PSYCH OpenIR  > 中国科学院心理研究所回溯数据库(1956-2010)
Alternative TitleImpact of Public Policy-making Procedures on the Acceptability of a Public Policy
Thesis Advisor王二平
Degree Grantor中国科学院心理研究所
Place of Conferral心理研究所
Keyword公共政策 政策制定程序 可接受性
Abstract公共政策的制定及推行过程中蕴含着大量的心理问题。其中可接受性(Acceptability)因为实际反映了代表不同利益的社会群体对公共政策持肯定态度的一致程度,成为公共政策制定者不可忽视的心理因素。然而目前在公共政策领域的心理学研究积累并不多,已有的研究也没有注意到政策制定程序与政策的可接受性或公众的满意感的关系。本研究根据程序公正理论(Theory of Procedural Justice)提出公共政策制定程序与政策的可接受性的关系问题,并通过三个子研究论证公共政策制定程序对政策可接受性的影响。 研究一应用半结构化访谈的方法,通过访谈分别来自于高等院校、学术团体和行政部门政策研究机构的学者,并将访谈录音转换为文字记录,进行编码分析,初步揭示了我国公共政策存在的问题——对公共问题不敏感、解决问题的措施成效差、可接受性低。这些问题主要是公共政策制定程序的缺陷所致。 研究二应用问卷调查的方法,追踪一个公共政策的制定程序及成效。为应对燃油价格持续上涨和解决出租汽车行业经营困难,北京市政府决定提高出租汽车运营价格。听证会上也以16人赞成,9人反对的结果通过了涨价方案。然而,在涨价政策实施前一个月内调查乘车人和出租汽车司机的态度发现,绝大多数乘车人和出租汽车司机都反对提价,认为提价无法根本解决出租汽车行业经营的困难,而控制出租汽车保有量和打击非法运营车辆是解决问题的有效措施,恰与政策制定者的愿望及听证会的结果相反。该结果进一步证明了我国公共政策存在的缺陷——不能准确地找到问题的症结,出台的解决措施成效差、可接受性低。同时,该结果也证明了听证会不能广泛反映待解决的公共问题涉及的各社会群体的意见,因而不是政策制定程序的有效措施。我国目前的公共政策制定程序中尚缺少一个系统了解公众态度的环节,这是政策制定者对公共问题不敏感、政策措施缺乏有效性和可接受性低的重要原因。 研究三设计了一个非等组前后测准实验,比较不同的政策制定程序对政策可接受性的影响。在互联网两个同类电子公告板上举办主题相似的原创摄影作品展赛,以展赛规则及其制定程序模拟公共政策及其制定程序,以两组被试的发帖数作为可接受性的操作指标,分别比较不同的制定程序对政策可接受性的影响。控制组以传统的政策制定程序宣布展赛规则和投稿要求;实验组则用一周时间征求网友对展赛规则及投稿要求的建议,并于一周后公布吸收网友意见以后制定的展赛规则和投稿要求。分别比较两组被试在展赛前23天和展赛期间23天的发帖总数,结果显示,展赛前两组被试的发帖数没有显著差异,而在展赛期间,实验组被试的发帖数显著高于控制组被试的发帖数。结果证明,制定政策时了解公众的态度,并把公众态度作为制定政策的依据,可以提高政策的可接受性。 综合三个子研究的结果,本研究认为我国现行公共政策普遍存在的问题是:对公共问题不敏感,解决问题的措施成效差、可接受性低。现行公共政策制定程序中的听证会不是能广泛反映待解决公共问题涉及的各社会群体意见的有效措施,无助于提高发现公共问题的敏感性和政策的可接受性。在公共政策制定程序中增加了解公众态度的环节,并把公众态度作为制定政策的依据,可以提高政策的可接受性。本研究呼吁心理学在未来更多地关注公共政策领域中社会水平的问题,在社会生活中发挥更大的作用。
Other AbstractThis research addresses the problems of public policy-making procedures. In conducting our research, we considered public policy as the allocation or reallocation of interests or resources among different members of the public. Due to limited resources, administrations should trade off all interests among different segments of society when formulating a policy. Unfortunately, in recent years there have been several mass conflicts with administration of public policy. This infers that some people’s interests were ignored or harmed by certain policies. According to the theory of procedural justice, people may accept the unexpected result if they consider the procedure is just. This research hypothesizes that there are certain problems in current policy-making procedures and that improving these procedures may make policies more acceptable. A pilot study was conducted by interviewing ten scholars from a range of disciplines. The interview record transcripts were coded by three analysts. The results indicate that: 1) Most of the scholars criticized current public policies as lacking sensitivity to public issues; 2) Most of them considered that current public policies do not resolve problems effectively; and 3) They all considered that psychology research may enhance awareness of public issues and improve the effectiveness of policy. In study 2, the procedure of public policy was tracked and compared with a social survey. The Beijing government would like to increase the taxi fare rate to cope with the rising price of petroleum. Although the majority of delegates in a hearing of witnesses supported the policy consideration, the social survey of 186 residents and 63 taxi drivers indicated that both of them oppose the consideration. The findings indicate that the hearing of witnesses was not able to delegate the opinions of the public, resulting in the policy failing to resolve the problem. Study 3 was a nonequivalent control group quasi-experiment. Visitors of two Internet Website were chosen as subjects for original photo games. For the experiment group, visitors were invited to express their desires and suggestions on the game rules for one week, and then declare rules referencing the suggestions before starting the game. Meanwhile, the control group simply declared the rules at the beginning of the game. Compared with the two games during 23 days, the experiment group submitted more photos than the control group. The results of this research imply that, the good will of policy makers is not enough to make a policy effective. Surveys on public attitudes at the beginning of the policy-making process can allow policy makers to better determine public issues, assess the tradeoff of public interests, help ensure policies are more acceptable, and help foster a harmonious society. The authors of this research suggest that psychology research should take more social level problems into account in the policy-making process.
Document Type学位论文
Recommended Citation
GB/T 7714
李大治. 公共政策制定程序对政策可接受性的影响[D]. 心理研究所. 中国科学院心理研究所,2007.
Files in This Item:
File Name/Size DocType Version Access License
10001_12508T302李大治_p(466KB) 限制开放--View Application Full Text
Related Services
Recommend this item
Usage statistics
Export to Endnote
Google Scholar
Similar articles in Google Scholar
[李大治]'s Articles
Baidu academic
Similar articles in Baidu academic
[李大治]'s Articles
Bing Scholar
Similar articles in Bing Scholar
[李大治]'s Articles
Terms of Use
No data!
Social Bookmark/Share
File name: 10001_12508T302李大治_paper.pdf
Format: Adobe PDF
This file does not support browsing at this time
All comments (0)
No comment.

Items in the repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.