描述性官僚制促进社会正义的一种路径研究

发布时间：2018-03-07 13:17

本文选题：描述性官僚制　切入点：社会正义　出处：《吉林大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：现代国家的官僚机构具有政治性。官僚制定与执行分配性政策时,都会受意识形态与文化观念等影响,结果可能导致社会不正义。这种不正义的程度在人员结构构成完全不成比例性的官僚机构中体现地更为严重。为此,学术界提出描述性官僚制来解决这一问题。描述性官僚制是指官僚机构的人员结构应该反映它所服务人口的社会结构性特征,具有“描述性”的官僚机构能反映社会的整体偏好,从而更能够回应整个社会群体的利益诉求,包括满足少数群体的利益要求。从本质上来说,描述性官僚制使对传统官僚制的继承与完善。描述性官僚制的概念自从英国学者金斯利提出以后,经过了朗、范·里帕、利维坦等人的发展,直到莫舍尔从消极的和积极的两个方面对该理论进行了界定与区分,标志着描述性官僚制理论基调的形成。消极方面是从“描述性”角度而言的,个体官僚们的来源应该反映社会人口结构的总体构成,即描述性官僚在场。积极的方面是从积极的描述性官僚角度而言的,是指个体官僚被期待去追求那些描述性群体的利益和期望。莫舍尔表达了他对积极的描述性官僚能否产生的质疑以及产生方式的担忧,即积极的描述性官僚产生机制很可能是官僚的偏私。积极的描述性官僚的产生实际上表明了少数群体官僚与他们所群体成员所获得的实质性利益之间的积极关系。正是如此,大量学者坚信积极的描述性官僚能够促进社会公平正义,提升对少数群体的公平性,而忽略了莫舍尔的担忧。近些年来,为了研究的可操作性,梅尔、塞尔登、都兰等实证研究者对积极的描述性官僚的验证,将作为二级变量的态度与价值观替换成作为一级变量的社会结构性特征,即直接以“描述性”特征(限于种族、民族、性别特征)为自变量,以描述性群体实质性利益的增加为因变量,来寻找两个变量之间的相关性。如果描述性群体实质性利益的增加,则认为“描述性”与积极的描述性官僚之间存在联系,即积极的描述性官僚产生了,也就是说少数群体实质性利益的增加是少数群体官僚的行为(沟通、提倡、偏私)所致,其中很大程度上可能是少数群体官僚的偏私。此外,以总体层次数据的方法,我们也无法得知是“谁”的行为促进了少数群体的利益增加。塞尔登的“少数群体角色认知理论”说明了非少数群体官僚也可能具有少数群体角色认知,这意味着少数群体官僚利益的增加可能是其他群体官僚的行为所致。此外,由于少数群体官僚的象征性作用,会诱导少数群体成员自身行为发生改变,少数群体成员主动与官僚机构合作也可能促进少数群体实质性利益的增加。本文将在介绍描述性官僚制必要性与关于积极的描述性官僚实证研究所存在问题的基础上,厘清促进少数群体实质性利益增加的几种机制并进行批判反思,最后构建一个理性的机制:视角——协商。
[Abstract]:The bureaucracy of the modern state political bureaucracy. Formulate and implement distributive policies, they are affected by the ideology and culture influence, the results may lead to social injustice. This is not the degree of justice in the personnel structure form of local bureaucracy completely out of proportion is more serious. Therefore, the academic circles put forward the descriptive bureaucracy to solve this problem. The descriptive bureaucracy refers to the personnel structure of the bureaucracy should reflect the social structural features of IT services to the population, with "bureaucracy descriptive" can reflect the overall social preferences, and thus better able to respond to the interests of social groups, including meet the interests of minorities from the essential requirements. It makes descriptive bureaucracy and perfect the inheritance of the traditional bureaucratic system. The concept of descriptive bureaucracy since the British scholar Kingsley put forward by Lang, Van Ripa, et al. Development of Leviathan, until Scher Mo from positive and negative two aspects of the theory of the definition and distinction, marks the formation of a descriptive theory of bureaucracy. The negative tone is from "descriptive" perspective, the individual bureaucrats should reflect the overall structure of social population structure that is, the descriptive bureaucracy is a positive aspect present. From the angle of positive descriptive bureaucracy, refers to the individual bureaucrats are expected to pursue the interests and expectations of those descriptive groups. Mo Scher expressed doubts whether he of descriptive officials actively produced and caused concerns that positive mechanism is descriptive of bureaucracy may be a bureaucratic partiality. Descriptive officials actively resulted in that minority groups and their bureaucratic group members received substantial interest The positive relationship between. It is so, a large number of scholars believe that the descriptive officials actively to promote social fairness and justice, enhance the fairness of minority groups, while ignoring the Mo Scher concerns. In recent years, in order to study the maneuverability, Mel, Selden, Dulan, who study empirical verification of the descriptive positive bureaucracy and as two variables of attitude and value outlook of social structural features replaced as a variable, that is the "descriptive" feature (limited to race, nationality, gender characteristics) as independent variables and dependent variables to increase the substantial benefit for descriptive groups, to find the correlation between the two variables. If descriptive group and substantial benefit, is that "there is a link between descriptive and positive descriptive bureaucracy, namely descriptive officials actively produced, that is to say a few groups of substantial benefit The benefits of increased minority bureaucratic behavior (communication, advocate, favoritism) caused by, which may be largely minority bureaucratic partiality. In addition, with the overall level of the data, we can not know who is the behavior to promote the interests of minorities. Selden's "minority role cognition the theory of" the non minority bureaucrats may also have a minority role cognition, which means to increase minority bureaucratic interests may be bureaucratic behavior caused by other groups. In addition, the minority bureaucratic symbolic role will change their behavior induced by members of minority groups, minority group members cooperate actively with the bureaucracy may also increase the minority substantive interests. This article will introduce the descriptive bureaucratic necessity and empirical research on the descriptive positive existing bureaucracy On the basis of these problems, we should clarify several mechanisms to promote the increase of minority interests and conduct critical reflection. Finally, we should build a rational mechanism: Perspective -- negotiation.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D035

【相似文献】