公共政策制定程序对政策可接受性的影响
Impact of Public Policy-making Procedures on the Acceptability of A Public Policy
查看参考文献41篇
|
文摘
|
根据程序公正理论提出公共政策制定程序与公众对政策的可接受性的关系问题。研究一通过访谈不同领域的学者,初步揭示了公共政策及其制定程序存在的问题——对公共问题不敏感,解决问题的措施成效低。研究二用问卷调查公众对一个制定中的公共政策的态度,恰与政策制定者的愿望相反,公众并不认可政府解决问题的设想,也不认同政府举行的听证会的结果。研究三设计了一个非等组前后测准实验,在两个互联网站的电子公告板上比较根据不同的公共政策制定程序的政策的可接受性。结果证明,制定政策时了解公众态度可增强政策的针对性,提高解决问题措施的成效和可接受性. |
|
其他语种文摘
|
This research addresses the problems of public policy-making procedures. In conducting our research, we considered public policy as the allocation or reallocation of interests or resources among different members of the public. Due to limited resources, administrations should trade off all interests among different segments of society when formulating a policy. Unfortunately, in recent years there have been several mass conflicts with administration of public policy. This infers that some people's interests were ignored or harmed by certain policies. According to the theory of procedural justice, people may accept the unexpected result if they consider the procedure is just. This research hypothesizes that there are certain problems in current policy-making procedures and that improving these procedures may make policies more acceptable. A pilot study was conducted by interviewing ten scholars from a range of disciplines. The interview record transcripts were coded by three analysts. The results indicate that: 1) Most of the scholars criticized current public policies as lacking sensitivity to public issues; 2) Most of them considered that current public policies do not resolve problems effectively; and 3) They all considered that psychology research may enhance awareness of public issues and improve the effectiveness of policy. In study 2, the procedure of public policy was tracked and compared with a social survey. The Beijing government would like to increase the taxi fare rate to cope with the rising price of petroleum. Although the majority of delegates in a hearing of witnesses supported the policy consideration, the social survey of 186 residents and 63 taxi divers indicated that both of them oppose the consideration. The findings indicate that the hearing of witnesses was not able to delegate the opinions of the public, resulting in the policy failing to resolve the problem. Study 3 was a nonequivalent control group quasi-experiment. Visitors of two Internet Website were chosen as subjects for original photo games. For the experiment group, visitors were invited to express their desires and suggestions on the game rules for one week, and then declare rules referencing the suggestions before starting the game. Meanwhile, the control group simply declared the rules at the beginning of the game. Compared with the two games during four weeks, the experiment group submitted more photos than the control group. The results of this research imply that, the good will of policy makers is not enough to make a policy effective. Surveys on public attitudes at the beginning of the policy-making process can allow policy makers to better determine public issues, assess the tradeoff of public interests, help ensure policies are more acceptable, and help foster a harmonious society. The authors of this research suggest that psychology research should take more social level problems into account in the policy-making process. |
|
来源
|
心理学报
,2007,39(6):1093-1101 【核心库】
|
|
关键词
|
公共政策
;
政策制定程序
;
可接受性
|
|
地址
|
中国科学院心理研究所, 北京, 100101
|
|
语种
|
中文 |
|
ISSN
|
0439-755X |
|
学科
|
社会科学总论 |
|
文献收藏号
|
CSCD:3134863
|
参考文献 共
41
共3页
|
|
1.
单天信.
当代美国社会科学,1993:166
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
2.
Tyler L. An approach to public affairs:Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on public affairs.
American Psychologist,1968,24(1):1-4
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
3.
McKeahie W J. A public policy conference for psychologists.
American Psychologist,1969,24(6):593-596
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
4.
戴伊.
理解公共政策,2004
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
5.
Lasswell H D.
Power and Society,1970:71
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
6.
詹姆斯·E·安德森.
公共决策,1990
|
CSCD被引
2
次
|
|
|
|
|
7.
张金马.
公共政策分析:概念·过程·方法,2004
|
CSCD被引
3
次
|
|
|
|
|
8.
陈庆云. 关于利益政策学的思考.
北京行政学院学报,2000,1:8-13
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
9.
Sobel S B. Equality, public policy, and professional psychology.
Professional Psychology:Research and Practice,1981,12(1):180-189
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
10.
Kiesler C A. Psychology and public policy in thehealth care revolution..
American Psychologist,1988,43(12):993-1003
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
11.
Mittelmark M B. The psychology of social influence and health public policy.
Preventive Medicine:An International Journal Devoted to Practice and Theory,1999,29:24-29
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
12.
Nissim-Sabat D. Psychologys, congress, and public policy.
Professional Psychology:Research and Practice,1997,28(3):275-280
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
13.
Staples S L. Human response to environmental noise:Psychological research and public policy.
American Psychologist,1996,51(2):143-150
|
CSCD被引
2
次
|
|
|
|
|
14.
Staples S L. Public policy and environmental noise:Modeling exposure or understanding effects.
American Journal of Public Health,1997(12):2063-2067
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
15.
Rosenberg A A. Psychology and homelessness:A public policy and advocacy agenda.
American Psychologist,1991,46(11):1239-1244
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
16.
Kiesler C A. Homelessness and public policy priorities.
American Psychologist,1991,46(11):1245-1252
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
17.
American Psychological Association. Awards for distinguished contribution to psychology in the public interest.
American Psychologist,1993,48(4):364-375
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
18.
Barusch A S.
Older Women in Poverty:Private Lives and Public Policies,1994:228
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
19.
American Psychological Association. Psychology and public policy.
American Psychologist,1986,41(8):914-921
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
20.
Klerman G L. The efficacy of psychotherapy as the basis for public policy.
American Psychologist,1983,38(8):929-934
|
CSCD被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
了解气象卫星更多信息，请访问