Complexity and the Reconstruction of Public Administration
-
Available Online:
2023-02-20
CLC number: D0
-
摘要托马斯·伍德罗·威尔逊：《行政学研究》，《国外政治学》1987年第6期。约瑟夫·泰恩特：《复杂社会的崩溃》，邵旭东译，海口：海南出版社，2010年，第37—38页。韩志明：《从粗放式管理到精细化治理−迈向复杂社会的治理转型》，《云南大学学报（社会科学版）》2019年第1期。景天魁、高和荣：《探索复杂社会的治理之道−中国社会治理的情境、逻辑与策略》，《人民论坛·学术前沿》2016年第1期。叶娟丽、马骏：《公共行政学的新范式−混沌理论−兼评基尔的〈政府管理中的无序和复杂性〉》，《武汉大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2000年第5期。刘晶：《面向复杂治理场域的两种公共行政叙事及其整合》，《行政论坛》2015年第5期。宋雄伟、张翔、张婧婧：《国家治理的复杂性：逻辑维度与中国叙事−基于“情境—理论—工具”的分析框架》，《中国行政管理》2019年第10期。范如国：《复杂网络结构范型下的社会治理协同创新》，《中国社会科学》2014年第4期。Elizabeth A. Eppel and Mary L. Rhodes, “Complexity Theory and Public Management: a ‘Becoming’ Field,” Public Management Review, 2018(7), pp. 949-959.Elizabeth A. Eppel and Mary L. Rhodes, “Complexity Theory and Public Management: a ‘Becoming’ Field,” Public Management Review, 2018(7), pp. 949-959.Christopher Ansell and Robert Geyer, “Pragmatic Complexity’ a New Foundation for Moving Beyond ‘Evidence-Based Policy Making’ ?” Policy Studies, 2017(2), pp. 149-167.Peter Allen, Steve Maguire and Bill McKelvey, SAGE Handbook of Complexity and Management, London: SAGE, 2011.Stefano Battiston, J. Doyne Farmer and Andreas Flache, “Complexity Theory and Financial Regulation,” Science, 2016, 351(6275), pp. 818-819.Tim Blackmore, Placing Health: Neighbourhood Renewal, Health Improvement and Complexity, Polity Press, 2006.Brent Davis and Dennis Sumara, Complexity and Education: Inquiries into Learning, Teaching, and Research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006.参见米歇尔·沃尔德罗普：《复杂：诞生于秩序与混沌边缘的科学》，陈玲译，北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，1997年。混沌是指确定性系统中存在的内在随机性，处于混沌边缘意味着系统内存在着不确定性。钱学森、于景元、戴汝为：《一个科学新领域−开放的复杂巨系统（包括社会系统）及其方法论》，《自然杂志》1990年第1期。任佩瑜、张莉、宋勇：《基于复杂性科学的管理熵、管理耗散结构理论及其在企业组织与决策中的作用》，《管理世界》2001年第6期。Robert Geyer and Samir Rihani, Complexity and Public Policy: a New Approach to Twenty-First Century Politics, Policy and Society, Routledge, 2010.Michel Baranger, Chaos, Complexity, and Entropy, New England Complex Systems Institute, 2000.需要说明的是agent与actor在英文世界的作品中也较难进行区分，甚至进行混用。但也有学者尝试提出二者概念的区别，认为agent在复杂性理论中应该优于actors，因为行动者是活跃的实体：他们表现出适应性行为，能够适应不断变化的环境。而actor则被认为是被动的，因为他们处理信息，但不寻求适应系统。参见Geert Teisman, Arwin V. Buuren and Lasse M.Gerrit, Managing Complex Governance Systems: Dynamics, Self-Organization and Coevolution in Public Investments, Routledge, 2009. 本文在中文语境中使用“能动者”的概念是从语义的角度为突出主动性而使用的，而英文单词的选用则按照复杂性理论者通常使用的词汇agent。在管理科学或其他自然科学领域也多将其译为“智能体”。Rumelhart, D. E. Schemata, The Building Blocks of Cognition, Erlbaum Associates, 1980, pp. 33-58.Morçöl Göktuğ, A New Mind for Policy Analysis: Toward a Post-Newtonian and Postpositivist Epistemology and Methodology, Westport: Praeger. 2002, pp. 13-17.Niklas Luhmann, Social systems, Stanford University Press, 1995.参见亚里士多德：《政治学》，吴寿彭译，北京：商务印书馆，1965年。Stuart Kauffman, At Home in the Universe-The Search for the Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity, Oxford University Press, 1995.Paul Cilliers, Complexity and Postmodernism: Understanding Complex Systems, Routledge, 1998, pp. 90.Paul Cilliers, Complexity and Postmodernism: Understanding Complex Systems, Routledge, 1998, pp. 90.这一过程也可以被理解为涌现，将在后文中进一步阐述。Geert Teisman, Arwin V. Buuren and Lasse M. Gerrit, Managing Complex Governance Systems: Dynamics, Self-Organization and Coevolution in Public Investments, Routledge, 2009, pp. 1-16.Tominomori K. “Self-Organization Theory and Its Applicability to ‘Economic System’ ,” Economic Journal Of Hokkaido University, 2002(31), pp. 41-62.Arthur Koestler, The Ghost in Machine, Huchinson, 1905, pp. 383.Ilya Prigogine, Isabelle Stengers, Order Out of Chaos: Man’ s New Dialogue with Nature, Bantam Books, 1984.Anderson Philip. Complexity Theory and Organization Science, Organization Science, 1999(3), pp. 216-232.霍布斯：《利维坦》，黎思复等译，北京：商务印书馆，2011年。James Coleman, Foundations of Social Theory, Havard University Press, 1994.John H. Holland, Emergence: From Chaos to Order, Basic Books, 1998.Mark Kuperberg, “The Two Faces of Emergence in Economics,” Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2007, pp. 49-63.John H. Holland, Emergence: From Chaos to Order, Basic Books, 1998,.R. Keith Sawyer, Social Emergence: Societies as Complex Systems, Cambridge University Press, 2005.Joshua M. Epstein and Robert L. Axtell, Growing Artifi Cial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom up, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 1996.PhilipAnderson, “Complexity Theory and Organization Scienc,” Organization Science, 1999, pp. 216-232.Thomas C. Schelling, Micromotive and Macrobehavior, WW Norton & company, 1978.Philip W. Anderson, “More is different,” Science, 1972, pp. 393-396.参见Robert Axelrod, The Complexity of Cooperation: Agent-Based Models of Competition and Collaboration, Princeton University Press, 1997.John H. Holland., Hidden Order: How Adaptation Builds Complexity, Basic Books, 1995, p. 11.Sawyer R. Keith, Social Emergence: Societies as Complex Systems, Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 95-97.Julian le Grand and Clifford S. Russell, Collective decision making: Applications from public choice theory, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979, pp. 27-45.Lichbach and Mark Irving, Is Rational Choice Theory all of Social science? University of Michigan Press, 2003, pp. 32.
51 Paul K. MacDonald, “Useful Fiction or Miracle Maker: The Competing Epistemological Foundations of Rational Choice Theory,” American Political Science Review, 2003, pp. 551-565.52 让−雅克·卢梭：《社会契约论》，吴迎娅编译，北京：民主与建设出版社，2018年。53 Melanie Mitchell, Complexity: A Guided Tour, Oxford University Press, 2009.54 Melanie Mitchell, Complexity: A Guided Tour, Oxford University Press, 2009.55 Eppel and Elizabeth., “Complexity Thinking in Public Administration’ s Theories-in-Use,” Public Management Review, 2017, pp. 1-17.56 Jean G. Boulton, Peter M. Allen and Cliff Bowman, Embracing Complexity: Strategic Perspectives for an Age of Turbulence, Oxford University Press, 2015.57 参见Public Management Review, No. 3, 2008.58 Lasse Gerrits and Peter Marks “How the Complexity Sciences Can Inform Public Administration: An Assessment,” Public Administration, 2015, pp. 539-546.59 Ansell Christopher and Geyer Robert “ ‘Pragmatic Complexity’ a New Foundation for Moving Beyond ‘Evidence-Based Policy Making’ ?” Policy Studies,2017, pp. 149-167.60 Peter Allen, Steve Maguire and Bill McKelvey, SAGE Handbook of Complexity and Management, London: SAGE, 2011.61 Fligstein Neil “Sense Making and the Emergence of a New Form of Market Governance: the Case of the European Defense Industry,” American Behavioral Scientist, 2006, pp. 949-960.62 Wagenaar Hendrik, “Governance, Complexity, and Democratic Participation,” The American Review of Public Administration, 2007, pp. 17-50.63 Wagenaar Hendrik, “Governance, Complexity, and Democratic Participation,” The American Review of Public Administration, 2007, pp. 17-50.64 Levi Faur, and David, The Oxford Handbook of Governance, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 129-142.65 Geyer Robert and Rihani Samir, Complexity and public policy: A new approach to 21st century politics, policy and society, Routledge, 2010.66 Geyer Robert, “Beyond the Third Way: the science of complexity and the politics of choice,” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2003, pp. 37-257.67 Göktuğ Morçöl, A Complexity Theory for Public Policy, Routledge, 2012.68 Murray Gell-Mann, What is Complexity? Complexity, 1995, pp. 16-19.69 Göktuğ Morçöl, “A New Systems Thinking: Implications Of The Sciences Of Complexity For Public Policy And Administration,” Public Administration Quarterly, No. 3/4, 2005.70 Robert Geyer, Paul Cairney, Handbook on Complexity and Public Policy, Edward Elgar. 2015, pp. 19-31.71 Koppenjan Jfm., “Complexity in Governance Network Theory,” Complexity, Governance & Networks, 2014, pp. 61-75.72 Robert Geyer, Paul Cairney, Handbook on Complexity and Public Policy, Edward Elgar. 2015, pp. 19-31.73 Harris Neville “Complexity in the Law and Administration of Social Security: is it Really a Problem?” Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law, 2015, pp. 1-19.74 Paul Spicker, How Social Security Works: An Introduction to Benefits in Britain, Policy Press, 2011.75 Eppel Elizabeth Anne and Mary L. Rhodes, “Complexity Theory and Public Management: a ‘Becoming’ Field,” Public Management Review, 2018, pp. 1-11.76 Matthew Jones, “A Complexity Science View Of Modern Police Administration,” Public Administration Quarterly, 2008, pp. 433-457.77 Eppel Elizabeth Anne and Mary L. Rhodes, “Complexity Theory and Public Management: a ‘Becoming’ Field,” Public Management Review, 2018, pp. 1-11.78 Ansell Christopher and Geyer Robert, “ ‘Pragmatic Complexity’ a New Foundation for Moving Beyond ‘Evidence-Based Policy Making’ ?” Policy Studies, 2017, pp. 149-167.79 Cairney Paul and Geyer Robert, “A Critical Discussion of Complexity Theory: How Does ‘Complexity Thinking’ Improve Our Understanding of Politics and Policy Making?” Complexity, Governance and Networks, 2017, p. 1.80 Lester M. Salamon, The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance, Oxford University Press, 2002.81 Ansell Christopher and Geyer Robert, “ ‘Pragmatic Complexity’ a New Foundation for Moving Beyond ‘Evidence-Based Policy Making’ ?” Policy Studies, 2017, pp. 149-167.82 Edward P. Weber and Anne M. Khademian, “Wicked Problems, Knowledge Challenges, and Collaborative Capacity Builders in Network Settings,” Public Administration Review, 2008, pp. 334-349.83 Kvilvang Nils, Bjurström Erik and Almqvist Roland, “Making Sense of Complexity in Governance: the Case of Local Public Management in the City of Stockholm,” Policy Studies, 2019, pp. 1-18.84 Walters William, “Some Critical Notes on ‘Governance’ ,” Studies in Political Economy, 2004, pp. 27-36.85 高宣扬：《后现代论》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2016年，第22—23页。86 Jean-François Lyotard, La Condition Postmoderne, Minuit, 1979.87 高宣扬：《后现代论》，第4页。88 Hans-Georg Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode: Grundzüge einer Philosophischern Hermeneutik, J. C. B. Mohr-P. Siebeck, 1999.89 保罗·西利亚斯：《复杂性与后现代主义−理解复杂系统》，曾国屏译，上海：上海世纪出版集团，2006年，第156—159页。90 张康之：《公共行政的行动主义》，南京：江苏凤凰出版集团公司，2014年，第72页。91 后现代主义口中的正统公共行政，在文献的意义上通常是指涉威尔逊（政治与行政二分）、泰勒（科学管理）和韦伯（科层制）的理论。92 美国社会学家奥格本在1923年出版的《社会变迁》中，提出“文化堕距”概念，来说明在社会变迁中由于社会各部分变化的速度不同，文化集丛中的一部分落后于其他部分而呈现迟滞的现象。93 何艳玲：《公共行政学史》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2018年，第51页。94 Hugh T. Miller and Charles J. Fox, Postmodern Public Administration: Toward Discourse, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1995.95 David John Farme, “Public Administration Discourse: A Matter of Style?” Administration and Society, 1999, pp. 299-320.96 Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: Report on Knowledge, University of Minnesota Press, 1984.97 Steven Seidman , Contested Knowledge: Social Theory in the Post-Odern Era, Basil Blackwell, 1998.98 Hugh T. Miller and Charles J. Fox, Postmodern Public Administration, M E Sharpe Inc, 2006. -
HTML全文
-
图
(0) 表(0) -
参考文献
(0) - 相关文章
-
引证文献
-
资源附件
(0) -
访问统计
-
摘要: 复杂性是现代公共行政面临的重要问题。复杂性理论对既有公共行政理论的分析概念和研究议题进行了重构，使其更能解释复杂公共事务的治理逻辑。复杂公共行政的研究既有助于重新理解复杂的行政环境，也有助于进一步了解组织的变革或政策过程。复杂公共行政的研究是对治理理论的继承与超越，它拓展了对多主体能动性特征、关系网络的形态、“微观−宏观”机制方面的理解，并为治理行为的发生寻找到了意义框架。复杂性理论在诸多立场上与后现代主义公共行政是一致的。建构一种复杂公共行政的分析范式，对于丰富和发展公共行政理论具有重要价值。Abstract: Complexity is an important problem facing modern public administration. The complexity theory reconstructs the analytical concepts and research topics of the existing public administration theories so as to better explain the governance logic of complex public affairs. The study of complex public administration contributes both to a new understanding of the complex administrative environment and to a better understanding of organizational change or policy processes. The study of complex public administration is the inheritance and transcendence of governance theory. It expands the understanding of the characteristics of multi-agent initiative, the form of relationship network, the “micro-macro” mechanism, and finds the meaningful framework for the occurrence of governance behavior. Complexity theory is consistent with postmodern public administration in many aspects. It is of great value to construct an analytical paradigm of complexity public administration to enrich and develop public administration theory.
-
Key words:
- complexity /
- complexity public administration /
- governance theory /
- postmodernism
-
-
[1]
周沐君 . 在理论与经验事实之间：哈贝马斯与公共领域研究的社会学论辩. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(8): 157-170.
-
[2]
史丹 , 李鹏 . 现代化强国目标下能源使用成本最小路径研究——情景分析与理论检验. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(1): 45-58.
-
[3]
杨岚 , 周亚虹 , 萧莘癑 . 数字基础设施建设、收入差距变化与包容性发展. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(1): 71-83.
-
[4]
辛方坤 . 基层跨界难题的敏捷治理. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(3): 91-101.
- [5]
-
[6]
沈奕斐 . 情感经济的理论谱系与中国语境. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(7): 129-142.
-
[7]
李明 , 徐海琪 , 徐长拓 . 公共财政投资于人的统计框架与核算结果. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(8): 91-105.
-
[8]
谢岳 . 国家能力如何在运作中生成——国家治理的动态均衡模型. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(8): 106-117.
-
[9]
雷磊 . 数字司法的方法论立场：功能主义抑或规范主义?. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(1): 108-119.
-
[10]
林尚立 . 建构原创性理论的中国使命及其方法论基础. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(7): 5-11.
-
[11]
赵琳 , 张博宇 , 梁华 . 信息产品市场中垄断与创新的关系——基于成长网络的理论研究. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(7): 64-76.
-
[12]
丁惠平 . 隐形治理与地方秩序再造:晚明祁彪佳救荒行动的历史社会学分析. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(3): 143-154.
-
[13]
刘伟 . 发展壮大民营经济需要进一步明确的若干重要理论问题. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(7): 41-53.
-
[14]
刘锋杰 . “此花颜色一时明白起来”——阳明“心物关系说”的美学意涵与现代回响. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(1): 180-193.
-
[15]
熊昌锟 , 张紫源 . 央地财政关系的多方博弈与非正式治理——以民初广东盐税改征银毫为中心. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(5): 198-210.
-
[16]
倪梁康 . 黑格尔之后的“新观念论”历史哲学：新黑格尔主义. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(7): 12-22.
-
[17]
贺磊 . 康德“物自身问题”的视角主义审思——兼评牟宗三与李明辉的阐释. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(3): 31-40.
-
[18]
鲁明军 . 拟像、模式识别与计算形式主义——反思AI在艺术创作与艺术史研究中的运用. 学术月刊, 2026, 58(8): 41-55.
-
[1]
-
下载:
沪公网安备 31010102003103号