal management system of the government.

In the process of public administration reform for more than 20 years, western countries have formed a new public administration model. According to the research of Australian scholar Owen Hughes, since the mid-1980s, the management mode of public sector in western developed countries has changed, and the traditional bureaucratic-based administrative management mode is changing to a new market-based public management mode. Although this model has various names such as "new public management", "managerialism", "enterprise government" and "post-bureaucratic model", it all represents the same phenomenon, that is, the traditional bureaucracy has been replaced by a market-oriented model.

Although it is difficult to make a proper definition and comprehensive evaluation of the "new public management" model in the contemporary western public management reform movement, it means profound changes in contemporary western public management, especially government management, the transformation of public governance, and the end of the traditional public governance model at least in western countries. And the development of modern public governance, as Ryan said: the changes in the theory and practice of public governance in the 20th century made the traditional way of state governance obsolete. "NPM is the latest theoretical paradigm change of public sector governance". In fact, the emergence of new public management is not only a change in the theoretical paradigm of public management, but also a revolution in the practical model. Ryan believes that traditional public governance emphasizes the difference between politics and public management and private sector management, while in modern public governance, there is no difference between the goals of the public sector and the goals of the private sector in realization principle, and they are all realized through the contract system. The providers in the contract may be public organizations or private organizations.

The reform of public administration is global, which began in Britain (1979, when Margaret Thatcher became prime minister), the United States (1980, when Reagan was elected president), Australia (1983) and Canada (1984, when Prime Minister maroni was in power). Both the former Soviet countries in Eastern Europe, the newly industrialized countries in East Asia, and a large number of developing countries in Africa and Latin America with low modernization are involved in this reform movement. Although the specific reasons for public administration reform vary from country to country, some are due to economic crisis or budget deficit, such as Britain, the United States and New Zealand, some are due to economic crisis accompanied by changes in political leaders, such as Japan, South Korea and Uganda, some are expected to meet the standards required by the European Union, such as Hungary and Greece, and some are expected to meet the standards required by national development organizations, such as Maldives, Kenya and Ukraine. Some of them are due to democratic transformation, such as Georgia, Zambia, South Africa and Russia. And some are expected to be more efficient, such as Switzerland. It is also quite different from the specific characteristics of traditional public management models, such as Anglo-Saxon model, Napoleon model, Germanic model, Scandinavian model, Islamic model, Confucian model, and the administrative model of developing countries mentioned by Peters. However, the general direction and main measures of reform are often the same, just as Kamak's survey of 123 countries in the world shows that "the reform efforts of various countries are very similar", in other words, "the reform movements of various countries have the characteristics of global imitation". It is undeniable that the emergence of a new public governance model is also global. If at the beginning of the 20th century, governments all over the world generally established their own corporate governance model according to Max Weber's bureaucratic principle, then the global corporate governance reform at the end of the 20th century means that countries are scrambling to surpass the bureaucratic model of the 20th century and move towards a new realm of corporate governance of 2 1 century.

Second, social transformation and governance transition.

On the surface, contemporary public governance transition is the product of public management reform, but in essence it is the result of economic and social transformation. The traditional governance model is a practical model of public management that adapts to the industrial society and industrial economy era. When human society is transforming from an industrialized society to an information society or a post-industrial society, the traditional governance model will inevitably become more and more unsuitable, and human beings must seek a public governance model that adapts to the new information society and knowledge economy.

Transformation is a transitional process in which things change from one type of movement to another. The process of transition from one type of society to another is called social transformation. Social transformation is the "overall development" of society and a special structural change. Its main body is social structure, and its content involves all aspects of politics, economy, society and other fields, so it is also a field of concern to many disciplines. Sociology attaches great importance to the study of social structure transformation, and even a universally recognized discipline named "transition economics" has appeared in the economic discipline group, which specializes in the process and law of transition from planned economy to market economy. Transition economics generally pays attention to the economic factors that affect the transition process, but pays insufficient attention to a basic element in the transition process, that is, "government transformation". Government transformation and governance transition are the concomitant of economic transformation and social transformation, or they are necessary components, which should be paid enough attention to by political science and public management.

The so-called governance transition is a systematic, large-scale and fundamental transformation process in the field of public governance. In this sense, governance transition is nothing new. /kloc-in the 0/9th century, the industrialized democratic system in western countries pursued a "small government model" with few government goals. By the end of 19, the original "small government model" with extremely weak central authority was completely broken, because this kind of government has been unable to cope with many practical problems under the industrialized democratic system: factories have mushroomed, cities have developed at an alarming rate, and the whole emerging industry is gestating. These new phenomena have caused many new demands: large-scale transportation systems, railways and bridges, large-scale urban drainage and water supply systems and universal education systems.

When the original government model can't meet these needs, it is inevitable to create a new public management model to replace the old small government model. In short, the establishment of Weber-style bureaucracy model in western countries in the early 20th century was a major transformation of public governance.

Bureaucracy is a public management model that adapts to industrial society. At the beginning of the 20th century, the government departments in western countries introduced bureaucracy, which enabled fair administration and efficient administration to be realized and the organizational structure to be optimized. The hierarchical organizational structure makes officials and institutions have to accept strict supervision, which objectively strengthens the control of corruption. In terms of specialization, the work that was once completely done by professionals has been divided into several small parts, which is closer to a seamless government. However, the command system of bureaucratic organizations mostly adopts unified command, and information can be transmitted quickly and bi-directionally, which is conducive to the full integration of government organizations. Compared with the early governance model, it is an improvement. However, in the 1970s, the advantages of bureaucracy began to degenerate into disadvantages: standardized administration, inefficient administration and organizational integration failed, and bureaucracy began to be suspected and declared as an outdated governance model, "to the point where it must be changed".

What are the new features of the development of human society? Why must new changes take place in public governance?

First of all, as far as western society is concerned, the post-industrial society (or knowledge society and information society) has arrived. The basic characteristics of this new society are: (1) the service economy has replaced the manufacturing economy, and most of the labor force is no longer engaged in agriculture or manufacturing, but in trade, finance, transportation, medical care, entertainment, scientific research, education and management; (2) Professional and technical personnel are in a dominant position; (3) Theoretical knowledge is in the central position, which is the source of social innovation and policy making; (4) It is possible to plan and control the development of technology and identify it; (5) New "intelligent technologies" such as information theory, cybernetics, decision theory, game theory, utility theory, linear programming and computer technology have become decision-making tools. Secondly, there is a crisis in the management itself. In the United States, a country with an individualistic tradition, distrust of the government and bureaucrats has a long history. Americans have two views on their government, thinking that they have democracy to be proud of, but politicians are corrupt and the government's plans are not handled properly. Today, the American public increasingly believes that the government has created more problems than solved them, and that government policies and plans have not only failed to bring benefits to people's lives, but also reduced their quality of life. The increasingly incompetent government has led to the crisis in the field of public administration. As the basis of traditional governance, bureaucracy has become an outdated, rigid and inefficient public management system model. As Osborne and Guble said in the book "Reforming the Government", the bureaucratic system developed in the industrial age with various rules and regulations and their cascading command systems as the core has been unable to operate effectively; It becomes bloated, wasteful and inefficient; In the rapidly changing, information-rich and knowledge-intensive 1990s, it has been unable to operate effectively. When the government becomes more and more incompetent and inefficient, the private sector becomes very efficient. Various non-profit and non-governmental organizations known as the "third sector" are booming, making unique contributions to society and undertaking many functions played by government agencies in other countries. The emergence of the crisis indicates that "as an acceptable governance model, traditional governance is dead", and a new governance model with more reality and vitality than traditional governance is coming.

Third, towards good governance: public governance in 2 1 century

"Market failure" and "government failure" are important reasons for the revival of governance, and governance may also fail. In contemporary society, the effectiveness of public affairs governance increasingly depends on the mutual influence and benign interaction between government and citizens, society and enterprises, that is, "good governance" (or "good governance"). The basic elements of good governance or good governance include legitimacy, transparency, responsibility, rule of law, responsiveness and effectiveness.

There is no unified model for new governance. Moving towards "good governance" is the only choice for governance transition, and it is also the goal that public governance should pursue in the 26th century. 2 1 what new scene will public governance present? Donald Kate, a prolific scholar in the field of contemporary American public administration, once predicted that public administration in the 2 1 century must effectively solve many key problems and new problems that are becoming more and more important, mainly: (1) providing more non-traditional and non-governmental services to the public. (2) More power of public governance is delegated to lower-level government agencies, and decentralization is an important premise and content of government reform. (3) The burden of service coordination has increased. One of the main side effects of the institutional-based reforms in the past was that the services provided by the government were scattered and unsystematic. Public governance in 2 1 century requires strengthening the ability of government organizations, especially the ability to cooperate with various non-governmental organizations, so as to make the government and its services more perfect and more transparent to citizens. (4) Strengthen international cooperation in public governance. The growing globalization has had a more significant impact on the governance of public companies in the 2 1 century, which has established a principle that governments have their own sovereignty, but they need to consult with international organizations and other sovereign countries on major international issues, and international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the United Nations and the European Union must carefully define their new roles in global governance. (5) The national government plays a new role in public governance and needs new capabilities. Decentralization and international cooperation have left more policy issues in public governance to local governments and international organizations to solve, and the government will still play an important role in public governance in the 2/kloc-0 century. It needs to focus on solving at least five core issues: general defense and guiding foreign policy as the basic function of national sovereignty, income redistribution (low-level government can not fully operate), collecting data and promoting information circulation, establishing a new bridge of close contact and cooperation between different government functional departments and civil society to ensure the high efficiency of public services, and developing the strategic thinking needed by the public to deal with various public problems.

Owen e Hughes predicted that compared with the 20th century, corporate governance in the 20th century may have the following characteristics: (65,438+0) Due to paying more attention to the boundary between the corporate sector and the private sector and improving the relationship between them, corporate services will be more market-oriented; (2) Future management will be more flexible; (3) Politics may be strengthened, and public governance is a part of the political process; (4) Management can also be more participatory; (5) Civil servants are now more capable than before, and this situation will continue.

Fourthly, contemporary China: governance transition in a transitional country.

Governance transition is not a patent of western countries. In the 20th century, the global public management reform movement spread to developing countries like China, which also transformed the public management in contemporary China from government management to public governance. The occurrence of public management reform in contemporary China and its governance transition cannot be simply regarded as the result of the spread and demonstration of western governance transition to the world, but has its unique background and motivation. Since the reform and opening up from 65438 to 0978, China has been in a period of rapid transition from an agricultural society to an industrial society and from a planned economy to a market economy, and has entered the ranks of "transition countries".

Under the planned economy system, the main characteristics and disadvantages of public administration in China are: (1) all-round government. The government plays a highly centralized role in resource allocation in the whole society, monopolizing all social resources, and the basic role of the market in resource allocation is excluded. (2) Control, rule by man and closed management. The official standard and official standard system of all-round government make its operation mode mainly closed by internal meetings and internal documents, and "red-headed documents" and leadership instructions rather than laws and regulations become the main or even the only administrative basis. Its outstanding disadvantages are that government power is rarely supervised and restricted from bottom to top, there is no clear responsibility mechanism, and the functions of various departments overlap.

The reform that started at 1978 promoted the sustained and rapid economic growth in China, but also brought about drastic changes in the economic structure and social structure, which triggered the transformation of public governance. This change is mainly manifested in the following aspects: (1) Great changes have taken place in government functions. The main function of the government no longer focuses on the past political rule or leadership, relaxes the excessive intervention and strict control in the economic field, and the government gradually turns to social public management; (2) There is a new relationship between government and society, and between government and citizens. There are more and more non-governmental organizations, which play an increasingly important role in providing all kinds of public products, engaging in public welfare undertakings and public services, and undertake some functions originally undertaken by the government; (3) The operation mode of the government has changed greatly, and the law has begun to play a role in various fields, and administration according to law has become the basic requirement of the government's operation; (4) The power of the government began to be gradually decentralized, and the role of "units" as a supplement to the government's management of public affairs in grass-roots society was greatly weakened, while the role of communities and society increased, and welfare units were gradually replaced by social security systems; (5) With the establishment and gradual development of the professional civil servant system, experts and the public are playing an increasingly important role in public decision-making. The expert consultation system, citizen participation system, social situation and public opinion reflection system, social publicity system and social hearing system have been established.

Every step forward of human society will put forward new requirements for governance, and will promote governance to get rid of the old and keep the new. The driving force of governance transition is the resultant force of various forces to promote the renewal of governance and the direction change in harmony with the social development process. This resultant force comes from the change of governance itself and its environment, that is, the power of governance transition consists of external power and internal power. Donald Kate, a visiting senior researcher at the Brookings Institution in the United States, explained why many countries are involved in the global public management reform movement almost at the same time and actively seek the same reform goal, pointing out that there are four different political and economic forces playing a role in it: political forces, social forces, economic forces and institutional forces. Carmack believes that the driving force of global public management reform lies in global economic competition, democratization, information revolution and the government's own performance deficit. This includes the analysis of external forces and internal forces.

The external driving forces of governance transition include political, economic, social, demographic and cultural forces. The most important driving force of contemporary China and governance transition comes from the change of economic system. In the process of China's economic system transformation, many changes in the economic field are finally reflected in the structure and mode of public governance. Social development is also an important force to promote governance transition. The practice in governance transition, China shows that social development and social structure transformation have promoted governance transition. Many problems in China's social development, such as public safety, employment, pollution and social injustice, have not been alleviated, and some are still intensifying. The solution of these problems needs the continuous adjustment of government governance functions and the further reform of governance mechanism. The promotion of political development to governance transition can not be ignored, and it is often direct and huge. The change of social interest structure brought by the change of economic system has led to the expansion of political participation, caused many difficulties in government decision-making, and also developed the contradiction between the central and local governments. All these require our country to improve the degree of democratization and scientificity of government governance decision-making, and improve the ability and efficiency of the government.

China and governance transition also have their internal motivations. The internal motivation of China governance transition comes from the inefficient and incompetent governance dilemma caused by the mismatch between the government's role and ability, the reconstruction of the relationship between the government and society caused by the need to reposition the government's role, and the image damage caused by the anomie of government governance behavior during the system transformation period.

In a word, the motivations of contemporary China and governance transition are various, which still exist and some are even increasing. In particular, the requirements of changing the mode of economic development and improving the socialist market economic system, as well as the comprehensive promotion of political construction with the goal of democratic politics and social construction with the focus on improving people's livelihood, have made the reform and innovation of China's public management system enter a deep stage that needs to seek new breakthroughs in practice, which means that the pace of China and governance transition cannot stop, on the contrary, it must be accelerated. What is happening in governance transition, China? Up to now, the dust is undecided, which requires us to explore in practice and seek a breakthrough in theory. Studying the global governance transition law originated from the western public administration reform movement will help us get some enlightenment from it.