河长制水环境治理创新的困境与反思——基于协同治理的视角
|
摘要
河长制作为一项中央自上而下在全国范围内推行的水环境治理创新举措,旨在形成河长领治、上下同治、部门联治、全民群治、水陆共治的治水新格局,但其在基层的运作中却遭遇了上下层级协同的不力、跨部门协同的困顿、政社协同的尴尬,以及协同治理手段的阙如与失当等一系列困境。究其根源,从价值的角度看,源于内部协作的信任基础薄弱以及难以形成共享理解;从结构的角度看,源于双重管理体制的冲突、权责关系的不清以及多元主体合作共治的结构难以形成;从制度设计的角度看,源于激励机制的缺失、问责机制的扭曲以及跨部门责任风险共担机制的虚化;从技术的角度看,源于机械的计时打卡机制、信息流转的链条过长、培训与平台功能使用的协同配套不足。未来的治水之路,应强化协同治理理念,从河长制走向河长治。
As a measure for water environment governance innovation implemented nationwide by the central government from top to bottom, the river chief system is aimed at forming a new pattern of governing water,which is led by the river chief, co-governed by the superior and the subordinate, joint-governed by different departments, and governed by all the people collectively, and includes the shared governance of land and water,but in its operation in the grassroots, it encounters a series of difficulties, such as the lack of coordination between the superior and subordinate levels, the difficulty of cross-departmental coordination, the embarrassment of political and social coordination, and the absence and inappropriateness of means of collaborative governance. To trace them to their source, from the perspective of value, such difficulties are derived from the weakness of the trust foundation for internal collaboration and the difficulty to form a shared understanding; from the perspective of structure, they are derived from the conflict of dual management system, the unclarity of the authority-responsibility relationship, and the difficulty to form a structure of multi-agent cooperation and co-governance; from the perspective of system design, they are derived from the lack of incentive system, the distortion of accountability system, and the falsity of the cross-departmental responsibility and risk sharing system; from the perspective of technique, they are derived from the rigid timing clocking mechanism, the long chain of information flow, and the lack of collaborative supporting facilities between training and the use of platform function.The idea of collaborative governance, from the river chief system towards the river chief governance, should be strengthened in the future way of governing water.
As a measure for water environment governance innovation implemented nationwide by the central government from top to bottom, the river chief system is aimed at forming a new pattern of governing water,which is led by the river chief, co-governed by the superior and the subordinate, joint-governed by different departments, and governed by all the people collectively, and includes the shared governance of land and water,but in its operation in the grassroots, it encounters a series of difficulties, such as the lack of coordination between the superior and subordinate levels, the difficulty of cross-departmental coordination, the embarrassment of political and social coordination, and the absence and inappropriateness of means of collaborative governance. To trace them to their source, from the perspective of value, such difficulties are derived from the weakness of the trust foundation for internal collaboration and the difficulty to form a shared understanding; from the perspective of structure, they are derived from the conflict of dual management system, the unclarity of the authority-responsibility relationship, and the difficulty to form a structure of multi-agent cooperation and co-governance; from the perspective of system design, they are derived from the lack of incentive system, the distortion of accountability system, and the falsity of the cross-departmental responsibility and risk sharing system; from the perspective of technique, they are derived from the rigid timing clocking mechanism, the long chain of information flow, and the lack of collaborative supporting facilities between training and the use of platform function.The idea of collaborative governance, from the river chief system towards the river chief governance, should be strengthened in the future way of governing water.
引文
[1]燕继荣.协同治理:社会管理创新之道——基于国家与社会关系的理论思考[J].中国行政管理,2013(2):58-61.
[2]李正升.从行政分割到协同治理:我国流域水污染治理机制创新[J].学术探索,2014(9):57-61.
[3]王伟,李巍.河长制:流域整体性治理的样本研究[J].领导科学,2018(6):16-19.
[4]王勇.水环境治理“河长制”的悖论及其化解[J].西部法学评论,2015(3):1-9.
[5]任敏.“河长制”:一个中国政府流域治理跨部门协同的样本研究[J].北京行政学院学报,2015(3):25-31.
[6]MATTESSICH,MONSEY.Collaboration-whatmakes it work:a review of research literature on factors influencing successful collaboration[M].St.Paul,MN:Amherst H.Wilder Foundation,1992:1-57.
[7]CHRIS ANSELL,ALISON GASH.Collaborative governance in theory and practice[J].Journal of public administration research and theory,2007(11):543-571.
[8]吴春梅,庄永琪.协同治理:关键变量、影响因素及实现途径[J].理论探索,2013(3):73-77.
[9]THOMSON,ANN MARIE,JAMES L.PERRY.Collaboration processes:inside the black box[J].Special issue,public administration review,2006,66:20-32.
[10]PROVAN,KEITH G.,PATRICK KENIS.Modes of network governance:structure,management,and effectiveness[J].Journal of public administration research and theory,2008,18(2):29-52.
[11]AGRANOFF,ROBERT.Managing within networks:adding value to public organizations[M].Washington,DC:Georgetown University Press,2007:469-471.
[12]AGRANOFF,ROBERT.Collaborating to manage:a primer for the public sector[M].Washington,DC:Georgetown University Press,2012:1-10.
[13]BRYSON,JOHN M.,BARBARA C.CROSBY,MELISSA MIDDLETON STONE.The design and implementation of cross-sector collaborations:propositions from the literature[J].Special issue,public administration review,2006,66:44-55.
[14]JOHN M.BRYSON,BARBARA C.CROSBY,MELISSA MIDDLETON STONE.Designing and implementing cross-sector collaborations:needed and challenging[J].Public administration review,September/October,2015:543-571.
[15]安东尼.唐斯.官僚制内幕[M].郭小聪,等译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2017:135.
(1)选取S市作为个案研究的对象,主要基于如下考虑:一是S市作为实施河长制的先行地区,早在2014年就在全省率先构建起市—区—镇(街)—村(居)四级河长体系,已实现全市河湖河长制全覆盖,多年的运行实践为数据的获取与素材的挖掘提供了良好的基础;二是S市作为省会城市,其在河长制推行落实过程中所出现的问题具有一定的典型性与普遍性,能够在很大程度上折射出河长制这一制度创新的现实运作状况及普遍性问题;三是研究者自2018年6月开始接受S市河涌管理中心“完善治理体系,提升基层河长履职效率研究”的课题委托,具有“赢得研究进入”和“打开黑箱”的便利条件。
(2)2018年6-11月,研究者对S市河长办、S市河涌管理中心、3个市级职能部门(S市环保局、农业局、城市管理委员会)、11个区级河长办、4个镇街河长办以及15名村居河长等分别进行了深度访谈,整理访谈稿共计20万字。
(3)2017年10月到2018年1月,第二作者在S市流溪河流域管理办公室实习,利用实习的机会进行了大量的参与式观察。
(4)2018年10-12月,研究者对CH区、HD区、BY区、TH区、LW区、HZ区、PY区等7个区的河涌进行了实地考察。
(1)截至2018年8月,S市1484条河道(含1368条主要河道和部分小微水体)、49个湖泊、63座山塘、324座水库,落实四级河长共3030名,其中市级河长13名,区级河长275名,镇街级河长1019名,村居级河长1723名。
(2)目前市、区、镇街三级都成立了河长办公室,各级河长办公室负责总体设计、统筹协调、整体推进和督促落实等工作,研究全面推行河长制工作的重大问题。
(3)按照《S市河长巡河指导意见》的要求“:区级河长每两个月巡查不少于一次,镇街级河长每周巡查不少于一次,村居级河长落实河湖和排水设施一日一查。”此外,要按照河长APP的规定路线进行巡河。
(4)以HZ区某街道为例,辖内19条河涌,河长办放在街道城管科,总共4人,不仅要承担河长办的工作职责,还要兼顾城管科的各项职能。
(1)来自笔者访谈资料。
(2)来自笔者访谈资料。
(3)来自笔者访谈资料。
(1)上述谈话均来自笔者访谈资料。
(1)来自笔者访谈资料。
(1)2018年上半年,S市河长办监督问责组对70名(包括局级干部1人、处级干部34人、科级干部15人、村居级干部14人、其他6人)在水环境治理中不履行或不正确履行职责的工作人员作出了问责处理。问责的方式包括诫勉(9人)、责令书面检查(10人)、通报批评(9人)、约谈(42人)。
[2]李正升.从行政分割到协同治理:我国流域水污染治理机制创新[J].学术探索,2014(9):57-61.
[3]王伟,李巍.河长制:流域整体性治理的样本研究[J].领导科学,2018(6):16-19.
[4]王勇.水环境治理“河长制”的悖论及其化解[J].西部法学评论,2015(3):1-9.
[5]任敏.“河长制”:一个中国政府流域治理跨部门协同的样本研究[J].北京行政学院学报,2015(3):25-31.
[6]MATTESSICH,MONSEY.Collaboration-whatmakes it work:a review of research literature on factors influencing successful collaboration[M].St.Paul,MN:Amherst H.Wilder Foundation,1992:1-57.
[7]CHRIS ANSELL,ALISON GASH.Collaborative governance in theory and practice[J].Journal of public administration research and theory,2007(11):543-571.
[8]吴春梅,庄永琪.协同治理:关键变量、影响因素及实现途径[J].理论探索,2013(3):73-77.
[9]THOMSON,ANN MARIE,JAMES L.PERRY.Collaboration processes:inside the black box[J].Special issue,public administration review,2006,66:20-32.
[10]PROVAN,KEITH G.,PATRICK KENIS.Modes of network governance:structure,management,and effectiveness[J].Journal of public administration research and theory,2008,18(2):29-52.
[11]AGRANOFF,ROBERT.Managing within networks:adding value to public organizations[M].Washington,DC:Georgetown University Press,2007:469-471.
[12]AGRANOFF,ROBERT.Collaborating to manage:a primer for the public sector[M].Washington,DC:Georgetown University Press,2012:1-10.
[13]BRYSON,JOHN M.,BARBARA C.CROSBY,MELISSA MIDDLETON STONE.The design and implementation of cross-sector collaborations:propositions from the literature[J].Special issue,public administration review,2006,66:44-55.
[14]JOHN M.BRYSON,BARBARA C.CROSBY,MELISSA MIDDLETON STONE.Designing and implementing cross-sector collaborations:needed and challenging[J].Public administration review,September/October,2015:543-571.
[15]安东尼.唐斯.官僚制内幕[M].郭小聪,等译.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2017:135.
(1)选取S市作为个案研究的对象,主要基于如下考虑:一是S市作为实施河长制的先行地区,早在2014年就在全省率先构建起市—区—镇(街)—村(居)四级河长体系,已实现全市河湖河长制全覆盖,多年的运行实践为数据的获取与素材的挖掘提供了良好的基础;二是S市作为省会城市,其在河长制推行落实过程中所出现的问题具有一定的典型性与普遍性,能够在很大程度上折射出河长制这一制度创新的现实运作状况及普遍性问题;三是研究者自2018年6月开始接受S市河涌管理中心“完善治理体系,提升基层河长履职效率研究”的课题委托,具有“赢得研究进入”和“打开黑箱”的便利条件。
(2)2018年6-11月,研究者对S市河长办、S市河涌管理中心、3个市级职能部门(S市环保局、农业局、城市管理委员会)、11个区级河长办、4个镇街河长办以及15名村居河长等分别进行了深度访谈,整理访谈稿共计20万字。
(3)2017年10月到2018年1月,第二作者在S市流溪河流域管理办公室实习,利用实习的机会进行了大量的参与式观察。
(4)2018年10-12月,研究者对CH区、HD区、BY区、TH区、LW区、HZ区、PY区等7个区的河涌进行了实地考察。
(1)截至2018年8月,S市1484条河道(含1368条主要河道和部分小微水体)、49个湖泊、63座山塘、324座水库,落实四级河长共3030名,其中市级河长13名,区级河长275名,镇街级河长1019名,村居级河长1723名。
(2)目前市、区、镇街三级都成立了河长办公室,各级河长办公室负责总体设计、统筹协调、整体推进和督促落实等工作,研究全面推行河长制工作的重大问题。
(3)按照《S市河长巡河指导意见》的要求“:区级河长每两个月巡查不少于一次,镇街级河长每周巡查不少于一次,村居级河长落实河湖和排水设施一日一查。”此外,要按照河长APP的规定路线进行巡河。
(4)以HZ区某街道为例,辖内19条河涌,河长办放在街道城管科,总共4人,不仅要承担河长办的工作职责,还要兼顾城管科的各项职能。
(1)来自笔者访谈资料。
(2)来自笔者访谈资料。
(3)来自笔者访谈资料。
(1)上述谈话均来自笔者访谈资料。
(1)来自笔者访谈资料。
(1)2018年上半年,S市河长办监督问责组对70名(包括局级干部1人、处级干部34人、科级干部15人、村居级干部14人、其他6人)在水环境治理中不履行或不正确履行职责的工作人员作出了问责处理。问责的方式包括诫勉(9人)、责令书面检查(10人)、通报批评(9人)、约谈(42人)。
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |