共同生产视角下的城市共享单车服务治理——基于上海市案例的混合方法研究
|
摘要
共享单车服务的发展与管理是我国城市公共管理实践中遇到的热点问题。共享单车不仅促进了城市慢行交通服务,也带来了城市管理的突出挑战。本研究以上海市作为案例,采用定量与质性相结合的混合研究方法,深入分析了共享单车服务中共同生产行为的影响因素。研究发现,公众的内部自我效能,以及他们所受到的物质激励和规范感召与他们在共享单车服务中的规范停放行为具有紧密联系。当公众认为自己具有规范停车的能力,并且认可规范停车所带来的物质利益与道德规范认同时,他们就会更积极地采取规范停车行为。基于这一发现,本研究进一步分析了目前上海市共享单车服务中公共部门与企业如何共同在物质激励、宣传引导以及车辆规模与停放调控中形成合作,从而共同促进公民规范停车的积极性。研究发现对共同生产理论及其管理的现实提供了一定的启示。不同于过去的公共自行车研究主要聚焦于服务提供者的管理维护与车辆投放行为,本研究更注重分析和解释共享单车服务中的用户行为。另外,本研究也通过共享单车的案例检验了过去文献中提出的共同生产影响因素,这也有助于补充我们对共同生产的认识——特别中国情境下的共同生产,而这正是过去文献所较少涉猎的情境。
The development and management of Sharing Bike Service(SBS)have become emerging hot issues in urban governance of China today. SBS not only promotes urban slow traffic networking,but also bring prominent challenges to urban administrators. This study chooses Shanghai as case,and adopts hybrid method of qualitative and quantitative research to explore the factors in coproduction of SBS. It finds that internal selfefficacy,as well as material incentives and normal appeal significantly correlate with their coproductive behaviors of proper parking. When citizens consider them to have the capability to park Sharing Bike properly,and when they recognize parking Sharing Bike properly could meet their material and normal demands,they would be more willing to adopt proper parking. Based on this finding,this study further analyzes how government and enterprises could collaborate to offer material incentives,advertising and education,as well as strategic designing in bike dispatching and parking. In this way,governments and enterprises could jointly and effectively promote coproduction in proper parking. This study also proposes implications for both coproduction literature and management practices. Different from extant research on public bike service that mainly focus on providers' behaviors of bike maintenance and dispatching,this studies utilize coproduction theory to explain Sharing Bike users' behaviors. Meanwhile,this study also tests potential factors of coproduction in the case of SBS. This could also complement to our understanding about coproduction,especially in China,which is less explored in the body of literature.
The development and management of Sharing Bike Service(SBS)have become emerging hot issues in urban governance of China today. SBS not only promotes urban slow traffic networking,but also bring prominent challenges to urban administrators. This study chooses Shanghai as case,and adopts hybrid method of qualitative and quantitative research to explore the factors in coproduction of SBS. It finds that internal selfefficacy,as well as material incentives and normal appeal significantly correlate with their coproductive behaviors of proper parking. When citizens consider them to have the capability to park Sharing Bike properly,and when they recognize parking Sharing Bike properly could meet their material and normal demands,they would be more willing to adopt proper parking. Based on this finding,this study further analyzes how government and enterprises could collaborate to offer material incentives,advertising and education,as well as strategic designing in bike dispatching and parking. In this way,governments and enterprises could jointly and effectively promote coproduction in proper parking. This study also proposes implications for both coproduction literature and management practices. Different from extant research on public bike service that mainly focus on providers' behaviors of bike maintenance and dispatching,this studies utilize coproduction theory to explain Sharing Bike users' behaviors. Meanwhile,this study also tests potential factors of coproduction in the case of SBS. This could also complement to our understanding about coproduction,especially in China,which is less explored in the body of literature.
引文
[1]上海市自行车行业协会.中国共享单车遭美国“山寨”,能否骑乐融融[EB/OL].(2017-09-27)[2018-08-27]http://www.shbicycle.com/detail.asp?id=14152.
[2]人民网.韩正代表:应鼓励拥抱并规范共享单车[EB/OL].(2017-03-07)[2018-08-27]http://bj.people.com.cn/n2/2017/0307/c233086-29817311.html.
[3] THOMAS J C. Citizen,Customer,Partner:Engaging the Public in Public Management[M]. Armonk,NY:ME Sharpe,2012.
[4] OSBORNE S P,RADNOR Z,STROKOSCH K. Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services:A Suitable Case for Treatment[J]. Public Management Review,2016,18(5):639-653.
[5] PERCY S L. Citizen Participation in the Co-Production of Urban Services[J]. Urban Affairs Review,1984,19(4):431-446.
[6] VARGO S L,LUSCH R F. Service-Dominant Logic:Continuing the Evolution[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,2008,36(1):1-10.
[7] OSBORNE S P,STROKOSCH K. It Takes Two to Tango?Understanding the Co-Production of Public Services by Integrating the Services Management and Public Administration Perspectives[J]. British Journal of Management,2013,24(Supplement S1):S31-S47.
[8] ALFORD J. Engaging Public Sector Clients:From ServiceDelivery to Co-production[M]. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan,2009.
[9] WHITAKER G P. Coproduction:Citizen Participation in Service Delivery[J]. Public Administration Review,1980,40(3):240-246.
[10] OSTROM E. Crossing the Great Divide:Coproduction,Synergy,and Development[J]. World Development,1996,24(6):1073-1087.
[11] BRUDNEY J. Local Coproduction of Services and the Analysis of Municipal Productivity[J]. Urban Affairs Review,1984,19(4):465-484.
[12] ALFORD J. Co-production,Interdependence and Publicness:Extending Public Service-Dominant Logic[J]. Public Management Review,2015,18(5):673-691.
[13] PARKS R B,BAKER P C,KISER L,OAKERSON R,et al.Consumers as Coproducers of Public Services:Some Economic and Institutional Considerations[J]. Policy Studies Journal,1981,9(7):1001-1011.
[14]张云翔.居家养老服务中的共同生产研究——以上海花木社区乐巢项目为例[J].浙江学刊,2016(1):135-140.
[15] EIJK C V,STEEN T. Why Engage in Co-Production of Public Services? Mixing Theory and Empirical Evidence[J].International Review of Administrative Sciences,2016,82(1):28-46.
[16]唐世平.超越定性与定量之争[J].公共行政评论,2015(4):45-62.
[17] PARRADO S,VAN RYZIN G G,BOVAIRD T,L魻FFLER E.Correlates of Co-Production:Evidence from a Five-Nation Survey of Citizens[J]. International Public Management Journal,2013,16(1):85-112.
[18] UZOCHUKWU K,THOMAS J C. Who Engages in the Coproduction of Local Public Services and Why? The Case of Atlanta,Georgia[J]. Public Administration Review,2017,78(1):514-526.
[19] BANDURA A. Social Learning Theory[M]. New Jersey:Prentice Hall,1977.
[20] BOZEMAN B. Public-Value Failure:When Efficient Markets May Not Do[J]. Public Administration Review,2002,62(2):145-161.
[21] THOMAS J C, MELKERS J. Explaining Citizen-Initiated Contacts with Municipal Bureaucrats[J]. Urban Affairs Review,1999,34(5):667-690.
[22] JAKOBSEN M,ANDERSEN S C. Coproduction and Equity in Public Service Delivery[J]. Public Administration Review,2013,73(5):704-713.
(1)访谈记录编码规则:访谈记录编码由8位数字与访谈者单位首字母组成。如20180814-HJD表示2018年8月14日对H街道受访者的访谈。
(1)参见“http://mobike.com/global/faq.”。
[2]人民网.韩正代表:应鼓励拥抱并规范共享单车[EB/OL].(2017-03-07)[2018-08-27]http://bj.people.com.cn/n2/2017/0307/c233086-29817311.html.
[3] THOMAS J C. Citizen,Customer,Partner:Engaging the Public in Public Management[M]. Armonk,NY:ME Sharpe,2012.
[4] OSBORNE S P,RADNOR Z,STROKOSCH K. Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services:A Suitable Case for Treatment[J]. Public Management Review,2016,18(5):639-653.
[5] PERCY S L. Citizen Participation in the Co-Production of Urban Services[J]. Urban Affairs Review,1984,19(4):431-446.
[6] VARGO S L,LUSCH R F. Service-Dominant Logic:Continuing the Evolution[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,2008,36(1):1-10.
[7] OSBORNE S P,STROKOSCH K. It Takes Two to Tango?Understanding the Co-Production of Public Services by Integrating the Services Management and Public Administration Perspectives[J]. British Journal of Management,2013,24(Supplement S1):S31-S47.
[8] ALFORD J. Engaging Public Sector Clients:From ServiceDelivery to Co-production[M]. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan,2009.
[9] WHITAKER G P. Coproduction:Citizen Participation in Service Delivery[J]. Public Administration Review,1980,40(3):240-246.
[10] OSTROM E. Crossing the Great Divide:Coproduction,Synergy,and Development[J]. World Development,1996,24(6):1073-1087.
[11] BRUDNEY J. Local Coproduction of Services and the Analysis of Municipal Productivity[J]. Urban Affairs Review,1984,19(4):465-484.
[12] ALFORD J. Co-production,Interdependence and Publicness:Extending Public Service-Dominant Logic[J]. Public Management Review,2015,18(5):673-691.
[13] PARKS R B,BAKER P C,KISER L,OAKERSON R,et al.Consumers as Coproducers of Public Services:Some Economic and Institutional Considerations[J]. Policy Studies Journal,1981,9(7):1001-1011.
[14]张云翔.居家养老服务中的共同生产研究——以上海花木社区乐巢项目为例[J].浙江学刊,2016(1):135-140.
[15] EIJK C V,STEEN T. Why Engage in Co-Production of Public Services? Mixing Theory and Empirical Evidence[J].International Review of Administrative Sciences,2016,82(1):28-46.
[16]唐世平.超越定性与定量之争[J].公共行政评论,2015(4):45-62.
[17] PARRADO S,VAN RYZIN G G,BOVAIRD T,L魻FFLER E.Correlates of Co-Production:Evidence from a Five-Nation Survey of Citizens[J]. International Public Management Journal,2013,16(1):85-112.
[18] UZOCHUKWU K,THOMAS J C. Who Engages in the Coproduction of Local Public Services and Why? The Case of Atlanta,Georgia[J]. Public Administration Review,2017,78(1):514-526.
[19] BANDURA A. Social Learning Theory[M]. New Jersey:Prentice Hall,1977.
[20] BOZEMAN B. Public-Value Failure:When Efficient Markets May Not Do[J]. Public Administration Review,2002,62(2):145-161.
[21] THOMAS J C, MELKERS J. Explaining Citizen-Initiated Contacts with Municipal Bureaucrats[J]. Urban Affairs Review,1999,34(5):667-690.
[22] JAKOBSEN M,ANDERSEN S C. Coproduction and Equity in Public Service Delivery[J]. Public Administration Review,2013,73(5):704-713.
(1)访谈记录编码规则:访谈记录编码由8位数字与访谈者单位首字母组成。如20180814-HJD表示2018年8月14日对H街道受访者的访谈。
(1)参见“http://mobike.com/global/faq.”。