摘要
20世纪90年代中期以来,伴随着中国经济体制的深化改革,中国政府管理社会的职能也发生了重要的变化。这种经济社会条件的变化对中国城市社区组织产生了重要的影响。一方面,城市社区组织重新获得新生并日益发展壮大起来,以不断完善的城市基层社会管理功能展现其在社会经济生活中的组织魅力,在城市基层社区公共管理和公共服务中发挥了重要的作用,成为和谐社区建设不可或缺的重要组织力量。另一方面,随着中国城市社区组织的快速发展及其在社会经济生活中的重要作用的日益提升,加剧了组织之间的复杂性和非协调性,需要加强对城市社区组织协调发展机理的研究。因此,研究中国城市社区组织的协调发展,对于构建和谐社会具有重要的理论与实践意义。
由于中国城市社区组织是在政府职能分化的背景下,借助于政府部门的资源发展起来的,因此,中国城市社区组织与政府之间具有千丝万缕的联系,这造就了中国城市社区组织具有特殊的身份治理的制度特点。城市社区组织身份特征的变化,必然带来城市社区组织身份治理模式的变化,从而导致组织协调发展路径发生变化。因此,讨论城市社区组织的协调发展,离不开对城市社区组织身份的确认。
在经济体制和行政管理体制同时在发生职能转变的社会背景下,中国城市社区组织的身份管理特征已发生了变化,市场化改革导致了资源的重新分配,导致了城市社区组织身份治理的矛盾与冲突。据此,本文提出以下三个问题:(1)城市社区组织现实身份异化的制度属性是什么?(2)城市社区组织身份治理的协调性和非协调性的矛盾体现在哪些方面?(3)城市社区组织身份治理模式需要什么样的协调机制?
围绕上述三个问题,论文形成了“中国城市社区组织身份治理与协调发展”的研究主题,并以政府管理职能分化为背景,在基于组织共生理论和新制度经济学理论相结合的综合分析方法支持下,构建了城市社区组织身份治理分析的逻辑框架,探讨了城市社区组织现实身份异化的性质以及城市社区组织身份治理的制度属性和制度效应,探讨了城市社区组织身份治理所体现出来的协调性与非协调性矛盾的内在因素、表现形式及其综合效应,揭示了城市社区组织身份治理模式调整的原因、变革阻力因素及其影响。在此基瓷?重新界定了城市社区组织身份治理的功能边界与作用范围,探寻了城市社区组织身份治理协调发展的机理和机制,提出了优化城市社区组织身份治理协调发展模式的途径和政策保障措施。
论文正是在围绕上述“中国城市社区组织身份治理与协调发展”主题的深入研究中,形成了以下4个创新点:
(1)在论文的第2章中,拓展了城市社区组织研究的基本假设。针对已有的社区理论往往是从城市社区组织的单一属性来讨论城市社区组织的性质问题,本文作者认为,中国现有的城市社区组织由“自治性组织”异化为“行政化组织”的根本原因是由“身份治理的制度属性”所决定的,城市社区组织身份治理体现为“身份的治理”与“契约的治理”双重制度属性。因此,本文首先提出了“城市社区组织身份治理”这一命题和基本假设,从城市社区组织身份的异化及其制度属性出发来讨论城市社区组织身份治理的制度效应。城市社区组织的双重属性既有协调的一面又有不协调的一面,由此导致了中国城市社区组织身份治理模式的复杂性和多样性。从城市社区组织身份治理的角度来研究城市社区组织的性质,这在城市社区组织理论研究上具有开拓性意义。
(2)在论文的第3章和第4章4.1中,揭示了城市社区组织身份异化的性质,延伸了城市社区组织的研究内容。即城市社区组织的身份异化是为了实现组织资源的依赖和组织合法身份的获得。城市社区组织“行政化身份”的获得及其所体现的身份治理模式,内涵着明显的“身份”与“契约”共同治理的制度特征。这种制度属性来自于两个方面:其一是组织共生的结果;其二是中国城市政府管理制度安排的结果。本文提出,城市社区组织的身份特征及其身份治理的制度属性是在城市社区组织与社区政府、驻区单位、社区其它组织以及社区居民群体的互动关系中表现出来的。由于城市社区组织所面对的这些组织的职能是随着经济社会条件的变化而发生变动的,因此,共生关系形成的城市社区组织的身份治理模式具有多样性和复杂性,呈现出不规则的非线性的变化趋势。尤其是,城市社区组织与社区政府双向“组织依赖”的结果,造就了城市社区组织身份治理的双重制度属性。
(3)在论文的第4章4.2、4.3和第5章中,多维度考察了城市社区组织身份治理的综合效应。论文从组织共生关系和制度经济学的委托代理关系等多角度考察了中国城市社区组织身份治理的特殊制度安排,揭示了中国城市社区组织身份治理协调性及非协调性内在矛盾的因素、表现形式和综合效应。本文指出,政府通过赋予城市社区组织行政化现实身份而使其成为政府在城市基层社会管理协调的工具。一方面,城市社区组织现实身份治理的过程就是城市社区组织行政化为政府组织的过程,政府借助于城市社区组织这一中介层,有利于降低政府治理城市基层社区的阻力,从而节约政府管理成本;另一方面,城市社区组织现实身份治理的过程就是把组织之间市场交易契约内部化的过程,组织之间市场交易契约的内部化有利于节约组织之间的交易成本。但由于城市社区组织身份治理体现为“身份的治理”和“契约的治理”两个层面,因此,城市社区组织身份治理的制度效应既表现为正面效应也表现为负面效应。消除城市社区组织身份治理双重属性所表现出来的负面影响,正是城市社区组织协调发展的任务。
(4)在论文的第6章和第7章中,提出了城市社区组织身份治理的协调机制和发展模式。即根据城市社区组织与社区政府以及社区居民群体的共生关系,提出了城市社区组织身份治理的八种模式,并论证了差异化的共生模式需要多元化的组织协调机制和协调方式。利用调研数据实证检验了城市社区组织身份治理模式调整和变革的阻力因素及其影响,并据以提出了优化城市社区组织身份治理模式协调发展的制度安排和政策建议。
通过上述内容的研究,本文不仅丰富了城市社区组织身份治理研究的内涵,拓展了城市社区组织身份治理研究的内容,使城市社区组织身份治理模式更符合现实的需要。更为重要的是,本文的研究结论意味着城市社区组织身份治理模式的选择需要根据各种类型社区自身的状况来选择恰当的城市社区组织身份治理模式。因此,本文的研究成果为城市基层社区不同类型的社区组织身份治理模式调整与协调发展的路径选择提供了一个有价值的参考。在实践上将有利于促进我国城市社区组织的健康发展。
The functions of China's governments performed in controlling the society have changed importantly since the middle of 1990s with the deepening reform of China's economic system. The changes of the social economic conditions have influenced China's urban residents community organizations significantly. On the one hand, the urban residents community organizations have revived and have become increasingly stronger with their increasingly better functions of urban social management at the basic level. They have played an important role in the urban community public management and services at the basic levels and become an indispensable and important organizational force. On the other hand, with the fast development of China's urban residents community organizations and their increasing importance in the social and economic life, the complexity and non-harmoniousness between the organizations have become serious. It is therefore necessary to strengthen the research on the harmonious development mechanism of urban residents community organizations. Therefore the research on the harmonious development of urban residents community organizations is of theoretical and practical importance in building a harmonious society.
Under the background of dividing governmental functions China's urban residents community organizations developed with the help of the government department's resources, so China's urban residents community organizations have countless ties with the government. Hence China's urban residents community organizations have the system characteristics with special identity governance. The changes of community organization's identity will inevitably change the model of identity governance of urban residents community organizations, thereby changing the path of harmonious development of the organizations. Therefore, the harmonious development of urban residents community organizations can not be discussed without the confirmation of their identity.
Under the social background that the functions of economic system and administrative system change simultaneously, the characteristics of identity management over China's urban residents community organizations have also changed. The market-oriented reform has resulted in re-allocation of resources and brought about the contradictions and conflicts of identity governance of urban community organizations. Accordingly, this paper raises the following three questions: (1) What are the institutional attributes of the real identity dissimilation of urban residents community organizations? (2) What are the contradictions between harmoniousness and non- harmoniousness of urban residents community organization identity governance? (3) What coordinating mechanism is needed in the models of urban residents community organization identity governance?
Centering on the above three questions, the paper develops the research subject of "identity governance and harmonious development of China's urban residents community organizations". Under the background of splitting up the government administration functions and supported by the comprehensive analyzing methods which combine the theories of organization symbiosis and new institutional economics, this paper formulates a logic framework for the analysis of urban residents community organization identity governance, discusses the nature of their real identity dissimilation, the institutional attributes and institutional effect of the urban residents community organization identity governance, deals with the internal factors of the contradictions between harmoniousness and non-harmoniousness, the forms of expression, and its comprehensive effect of the urban residents community organization identity governance shown in the urban residents community organization administration, explains the causes of adjusting the models of urban residents community organization identity governance, the factors of change resistance, and its influences. On this basis, the paper redefines the functional boundary and role scope of urban residents community organizations, explores the harmonious development mechanism of urban residents community organization's identity governance, and puts forward the ways and policy-ensuring measures to optimize the models of harmonious development in urban residents community organization identity governance.
In the deeper research centering around the subject of "identity governance and harmonious development of China's urban residents community organizations", the paper forms the following four innovative points of view:
(1) The basic hypotheses of the research on community organizations have been expanded in Chapter 2 of this paper. The existing community theories discuss the nature of urban residents community organizations in terms of their single attribute. However, the author of this paper assumes that the fundamental reasons for the dissimilation of urban residents community organizations in China from "autonomous organizations" into "administrative organizations" are determined by "the institutional attributes of identity governance". The identity governance of urban residents community organizations is embodied as dual institutional attributes of "identity governance" and "contract governance". The paper therefore begins with the proposition and the basic hypothesis of "identity governance of urban residents community organizations", discussing the system effect of urban residents community organization identity governance from the aspect of identity dissimilation of urban residents community organizations and their system attributes. The dual attributes of urban residents community organizations are harmonious on the one hand; on the other hand they are not harmonious too. Therefore the identity governance model of urban residents community organizations is complicated and diversified. The research on the nature of urban residents community organizations from the point of view of their identity governance is of pioneering significance.
(2) In Chapter 3 and Section 4.1 of Chapter 4, the paper reveals the identity dissimilation nature of urban residents community organizations and extends the research contents of urban residents community organizations, that is, the identity dissimilation of urban residents community organizations is to achieve dependence of organizational resources and obtain the legal organization identity. The obtaining of "administrative identity" of urban residents community organizations and their identity governance model connote a clear co-governance system feature of "identity" and "contract". This system attributes derive from two aspects: one is the co-existence result of organizations, the other is the system arrangement result of China's city government administration. This paper points out that the identity features and their identity governance system attributes of urban residents community organizations are expressed in the mutual relationship between urban residents community organizations and community government, units stationed in the community, other organizations in the community, and groups of residents in the community. Since the organizational functions of urban residents community organizations change as the social and economic conditions change, their identity governance models arising out of co-existence relations are diversified and complicated and tend to change irregularly and nonlinearly. Especially, the result of the "two-way dependence" between urban residents community organizations and community governments fosters the dual identity governance institutional attributes of urban residents community organizations.
(3) The comprehensive effect of the identity governance of urban residents community organizations are examined from many dimensions in Section 4.2 and 4.3 of Chapter 4 and Chapter 5 of this paper. The paper examines the special institutional arrangement of identity governance of urban residents community organizations from many dimensions such as relations of organizational symbiosis and agency relationships of institutional economics, reveals the factors, forms of expression, and comprehensive effect of internal contradictions between the harmoniousness and non-harmoniousness of China's urban residents community organization identity governance. The paper points out that government can make urban residents community organizations realize their identity by administration, thereby making them become the government's coordinating means of social administration at the basic levels in cities. On the one hand, the process of real identity governance of urban residents community organizations is just their administrative process as government organizations. With help of urban residents community organizations as an intermediary, governments can reduce the resistance in their administering basic urban residents community, thereby lowering their administration costs. On the other hand, the process of real identity governance of urban residents community organizations is just the process of internalizing the market trading contracts between organizations. The internalization of the market trading contracts between organizations can economize on the transaction costs between organizations. Identity governance of urban residents community organizations is embodied as "identity governance" and "contractual governance", therefore, the institutional effect of identity governance of urban residents community organizations is reflected as both positive effect and negative effect. The task of urban residents community organizations' administration is to eliminate the negative effect posed by the dual attributes of the identity governance of urban residents community organizations.
(4) In Chapter 6 and Chapter 7, coordinating mechanism and development models of urban residents community organization identity governance are put forward, that is, putting forward 8 models of urban residents community organization identity governance according to the symbiosis relationship between urban residents community organizations, community governments, and community resident groups. At the same time the paper proves that differential symbiosis models need a diversified organizational coordinating mechanism and manners. The adjustment of identity governance models of urban residents community organizations, resisting factors of transformation, and their effect have been tested empirically by means of the survey data, whereby the institutional arrangements and policy suggestions to optimize harmonious development of identity governance models of urban residents community organizations are put forward.
Through the above research, this paper enriches the research connotations of urban residents community organization identity governance, expands the research contents of urban residents community organization identity governance, which makes the identity governance models of urban residents community organizations more conformable to the actual demands. More importantly, the conclusion of the research in this paper means the choosing of the identity governance models of urban residents community organizations needs to select the suitable ones according to the different situations of various communities. The research results of this paper therefore offer a valuable reference for the transition of and choosing of harmoniously developing ways of various models of community organization identity governance at the basic levels in cities. In practice, this will help China's urban residents community organizations develop healthily.
引文
[1]刘继同.(2003).中国城市社区实务模式研究--二十年的发展脉络与理论框架.学术论坛,(4),117.
[2]魏娜.(2003,).我国城市社区治理模式:发展演变与制度创新.新华文摘.(6),20.
[3]冯玲,李志远.(2003).中国城市社区治理结构变迁的过程分析-基于资源配置视野.人文杂志,(1),133.
[1]林光祺、王金丰.(2004).我国第三部门的生存弱势与路径选择.改革,(4),111.
[1]高隆昌.(2003).数学及其认识.北京:高等教育出版社,施普林格出版社.P342.
[1]郭小聪、文明超.(2004).合作中的竞争:非营利组织与政府的新型关系.公共管理学报,(1),58.
[1]陈伟东.(2004).社区自治.北京:中国社会科学出版社,P48.
[1] Agrawal,A.(1999).Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation. World Development,(4),629-649.
[2] Alexander, J.A.,& Weiner, B.J. (1998).The adoption of the corporate governance model by nonprofit organization. Nonprofit Management&Leadership,8-20.
[3] Arrow, Kenneth J.(1985). The Economy of Agency in Principles and Agents:Structure of Business, Boston.
[4] Arun ,A.(1999).. Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation(J]. World Development,(4),629-649.
[5] Axelrod,D.(1998). The Chief executive's role in developing the nonprofit board.Washington, DC: National Center for Nonprofit Boards.
[6] Bacharach,S.B.& Mitchell,S.M.(1987). The Generation of Practical Theory:Schools as Political Organizations. In J.W. Lorsch (ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice Hall.
[7] Bell,C. & Lyall,J.(2000). Community in the new: the social ergonomics of community design . Futures, (32),749-758.
[8] Billings, J.R.(2000). Community development: a critical review of approaches to evaluation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, (2),472-480.
[9] Boyne,G.A.(2002).Public and private management: what's the difference? Journal of Management Studies 39(1),97-122.
[10] Carver, J. (1997).Boards that make a difference: a New design for leadership in nonprofit and public organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[11] Corning, P. A.(1999). "The synergism hypothesis": on the concept of synergy and its role in the Evolution of complex systems . Journal of social and Evolutionary systems. Volume: 21(2),133-172.
[12] David, M. B. (2000). Capitalization and community size . Journal of Urban Economics, (50),385-395.
[13] David, M.& Bastow, W.(2002). Can we tell how a community was constructed? A comparison of five evenness indices for their ability to identify theoretical models of community construction. Theoretical Population Biology,
[14] Douglas,D.P.(1997). Community building and the necessity for radical revision.Landscape and urban planning, (39), 83-98.
[15] Drucker, P.F.(1990). Managing the Nonprofit Organization: Practices and Principles, Oxford Butter Worth-Heinemann Ltd.p.ix.
[16]Dunham, A.(1970). The new community organization . New York: Thomas Y.Crowell Co.
[17] Figueira,M.J.(1995). Community organization and the underclass: Exploring new practice directions. Social Service Reviews, Vol.69,57-85.
[18]Gross, E. & Etzioni, A.(1985). Organizations in society. N.J.Prentice Fall.
[19]Hansmann, H.(1980). The role of nonprofit enterprise .Yale Law Journal,(89),835-901.
[20] Hardcastle,D., Wenocur,S. & Powers, P.(1997). Community practice:Theories and skills for social workers. New York: Oxford University Press.
[21] Harold,D.H.(2000). Community Prevention OF Alcohol Problems. Addictive Behaviors, (6),843-859
[22] Hummel,J.M.(1996).Starting and Running a Nonprofit Organization.University of St. Thomas.
[23] Husted, B.W.(2003). Governance choices for corporate social responsibility:to contribute, collaborate or internalize? . Long Range Planning. (36),481-498.
[24] Joureals,A.(1999).Community Relation.Public Relations Review,(25),13-15.
[25] Klein, B. and Leffler, K.b.(1981). The role of forces in assuring contractual performance. Journal of Political Economy,89,615-641.
[26] Kramer, L., Melief,D. & Pasquinelli,A.(1993). Privatization in four european countries . New York: M. E. Sharpe, Inc.
[27] Lindsey, E.M., Liza, L. E.(1998). Significant elements of community community involvement in participatory action research: evidence from a project[J]. Journal of Advanced Nursing, (5),1106-1114
[28] Murat, M.(2004). Experiences from early stages of a national industrial symbiosis programmed in the UK: determinants and coordination challenges.Journal of Cleaner Production. (12),967-983.
[29]Niskanen,W. A.(2004). Bureaucracy and public economics. Beijing:China Youth Press.
[30]North, D.C.(1990). A transaction cost theory of politics. Journal of Theoretical Politics. 2(4), 355-367.
[31]North, D.C.(1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
[32] Pierre,D.(2004). Industrial symbiosis: the case for market coordination .Journal of Cleaner Production. (12),1099-1110.
[33]Porth, S. J.(2003). Strategic management: a cross—functional approach.Peearson Education, Inc., Publishing as Prentice Hall.
[34]Post,J.E., Lawrence,A.T. & Weber, J.(1999). Business and society: corporate strategy, public policy, ethics. Irwin McGraw-Hill.
[35] Ross, M. & Lappin, B.(1967).Community Organization: Principle and Practice. New York: Harpers&Brothers.
[36] Ross, M.& Lappin, B.(1967).Community Organization: Principle and Practice[M]. New York: Harpers&Brothers.
[37] Salamon, L.M.(1981). Rethinking public management: third-party government and the changing forms of government action. Public Policy, 29(3),255-275.
[38] Salamon, L.M.(1990). Market Failure, Voluntary failure and third-party government: toward a theory of government-nonprofit relations in the modern welfare state. Journal of Voluntary Research, 136-145.
[39] Salamon, L.M.(1994). The rise of the nonprofit sector. Foreign Affairs, 73(4),16-39.
[40] Sanjay,J.(1999). Symbiosis Vs. crowding-out: the interaction of formal and informal credit markets in developing countries. Journal of Development Economies. Volume: 59. August, (2),419-444.
[41] Singhal, S. & Kapur, A.(2002). Industrial estate planning and management in India——an integrated approach towards industrial ecology. Journal of Environmental management Volume: 66. September, (1),19-29.
[42] Smith,T.Nelischer,M. & Perkins,N.(1997). Quality of an urban community: a framework for understanding the relationship between quality and Physical form Landscape and Urban Planning,(39),229-241.
[43]Steiner,G.A.& Steiner,J.F.(1997).Business,government,and society McGraw-Hill,Inc.
[44]Thomas,G.Y.& Daniel,J.N.(1997).Community by design:contemporary problems-historic resolve[J].Landscape and Urban Planning,(39),137-151.
[45]Twelvetrees,A.(1990).Community work.London:British Association of Social Workers.
[46]Uhlenbruck,K.M.,Klaus,E.& Hitt,Mi.A.(2003).Organizational transformation in transition economies:resource-based and organizational learning perspectives.Journal of Management Studies,(40),2 March,257-282.
[47]Weil,M.O.(1996).Community Building:Building Community Practice.Social Work,(5),481-499.
[48]Weisbrod,B.(1997).The voluntary nonprofit sector.Manchesten Manchester University Press,235-251.
[49]Williamson,O.E.(1986).Economic organization.New York University Press.
[50]Williamson,O.E.(1989).Transaction cost economics.In handbook of industrial organization,volume i,eds.Richard Schmalensee and Robert Willig.Amsterdam:North--Holland,135-182.
[51]Zaccaro,S.J.& Horm,Z.N.(2003).Leadership theory and practice:fostering and effective symbiosis.The Leadership Quarterly.Volume:14(6),769-806.
[52]阿维纳什·K·迪克西特著、刘元春译.(2004).经济政策的制定:交易成本政治学的视角.北京:中国人民大学出版社.
[53]奥尔森(0lson,M.)著,陈郁 等译.(1995).集体行动的逻辑.上海:上海三联书店、上海人民出版社.
[54]蔡宁,田雪莹.(2007).国外非营利组织理论的研究进展.重庆大学学报(社会科学版),(2),38-42.
[55]蔡宁,张彬.(2003).非营利组织的协调失灵及其管制机制.经济管理,(22),91-96.
[56]蔡强.(2005).社区公众参与可持续发展的微观过程研究.求索,(10),94-96.
[57]陈万灵.(2002).社区研究的经济学模型.经济研究,(9),57-66.
[58]陈喜强、贾志永.(2005).城市社区组织的治理结构效应分析--基于经济社会协调发展的视角.软科学,(6),42-44,48.
[59]陈喜强、张培胜.(2006).社区组织建设与社会协调发展.广西社会科学,(2),1-4.
[60]陈喜强.(2004).政府与社区组织:从纵向控制到横向互动--基于交易费用视角的考察.中国行政管理,(11),71-75.
[61]陈喜强.(2005).顾客导向型社区组织战略目标定位及其政策意义.经济体制改革,(1),59-62.
[62]陈晓春,黄炎波,颜克高.(2004).非营利组织的共生探析.湖南大学学报(社会科学版),(3),52-54,81.
[63]陈振明.(2001).公共管理需要新的战略思维.中国人民大学学报,(6),118-120.
[64]储新宇.中国的地位身份分析--兼论中国国家利益诉求范围.吉林大学社会科学学报,2006,(5),72.
[65]邓国胜.(1999).非营利机构在人口控制与扶贫中的作用.人口研究,(6),71-74.
[66]丁宏、王巍.(2006).我国社区治理中的多元主体博弈分析[J].长沙大学学报,(1),24-25.
[67]董文琪.(2006).政府、企业及非营利组织的共生关系探析.江淮论坛,(2),73-77,89.
[68]冯德连.(2000).中小企业与大企业共生模式的分析.财经研究,(6),35-42.
[69]冯玲,李志远.(2003).中国城市社区治理结构变迁的过程分析--基于资源配置视野.人文杂志,(1),133-138.
[70]桂勇、崔之余.(2000).行政化进程中的城市居委会体制变迁.华中理工大学学报(社会科学版),(3),1-5.
[71]何海兵.(2003).我国城市基层社会管理体制的变迁:从单位制、街居制到社区制.管理世界,(6),52-62.
[72]何海兵.(2007).城市社区建设与街道管理体制改革刍议.天府新论,(3),84-87.
[73]胡学雷.(2002).身份建构与利益转变.东北亚论坛,(2),62-63.
[74]姜振华.(2007).社会资本视角下的社区治理.河南社会科学,(4),30-33,58.
[75]金红磊.(2005).政府职能的让渡与拓展--基于公共物品的提供.经 济体制改革,(4),37-40.
[76]康晓光、韩恒.(2005).分类控制:当前中国大陆国家与社会关系研究.社会学研究,(6),73-89.
[77]科斯、诺思、威廉姆森[美]等著,[法]克劳德·梅纳尔编,刘刚等译.(2003).制度、契约与组织--从新制度经济学角度德透视.北京:经济科学出版社,439-489.
[78]拉坦(Ruttan,V.w.).(1994).诱致性制度变迁理论.R·科斯,A·阿尔钦,D·诺斯等著.财产权利与制度变迁(中译本).上海:上海三联书店、上海人民出版社,327-370.
[79]雷洁琼等.(2001).转型中的城市基层社区组织--北京市基层组织与社区发展研究.北京:北京大学出版社.
[80]李金红.(2008).论和谐社会的社区治理结构.江汉大学学报(社会科学版),(2),25-29.
[81]李骏.(2006).城市街区空间的组织特征:国家--社会关系视角.上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版),(2),36-41.
[82]李丽君.(2005).我国城市社区治理的变迁及发展走向.山东社会利学,(7),123-125,48.
[83]李培林.(2005).杜区建设是构建和谐社会的基础.学习与实践,(11),17-21.
[84]李强.(1993).当代中国社会分层流动.北京:中国经济出版社.
[85]李维安.(2003).网络组织:组织发展新趋势.北京:经济科学出版社.
[86]李文钊.(2006).公共组织决策理论:起源、模型与发展趋势.管理世界,(12),146-151.
[87]李新春.(2000).转型时期的混合式契约制度与多重交易成本.理论经济学,(6),66-74.
[88]李新春.(2001).单位化企业的经济性质.经济研究,(7),35-43.
[89]廖飞.(2003).非营利组织战略管理分析方法的探讨.贵州工业大学学报(社会科学版),(3),58-62.
[90]廖俊松.(2004).地方二十一世纪永续发展之策略.台北:中国行政评论,(2),185-186,208-209.
[91]林光祺,王金丰.(2004).我国第三部门的生存弱势与路径选择.改革,(4),110-113.
[92]刘阿荣、石慧莹.(2004).社群意识与永续发展:邻避现象及补偿金之分析.台北:中国行政评论,(2),1-32.
[93]刘春荣.(2007).国家介入与邻里社会资本的生成.社会学研究,(2),60-79.
[94]刘继同.(2003).中国城市社区实务模式研究--二十年的发展脉络与理论框架.学术论坛,(4),117-122.
[95]刘瑞.(2003).政府组织的规范化管理.经济理论与经济管理,(3),15-18.
[96]刘娴静.(2006).城市社区治理模式的比较及中国的选择.社会主义研究,(2),59-61.
[97]刘娅.(2005).居委会自治性质的重新探讨--居民委员会与业主委员会的自治性比较.中国行政管理,(5),48-51.
[98]刘颖.(2005).从身份到契约与从契约到身份--中国社会进步的一种模式探讨.天津社会科学,(4),47.
[99]卢霞.(2004).农村社区精英的身份认同.社会科学家,(1),55.
[100]卢英,全天赐.(2006).城市社区组织关系架构重塑探析--以深圳市为视角.学术论坛,(11),99-101.
[101]吕星.(1999).浅析中国非营利机构的地位与作用.云南地理环境研究,(6),61-65.
[102]罗必良.(2000).市场、企业和政府:功能边界与作用范围--基于交易费用经济学的考察.学术研究,(7),41-45.
[103]罗珉.(2004).组织概念的后现代图景.管理科学,(3),19.
[104]马克斯·韦柏.(1998).经济与社会(上下册),北京:商务印书馆.
[105]马伊里,盛国生,宋宪东.(1996).城市社区组织管理体制的初步研究.毛泽东邓小平理论研究,(5),66-71.
[106]马伊里.(2005).关于社区科层结构的反功能研究.社会科学,(12),57-64.
[107]潘小娟.(2004).中国基层社会重构--社区治理研究.北京:中国法制出版社.
[108]苏景辉(台湾).(2003).社区工作--理论与事务.台北:巨流图书有限公司.
[109]孙柏瑛.(2004).当代地方治理--面向21世纪的挑战.北京:中国人 民大学出版社.
[110]谭力文.(1994).非营利性组织及战略管理工作.武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版),(4),45-50.
[111]唐拥军.(2000).市场经济中的政府行为.北京:中国商业出版社.
[112]田凯.(2003).机会与约束:中国福利制度转型中非营利部门发展的条件分析.社会学研究,(2),92-100.
[113]田凯.(2003).西方非营利组织理论述评.中国行政管理,(6),59-64.
[114]田凯.(2004).非协调约束与组织运作--一个研究中国慈善组织与政府关系的理论框架.中国行政管理,(5),88-95.
[115]涂锦、王成璋.(2004).组织均衡及信息技术影响.中国软科学,(7),78-81.
[116]王家峰.(2004).组织管理中的科层与激励制度化.现代管理科学,(3),86-87.
[117]王金秀.(2002).“政府式”委托代理模型的构建.管理世界,(1),139-140.
[118]王敬尧.(2005).“互动合作”的制度变迁模型--以武汉市江汉区社区建设为例.(5),18-24.
[119]王名.(2000).NGO在扶贫开发中的作用.清华大学发展研究通讯,(37),1-13.
[120]王思斌.(2001).体制改革中的城市社区建设的理论分析.新华文摘,(3),24-28.
[121]王学义,龙少华.(2000).社区服务与管理:影响因素及实证研究.四川行政学院学报,(3),15-21.
[122]王中昭、陈喜强、曾宪友.(2006).社区政府与社区组织的委托代理关系模型.统计与决策,(2),7-9。
[123]魏娜.(2003).我国城市社区治理模式:发展演变与制度创新.新华文摘,(6),20-24.
[124]吴光芸.(2007).利益相关者合作逻辑下的我国城市社区治理结构.城市发展研究,(1),82-86.
[125]吴猛、陈伟东.(2007),.制度设置与运行状态的异化--对W市社区组织与政府部门权利关系的调查与分析.江汉论坛,(8),45-46.
[126]武志伟.(2003).当前我国非营利组织实施战略管理面临的问题与对 策分析.生产力研究,(2),176-180.
[127]席酉民、尚玉钒.(2002).和谐管理理论.北京:中国人民大学出版社.
[128]夏建中.(2005).城市新型社区居民自治组织的实证研究.学海,(3),89-95.
[129]向德平.(2006).社区组织行政化:表现、原因及对策分析.学海,(2),26-30.
[130]肖艳.(2003).城市新型社区组织体系构建中存在的问题和对策.福州党校学报,(5),40-43.
[131]谢岳.(2000).第三域的兴起与政府空心化.学术研究,(4,0-64.
[132]薛冰.(2002).社区建设中的政府职能转变.西北大学学报(哲学社会科学版),(1),101-105.
[133]杨团,葛道顺.(2002).中国城市社区的社会保障新范式.管理世界,(2),57-64.
[134]杨团.(2000).中国的社区化社会保障与社区组织.管理世界,(1),111-120.
[135]杨团.(2001).推进社区公共服务的经验研究:导入新制度因素的两种方式.新华文摘,(12),13-19.
[136]杨团.(2002).社会政策研究范式的演化及其启示.新华文摘,(10),16-21.
[137]杨威.(2006).身份的现代性意蕴.唯实,(7),11-14.
[138]杨小凯、黄有光.(1999).专业化与经济组织--一种新兴古典微观经济学框架.北京:经济科学出版社.
[139]杨小凯、张永生.(2003).新兴古典经济学与超边际分析(修订版).北京:社会科学文献出版社.
[140]杨寅.(2005).城市社区行政体制改革:方向、要点与法律修改.中国行政管理,(3),32-36.
[141]杨章明、杨蓓蕾.(1998).上海社区建设与可持续发展.同济大学学报(人文·社会科学版),(2),74-78.
[142]叶客南、李芸.(2000).当代城市发展战略的转型--论中国都市社区更新与可持续发展方案.江海学刊,(3),61-64.
[143]俞可平.(2000).治理与善治.北京:社会科学文献出版社.
[144]俞可平.(2002).全球治理引论.马克思主义与现实,(1),20-32.
[145]郁建兴,吴宇.(2003).中国民间组织的兴起与国家--社会关系理论的转型.人文杂志,(4),142-148.
[146]袁纯清.(1998).共生理论及其对小型经济的应用研究(上、下).改革,(2),101-105:(3),76-87.
[147]张宝锋.(2006a).城市基层社会管理体制创新的理念、原则和措施.学术论坛,(5),59-61.
[148]张宝锋.(2006b).我国城市社区治理结构研究综述.华北水利水电学院学报(社科版),(1),6-9.
[149]张长立.(2003).古典管理组织理论创新的方法论探析.管理科学文摘,(6,2-14.
[150]张锋,何亚云.(2003).当代组织创新的理论及其应用意义.管理科学,(9),4-7.
[151]张会霞.(2007).城市社区政府与社区组织之间的新型互动关系.中国集体经济,(2),242-244.
[152]张康之.(2003).公共管理伦理学.北京:中国人民大学出版社.
[153]张立荣,李莉.(2001).当代中国城市社区组织管理体制:模式分析与改革探索.华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),(5),14-19.
[154]张维迎.(1999).企业理论与中国企业改革.北京:北京大学出版社.
[155]张再生.(1998).论社区可持续发展的机制与模式.中国人口·资源与环境,(4),21.
[156]赵黎青.(1999).非政府组织与世界银行的合作机制.世界经济研究,(5),15-18.
[157]仲伟周.(2003).中国非营利组织行为的研究现状与未来趋势.预测,(3),12.
[158]朱贻胜.(2005).双向互构:公共领域与城市社区的未来发展.山东理工大学学报(社会科学版),(4),67-69.
[159]诸大建、陈讯.(2001).城市管理:上海面向21世纪的战略性课题.同济大学学报(社会科学版),(2),1-11.
[160]卓越.(2004).公共部门绩效评估初探.中国行政管理,(2),71-76.
[161]踪家峰、王志峰、郭鸿懋.(2002).论城市治理模式.上海社会科学院学术季刊,(2),115-123.