摘要
长达半个世纪的西蒙—沃尔多之争显示,致使经典公共行政学范式走向反常和危机的症结正在于政治—行政二分及其导致的效率与价值分离。60年代后出现的诸多公共行政学流派未能有效消除经典范式的反常和危机。治理理论诞生于福利国家危机、全球化和地方化的大背景之下,它突破了包括政治—行政二分在内的一系列二分法,试图融合价值与效率的冲突,从而大大推进了公共行政学的发展,有学者据此认为它实现了公共行政学的范式革命。但是,基于库恩范式概念的考察表明,治理理论在公共行政学界得到的认同是以形而上学和信念层面的混乱及实用主义的盛行为代价,表面的认同背后隐藏着深刻的分歧。对治理理论的公共行政学范式定位,既说明了治理理论应以形成统一的学科逻辑和形而上学为目标,也预示着新的公共行政范式产生的可能路径。
The half-century long Simon/Waldo debate indicates that the crux of the issue of anomalousness and crisis in the classical paradigm of public administration lies in the politics-administration dichotomy and the resultant separation of value and efficiency.The various schools of public administration emerging since the 1960s have failed to effectively eliminate this anomalousness and crisis.Governance theory,born of globalization,localization and the crisis of the welfare state,breaks through a series of dichotomies including the politics-administration dichotomy in an attempt to bridge the gap between value and efficiency and thereby advance the development of public administration.Some scholars have therefore argued that it has achieved a paradigm revolution in public administration.However,an examination employing Kuhn's paradigm concept suggests that the approbation that governance theory has garnered in public administration circles has come at the cost of metaphysical and belief confusion and a prevailing pragmatism.Profound differences underlie surface agreement.The analysis of governance theory from the perspective of public administration paradigm indicates that such theory should have as its goal the establishment of a unified disciplinary logic and metaphysics and foreshadows a possible path for the emergence of a new paradigm of public administration.
出处
《中国社会科学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2010年第4期87-100,共14页
Social Sciences in China
