摘要
本文重点梳理并分析了西方协商民主理论视野中的公共决策问题研究成果,并在此基础上对协商民主理论关于公共决策问题研究的贡献与不足进行了评价,同时也试图将协商民主理论的研究成果应用到中国公共决策民主化进程中来,并结合中国的现实国情论证了协商民主理论对中国公共决策民主化的启示。具体来说,协商民主理论视野中的公共决策问题研究主要集中于三个方面,即公共决策的合法性、公共决策模式与公民参与公共决策问题。这三个问题依次对应了公共决策研究中的三个永恒的价值目标,即公共决策的合法性、科学化与民主化。本文认为,协商民主理论关于这三方面问题的研究对于实现公共决策的合法性、科学化与民主化目标具有重要理论与现实意义。同时,协商民主理论的研究无论从观念层面还是从制度层面对于中国公共决策民主化目标的实现都有不少启示,但在分析具体问题时,还应该充分考虑中国的现实国情,借鉴协商民主理论研究成果中适合中国公共决策民主化发展的观点,这样才能真正有利于推动中国公共决策的民主化进程。
The theory of deliberative democracy is a new paradigm of democratic theory in Western at the end of the 20th century, which demonstrates a new development and turn of the western democracy theory and arouses more and more the concerns of the scholars. Within the 30 years of the development of the theory of deliberative democracy, with the publication of many related works and articles, many scholars deepen the thought and the understanding about the theory of deliberative democracy from all aspects so that they gradually improve the theory of deliberative democracy. However, the most of academic study about the theory of deliberative democracy focuses largely on the theory itself, such as the study about the connotation and the theoretical base of the theory of deliberative democracy, the study about the positioning of the theory of deliberative democracy in the democracy theory system, the study about the relations of the theory of deliberative democracy and the Value concepts such as the freedom, equality, fairness, justice and so on, which enrich the theory of deliberative democracy itself, but ignores the focuses on the governmental governance, the public decision-making and institution construction. The subject of the public decision-making is a basic subject in the politics theory and an important process of dealing with the specific issues and managing with the specific matters by people, which is in the centre of the political activities. The Public decision-making relates to the development of the society and the politics, which have an impact on the effectiveness of public activity. Because of the important theoretical significance and the closed contact with the reality, the Public decision-making becomes a subject of the deliberative democracy. There has three points on the study of the deliberative democracy about the Public decision-making. First, the study conform to the general trend from the normal study to the empirical study of the deliberative democracy, which helps to strengthen the degree concerning the extent of practical problems of the deliberative democracy and improve the development of the deliberative democracy. Second, the study helps to achieve the goals of the legitimacy, the scientization and the democratization of the public decision-making. Third, the study has an important role in the Enlightenment on the democratization process of the public decision-making in China.
There are many subjects related to the public decision-making, but based on the studying and carding from the works of the theory of the deliberative democracy, the paper believes that there are three aspects about the study on the public decision-making in the theory of the deliberative democracy, which is about the study on the legitimacy of the public decision-making by the deliberative democracy, the study on the model of the public decision-making by the deliberative democracy, the study on the citizen participation in the public decision-making by the deliberative democracy. The study on the three subjects in the deliberative democracy is highly relevant, which corresponds to the three value targets of the public decision-making which contain the legitimacy, the scientization and the democratization. The study on the public decision-making by the deliberative democracy gets the key points of the subject because these value targets are pursued and argued.
There are two reasons about the study on the public decision-making by the deliberative democracy. First, almost all the advocators of the theory of deliberative democracy have emphasized the linkages between the deliberative democracy and the legitimacy, who think that the deliberative democracy is essential for the study on the public decision-making. Second, the study on the political legitimacy by the theory of the legitimacy is systematic, but the theory of the legitimacy make no more enough study on the legitimacy of the public decision-making, which contain the neglect to the study on the legitimacy of the public decision-making by the experience-oriented theory of the legitimacy and the vague argument of study on the legitimacy of the public decision-making by the norm-oriented theory of the legitimacy. Therefore the theory of deliberative democracy must first study on the legitimacy of public decision-making. The study on the public decision-making by the deliberative democracy has undergone a process of easy-to-digest. Initially the theory of the deliberative democracy demonstrates that the legitimacy of the public decision-making is rooted in the deliberative process, and analysis the significance of the deliberative process to the majority rule. And with the deepening of the study, the theorists of the deliberative democracy have not only studied on that the legitimacy of the public decision-making is rooted in the deliberative process, but also pay more attention to make the goal of the legitimacy of public decision-making come true. In other words, they begin to study the specific realizing conditions for the legitimacy of decision-making. The greatest contribution of the study on the legitimacy of public decision-making by the deliberative democracy is that it not only enriches the theory of the legitimacy itself, but also provides a new perspective and theoretical support to the study on the legitimacy of public decision-making. In particular, many theorists of the theory of the deliberative democracy all support the "Epistemic Proceduralism", which has the great significance in judging the legitimacy of public decision-making. But at the same time there are some limitations of the study by the deliberative democracy. For example, certain public decision-making in reality may also produce unjust results through the deliberative process. The study on the legitimacy of the public decision-making by the deliberative democracy may be used by the strong individuals or groups.
Besides the study on the legitimacy of the public decision-making, the theory of the deliberative democracy also makes the models of the public decision-making as an important subject. This is mainly because that in the public decision-making theory the goal of the models of the public decision-making is about how to make the scientization of the public policy-making come true. And there has close ties between the scientization and the legitimacy of public decision-making. Scientifically formulating and implementing public policies are important guarantees to the legitimacy of public decision-making. Therefore, the scientific and rational models of the deliberative democracy have direct impact on realizing the goal of the scientization of the public policy-making. The theory of the deliberative democracy not only focuses on all existing models of the public decision-making, but also provides a new model of the public decision-making——the deliberative model of the public decision-making, which absorbs many advantages of the existing models of the public decision-making, but also has many independent characteristics, such as the inclusive, procedural, institutional and dynamic characteristics, which make the deliberative model of the public decision-making play a positive and important role in the process of the public decision-making. In the first time, there are three functions about the deliberative model of the public decision-making at the stage of the formulation of public policies. First, the deliberative model of the public decision-making is good at breaking the policy monopolies in the process of the formulation of public policies, which ensures the policy-making process setting up on the basis of the people. Second, the deliberative model of the public decision-making is good at resolving the problem of the public decision-making arising by the limited rationality in the policy-making process. Third, the deliberative model of the public decision-making is good at boycotting the "Camera Obscura" problem in the policy-making process, which protects the openness of the public policy-making process. And in the second time, there are also three functions about the deliberative model of the public decision-making at the stage of the implementation of public policies. First, the deliberative model of the public decision-making is good at restricting the expansion of executive power, which ensures the implementation of the results of the public decision-making. Second, the deliberative model of the public decision-making is good at testing the nonconsensual decision-making, which improves the policies in the policy-implementing process. Third, the deliberative model of the public decision-making is good at cultivating the ruling Virtues of the administrative staff and the sense of responsibility of the participants. The study on the models of the public decision-making by the theory of the deliberative democracy not only enriches the content of the models of the public decision-making, but also provides a new theoretical support for realizing the goal of the scientization and the justification of the public policy-making. But there are some limitations of the study by the deliberative democracy. The theory of the deliberative democracy should continue to study the application of the deliberative model of the public decision-making. And the study on the deliberative institutions should also be more refined.
The study on the public decision-making can not ignore the democratization of public decision-making besides the study on the legitimacy and the scientization of the public decision-making. As a democratic theory, the theory of the deliberative democracy will naturally concern about how to achieve the goal of the democratization of the public decision-making, which reflects the citizen participation in the public decision-making. First of all, the theory of deliberative democracy defines the main body of citizen who participate in the process of the public decision-making, which analysis the rights and responsibilities of the main body of citizen. Then, the theory of deliberative democracy also explores the concrete form of the citizen participation in the public decision-making, such as the deliberative polls and the citizen jury and so on, which are different from the pre-existing and traditional forms of the public decision-making. In addition, the theory of deliberative democracy responds to the criticism of other theories such as the social choice theory and the theory of the democracy of the difference. There are two contribution of the study on the citizen participation in the public decision-making by the theory of the deliberative democracy. On the one hand, the study on the citizen participation in the public decision-making by the theory of the deliberative democracy has found a new way of studying on the democratization of the public decision-making. On the other hand, the response of the theory of the deliberative democracy to other theories may promote the process of the study on the democratization of the public decision-making. But there are some limitations of the study by the theory of the deliberative democracy. For example, the theory of the deliberative democracy should study more and more the problems in the real world, such as the problem of the representation, the efficiency of the public decision-making as well as the quality of the public decision-making. The theory of the deliberative democracy should make the criticism of other theories more elaborate.
As a new paradigm of western democracy theory in the late 20th century, the study on the public decision-making by the theory of the deliberative democracy not only has great theoretical innovation, but also has important value to the problem in the western reality of the public decision-making. The theory of the deliberative democracy is deeply rooted in the political reality of the developed capitalist countries of Western, and there are different aspects about the polity, the conditions of the society and history, which decide that the construction of the china’s democracy will not be a replica of the western. The problems of the process of the construction of the China’s democracy have many substantial differences with the modern challenges the western faced. However, the theory of the deliberative democracy advocates the value of the fairness and the justice, improving the rules and procedures of the democratic decision-making and encouraging the citizen to participate in the public decision-making extensively and rationally, which have many significantly positive valves. Therefore, the study on the public decision-making by the theory of the deliberative democracy can be applied to analyze the China’s problem in reality, which has some enlightenment to solve the problems of China. More and more academics and politicians concern about the goal of the democratization of the public decision-making in the process of the current administration reform in China. There are two enlightenment of the theory of the deliberative democracy from the levels of the value and the system. At the value level, the citizen-oriented value should be established for the government staff and citizens. Then the dialogue and deliberation between the government staff and citizens should be strengthened. At the system level, there are three enlightenment of the theory of the deliberative democracy. First, it needs to improve the system of People’s Congress and the system of multiparty cooperation and political consultation under the leadership of the Communist Party of China. Second, it needs to strengthen decision-making systems in the decision-making process, which include the system of public hearings, the system of public openness, the system of the public consultation and the system of the responsibility in the process of the public decision-making and so on. Third, it needs to strive to explore the new type of the system of the grass-roots democracy. When faced to the specific issues, it should not copy all the theories of the deliberative democracy, but take into account the specificity of China's national conditions. It is not desirable to apply all the theories of the deliberative democracy to solving any of the problems in China. Only based on the actual situation in China, drawing on the theory of the deliberative democracy which is fit for the development of the democratization of the public decision-making in China can really promote the process of democratization of public decision-making in China.
引文
1加藤节.政治与人[M].唐士其译.北京:北京大学出版社. 2003:45
2阿玛蒂亚·森.民主的价值观放之四海而皆准[J].当代中国研究. 2000(2)
3张贤明.论政治责任——民主理论的一个视角[M].长春:吉林大学出版社. 2000
4戴维·赫尔德.民主的模式[M].燕继荣等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 1998
5亨廷顿.第三波:20世纪后期民主化浪潮[M].刘军宁译.上海:三联书店. 1998
6 Ian Shapiro and Casiano Hacker-Cordon, Promise and disappointments: reconsidering democracy’s value[A],Democracy’s value[C], ed by Ian Shapiro and Casiano Hacker-Cordon, Cambridge University Press, 1999:1-20
1 Joseph M. Bessette, Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government[A], How Democratic Is the Constitution?[C], Ed by Robert A. Goldin and William A. Schambra, Washington: American Enterprice Institure,1980:102-106
2 Manin, Bernard,1987,“On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation”[J], Political Theory 15:338-368;Cohen Joshua, 1997,“Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy”[A], James F Boman and William Rehg, Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics[C], Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1980:67-91
3 Michael Saward. Democratic Innovation[C], Routledge,2000:3-13
4毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:总序
1参见Samantha Besson and Fos’e Luis Marti, Deliberative Democracy and its Discontents[C], ASHGATE, 2006:introduction
1谈火生.民主审议与政治合法性[M].北京:法律出版社. 2007:12-13(注:对于deliberative democracy的译法,国内尚处于争论之中,除了翻译为“协商民主”以外,还有“审议民主”、“商议民主”、“慎议民主”与“商谈民主”等,而目前内地学者多采用协商民主译法,台湾学者多采用“审议民主”译法。关于deliberative democracy不同译法争论的梳理还可参见陈家刚.协商民主研究在东西方的兴起与发展[J].毛泽东邓小平理论研究.2008(7)
2 James S. Fishkin, Deliberative Democracy[A], Robert L. Simon, The Blackwell Guide to Social and Political Philosophy[C], Blackwell Publishers, 2002; Any Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, Deliberative Democracy[A],P. B. Clarke and J. Foweraker, Encyclopedia of Democratic Thought[C], London: Routledge, 2001
3 Dudley Knowles, Political Philosophy[M], London: Routledge, 2001; Fank Cunningham, Theories of Democracy: A Critical introduction[M], London: Routledge, 2002
4 Dryzek, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond[M], Oxford University Press, 2000:3
1中国社会科学院哲学研究所编.哈贝马斯在华演讲集[M].北京:人民出版社. 2002:80-86
2 Manin, Bernard,1987, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15:338-368
3 James Bohman, Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy[M], Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996
4 Jorge M. Valadez, Deliberative Democracy[A],Political Legitimacy, and Self Determination in Multicultural Societies[C], Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2002
1哈贝马斯.在事实与规范之间[M].童世骏译.北京:三联书店. 2003
2 Thomas McCarthy, Legitimacy and Diversity: Dialectical Reflections on Analytic Distinctions[A],Michel Rosenfeld and Andrew Arato, Habermas on Law and Democracy[C], 1998:115-153
3 Joshua Cohen,“Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy”, &“Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy”[A],James Bohman and William Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], The MIT Press, 1997:67-91;407-438; An Epistemic Conception of Democracy[J], Ethics 97(1986):26-38
4参见Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:279-348
5其他相关文章还可参见Andrel Marmor, Authority, Equality and Democracy, Ratio Juris[J], Volume 18, 2005:315-345;Joshua Cohen, Democracy and Liberty[A],Jon Elster, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge University Press,1998
6目前对协商民主批判的文集主要有:Samantha Besson and Fos’e Luis Marti, Deliberative Democracy and its Discontents[C], ASHGATE, 2006;James S. Fishkin and Peter Lasslet, Debating Deliberative Democracy[C], Oxford: Blackwell, 2003; Stephen Macedo, Deliberative Politics[C], Oxford: Oxford University Press,1999
7参见A. Przeworshi, Democracy and the Market[M], Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1991; G.. Sartori, The Theory of Democracy Revisited[M], Chatham NJ. Chatam House,1987
8参见J. Coleman and J. Knight and J. Johnson, Democracy and social choice[J], Ethics, 97(1986): 6-25; J. Knight and J. Johnson, Aggregation and deliberation: on the possibility of democratic legitimacy[J], Political Theory, 22(1994):277-96
1 L. Sanders, Against deliberation, Political Theory[J], 25(1997):347-76; I. M. Young, Communication and the other: beyond deliberative democracy[A], Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996
2 D. Miller, Deliberative democracy and social choice[J], Political Studies 40(1992);其它回应性文章可参见J. Johnson, Arguing for deliberation: some skeptical considerations[A], Elster, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge University Press, 1998; John S Dryzek and Christian List, Social choice theory and deliberative democracy: a response to Aldred[J], British Journal of Political Science, Oct 2004;戴维·米勒.协商民主不利于弱势群体? [A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,中央编译出版社,2006:139
3 Stefan Voigt, The Consequence of popular constitutional choice- towards a comparative analysis[A],Anne Van Aaken, Deliberation and Decision: Economics, Constitutional Theory and Deliberative Democracy[C], ASHGATE, 2004
4 Anne Van Aaken, Deliberation and Decision: Economics, Constitutional Theory and Deliberative Democracy[C], ASHGATE, 2004,Preface
1 Philip Pettit, A dilemma for deliberative democrats[A], Anne Van Aaken, Deliberation and Decision: Economics, Constitutional Theory and Deliberative Democracy[C], ASHGATE, 2004
2 Andreas Suchanek, What is meant by consent? [A], Anne Van Aaken, Deliberation and Decision: Economics, Constitutional Theory and Deliberative Democracy[C], ASHGATE, 2004
3阿米·古特曼,丹尼斯·汤普森.民主与分歧[M].杨立峰,葛水林,应奇译.东方出版社. 2007:376-377
4张贤明.论政治责任——民主理论的一个视角[M].长春:吉林大学出版社. 2000
5马修·费斯廷斯泰因.协商、公民权与认同[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,中央编译出版社,2006:58
1 John Forester, The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes[M], The MIT Press, 1999:241
2 Maurizio Passerin D’Entre’ves, Deliberation: New Perspectives, Manchester University Press[C], 2002:201
3 Martha L. McCoy, Patrick L. Scully, Deliberative Dialogue to Expand Civic Engagement: What Kind of Talk Does Democracy Need?[J], National Civic Review, Volume 91, Issue 2, Summer 2002
4参见N. Porter, Rethinking Unionism: Alternative Vision for Northern Ireland[M], Belfast: Black Staff Press, 1996; J. Ruane and J. Todd, The Dynamics of Conflict in Northern Ireland: Power, Conflict and Emancipation[M], Cambridge University Press, 1996;沙恩·奥尼尔,民主权利与文化权利[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,中央编译出版社,2006:119
5参见Samantha Besson and Fos’e Luis Marti, Deliberative Democracy and its Discontents[C], ASHGATE, 2006,introduction
1 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A],James Bohman and William Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], The MIT Press, 1997:73 2 Paul Quick and Sarah Binder, The Legislative Branch[M], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005
3格雷厄姆·史密斯,科琳娜·威尔斯.公民陪审团与协商民主[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,中央编译出版社,2006:98
4 J. Mansbridge, Beyond Adversary Democracy[M], Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983
5 J. Elster, Deliberation and constitution making[A],J. Elster, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998
6 James S. Fishkin, Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform[M], New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 1991; G. Smith, Toward deliberative institutions[A],M. Saward, Democratic Innovation[C], London, Routledge, 2000 7 Archon Fung, Recipes for public sphere[J], Journal of Political Philosophy 3 ,2003:338-367
8 Michael Dorf and Charles Sabel, The constitution of democratic experimentalism[J], Columbia Law Review 98: 2, 1998:267-437;292 9 Cohen and Sabel, Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US[A],J. Zeitlin and D. Trubek, Governing Work and Welfare in a New Economy: European and American Experiments[C], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004:345-375
1陈家刚.协商民主[C].上海三联书店. 2004
2该套译丛一共包括4本译作,它们分别是詹姆斯·博曼,威廉·雷洁.协商民主:论理性与政治[C];毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C];詹姆斯·博曼.公共协商:多元主义、复杂性与民主[M];约翰S.德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M],北京:中央编译出版社. 2006
3谈火生.审议民主[C].凤凰出版传媒集团与江苏人民出版社. 2007
4阿米·古特曼,丹尼斯·汤普森.民主与分歧[M].杨立峰,葛水林,应奇译,东方出版社,2007
5约翰·罗尔斯.政治自由主义[M].万俊人译.南京:译林出版社. 2000;哈贝马斯.在事实与规范之间[M].童世骏译.北京三联书店. 2003;威尔·金里卡.当代政治哲学[M].刘莘译.上海三联书店. 2004
6参见谈火生.民主审议与政治合法性[M].北京:法律出版社. 2007
7参见何包钢.协商民主:理论、方法和实践[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社. 2008
1参见韩冬梅.西方协商民主理论研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2008
1学者陈家刚发表的一系列关于协商民主的文章可参见:协商民主引论[J].马克思主义与现实. 2004(3);协商民主:概念、要素与价值[J].中共天津市委党校学报. 2005(3);协商民主的价值、挑战与前景[J].中共天津市委党校学报. 2008(3);多元主义、公民社会与理性:协商民主要素分析[J].天津行政学院学报. 2008(4);协商民主与当代中国的政治发展[J].北京联合大学学报. 2008(6);协商民主研究在东西方的兴起与发展[J].毛泽东邓小平理论研究. 2008(7);协商民主概念的提出及其多元认知[J].公共管理学报. 2008(7)等。
2朱勤学.中国政治文明建设中的协商民主探析[J].政治学研究. 2004(3)
3可参见:燕继荣.协商民主的价值何在?[N].学习时报. 2006-12-4;宋惠昌.也谈协商民主的价值问题——与燕继荣同志商榷[N].学习时报. 2007-7-30;燕继荣.再谈协商民主的价值—对于协商民主价值之商榷的回应[N].学习时报. 2007-9-10
4其他较有影响的文章还有:林尚立.协商政治与中国的政治形态[N].人民政协报. 2006-12-25;王邦佐、朱勤军. 协商民主的内涵和中国协商民主的特征[N].联合时报. 2006-9-15;浦兴祖.有关“协商民主”的三个关系[N].联合时报. 2006-9-29;李君如.协商民主:重要的民主形式[N].文汇报. 2006-7-27;谢庆奎、李允熙.走向决策的协商民主[J].云南行政学院学报. 2008(3);燕继荣.协商民主的价值和意义[J].科学社会主义. 2006(6),卢瑾.当代西方协商民主理论研究:现状与启示[J].政治学研究. 2008(5)等。
5参见郎友兴.商议式民主与中国的地方经验:浙江省温岭市的“民主恳谈会”[J].浙江社会科学. 2005(1);蒋招华、何包钢.协商民主恳谈:参与式重大公共事项的决策机制[N].学习时报.2005-10-24;陈剩勇、吴兴智.公民参与与地方公共政策的制定——以浙江省温岭市民主恳谈会为例[J].学术界. 2007(5);胡家勇等.乡镇财政与财力分析——浙江省温岭市泽国镇财政运行状况调查[J].中国社会科学院研究生院学报. 2008(2);黄军勇.协商民主:利益协调与矛盾化解新机制——基于温岭市“民主恳谈”的典型案例分析[J].台州学院学报. 2008(4)等。
1参见张雅利、劳洁.社区网络论坛中的协商民主——杭州市德加社区的实践[A].陈剩勇、何包钢.协商民主的发展:协商民主理论与中国地方民主国际学术研讨会论文集[C].北京:中国社会科学出版社. 2006;梁莹.“市民论坛”:离协商民主到底有多远?——以南京市的“市民论坛”活动为研究个案[J].理论与改革. 2008(4)等
2陈剩勇、何包钢.协商民主的发展:协商民主理论与中国地方民主国际学术研讨会论文集[C].北京:中国社会科学出版社. 2006
1马克思恩格斯选集(第二卷)[M].北京:人民出版社. 1972:122
1 Joseph Bessette, Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government[A],Goldwin R., Shambra W. How Democratic is the Constitution?[C] American Enterprise Institute, 1981
2参见James Bohman and William Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], The MIT Press, 1997,introduction;约翰S.德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006,前言:2;Jeffrey K. Tulis, Deliberation Between Institutions[A],James S. Fishkin and Peter Lasslet, Debating Deliberative Democracy[C], Oxford: Blackwell, 2003,另外值得一提的是,学者谈火生曾提到莫奎尔在1979年已经明确使用了“deliberative democracy”一词,将协商民主概念的最初使用时间提前。可参见谈火生.民主审议与政治合法性[M].北京:法律出版社. 2007:5注释8
1萨托利.民主新论[M].冯克利、阎克文译.上海:东方出版社. 1998:323-326
2 Jon Elster, introduction[A], Jon Elster, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge University Press, 1998:1-5
3戴维·赫尔德.民主的模式[M].燕继荣等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 1998:19
4菲什金认为后来的一些评论者长期把古雅典与希腊其他城邦国家看成是全体公民聚集在一起实践直接民主的地方,这点略显偏颇,因为据研究表明,雅典人集会的小山Pnyx,只能容纳6000公民,而在5世纪雅典却有6万公民,雅典人也不能把所有相关公民都集合在同一个地方,他们越来越依靠由公民选举而形成的公民协商微观组织。参见菲什金.协商民主[A],陈家刚.协商民主[C].上海:上海三联书店,2004:24-25
5埃米·古特曼、丹尼斯·汤普森.审议民主意味着什么[A],谈火生编.审议民主[C].凤凰出版传媒集团与江苏人民出版社. 2007:7
1 Susan Bickford, Beyond Friendship: Aristotle on Conflict, Deliberation and Attention[J], in the Journal of Politics, Vol. 58, 1996:396-399
2亨利·皮朗.中世纪欧洲经济社会史[M].乐文译.上海:上海人民出版社. 1964:49
3汤普逊.中世纪经济社会史(下)[M].徐家玲等译.北京:商务印书馆. 1984:427
4毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:前言
1 Edmund Burke, Burke’s Politics[A],R. Hoffman and P. Levack, , Knopf[C], 1959:115
2有关密尔协商思想的论述可参见Dennis E. Thompson. John Stuart Mill and Representative Government[M], Princeton University Press, 1976:80-82
3徳雷泽克在分析自由宪政主义中的协商民主时，指出自由主义为协商民主提供了民主协商的制度框架，其中包括,第一,自由宪政主义遵循认可自由权利的协商原则,为使个体成为有效的协商者提供必须有的自由程度;第二,自由宪政主义推动协商,扩大了现代协商民主的领域和范围;第三,制宪本身就是协商。参见约翰S.德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:3-10
1参见本杰明·巴伯.强势民主[M].彭斌译.长春:吉林人民出版社. 2006:5
2李瑞昌.商谈民主:哈贝马斯与吉登斯的分歧[J].浙江学刊,2005(2):127
1参见乔治·M·瓦拉德兹.协商民主[J].何莉译.马克思主义与现实. 2004(3):38-39
1约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:前言
2詹姆斯·D·费伦.作为讨论的协商[A].陈家刚.协商民主[C].上海:上海三联书店. 2004:1
3参见Bessette J. Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government[A],Goldwin R., Shambra W. How Democratic is the Constitution? [C]American Enterprise Institute, 1981
4参见Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A] , Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:18-20
5约翰·罗尔斯.再论公共理性[A],时和兴译.公共理性与现代学术[C].北京:三联书店.2000:8-9
1梅维·库克.协商民主的五种观点[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:15
2 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A],Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:17
3马克·华伦.协商性民主[J].孙亮译.浙江大学学报. 2005(1):21
4哈贝马斯.在事实与规范之间[M].童世骏译.北京:三联书店. 2003:369
5乔治·M·瓦拉德兹.协商民主[J].何莉译.马克思主义与现实. 2004(3):35
6詹姆斯·博曼.公共协商:多元主义、复杂性与民主[M].黄相怀译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:20
1王佃利、曹现强.公共决策导论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2003:1
1乔治·弗雷德里克森.公共行政的精神[M].张成福译.北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2003:18-19
2参见戴维·毕瑟姆.官僚制[M].韩志朋、张毅译.长春:吉林人民出版社. 2005:29
1王佃利、曹现强.公共决策导论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2003:29
2托马斯·戴伊.理解公共政策[M].蓬勃等译.华夏出版社. 2004:13
3迈克尔·豪利特、M·米拉什.公共政策研究:政策循环与政策子系统[M].庞诗等译.三联书店,2006:15-18
4王佃利、曹现强.公共决策导论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2003:29
1参见Samantha Besson and Fos’e Luis Marti, Deliberative Democracy and its Discontents[C], ASHGATE, 2006:introduction
2新黑格尔的哲学心理学观念强调主体的独立性,将人与人之间彼此的承认作为最高阶段,一切研究都围绕证实人与人之间的自我价值为终极指向,具有极大的人文关怀,但同时,由于过于强调人的地位,也表现出一定的激进性。参见查尔斯·泰勒.承认的政治[A],汪晖、陈燕谷.文化与公共性[C].三联书店,2006:290-300
3持有这种观点的学者有詹姆斯·博曼、威廉·雷洁、阿米·古特曼、丹尼斯·汤普森、詹姆斯·菲什金、塞拉·本哈比等,参见毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:82
1乔治·M·瓦拉德兹.协商民主[J].何莉译.马克思主义与现实. 2004(3):35
2托马斯·克里斯提亚诺.公共协商的意义[A].詹姆斯·博曼,威廉·雷洁.协商民主:论理性与政治[C].陈家刚等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:186-187
3 Jon Elster, introduction [A],Jon Elster , Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge University Press, 1998:5
4 Michael Saward, Democratic Innovation[C], Routledge,2000:68
1詹姆斯·博曼.公共协商:多元主义、复杂性与民主[M].黄相怀译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:4
1马修·费斯廷斯泰因.协商、公民权与认同[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:15
2毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.政治合法性与民主协商[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:3
1 Sternberger, Dolf, Legitimacy, International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences[C], Vol 9, London: Free Press and Macmillan, 1968:244-248
1 Wiberg, Matti, Between Apathy and Revolution: Explications of the Conditions for Political Legitimacy[M], Turun Yliopisto, 1988:60-61
2哈贝马斯.交往与社会进化[M].张博树译.重庆出版社. 1990:184
3哈贝马斯.交往与社会进化[M].张博树译.重庆出版社. 1990:186
4柏拉图.理想国[M].郭斌和、张竹明译.北京:商务印书馆. 2002:25
5亚里士多德选集·政治学卷[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2000:100;240
1托马斯·阿奎那.阿奎那政治著作选[M].马清槐译.北京:商务印书馆. 1982:43-47
2洛克.政府论[M].叶启芳、翟菊农译.北京:商务印书馆. 2005:109
3卢梭.社会契约论[M].何兆武译.北京:商务印书馆. 1997:35
1马克斯·韦伯.经济与社会(上卷)[M].林荣远译.北京:商务印书馆. 1997:241
2马克斯·韦伯.经济与社会(上卷)[M].林荣远译.北京:商务印书馆. 1997:238-239
3 T·帕森斯.现代社会的结构与过程[M].梁向阳译.北京:光明日报出版社,1988:144
4李普赛特.政治人——政治的社会基础[M].张绍宗译.上海:上海人民出版社,1997:55
5加布里埃尔·A·阿尔蒙德、G·宾厄姆·鲍威尔.比较政治学:体系、过程和政策[M].曹沛霖等译.上海:上海译文出版社,1987:35-36
1罗伯特·W·杰克曼.不需暴力的权力:民族国家的政治权力[M].欧阳景根译.天津:天津人民出版社,2005:52-53
2戴维·米勒、韦农·波格丹诺.布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[C].邓正来译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002:56
1赵成根.民主与公共决策研究[M].哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社. 2003:64
2约翰·基恩.公共生活与晚期资本主义[M].马音、刘利圭、丁耀琳译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,1999:284
3 Robert Grafstein, The Failure of Weber’s Conception of Legitimacy: Its Cause and Implications[J], in The Journal of Politics, Vol 42, No. 2, 1981
4 Wiberg, Matti, Between Apathy and Revolution: Explications of the Conditions for Political Legitimacy[M], Turun Yliopisto, 1988:88
1谈火生.审议民主[C].凤凰出版传媒集团与江苏人民出版社. 2007:151
2谈火生.审议民主[C].凤凰出版传媒集团与江苏人民出版社. 2007:152
1 Bernhard Peters, Conceptions of Public Decision-Some Challenge, Some Revisions[C], Prepared for delivery at 2002 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 29-September 1, 2002
2 Peritz, David, The Discursive Dilimma Dissolved[C], Paper prepared for presentation at the 53rd Annual Political Studies Association Conference, University of Leicester, April 15-17, 2003:6-11
3参见马修·费斯廷斯泰因.协商、公民权与认同[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:15
4 Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987
5 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A], Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:21
1 Benhabib, Seyla, Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy[A], Seyla Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996:69
2 Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987
3 Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987翻译参考卢梭.社会契约论[M].何兆武译.北京:商务印书馆. 1997:39
4 Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987
1参见Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987; Benhabib, Seyla, Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy[A], Seyla Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996:71
2 Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987
1梅维·库克.协商民主的五种观点[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角,王英津等译[C],北京:中央编译出版社,2006:21-22
2 Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987
1 Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987
2 Benhabib, Seyla, Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy[A], Seyla Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996:72
1埃米·古特曼、丹尼斯·汤普森.商议民主[M],施能杰译,台北:智胜文化事业有限公司,2006:12-13
2持此种观点的学者有很多,比较具有代表性的有约瑟夫·熊彼特与安东尼·唐斯等,可参见约瑟夫·熊彼特.资本主义、社会主义与民主[M].吴良健译.北京:商务印书馆. 1999:395-400;安东尼·唐斯.民主的经济理论[M]. 姚洋、刑予青、赖平耀译.上海:上海世纪出版集团. 2005:19-21
1埃米·古特曼、丹尼斯·汤普森.商议民主[M],施能杰译,台北:智胜文化事业有限公司,2006:16-17
2马克·华伦.协商性民主[J].孙亮译.浙江大学学报. 2005(1):21
3 David Estlund,Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:173
1 David Estlund,Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:177-181
2可参见Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987;Cass Sunstein, The Partial Constitution[M], Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1993:137, Frank Michelman, Conception of Democracy in American Constitutional Argument: The Case of Pornography Regulation[J], Tennessee Law Review, 562(1989):291-319
3可参见Benhabib, Seyla, Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy[A], Seyla Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996:72;James Fishkin, The Dialogue of Justice: Toward a Self-reflective Society[M], New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992
4 Benhabib, Seyla, Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy[A], Seyla Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996:72
5 Habermas,Between Fact and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy[M], trans. W. rehg, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996:305-306,译文参考:哈贝马斯:在事实与规范之间[M].童世骏译.北京:三联书店. 2003:379-380
1 David Estlund,Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:180
2 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A], Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:22-26
3 David Estlund,Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:180
1参见Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy[M], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000:53-56
2 David Estlund,Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:183-184
1 David Estlund,Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:180
1 Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987
1参见埃米·古特曼、丹尼斯·汤普森.商议民主[M],施能杰译,台北:智胜文化事业有限公司,2006:1-2;37-39
1参见Stanley Fish, Mutual Respect as a Device of Exclusion[A], Stephen Macedo, Deliberative Politics[C], Oxford: Oxford University Press,1999:88-102
1托马斯·R·戴伊.理解公共政策[M].彭勃等译.北京:华夏出版社. 2004:11
1张金马.政策科学导论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社. 1992:90
2托马斯·R·戴伊.理解公共政策[M].彭勃等译.北京:华夏出版社. 2004:24-25
1迈克尔·豪利特、M·米拉什.公共政策研究:政策循环与政策子系统[M].庞诗等译.三联书店,2006:244
1参见Herbert A. Simon. A Behavior Model of Rational Choice[J], Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol 69, 1(1955): 99-118
2参见Charles E. Lindblom, The Science of Muddling Through[J], Public Administration Review, Vol 19, 1(1959):79-88
1 Amitai Etzioni, Mixed-Scanning: A Third Approach to Decision-making[J], Public Administration Review, No. 5(1967): 388-389
2 Yehezkel Dror. Muddling Through of Science or Inertia?[J] Public Administration Review, No.3(1964):163-164
1 Yehezkel Dror. Public Policymaking Reexamined. Scranton[M], Pennsylvania: Chandler Publishing Company, 1968:312-318
2 Charles Jones, State and Local Policy Analysis: A Review of Progress[A],Jones, Political Science and State and Local Government[C], Washington D.C.: American Political Science Association, 1973
3参见托马斯·戴伊、哈蒙·齐格勒.民主的嘲讽[M].孙占平等译.北京:世界知识出版社,1991
1 Manin, Bernard,1987, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15:338-368
2戴维·米勒.协商民主不利于弱势群体?[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:137
3克里斯蒂安·亨诺德.法团主义、多元主义与民主:走向协商的官僚责任理论[A],陈家刚.协商民主[C].上海:上海三联书店. 2004:298
1 Jack Knight, James Johnson, Aggregation and Deliberation: on the possibility of democratic legitimacy[J], Political Theory, Vol22, 2(1994):286
2 Henry Richardson, Democratic Intentions[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:356
3菲什金提出的协商性民意调查方式更重要的贡献在于它也是一种比较具有操作性的公民参与公共决策方式,本文下一章还会重点阐释。
1 James Fishkin, Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions For Democratic Reform[M], New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 1991:4
2 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A],Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:84-86
3参见约翰·罗尔斯.再论公共理性[A],时和兴译.公共理性与现代学术[C].北京:三联书店, 2000:8-9;J. Rawls, Political Liberalism[M], New York: Columbia University Press, 1993:252-253; Michael Saward, Democratic Innovation[C], Routledge,2000:66-67
1哈贝马斯.在事实与规范之间[M].童世骏译.北京:三联书店. 2003:314
2梅维·库克.协商民主的五种观点[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:30
3哈贝马斯.在事实与规范之间[M].童世骏译.北京:三联书店. 2003:470-471
4朱迪特·斯夸尔斯.协商与决策:双轨模式中的非连续性[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:92.
1许多协商民主理论家例如科恩、斯夸尔斯、瓦拉德兹、威廉姆斯等,在以协商为视角研究公共决策时都提出过“协商性决策”(deliberative decision-making)的观点,具体可参见Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:73-75;朱迪特·斯夸尔斯.协商与决策:双轨模式中的非连续性[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:83-88;Jorge M. Valadez, Deliberative Democracy, Political Legitimacy and Self Determination in Multicultural Societies[M], Boulder CO: Westview Press, 2002:38; Molissa Williams, The Uneasy Alliance of Group Representation and Deliberative Democracy[A], Will Kymlicka and Wayne Norman, Citizenship in Diverse Societies[C], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000:129-131
2戴维·米勒.协商民主不利于弱势群体[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:140
3格雷厄姆·史密斯、科琳娜·威尔斯.公民陪审团与协商民主[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:103
1哈贝马斯.在事实与规范之间[M].童世骏译.北京:三联书店. 2003:369
1 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A],Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:21-22
2 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A],Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:22-23
1参见John Ferejohn, Instituting Deliberative Democracy[A], Ian Shapiro and Stephen Macedo, Designing Democratic Institutions[C], New York University Press, 2000:94-96
2 Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy[M], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000:36
1 Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy[M], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000:124
2 Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy[M], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000:131
3 Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy[M], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000:131
4 Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy[M], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000:131
5参见Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A],Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:26-27
1参见埃米·古特曼与丹尼斯·汤普森.审议民主意味着什么[A],谈火生.审议民主[C].江苏人民出版社. 2007:6-7
2参见John Ferejohn, Instituting Deliberative Democracy[A],Ian Shapiro and Stephen Macedo, Designing Democratic Institutions[C], New York University Press, 2000:200-202
1米切尔·黑尧.现代国家的政策过程[M].赵成根译.北京:中国青年出版社. 2004:67
2米切尔·黑尧.现代国家的政策过程[M].赵成根译.北京:中国青年出版社. 2004:67-68
1西蒙.管理行为——管理组织决策过程的研究[M].杨砾、徐立译.北京:北京经济学院出版社. 1991:19-20
2丁煌.西方行政学说史[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社. 2004:180-181
3何增科.中国政治体制改革研究[M].北京:中央编译出版社. 2004:163
4 James D. Fearon, Deliberation as Discussion[A], Jon Elster, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998:49
1 James D. Fearon, Deliberation as Discussion[A], Jon Elster, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998:50
2拉雷·格斯顿.公共政策的制定——程序和原理[M].朱子文译.重庆:重庆出版社. 2001:72
3拉雷·格斯顿.公共政策的制定——程序和原理[M].朱子文译.重庆:重庆出版社. 2001:74-75
1 Seyla Benhabib, Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy[A], Seyla Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996:71-72
2许国贤.商议式民主与民主想像[J].政治科学论丛. 2000(13)
1克里斯蒂安·亨诺德.法团主义、多元主义与民主:走向协商的官僚责任理论[A],陈家刚.协商民主[C].上海:上海三联书店. 2004:297-298
2詹姆斯·伯曼.公共协商、多元主义、复杂性与民主[M].黄湘怀译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:161-162
3克里斯蒂安·亨诺德.法团主义、多元主义与民主:走向协商的官僚责任理论[A],陈家刚.协商民主[C].上海:上海三联书店. 2004:303
4詹姆斯·伯曼.公共协商、多元主义、复杂性与民主[M].黄湘怀译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:161
1 John Ferejohn, Instituting Deliberative Democracy[A], Ian Shapiro and Stephen Macedo, Designing Democratic Institutions[C], New York University Press, 2000:79-80
2参见詹姆斯·伯曼.公共协商、多元主义、复杂性与民主[M].黄湘怀译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:87
3马修·费斯廷斯泰因.协商、公民权与认同[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:42
1 Martha L. McCoy, Patrick L. Scully, Deliberative Dialogue to Expand Civic Engagement: What Kind of Talk Does Democracy Need?[J], National Civic Review, Volume 91, Issue 2, Summer 2002:117-118
1约翰·克莱顿·托马斯.公共决策中的公民参与:公共管理者的新技能与新策略[M].孙柏瑛译.北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2005:10
2陶东明、陈明明.当代中国政治参与[M].杭州:浙江人民出版社. 1998:103
1石路.当代中国政府公共决策中的公民参与问题研究[D].华东师范大学,2007:12
2格雷厄姆·史密斯、科琳娜·威尔斯.公民陪审团与协商民主[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:100
1 C. Offe and U. Preuss, Democratic institutions and moral resources[A], D. Held, Political Theory Today[C], Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991:165
2格雷厄姆·史密斯、科琳娜·威尔斯.公民陪审团与协商民主[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:101
3戴维·米勒.协商民主不利于弱势群体?[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:140
4 Martha L. McCoy, Patrick L. Scully, Deliberative Dialogue to Expand Civic Engagement: What Kind of Talk Does Democracy Need?[J], National Civic Review, Volume 91, Issue 2, Summer 2002:129
5约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:77
1 Henry Richardson, Democratic Intentions[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:378
2由于这些研究涉及到了公民参与公共决策的具体形式,本文在下部分还有详细阐释,在此就不再累述。
3约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:78
4 Iris Marion Young, Difference as a Resource for Democratic Communication[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:389
1 Iris Marion Young, Difference as a Resource for Democratic Communication[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:402-404
2 Joshua Cohen, Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy[A], Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:426-427
3 Joshua Cohen, Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy[A],Bohman and Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997:408-409
4 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A], Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:22-23
1詹姆斯·伯曼.公共协商、多元主义、复杂性与民主[M].黄湘怀译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:23
2马修·费斯廷斯泰因.协商、公民权与认同[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:42
3马修·费斯廷斯泰因.协商、公民权与认同[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:43
4马修·费斯廷斯泰因.协商、公民权与认同[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:43
1马修·费斯廷斯泰因.协商、公民权与认同[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:44
2孙柏瑛.公民参与形式的类型及其适用性[J].中国人民大学学报. 2005(5)
1图表来源:根据Sherry R. Arnstein, A Ladder of Citizen Participation[J], Journal of American Institute of Planners, 1969(35)中“公民参与阶梯理论”模型图制作。
2参见约翰·克莱顿·托马斯.公共决策中的公民参与:公共管理者的新技能与新策略[M].孙柏瑛译.北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2005:35
3参见约翰·克莱顿·托马斯.公共决策中的公民参与:公共管理者的新技能与新策略[M].孙柏瑛译.北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2005;孙柏瑛.公民参与形式的类型及其适用性[J].中国人民大学学报. 2005(5)
1卡罗琳·亨德里克斯.公民社会与协商民主[A].陈家刚.协商民主[C],上海:上海三联书店,2004:134
2参见詹姆斯·菲什金.实现协商民主:虚拟和面对面的可能性[A],陈剩勇、何包钢.协商民主的发展[C],北京:中国社会科学出版社,2006:27
1参见詹姆斯·菲什金.协商民主[A],陈家刚.协商民主[C],上海:上海三联书店,2004:37-38;James S. Fishkin and Robert C. Luskin, The quest for deliberative democracy[A], Michael Saward, Democratic Innovation[C], Routledge, 2000:19-20;马奔.协商民主问题研究[D].山东大学. 2007:47-48
2图一来源于美国斯坦福大学协商民主中心网站(the center for deliberative democracy at Stanford University),网址是http://cdd.stanford.edu/
1 James S. Fishkin, Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform[M], New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 1991:2
2参见毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.政治合法性与民主协商[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:13
3参见James S. Fishkin and Robert C. Luskin, The quest for deliberative democracy[A], Michael Saward, Democratic Innovation[C], Routledge, 2000: 23-25
1 Graham Smith, Toward deliberative institutions[A], Michael Saward, Democratic Innovation[C], Routledge, 2000:29-30
2参见格雷厄姆·史密斯、科琳娜·威尔斯.公民陪审团与协商民主[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:108;何包钢.民主理论:困境和出路[M].孙柏瑛译.北京:法律出版社. 2008:250-251
1 Jon Elster, Deliberation and Constitution Making[A], Jon Elster, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge University Press, 1998:105
2 P. Dienel and O. Renn, Planning cells: a gate to fractal mediation[A], O. Renn, T. Webler and P. Wiedemann, Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating models for environmental discourse[C]. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995:137
3 Jon Elster, Deliberation and Constitution Making[A], Jon Elster, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge University Press, 1998:105
4约翰·克莱顿·托马斯.公共决策中的公民参与:公共管理者的新技能与新策略[M].孙柏瑛译.北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2005:2
1参见罗纳德·德沃金.至上的美德——平等的理论与实践[M].冯克利译.南京:江苏人民出版社. 2003:414
2参见罗伯特·达尔.论民主[M].李柏光、林猛译.北京:商务印书馆,1999:79;84
3 John S. Dryzek, Christian List, Social Choice Theory and Deliberative Democracy: A Reconciliation[J], British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 33, 2003:2-3
4罗云峰、肖人彬.社会选择的理论与进展[M].北京:科学出版社. 2003:6-7
1罗云峰、肖人彬.社会选择的理论与进展[M].北京:科学出版社. 2003:11-14
2参见肯尼斯·阿罗.社会选择与个人价值[M].陈志武、崔之元译.成都:四川人民出版社. 1987:41-61
1约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:37
2戴维·米勒.审议民主与社会选择[A],谈火生.审议民主[C],南京:江苏人民出版社,2007:290
3 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A], Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:28
1 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A], Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:21
2 John S. Dryzek, Christian List, Social Choice Theory and Deliberative Democracy: A Reconciliation[J], British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 33, 2003:9
3约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:37
4约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:37
1约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:38
2约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:38
3 Jon Elster, Deliberation and Constitution Making[A], Jon Elster , Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge University Press, 1998:111
4参见约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:49
1参见Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy[M], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000:53-56
2林·M·桑德斯.反对审议[A],谈火生.审议民主[C],南京:江苏人民出版社,2007:336-342
3参见Iris Marion Young, Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy[A], Seyla Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996:123-124
1参见林·M·桑德斯.反对审议[A],谈火生.审议民主[C],南京:江苏人民出版社,2007:342-344;Iris Marion Young, Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy[A], Seyla Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996:128-132
2参见格雷厄姆·史密斯、科琳娜·威尔斯.公民陪审团与协商民主[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:115
1戴维·米勒.协商民主不利于弱势群体?[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:152
2参见戴维·米勒.协商民主不利于弱势群体?[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:152
3约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:57-58
1参见约翰·S·德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006:61
2参见戴维·米勒.协商民主不利于弱势群体?[A],毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006:153-159
1参见谈火生.民主审议与政治合法性[M].北京:法律出版社. 2007:185
1陶东明、陈明明.当代中国政治参与[M].杭州:浙江人民出版社. 1998:269-270
1吴春波.官僚制统治[M].北京:民族出版社. 1988:86-102
1亨廷顿.难以抉择—发展中国家的政治参与[M].汪晓寿译.北京:华夏出版社. 1989:31
1 Joshua Cohen, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A], Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, The Good Polity[C], Basil Blackwell, 1989:22-23
2 T. Welber, Right Discourse in Citizen Participation: An Evaluative Yardstick[A], O. Renn, T. Webler and P. Wiedemann, Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating models for environmental discourse[C]. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995:35-86转引自:谢宗学.网际民主与审议民主之实践—资讯化社会的桃花源村?[J],资讯社会研究,2003(4):99-100
1邓小平文选(第2卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1994:368
2王名扬.美国行政法[M].北京:中国法制出版社,1995:959-960
1 Martha L. McCoy, Patrick L. Scully, Deliberative Dialogue to Expand Civic Engagement: What Kind of Talk Does Democracy Need?, National Civic Review[J], Volume 91, Issue 2, Summer 2002, pp117-118
2卡罗琳·亨德里克斯.公民社会与协商民主[A],郝文杰、许星剑译.陈家刚.协商民主[C],上海:上海三联书店,2004:125
1 John Ferejohn, Instituting Deliberative Democracy[A], Ian Shapiro and Stephen Macedo, Designing Democratic Institutions[C], New York University Press, 2000:100
2关于学者杨所提出的协商代表制度在前文已经论述过了,具体可参见第三章;科恩提出的社会民主制度是建议用辅助性社团补充代议制政府,实际上也反映了他试图增强现行决策制度协商性的努力,具体可参见Joshua Cohen and Joel Rogers, Secondary associations and democratic governance[J], Politics and Society, Vol. 20, No. 4(1992):393-472
1 John Ferejohn, Instituting Deliberative Democracy[A], Ian Shapiro and Stephen Macedo, Designing Democratic Institutions[C], New York University Press, 2000:101
2具体关于这些有利于公民参与公共决策的具体制度设计可以参见前面第四章的相关论述。
3参见王振亚.政治文明与当代中国政治发展[M].北京:人民出版社. 2006:9
4参见李杰、吴勇辉.我国决策模式剖析[J].社会科学研究. 2006(6):62
5朱勤军.中国政治文明建设中的协商民主探析[J].政治学研究. 2004(3):66
1中共中央文献研究室编.江泽民论有中国特色社会主义(专题摘编)[C].北京:中央文献出版社. 2002:547
2参见李火林.论协商民主的实质与路径选择[J].中国人民大学学报. 2006(4):98
1参见王学军.协商民主与公共决策[J].天府新论. 2006(1):8
2张贤明.论政治责任——民主理论的一个视角[M].长春:吉林大学出版社. 2000:22
3王学军.协商民主与公共决策[J].天府新论. 2006(1):7
1参见慕良泽、熊凤水.构建中国的协商民主:国家和社会层面上的探析[J].理论探讨. 2007(3):38
2参见郎友兴.商议式民主与中国的地方经验:浙江省温岭市的“民主恳谈会”[A],陈剩勇、何包钢.协商民主的发展[C],北京:中国社会科学出版社,2006:208-213
3参见李火林.论协商民主的实质与路径选择[J].中国人民大学学报. 2006(4):98
1参见张雅丽、劳洁.社区网络论坛中的协商民主——杭州市德加社区的实践[A],陈剩勇、何包钢.协商民主的发展[C],北京:中国社会科学出版社,2006:320-321
[1]陈家刚.协商民主[C].上海:上海三联书店. 2004
[2]陈庆云.公共政策分析[M].北京:中国经济出版社. 1996
[3]陈剩勇、何包钢.协商民主的发展[C].北京:中国社会科学出版社. 2006
[4]邓小平文选(第2卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1994
[5]丁煌.西方行政学说史[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社. 2004
[6]韩冬梅.西方协商民主理论研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2008
[7]何包钢.协商民主:理论、方法和实践[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社. 2008
[8]何增科.中国政治体制改革研究[M].北京:中央编译出版社,2004
[9]罗云峰、肖人彬.社会选择的理论与进展[M].北京:科学出版社. 2003
[10]慕毅飞、陈弈敏.民主恳谈:温岭人的创造[C].北京:中央编译出版社. 2005
[11]谈火生.民主审议与政治合法性[M].北京:法律出版社. 2007
[12]谈火生.审议民主[C].凤凰出版传媒集团与江苏人民出版社. 2007
[13]陶东明、陈明明.当代中国政治参与[M].杭州:浙江人民出版社. 1998
[14]王佃利、曹现强.公共决策导论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2003
[15]王振亚.政治文明与当代中国政治发展[M].北京:人民出版社. 2006
[16]汪晖、陈燕谷.文化与公共性[C].北京:三联书店. 1998
[17]吴春波.官僚制统治[M].北京:民族出版社. 1988
[18]薛晓源、李会斌.当代西方学术前沿研究报告2005-2006[C].上海:华东师范大学出版社.2006
[19]徐凌、张继.公共政策分析[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社. 2004
[20]张金马.政策科学导论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社. 1992
[21]张贤明.论政治责任——民主理论的一个视角[M].长春:吉林大学出版社. 2000
[22]张国庆.公共政策分析[M].上海:复旦大学出版社. 2004
[23]中国社会科学院哲学研究所编.哈贝马斯在华演讲集[M].北京:人民出版社. 2002
[24]周光辉.论公共权力的合法性[M].吉林出版集团有限责任公司. 2007
[25]赵成根.民主与公共决策研究[M].哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社. 2003
[1]安东尼·唐斯.民主的经济理论[M].姚洋、刑予青、赖平耀译.上海:上海出版社. 2005
[2]埃米·古特曼、丹尼斯·汤普森.商议民主[M],施能杰译,台北:智胜文化事业有限公司,2006
[3]阿米·古特曼,丹尼斯·汤普森.民主与分歧[M].杨立峰,葛水林,应奇译.上海:东方出版社. 2007
[4]柏拉图.理想国[M].郭斌和、张竹明译.北京:商务印书馆. 2002
[5]保罗·A·萨巴蒂尔.政策过程理论[C].彭宗超、钟开斌译.北京:三联书店. 2004
[6]本杰明·巴伯.强势民主[M].彭斌译.长春:吉林人民出版社. 2006
[7]戴维·毕瑟姆.官僚制[M].韩志朋、张毅译.长春:吉林人民出版社. 2005
[8]戴维·赫尔德.民主的模式[M].燕继荣等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 1998
[9]戴维·米勒、韦农·波格丹诺.布莱克维尔政治学百科全书[C].邓正来译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002
[10]哈贝马斯.交往与社会进化[M].张博树译.重庆出版社. 1990
[11]哈贝马斯.在事实与规范之间[M].童世骏译.北京:三联书店. 2003
[12]霍布斯.利维坦[M].黎思复、黎廷弼译.北京:商务印书馆. 1997
[13]海伦·英格兰姆、斯蒂文R.史密斯.新公共政策:民主制度下的公共政策[M].钟振明、朱涛译.上海:上海交通大学出版社. 2005
[14]亨廷顿.第三波:20世纪后期民主化浪潮[M].刘军宁译.上海:上海三联书店. 1998
[15]亨廷顿.难以抉择—发展中国家的政治参与[M].汪晓寿译.北京:华夏出版社. 1989
[16]亨利·皮朗.中世纪欧洲经济社会史[M].乐文译.上海:上海人民出版社. 1964
[17]加布里埃尔·A·阿尔蒙德、G·宾厄姆·鲍威尔.比较政治学:体系、过程和政策[M].曹沛霖等译.上海:上海译文出版社,1987
[18]加藤节.政治与人[M].唐士其译.北京:北京大学出版社. 2003
[19]卡罗尔·佩特曼.参与和民主理论[M].陈尧译.上海:上海人民出版社. 2006
[20]拉雷·格斯顿.公共政策的制定——程序和原理[M].朱子文译.重庆:重庆出版社. 2001
[21]李普赛特.政治人——政治的社会基础[M].张绍宗译.上海:上海人民出版社,1997
[22]罗伯特·W·杰克曼.不需暴力的权力:民族国家的政治权力[M].欧阳景根译.天津:天津人民出版社,2005
[23]罗伯特·达尔.论民主[M].李光柏、林猛译.北京:商务印书馆. 1999
[24]罗纳德·德沃金.至上的美德——平等的理论与实践[M].冯克利译.南京:江苏人民出版社. 2003
[25]洛克.政府论[M].叶启芳、翟菊农译.北京:商务印书馆. 2005
[26]卢梭.社会契约论[M].何兆武译.北京:商务印书馆. 1997
[27]肯尼斯·阿罗.社会选择与个人价值[M].陈志武、崔之元译.成都:四川人民出版社. 1987
[28]马克思、恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第二卷)[M].北京:人民出版社. 1972
[29]马克斯·韦伯.经济与社会(上卷)[M].林荣远译.北京:商务印书馆. 1997
[30]迈克尔·豪利特. M·拉米什.公共政策研究[M].庞诗等译.北京:三联书店. 2006
[31]毛里西奥·帕瑟林·登特里维斯.作为公共协商的民主:新的视角[C],王英津等译,北京:中央编译出版社,2006
[32]密尔.代议制政府[M].汪暄译.商务印书馆. 2007
[33]米切尔·黑尧.现代国家的政策过程[M].赵成根译.北京:中国青年出版社. 2004
[34]帕森斯.现代社会的结构与过程[M].梁向阳译.北京:光明日报出版社,1988
[35]乔治·弗雷德里克森.公共行政的精神[M].张成福译.北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2003
[36]萨托利.民主新论[M].冯克利、阎克文译.上海:东方出版社. 1998
[37]汤普逊.中世纪经济社会史(下)[M].徐家玲等译.北京:商务印书馆. 1984
[38]托马斯·阿奎那.阿奎那政治著作选[M].马清槐译.北京:商务印书馆. 1982
[39]托马斯·戴伊.理解公共政策[M].蓬勃等译.华夏出版社. 2004
[40]托马斯·戴伊、哈蒙·齐格勒.民主的嘲讽[M].孙占平等译.北京:世界知识出版社,1991
[41]西蒙.管理行为——管理组织决策过程的研究[M].杨砾、徐立译.北京:北京经济学院出版社. 1991
[42]约翰·克莱顿·托马斯.公共决策中的公民参与[M].孙柏瑛等译.北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2005
[43]约翰·基恩.公共生活与晚期资本主义[M].马音、刘利圭、丁耀琳译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,1999
[44]约翰·罗尔斯.再论公共理性[A].时和兴译.公共理性与现代学术[C].北京:三联书店.2000
[45]约翰S.德雷泽克.协商民主及其超越:自由与批判的视角[M].丁开杰等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006
[46]约瑟夫·熊彼特.资本主义、社会主义与民主[M].吴良健译.北京:商务印书馆. 1999
[47]亚里士多德.政治学[M].吴寿彭译.北京:商务印书馆. 1997
[48]詹姆斯·博曼,威廉·雷洁.协商民主:论理性与政治[C].陈家刚等译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006
[49]詹姆斯·博曼.公共协商:多元主义、复杂性与民主[M].黄相怀译.北京:中央编译出版社. 2006
[1]陈家刚.协商民主引论[J].马克思主义与现实. 2004(3)
[2]陈家刚.协商民主:概念、要素与价值[J].中共天津市委党校学报. 2005(3)
[3]陈家刚.协商民主的价值、挑战与前景[J].中共天津市委党校学报. 2008(3)
[4]陈家刚.协商民主与当代中国的政治发展[J].北京联合大学学报. 2008(6)
[5]陈东升、林国明.公民会议与审议民主:全民健保的公民参与经验[J].台湾社会学(台)2003(6)
[6]陈俊宏.永续发展与民主:审议式民主理论初探[J].东吴政治学报(台)1998(9)
[7]黄东益.审议思辨民调——研究方法的探讨与可行性评估[J].民意研究季刊(台)2000(1)
[8]胡永琴.公民有序政治参与:公共决策科学化民主化的基石[J].学术交流.2005(12)
[9]胡象明.论我国行政决策模式选择[J].武汉大学学报. 1990(1)
[10]李炳烁.超越古典共和主义与自由主义:协商民主与合法性重建.江苏大学学报2006(9)
[11]李火林.论协商民主的实质与路径选择[J].中国人民大学学报. 2006(4)
[12]李杰、吴永辉.我国决策模式剖析[J].社会科学研究. 2006(6)
[13]李强彬.论协商民主与公共政策议程建构[J].求实. 2008(1)
[14]李瑞昌.商谈民主:哈贝马斯与吉登斯的分歧[J].浙江学刊. 2005(2)
[15]林尚立.协商政治与中国的政治形态[J].中国人民政协理论研究会议会刊. 2007(1)
[16]林志鹏.我国公共决策制度创新问题研究[D].吉林大学.2005
[17]罗依平.协商决策:我国政府决策模式创新的必然选择[J].理论探讨. 2008(2)
[18]卢瑾.当代西方协商民主理论研究:现状与启示[J].政治学研究. 2008(5)
[19]马奔.协商民主问题研究[D].山东大学.2007
[20]马奔.公民参与公共决策:协商民主的视角[J].中共福建省委党校学报. 2006(8)
[21]莫茜.哈贝马斯的公共领域理论与协商民主[J].马克思主义与现实. 2006(6)
[22]慕良泽、熊凤水.构建中国的协商民主:国家和社会层面上的探析[J].理论探讨. 2007(3)
[23]石路.当代中国政府公共决策中的公民参与问题研究[D].华东师范大学,2007
[24]孙柏瑛.公民参与的类型及其适用性分析[J].中国人民大学学报. 2005(5)
[25]许国贤.商议式民主与民主想像[J].政治科学论丛(台).2000(13)
[26]王建华、林丽慧.协商民主视角下的议事程序[J].社会科学研究. 2007(6)
[27]王学军.协商民主与公共决策[J].天府新论. 2006(1)
[28]向玉琼.协商民主与公共决策合法性的提升[J].理论导刊. 2007(4)
[29]谢庆奎、李允熙.走向决策的协商民主[J].云南行政学院学报. 2008(3)
[30]谢宗学.网际民主与审议民主之实践—资讯化社会的桃花源村?[J],资讯社会研究(台),2003(4)
[31]燕继荣.协商民主的价值和意义[J].社会主义科学. 2006(6)
[32]袁峰.中国协商民主的成长[D].复旦大学. 2006
[33]张方华.协商民主语境下的公民参与[J].南京社会科学. 2007(7)
[34]张娟、习裕军.协商民主的兴起与合法性理论的重建[J].湖北社会科学. 2007(7)
[35]朱勤军.中国政治文明建设中的协商民主探析[J].政治学研究. 2004(3)
[36] [澳]何包钢.协商民主和民主化[J].中国人民政协理论研究会议会刊. 2007(4)
[37] [澳]约翰·S·德雷泽克.不同领域的协商民主[J].王大林译.浙江大学学报. 2005(5)
[38] [美]乔治·瓦拉德兹.协商民主[J].何莉译.马克思主义与现实. 2004(3)
[39] [美]詹姆斯·博曼.公共协商和文化多元主义[J].陈志刚译.马克思主义与现实. 2006(3)
[40] [美]詹姆斯·菲什金.实现协商民主:虚拟和面对面的可能性[J].劳洁译.浙江大学学报.2005(5)
[41] [加]马克·沃伦.协商性民主[J].孙亮译.浙江大学学报. 2005(1)
[42] [英]迈克尔·萨沃德.罗尔斯和协商民主[J].何文辉译.马克思主义与现实. 2006(3)
[1]陈家刚.协商民主是不是民主的一种形式[N].解放日报. 2006-7-31
[2]陈家刚.当代西方协商民主理论[N].学习时报. 2004-1-5
[3]傅丕毅、杨金志、蔡玉高.温岭“协商民主”调查[N].协商新报. 2006-6-27
[4]李君如.协商民主:重要的民主形式[N].文汇报. 2006-7-27
[5]何包钢.协商民主恳谈与现代社会科学方法[N].学习时报. 2007-5-21
[6]胡润忠.毕塞特的协商民主概念解析[N].学习时报. 2007-8-27
[7]蒋招华、何包钢.协商民主恳谈:参与式重大公共事项的决策机制[N].学习时报.2005-10-24
[8]浦兴祖.有关“协商民主”的三个关系[N].联合时报. 2006-9-29
[9]燕继荣.协商民主的价值何在?[N].学习时报. 2006-12-4
[10]燕继荣.再谈协商民主的价值—对于协商民主价值之商榷的回应[N].学习时报. 2007-9-10
[11]宋惠昌.也谈协商民主的价值问题——与燕继荣同志商榷[N].学习时报. 2007-7-30
[12]王邦佐、朱勤军.协商民主的内涵和中国协商民主的特征.联合时报. 2006-9-15
1、Anne Van Aaken, Deliberation and Decision: Economics, Constitutional Theory and Deliberative Democracy[C], ASHGATE, 2004
2、Craig Calhoun, Habermas and the Public Sphere[C], The MIT Press, 1992
3、Cohen Joshua, An Epistemic Conception of Democracy[J], Ethics 97(1986)
4、——1997a, Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy[A], James Boman and William Rehg, Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics[C], Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
5、——1997b, Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy[A], James Bohman and William Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], The MIT Press,
6、David. Miller, Deliberative democracy and social choice[J], Political Studies 40(1992)
7、——Is deliberative democracy unfair to disadvantaged groups? [A], Maurizio Passerin D’entre’ves, Democracy as Public Deliberation: New Perspectives[C], Manchester University Press, 2002
8、G. Smith, Toward deliberative institutions[A], M. Saward, Democratic Innovation[C], London, Routledge, 2000
9、Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy[M], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000
10、——Communication and the other: beyond deliberative democracy[A], Seyla Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996
11、Ian Shapiro and Stephen Macedo: Designing Democratic Institutions[C], New York University Press, 2000
12、J. Elster, Deliberative Democracy[C], Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998
13、J. Knight and J. Johnson, Aggregation and deliberation: on the possibility of democratic legitimacy[J], Political Theory, 22(1994),
14、James Bohman, Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy[M], Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996
15、James Bohman and William Rehg, Deliberative Democracy[C], The MIT Press, 1997
16、James S. Fishkin, Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform[M], New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 1991
17、——and Peter Lasslet, Debating Deliberative Democracy[C], Oxford: Blackwell, 2003
18、John Forester, The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes[M], The MIT Press, 1999
19、John S Dryzek, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond[M], Oxford University Press, 2000
20、——and Christian List, Social choice theory and deliberative democracy: a response to Aldred[J], British Journal of Political Science, Oct 2004
21、Martha L. McCoy and Patrick L. Scully, Deliberative dialogue to expand civic engagement: what kind of talk does democracy need?[J] National Civic Review, vol91, no2, Summer, 2002
22、Joseph M. Bessette, Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government[A], Robert A. Goldin and William A. Schambra, HowDemocratic Is the Constitution[C]? Washington: American Enterprice Institure,1980
23、L. Sanders, Against deliberation, Political Theory[J], 25(1997)
24、Maarten A. Hajer and Hendrik Wagenaar, Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society[C], Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003
25、Manin, Bernard, On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation[J], Political Theory 15,1987
26、Maurizio Passerin D’Entre’ves, Deliberation: New Perspectives[C], Manchester University Press, 2002
27、Michael Saward, Democratic Innovation[C], Routledge,2000
28、Paul Quick and Sarah Binder, The Legislative Branch[M], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005
29、Robert B. Talisse, Democracy After Liberalism: Pragmatism and Deliberative Politics[M], Routledge, 2005
30、Samantha Besson and Fos’e Luis Marti, Deliberative Democracy and its Discontents[C], ASHGATE, 2006
31、Seyla Benhabib, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political[C], Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996