摘要
治理,包括全球治理的兴起,是人类探求良好公共生活和政治秩序持久努力的延续,它本质上反映了现代性绝对主权的消解。通过审慎地分析治理与民主、官僚制等政治学传统话语的复杂关系,以及全球治理和地方治理两个分支,可以看到治理理论体现了现代性与后现代性的某种交融。
The rise of governance and global governance is a signal that we are continuously making hard efforts to pursue a good public life and political order. Today, when postmodernism is having more and more impact on politics, we can also perceive modernity interwoven with postmodernity in governance theory not only through analyzing the complicated relationship between governance and the traditional political discourses such as democracy, bureaucracy, but also through discussing two branches of the governance theory itself: global governance and local governance.The debate about direct democracy and indirect democracy indicates a dilemma which has puzzled us for a long time. That is, we have to face an unavoidable tension between providing citizens opportunities to take part in politics and making timely decisions to solve problems efficiently when we are going to design any political system. The rise of the governance theory can be viewed as a trial breakthrough in such a democracy dilemma. Governance theory doesn't discard representative democracy entirely but amends it by increasing the elements of direct democracy within a framework of representative democracy. After all, representative democracy as a great achievement in the development of modernity reflects the great advances of mankind and it indicates that we can depend on our reason to organize a good public life in a large domain successfully. At the same time, governance tends to have greater esteem for direct democracy, as does postmodernism. This direct democracy mode advocated by governance theory, however, is not exactly the referendum in ancient Greece. It is such a mode that people can widely take part in the local or community affairs and make decisions or even implement decisions by themselves.As far as bureaucracy is concerned, both the governance theory and postmodernism consider it as an outdated concept of modernity. In the postindustrial society, complexity, contingency and differentiation are increasing more dramatically than ever before. The idea that we ca achieve a grand goal in controlling or administrating the whole society totally only by depending on such single means as government or market is becoming more and more problematic. Bureaucracies will no longer work well. Nevertheless, governance theory and postmodernism regard complexity, contingency and differentiation as normal and given circumstances in which we establish systems and make decisions, not obstacles that must be overcome. So, decentralization, autonomy, network governance and business methods in public administration are necessary. On the other hand, governance can't throw away bureaucracy absolutely, for most organizations participating in governance have to deal with specialization and cooperation, harmony and control when bureaucracy may be a good choice.Global governance that faces many unprecedented handicaps tries to build up an ambitious universal theory based on such basic concepts as global civil society, world democracy, global identity and international NGOs to develop a desirable global political mode. Such grand narrative told by global governance is one of the typical characteristics of modernity. On the contrary, local governance is a type of a small narrative, which trends to do some regional and trivial empirical researches on governance instead of exploring a uniform governance mode or governance framework that can work well in any circumstances. So, local governance reflects more characteristics of postmodernity, such as pragmatism and differentiation. Finally, governance theory that is deeply affected by postmodernism may lead to an anxious sequence such as the end of politics.
出处
《浙江大学学报（人文社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2003年第2期5-13,共9页
Journal of Zhejiang University:Humanities and Social Sciences
关键词
主权
治理
现代性
后现代性
民主
官僚制
全球治理
Sovereignty
governance
modernity
post-modernity
democracy
bureaucracy
global governance
