【摘要】：貧困治理成效是判斷全面小康社會(huì)建成與否的核心標(biāo)志。十八大以來,脫貧攻堅(jiān)可謂成績斐然。在贊許行政主導(dǎo)所取得現(xiàn)實(shí)績效的同時(shí),也要看到貧困治理對(duì)社會(huì)協(xié)同的歷史訴求。囿于行政權(quán)力集中性與統(tǒng)一性的偏好,在治理實(shí)踐中難免存在一些潛在風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。結(jié)合"田東模式"與"郝堂試驗(yàn)"的治理實(shí)踐,闡述了行政主導(dǎo)下的市場(chǎng)路徑與社會(huì)路徑中的行動(dòng)者構(gòu)成與合作化過程。為避免行政主導(dǎo)的潛在風(fēng)險(xiǎn)、培育社會(huì)反貧困的內(nèi)生動(dòng)力、實(shí)現(xiàn)貧困治理的可持續(xù)性,需要在"上—下""內(nèi)—外"的雙向溝通機(jī)制、"直接—間接"互惠的激勵(lì)機(jī)制及"資本—資產(chǎn)"的互通機(jī)制等方面,進(jìn)一步提升政府主導(dǎo)下政府、市場(chǎng)與社會(huì)的合作化水平。
[Abstract]:The effect of poverty management is the core symbol of judging whether the overall well-off society is built or not. Since the 18th National Congress of the people's Republic of China (CPC), it has achieved remarkable results in overcoming poverty. At the same time, it is necessary to recognize the historical appeal of poverty governance to social coordination. Due to the preference of centralization and unity of administrative power, there are some potential risks in governance practice. Combined with the governance practice of "Tian Dong Model" and "Hao Tang experiment", this paper expounds the formation and cooperative process of the actors in the market path and the social path under the administrative guidance. In order to avoid the potential risks of executive-led, cultivate the endogenous power of anti-poverty in society, and realize the sustainability of poverty management, It is necessary to further enhance the cooperative level of government, market and society under the guidance of the government in such aspects as the two-way communication mechanism of "top-down" and "internal and external", the reciprocal incentive mechanism of "direct and indirect" and the mutual mechanism of "capital and assets".
【作者單位】： 國際關(guān)系學(xué)院;
【基金】：國家社會(huì)科學(xué)基金青年項(xiàng)目(15CZZ017) 北京市社科基金一般項(xiàng)目(16ZGB004)
【分類號(hào)】：D632.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 鄭輝,蘇孔孝,王學(xué)義;國家權(quán)力增長限制與地方行政主導(dǎo)[J];成都行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)類);2001年01期

2 汪波,曹南平;WTO視野下我國地方政府行政主導(dǎo)格局變遷[J];中國行政管理;2002年10期

3 毛壽龍;行政主導(dǎo)的“公共選擇”悲劇[J];安徽決策咨詢;2003年01期

4 張j9沁;郭偉和;;去行政主導(dǎo)的草根NGO發(fā)展策略——基于三個(gè)草根NGO的社會(huì)資本實(shí)證研究[J];東南學(xué)術(shù);2012年02期

5 羅曉華;;行政主導(dǎo)式制度建構(gòu)的內(nèi)在機(jī)理——廣州番禺新農(nóng)合的制度經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)解析[J];廣東技術(shù)師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2014年08期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前2條

1 王攀;行政主導(dǎo)下的慈善更是一種無奈[N];中國經(jīng)濟(jì)時(shí)報(bào);2007年

2 魏英杰;抗災(zāi)也應(yīng)發(fā)揮民間積極作用[N];東方早報(bào);2008年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 劉宸;行政主導(dǎo)下的公益創(chuàng)投：實(shí)踐觀察與理論思考[D];南京師范大學(xué);2015年

，

本文編號(hào)：2225953