The Public Dilemma of Contemporary Chinese Social Construction and Its Transcendence

Zhang Fa: Subjectivity, Civil Society, Publicity Three important concepts in the history of thought since China's reform and opening up, No, Sasaki Nobu, and so on: The History of Public and Private Thoughts, translated by Liu Wenzhu, Beijing: People's Publishing House, 2009.

Hai Beile and Shu Gengde: Political Participation from the Masses to Citizens in China, translated by Zhang Wenhong, Beijing: Central Compilation Press, 2009, pp. 6-12.

Since 2004, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China has promoted the construction of a "harmonious society" and strived to shape a new pattern of country-led, cohesive and attracting diverse social forces to participate in social construction and management. This means that China's public construction is gradually gaining national institutions. The echo of the construction.

(I) Characteristics of the policy paradigm of social construction In the past few years, domestic scholars have all believed that social construction is a rational allocation of social resources and opportunities, promotion of social justice, adjustment of social interests, cultivation of social organizations, development of social undertakings, and promotion of people's livelihood. A grand system composed of multiple fields. 1 "Social construction" as the national macro-strategy choice, not only refers to the value field (fairness, justice), but also involves the basic principles of system construction (people-oriented, scientific development, etc.), and even Refers to specific policy arrangements (priority to develop education, expand employment, deepen the reform of income distribution system, etc.), and its richness of content far exceeds the general specific social policy, and can be regarded as a new type of policy paradigm.

It also indicates the nature of the problem they need to solve. 2 As a belief and basic value of understanding public issues and thinking about their solutions, the policy paradigm not only governs the choice and allocation of policy objectives and policy instruments, but also represents policy actions. The basic framework. If “social construction” is used as a policy paradigm in formation, it is possible to understand the goals, principles and priorities of social construction in different periods in a cohesive and mutually causal whole. Most of the appearances echoed the relevant ideology and assumed a unique governance function. "Social construction" was not accidental at the Fourth Plenary Session of the 16th CPC Central Committee. It implies a new reform under the influence of national ideology. Consensus is taking shape and will have a profound impact on national policy making.

Since the 1990s, China has accelerated the pace of market reforms. While promoting the rapid development of China's economy, it has also triggered a large number of social contradictions and social problems, highlighted by imbalances in the structure of interests, such as polarization between the rich and the poor, urban-rural disparities, and regional differentiation. Wait. The promotion of “pan-marketization” policy ideas in the field of social security and welfare has caused a considerable number of people to enjoy the results of reforms and become relatively vulnerable groups. In this context, a large number of discussions on the direction of reforms that began in late 2003 have developed in the intellectual and public policy sectors. The topic has increasingly focused on the reflection of GDPism and how to expand the benefits of reform and adjust the structure of social interests, and gradually A consensus is reached to change the development model of a light economy and light society so that more people can benefit from the reform. "Social construction", which has the characteristics of the new policy paradigm, is precisely the consensus of this reform in the national economic and social development strategy: Zheng Hangsheng: social construction and social management in the perspective of sociology, the second importance of the Journal of Renmin University of China in 2006 is becoming increasingly prominent Performance. The goal of "social construction" is relatively clear from its starting point, namely, shaping a harmonious social interest relationship pattern and forming a new social management structure that is compatible with the socialist market economy.

Every policy paradigm is not a one-step process from maturity to maturity. According to the study of the historical institutional school, a mature policy paradigm generally covers three core elements of policy integration, policy tools and governance models. Policy objectives refer to the response paths defined as problems in a particular ideological system and the basic values ​​and principles of the state; policy tools provide concrete solutions to problems from a technical perspective; governance models define the roles of the actors involved in governance and Its relationship structure. These three elements work together as a cause and effect, enabling the policy paradigm to achieve the desired goals. The social construction policy paradigm has gone through three important stages of development. At different stages, social construction has been carried out around different elements.

In the first phase (about 2004 to 2006), the Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixteenth Central Committee adopted the decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on the construction of a major socialist harmonious society. For the first time, the document systematically summarizes the guiding ideology and basic principles for building a socialist harmonious society, and puts forward the policy goal of building a socialist harmonious society, that is, social construction by 2020, focusing on the adjustment of interest relations and forming a "to solve the people." The social construction policy ideas of the people's most concerned, most direct, and most realistic interest issues.

In the second stage (about 2007 to 2010), the report of the 17th National Congress of the Communist Party of China clearly defined the key progress of social construction as “improving people's livelihood” and proposed six major education, employment, income distribution, social security, medical and health care, and social management. Specific policy objectives for social development in the field. Correspondingly, the government has designed a series of policy tools, such as promoting the establishment of a comprehensive rural minimum living security system, the pilot of the basic urban residents' basic medical insurance system, the employment promotion law, the labor contract law, and so on.

In the third stage (from the beginning of 2011 to the present), the 12th Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development will design policy tools for improving “improving people's livelihood and establishing a sound basic public service system”, and “improving basic public service levels”. Specific areas such as “implementing employment priority strategy” and “reasonably adjusting income distribution relationship” put forward the ideas of policy tool setting and reform; progress emphasizes “strengthening party leadership, strengthening government social management functions, and strengthening social organizations of various enterprises and institutions. Management and service responsibilities, guiding various social organizations to strengthen their own construction, enhance their ability to serve the society, support the participation of people's organizations in social management and public services, and give play to the importance of the people's participation in the basic role of social management. 2 During this period, the central government held a meeting on strengthening innovative social management twice, and its core topics all involved the transformation of contemporary Chinese social governance model.

In the first and second phases, the state basically formed a system of policy objectives; in the second and third phases, the central and local governments began to propose corresponding policy tools; in the third phase, with policy objectives and policy : Building the industrial policy in the United States, Britain and France in the railway era, Zhang Netcheng, Zhang Haidong, Shanghai: Shanghai People's Publishing House, 2008. Campbell and others: American economic governance, Dong Yunsheng, Wang Yan translation, Shanghai: Shanghai People's Publishing House, 2009.

Tool-matching governance model building issues are becoming increasingly important. We regard the social governance model as the "social system", the so-called social system. In the traditional sense, it is a series of institutional arrangements around the allocation of public goods.

In the context of the high diversification of the sources of interests and public goods and the growing awareness of the rights of the people, it is difficult to achieve long-term effects by mobilizing a single effort within the traditional system and mobilizing a smaller policy network in the context of achieving a fair and just social construction goal. With the help of multiple forces in society and the public. Therefore, the social system that is compatible with these requirements is “the communication and negotiation system between different stakeholders built around the fair and equitable distribution of public goods”. Only through it, the policy objectives and tools of social construction can be systematically obtained. support.

However, the challenges facing this new type of social institution building are far more difficult than the formulation of policy objectives and policy tools. The core of the system is the communication and negotiation system between different stakeholders. In essence, it forms a public platform and fosters various stakeholders or The enthusiasm and rational ability of the group to participate in public activities, that is, the construction of "publicity" and its institutional guarantee system. The biggest difference between this new social system and the “overall dominance model” 2 is that the object of interest becomes the subject of interest and is highly diversified. The relationship between public power and different interests is also required to be relatively equal. The state and its agents exercise their own transformation to the state and its agents in communication and negotiation with other stakeholders. In other words, the state must stimulate the public to participate in and organize public life actively, orderly and autonomously while exerting the traditional advantages in the production and distribution of public goods. The proposal of "party leadership, government responsibility, social coordination, and public participation" is not only compatible with China's national conditions, but also a positive response to the above-mentioned changes in the social system. Of course, how to put "party leadership, government responsibility" and "social coordination"

The organic integration with "public participation" is not only a "social learning" problem, but also a re-division of power boundaries and reorganization of power relations.

(II) Deep problems in the reform of social system Publicity and social construction are mutual promotion rather than simple causality. The former is both the essential connotation of the latter and its fundamental driving force. But today, the lack of public development, that is, the lack of public spirit, constitutes one of the important constraints of social construction in our country.

First, promote democratic construction and participation. Since the 17th National Congress, the theoretical and public policy departments have gradually reached a new consensus: the development of democracy and the improvement of people's livelihood complement each other and promote each other. Therefore, in the new stage of social construction, the state must further explore the form of democratic realization that echoes the issue of people's livelihood. 5 In response, Guo Sun Liping, Wang Hansheng, Wang Sibin, Lin Bin, Yang Shanhua: Changes in China's social structure since the reform, Chinese society Zhao Wei: pay more attention to the role of democratic supervision in social construction. Interview with Li Junru, May 18, 2011, http ://theory.people,com.cn/GB/14672729.html, January 31, 2012. Li Pei-lin and Chen Guang-jin: The family has intensified the building of democracy at various levels and promoted the improvement of the institutional guarantee system for China's democratic construction.

However, the enthusiasm of the public to participate in democratic activities is not in sync with the pace of building democratic institutions (mechanisms).

Since 2003, Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen and other cities have begun to promote the direct election of the neighborhood committee on the “face”. In order to ensure the effectiveness of the election, the relevant departments have also designed a direct election process to encourage voters to actively participate in the election process. However, most of the respondents who actively responded to the election mobilization were groups that had more contact with the residents' committees. The attitudes of young voters and wealthy groups were relatively indifferent. Because the proportion of residents participating in the elections was not very high, some communities had different levels of entrusted ticketing and The voting phenomenon, the direct election effect is greatly reduced. 1 Case 2: Many cities in China have established an institutional system to guarantee residents' right to know and participate in community public affairs, but the “idle” problem of these systems is still serious. Some studies have found that the management departments that have been widely used in recent years have relied more on “the series of social construction activities carried out at the community level”. “The impact of “the discussion” on the “department” is minimal, and the enthusiasm of the residents” is hurt. "The procedure therefore flows in the "idle". 2 Second, the socialization of public affairs in the creation and practice of social orientation. Social public affairs is to stimulate public participation, foster "fair and justice" social values, enhance social self-coordination and management The foundation of capability is the realistic carrier of public production. In recent years, local governments at all levels have been striving to create various public affairs and attract public participation in public management and services. But in reality, public affairs privatize and create social public The efforts of the affairs are always entangled in contradiction.

Case 3: Village elections are the most important public affairs created by the state in the countryside. Through open and fair universal suffrage and direct elections, village self-governing organizations representing villagers' interests and credibility are established. Since the position of the director of the village committee has the power to decide on the allocation of public resources in the village, in recent years, in some economically developed areas, the phenomenon of bribery has become increasingly serious. Bribery not only undermines the fairness of village elections, but also transforms public choices that originally related to the public interest into private (or small group) behaviors based on individual interests. In this way, the election as a public affairs becomes a private profit-making business. Since the 1990s, while the country promoted rural grassroots democracy construction, the reconstruction and rejuvenation of clan organizations have emerged. These two processes are intertwined in China's rural society with extremely complicated mechanisms.

Clan organizations infiltrate or intervene in rural public affairs, although they can provide public goods and overcome common interests. China's current social construction framework design, December 27, 2010, March 19, http.

Jing Jia, Liu Chunrong: Direct election of neighborhood committees and urban grassroots governance. Direct election of Shanghai residents' committee in 2006 Yao Hua, etc.: Community autonomy: lack of autonomy space and the predicament of residents' participation, social science front 2010 Tongzhihui: election events and village politics Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2004. Zhang Jing: Grassroots Regime: Problems in the Rural System, Shanghai: Shanghai People's Publishing House, 2007.

The opportunistic orientation and other aspects play some positive roles. 1 However, the non-universal behavioral logic and the “differential pattern” behavioral ethics followed by clan organizations often cut or fragment the village’s public affairs. Especially in the villages composed of multiple clan, the negative competition between the clan often leads to the privatization of public affairs and weakens the villagers' recognition of the wider community.

Third, the development of social organizations and the lack of subjective consciousness. The important goal of social construction is to “guide various social organizations to strengthen their own construction and enhance their ability to serve the society”. 2 In the past few years, the state has encouraged the development of various social organizations that are qualified entities for social construction in policy orientation. The government also responded positively to the policy. In this context, China's social organizations have experienced strong expansion in both quantity and scale. By the end of 2009, the total number of registered social organizations nationwide reached 431,069, an increase of 35% over 2005. 3 In contrast, the participation of social organizations in the social management and public service has a limited awareness of the subject. First, in the context of strong resource demand and complex institutional environment, many social organizations adhere to “instrumentalism”. The development strategy, with the impulse to obtain resources, rather than based on specific public welfare values. Some studies have pointed out that if we focus on their functions and social participation roles in the study of contemporary Chinese community phenomena, it may be difficult to draw the following conclusions. : At least at this stage, these social groups are truly administrative or bureaucratic, another There is a certain degree of autonomy. This dual attribute forms two opposing forces, that is, the administrative tendency to return to the government and the tendency toward autonomous autonomy. The tension between the two limits the development of Chinese social organizations. It also limits the continuous reproduction of the subjectivity of social organizations. 5 Third, the rapid development of social organizations at the community level mostly stays at the level of “self-entertainment” or only provides “club products”, but does not play the role of expression groups. The expected functions that are not available to public authorities such as public administration or the provision of public goods.

Wang Peijun and Mao Weizhun: The village governance model under the clan competition explores the social organizations that are officially registered with the XL villages in the central and eastern Shandong Province.

Shen Yuan and Sun Wusan: "The Identity and Qualities of Institutions" and the Development of Social Groups, China Youth Foundation, Foundation Development Research Committee: Chinese Association at the Crossroads, Tianjin: Tianjin People's Publishing House, 2001.

巍 齐 齐 : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : "These consequences cannot be simply attributed to inadequate institutional supply or flaws in the institutional structure. We must also look for reasons from deeper factors such as the driving force of public life, the literacy of the public, and the boundaries of market rationality.

For example, Weber imagined China's cultural and social psychological characteristics when comparing Christian Protestantism with Chinese Confucian culture: on the one hand, the lack of trust and dishonesty that existed in people's interactions, 2 and abstract, non-personal and purely purposeful. The lack of a true "community" such as associations and companies, on the other hand, the irreplaceable role of political and economic organizations based on personal relationships. "Common actions are involved in purely personal relationships, especially in various relatives. To a certain extent, Fei Xiaotong confirmed Weber’s imagination that in China, “private” cannot be simply classified into the human nature, but with the boundaries of “groups, people and me”. The question of how to draw the law is to be linked, so it should be recognized in the "pattern of the entire social structure." The composition of Chinese society is "egoism"

(selfishness) is self-interested, and the "difference pattern" that is flexible and flexible according to the blood and capital of "self" is its basic derivative logic. This kind of flexible private morality blurs the difference between public interest and private interests, and can help to sacrifice the achievements of small and even individual individuals. 4 It can be seen that the “differential pattern” cannot be a fertile ground for “publicity” development and growth. It is worth noting that in today's marketization, the "differential pattern" logic is theoretically incompatible with the basic principles of the modern market economy and the work discipline of the modern bureaucracy to exclude private feelings, but in practice Instead, it combines with the latter with a unique mechanism, which on the one hand destroys its function of constructing a moral community in traditional society, and another weak water: public consciousness and Chinese culture, Beijing: Xinxing Publishing House, 2006, No. 99 A 105 page.

Fei Xiaotong: Rural China's Fertility System, Beijing: Peking University Press, 1998, p. 30.

The disintegration and replacement of the rules of the game within the market, bureaucracy and academic system undermines the boundaries between economic, political, cultural and academic boundaries. In short, the “differential pattern” magnifies the effect of “egoism”. 1 Therefore, although “publicity” may appear in the face of specific group interests, its essence is the sacrifice of greater publicity and self-interest. The obscuration of doctrine has not exceeded the scope of Fei Xiaotong’s "egoism."

(II) The current system's constraints on publicity Over the past decade or so, China has comprehensively strengthened the rationalization level of system construction, emphasizing the rationalist spirit of science, performance and cost control. 2 The rationalization of institutional construction provides basic support for the scientific management of management, represents the basic direction of modern state construction, and on the other hand promotes the highly technicalization of social management system and the resulting “fragmentation” characteristics. To a certain extent, it becomes an obstacle to public development and growth.

First, technological governance leads to the cutting and fragmentation of public spaces. Because the refined development of governance technology mostly touches the tools and operational aspects of the administrative system, it does not fundamentally change the layout and structure of the administrative power operation. Therefore, the system design that is centered on itself in different departments and regions is often easy. Make public spaces with overall characteristics technically "fragmented." For example, since the founding of New China, the adjustment and reform of the relationship between the central and local governments has basically continued the traditional Chinese governance logic, that is, characterized by territorial jurisdiction and administrative internal contracting system, which consists of multiple levels of authority and administrative decentralization. Local government structure. 4 In the absence of fundamental changes in the relationship between the central and central regions, since the reform and opening up, the Chinese local government has gradually formed a unique M-type structure (MultidivisionalStructure). In this structure, decentralization not only occurs at different levels of government (ie, central, provincial, regional, county, township, and village), but also occurs at different regional levels under the jurisdiction of the same level of government, resulting in overlapping of functions and high degree of decentralization. Government-level relationships, and inter-governmental relations with little interdependence. 5 This structure leads to the fragmentation and fragmentation of public space and public interest.

Second, the rationalization of the system and the dissynchronization of democratization inhibit the production of public. The rationalization of the system is usually earlier than the democratization, but pure rationalization may lead to the expansion of instrumentalism; the democratization of the system can stimulate the public to participate in public activities, ensuring that the rationalization of the system is in the direction beneficial to the interests of the majority. . In the past ten years, in line with the pursuit of performance goals in the market economy, the rationalization (technicalization) of China's system Xiao Wei: bringing individuals back to society, Ying Xing, Li Meng editor: Social theory: modernity and localization , Beijing: Sanlian Bookstore, 2011.

Yang Xuedong: Market development, social growth and public power construction: Taking the county as a micro-analysis unit, Zhengzhou: Henan People's Publishing House, 2002.

Qu Jingdong, Zhou Feizhou, Ying Xing: From the overall domination to technical governance based on China's 30 years of reform experience, Chen Zaiyong, Zhang Bingxuan: The transformation and prospect of China's local administrative divisions and inter-governmental relations in the 60 years since the founding of the People's Republic of China, Zhejiang Qian Yingyi Etc.: Why is China's economic reform different? The entry and progress of M-type hierarchical and non-state-owned sectors is relatively fast, but public participation is limited to the participation of a few links; participation is single, mainly satisfaction assessment or social evaluation. The influence of participation is limited. 1 The tension between the rationalization and democratization of the system limits the production of publicity: the rationalization of the system makes it increasingly difficult for the public who does not have relevant professional knowledge to express substantive opinions on public policy.

Third, the lack of systematic support for public participation weakens the foundations of public production. Effective institutional arrangements not only need to clearly define people's perceptions of interests, roles and behavior patterns, but also need to be closely embedded in other systems to obtain systematic support. Generally speaking, the mature public participation system supporting public production is “bundled” with the public budget system and the government performance evaluation system, and supports the public to participate in the public decision-making activities of the country. In contrast, the current public participation system design in China is mostly simple. For example, many urban communities have established community committees composed of representatives from various sectors of the community as institutionalized platforms for community public management, but such organizations cannot determine the allocation of public funds in the community, nor can they materialize the behavior of the public sector in the community. Supervision, in the end, it is difficult to avoid the idling of "idle."

(3) State, People and Intellectuals: Tension between Different Public Demands Although “publicity” is the commonality of modern society, due to the high differentiation of modern society, groups of different interests and values ​​are “public”. There must be some controversy about the cognition and role. In theory, these arguments are precisely the hallmark of public production. However, in the present China, there are some discussions on what kind of "publicity" and "publicity" function positioning, although there are some discussions at the practical level, but because of the various forces involved in the discussion, they communicate with each other. It is difficult to do so, but it delays the production of public.

First, the gradual institutional reform and the state's demands for publicity. There is a complex and multidimensional relationship between modern state and publicity: in terms of aspect, there is an inherent nature between "nationality" and "publicity". The former is essentially "public" and must pass "publicity". In order to obtain legitimacy; on the other hand, countries composed of bureaucracies and legislative departments have their own unique demands. In political practice, specific state institutions will adopt some mechanisms to regulate and shape publicity. 2 In analyzing the formation of the public sphere in the history of Britain, Germany and France, Habermas pointed out that differences in the structure of economic and political development will lead different countries to hold different positions on the issue of public development. Therefore, we cannot leave the specific political and economic development scenarios to discuss the state's demands for publicity. Since China's reform and opening up, the state has generally encouraged but relatively cautious attitude toward publicity: First, the state advocates a bottom-up, step-by-step approach to publicity. China's reforms are based on the ruling party-led, bottom-up gradual path, starting with micro-reforms, partial experiments, and incremental reforms outside the system, and gradually transitioning to Hong Zhou Zhi Ren: Citizen participation in government performance evaluation: China's practice history and prospects, China's administrative management Philip Hansen: history, politics and citizenship: Arendt biography, Liu Jialin translation, Nanjing: Jiangsu People's Publishing Page.

View reform, comprehensive promotion and institutional memory reform. 1 Since the cultivation of publicity is related to the allocation of power at a deep level and involves certain areas of political system reform, the state adopts a bottom-up gradual promotion strategy. As an objective consequence of this strategy, publicity has obtained certain institutional guarantees in grassroots space (rural and urban communities), but there are still many problems. Second, local governments are easy to institutionalize public tools. 2 Under this logical inertia, some power departments tend to regard publicity as a governance tool or strategy. On the one hand, the institutional guarantee of public governance is unstable, and on the other hand, the spirit and value foundation of public participation is chronically absent.

Second, pragmatic values ​​and the public's appeal to publicity. In today's China, on the one hand, the birth of middle-income groups with private property and modern rights awareness, on the other hand, the continuous expansion of the number and scale of non-governmental organizations, jointly promoting the growth of the “publicity” appeal of this group. . In general, this public appeal has a strong pragmatic character: first, it is mainly based on the protection of individual rights and private property. From the perspective of some public events in recent years, its core is generally related to public rights and In terms of the maintenance of legitimate rights and interests, in contrast, some local governments have made some public affairs at the grassroots level often because they are far from the public's actual interests and lack sufficient civil support. Secondly, it is often expressed through the Internet and other information media. There is no obvious center of opinion, and there is no explicit organization carrier, thus forming a cognitive tension between the state institutions and ordinary citizens on public production methods. Third, it is aimed at attracting the government's attention to help solve specific problems, and the instrumentalism is obvious. Finally, under the logic of the differential pattern, the public's public appeals tend to move toward collective self-interest.

Third, the value concept dominates and the intellectuals' demands for publicity. The imagination and pursuit of publicity by intellectuals is influenced by their social orientation, value orientation and way of thinking. They will form some basic logics for thinking about "publicity": first, from the perspective of dualism, analyze the relationship between "publicity" and other forces in society, such as imagining the state and society from the perspective of traditional state-social theory, "country The relationship between "sex" and "publicity" is eager to establish a distinct national and social category. Secondly, in the relationship between goals and processes, it tends to focus on design and light process analysis, and even treats the goal as a process and pays less attention to it. The “publicity” of goal orientation develops and grows under the complex context of China, and the unique logic and path possible. Therefore, the transition to Chinese society, including the future of publicity, is prone to polarization judgments, optimism and pessimism; In addition, it is less reflective of the intellectuals' "only intellectual" tendency, replacing the insights into complex social realities with theoretical analysis, replacing the actual requirements of "publicity" among the people in daily life with their own pursuits, with a "publicity" "The perspective replaces other "public" perspectives.

The tension of the above three different forces in the "publicity" appeal is particularly evident in China's current situation: the state has recognized the importance of "publicity" in modern market economy and open society, and promoted the provision of social public goods. Quality and scale. Intellectuals hope that the construction of "publicity" can be more advanced. This disagreement is highlighted in the definition of the goal orientation of grassroots community governance. 3 and in the "effectiveness" of the people's participation

See Li Youmei: Grassroots community research questioning method and its changes, Li Youmei, Sun Liping, Shen Yuan editor: When contemporary China (efficiency) does not expect, the result is multiple negative: either lack of participation enthusiasm, 1 country must spend a lot of Manpower and material resources to carry out "mobilization participation" 2 either the self-organization of the people into the underground, or the use of emerging media such as the Internet to gather, forming a "network public space" that the government can't evade.

Fourth, get out of the public dilemma: the realistic path of public production is presented. This article only discusses from the path of the times.

(I) Network grassroots organization and public growth In recent years, there have been many public relations organizations established on the Internet technology platform in China, and the real connection between them has benefited the public welfare of others and the participants themselves. The “public value” that promotes mutual understanding, equality, trust, friendliness, tolerance, sharing, responsibility and love among strangers

To build a platform for autonomy among college students and young white-collar workers to understand the psychosocial and action characteristics of these groups, and to openly organize mobilization through the Internet, participants can hold different motives without having to back Adhere to the "public welfare" burden and moral pressure; adhere to the volunteer spirit of the participants and the recognition of the organization's public welfare concept to ensure the effective operation of the organization, and use the resources of the participants to stimulate their creativity, trust and give them more power, Let them directly participate in the design and full operation of public welfare activities; attach importance to carrying out more influential public activities with government departments and enterprises on the premise of equal cooperation, and jointly promote public welfare undertakings. 3 Including the cultivation of “public value”, the “more than one kilogram” mode of operation is intrinsically consistent with the various demands and characteristics of “publicity”: the open mobilization method transcends the social mobilization of the traditional differential pattern. Logic, reducing the moral, organizational and material burden of participants, allowing participants to freely flow and exit; cherishing the initiative and creativity of middle class and college students, for public activities by ordinary activists, intellectuals and relevant government departments Different expectations provide opportunities for communication, and there is an opportunity for communication between the “national, public, and intellectuals' different demands for publicity”. In short, the combination of “participation,” “convincing,” and “diversity” shapes the “commonness” of common actions. It can be said that the network grassroots public welfare organization brings the traditional Chinese society to a social stratification: theory and evidence, Beijing: Social Science Press, 2006. Yang Wei: Urban Community Building Lin Shangli: Community Democracy and Governance: Case Study, Beijing: Social Science Press, 2003, Haibele, Shu Gengde: Political Participation from the Masses to Citizens China, p. 10.

See Zhang Zhixiang: The research on resource mobilization of network grassroots organizations is based on the case of more than one kilogram, Shanghai University Ph.D. Thesis, 2009.

The change in organizational model itself constitutes a representation of “public” production.

(II) Development and Publicity Transformation of Owners' Rights Protection Organizations With the property management of commercial housing estates, owners' rights protection has become an important part of Chinese urban life, and there are signs that it is one of the main driving forces for promoting public production in Chinese cities. 1 The motivation of the owner's rights movement is derived from the maintenance of private property rights. The rights of the owners themselves belong to the market phenomenon, 2 and “publicity”

No relationship. However, in the current situation in China, the forces that influence the “owner's rights protection” include not only the market and society, but also local governments and national laws. The owners' committee is an autonomous economic interest organization of citizens who own private residences. Its main responsibility is to supervise the management services of the property company and to be responsible for various fund management matters. '3 It is based on the same real estate developer or property management company. The boundary of the "publicity" shaped by the tension is limited to the wall of the residential community. This can be seen from the real estate management department of the local government rather than the civil affairs department. The old residential area that appears in accordance with the unit system Residents are highly dependent on local governments in their lives. Owners’ committees are less dependent on local governments, and their actions tend to be “autonomy participation” based on personal interests. Since the effective operation of the owners’ committee may lead to the marginalization of local government power, The latter will involuntarily intervene and constrain the operation of the former. Many owners self-organize to defend their own interests, 5 sometimes the "publicity" connotation will undergo a fundamental transformation, from the "social participation" level to the specific administrative The level of rational participation in affairs.

(III) Corporate Social Responsibility and Public Production Since the 1950s, more and more enterprises have begun to pursue social responsibilities beyond the narrow sense of responsibility of owners or shareholders. To this day, “Corporate Social Responsibility” has been highly institutionalized, embedded in institutional ethics such as “enlightened self-interest” or in the international standard code similar to SA8000 (Social Accountability 8000).企业自觉地在长期盈利与社会的公共目标之间建立起某种制度化关联。随着中国经济日益融入全球贸易体系，参见海贝勒、舒耕德：从群众到公民中国的政治参与，第50―55页。

约瑟夫格拉斯契维茨：使法人行动者（公司）负责任：明尼阿波利斯一圣保罗市的制度建立过程，沃尔特W.鲍威尔、保罗。迪马吉奥主编：组织分析的新制度主义，姚伟译，上海：上海人民出版社，2008年。

越来越多的大企业开始追求合格“企业公民”的形象。与般组织和社会团体不同的是，奉行企业社会责任的商业组织大多拥有较强的经济资源、技术储备和行动能力，当它们参与增进公共福祉的活动时，中国公共领域的资源供给结构和主体间的关系结构也随之发生变化：首先，企业参与公共活动的最主要形式是提供资源和技术支持，这改变了长期以来中国公共领域资源主要来自政府的单一供给格局；其次，企业主要是借助其他社会组织、团体来组织或参与公共活动，开展“跨界”活动，从而促成了活跃的社会力量与企业之间的互动，增进了各界之间关于公共问题的共识，推动公共性的生产；再次，企业总是结合自身的运营领域和技术特长开展公共活动，因而有可能从新的角度促进人们对公共性问题的思考，吸引更多的社会参与者；最后，更为重要的是，企业参与公共性的生产实质上改变了中国关于公共性的传统观念，把自利与利他结合起来思考公共性。

五、讨论：重建信任与公共性困境的超越在当代中国真正的个体化建构一方面需要从制度上否弃己私利，另方面需要作为社会成员的每一个个体的自我反思，参与到超越“利己”的公共活动中。从根本上说，利己主义与信任的缺失是分不开的。但是，民众参与和社会信任是相互强化的；信任别人的人是全面发展的好公民，而那些积极参与社会生活的人，不仅更信任别人，而且更值得信任。相反，脱离公共生活的人认为自己被恶人环绕，从而会缺乏诚实的自律。公众参与、互惠、诚实与社会信任这四者之间的因果关系十分复杂，就像团乱麻，不过这四者是紧密交织在起的。①无论是理论上还是经验上，“公共性”都不会作为公共权力的对立面而存在，相反会在多个方面支持公共权力的正常运转：第一，公共性的功能及其运作逻辑在于，在约束公权力的运作方式过程中，防止后者腐败，使之具有可持续性。第二，受到有效监督和约束的公共权力与民众的诉求之间虽然依然有着张力，但公众对政府的支持源于此。②更进步看，无论是政党一国家体制还是知识分子或者民众，对于当前中国公共性的特点及其发展，都需采取更为现实的对策。其中，更为细致地区分“政治参与”的内涵至关重要。有学者把“参与”分为“政治参与”和“社会参与”。在中国，有必要把罗伯特帕特南：独自打保龄：美国社区的衰落与复兴，刘波等译，北京：北京大学出版社，2011年，第152页。

海贝勒、舒耕德：从群众到公民中国的政治参与，第20页。

而且参与对国家在地方的代理人的权力和行动的监督。这种区分既为我国“公共性”

的功能限定了边界，也为其参与政治创造了空间。而且，后一种参与会自下而上地维护着政党政治的合法性和稳固性。从这个角度看，“公共性”同“政治性”并无对立，反而有助于形成良性的政治发展格局。

但是，仅有公众组织的这种自我克制和自我定位还不够，公共性的发育亦仰赖于稳定的、合理的、张弛有度的公共政策的制定和实施。更为重要的是明确公众组织的活动边界即上文所说的“事务性参与”，为民众对公共性的稳定预期创造制度性条件，体现公共权力部门对公共性的信任和支持。惟其如此，公共权力部门同民众之间的相互信任关系才可能建立起来。

当然，新型社会体制即培育和深化公共性不仅有赖于国家制度的认可，而且需要在社会认知层面经历人们将“社会协同、公众参与”的行为和相关知识“视为当然而接受”的过程。只有以这种“制度化”为基础，国家机构、各类社会组织和团体才会逐渐形成各自在社会建设中的角色预期，及在面对公共事务时相互共处的、可预期的“惯例”和“规则”，达成关于多元合作结构的事先协议，以“节约交易成本、减少行动者的机会主义行为和其他各种形式的'偷懒'行为”。①关于“制度化”的路径和方式，经典社会学制度研究提供了两种主要思路：第一种由人类学家道格拉斯提出，她在分析为何历史上只有部分制度所暗含的思想或象征符号会唤起人们的强烈情感反应时提出“自然化类推”（naturalizinganalogies）概念。按照这一概念，制度始于惯例，但由于惯例是以利益一致性为基础的，所以容易受到违背、重新谈判与机会主义的影响，因此，一种行为惯例要成功地制度化，要有一种“并行的认知惯例来维持它''，②即要从历史和文化中寻找惯例来支持制度化的进程。第二种认为制度化发生在定的”场域“中，是借助日常生活中的互动实践建构起来的。1980年代以后，社会学制度学派的研究接续这种思路，认为正是在组织场域中，不同组织在互动实践中形成了强制、模仿和规范等三种机制，使制度化过程得以成型。③概言之，在现代社会中，制度化的过程或者可以从历史文化的演进中寻求”认知惯例“，或者可以在相关行动者频繁的互动实践中逐步成型。

〔责任编辑：刘亚秋责任编审：冯小双〕

Glass Holder

Glass Holder,Bathroom Glass Toothbrush Holder,Glass Holder Brass,Shower Glass Holder

Kaiping Jenor Sanitary Ware Co., Ltd , https://www.sanitaryjenor.com