發(fā)布時間：2017-12-28 12:31

  本文關鍵詞：中國基層協(xié)商民主程序化建設研究　出處：《山東師范大學》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

  更多相關文章： 協(xié)商民主 基層 程序化 現(xiàn)狀 路徑

【摘要】：任何一種民主形式都是實質民主和程序民主的辯證復合體。民主的程序化是當代民主政治的重要原則。基層協(xié)商民主作為我國社會主義民主政治系統(tǒng)中重要的組成部分,是基層群眾參與民主政治的民主形式,也離不開實體的價值指向和程序硬性操作。基層協(xié)商民主看重并尊重程序,并認為程序是基層協(xié)商決策獲得穩(wěn)定性和權威性的必不可少的硬性要求。程序化是基層協(xié)商民主有效運轉的必然要求,基層協(xié)商民主程序化建設有利于實現(xiàn)協(xié)商決策的穩(wěn)定性與權威性,實現(xiàn)公眾真實有序參與,保證多元社會和諧共存,提升基層協(xié)商民主的系統(tǒng)效能�；鶎訁f(xié)商民主程序,是由主體要素、制度要素、機制要素構成的統(tǒng)一體,環(huán)環(huán)相扣,層層遞進。根據(jù)基層協(xié)商民主程序化中要素構成比例以及各要素所起的作用的差異,將基層協(xié)商民主的生長路徑分為內生性、外生性和融合性基層協(xié)商民主程序化三大類�；鶎訁f(xié)商民主程序化是根植于基層協(xié)商主體民主自覺性不斷提升、基層協(xié)商民主制度不斷健全、基層協(xié)商民主平臺不斷完善等深厚的現(xiàn)實基礎發(fā)展起來的。但同時也應該認識到基層協(xié)商民主才剛剛開始起步,在基層協(xié)商民主組織程序、開展程序、落實程序等方面普遍存在著共同的問題,具體表現(xiàn)為基層協(xié)商議題與協(xié)商主體的確定程序不合理、個體行動能力的不平等與社會的不平等制約了影響協(xié)商開展程序的公正性、落實停滯與落實走樣降低了協(xié)商的實效。深入探討其存在問題的原因主要是在于基層管理者在基層協(xié)商民主程序化上供給能力的不足、基層協(xié)商民主程序化的法制建設的落后、歷史和文化對個體政治參與行為的禁錮。總體來看,基層協(xié)商民主程序化建設涉及面廣,要想實現(xiàn)協(xié)商民主理念與基層民主治理的無縫對接,更好地發(fā)揮程序化建設對基層協(xié)商民主的實效,還有很多方面需要加以改進和完善。一是要明確基層協(xié)商民主程序化主體的角色定位,明確各級政府在基層協(xié)商民主程序化中的主導作用,基層干部在基層協(xié)商民主程序化中的組織作用,基層群眾在基層協(xié)商民主程序化中的核心作用,社會組織在基層協(xié)商民主獨特作用。二是要完善基層協(xié)商民主程序化機制建設,在原有的程序設計上引入更加合理、全面的代表生成機制、網絡參與機制和監(jiān)督機制,合理嫁接現(xiàn)有基層協(xié)商民主框架,遏制各種不平等因素對基層協(xié)商民主的影響。三是要加強基層協(xié)商民主程序化的制度建設,加強基層協(xié)商民主程序化的制度合理性,發(fā)揮制度宏觀的規(guī)定作用,加強基層協(xié)商民主程序化的制度權威性,發(fā)揮制度微觀的規(guī)范作用�；鶎訁f(xié)商民主程序化是協(xié)調多方面因素動態(tài)化的發(fā)展過程,要深刻融入到基層治理中去,才能在實踐中不斷得以發(fā)展。
[Abstract]:Any form of democracy is a dialectical complex of substantive democracy and procedural democracy. The procedure of democracy is an important principle of contemporary democratic politics. Deliberative democracy at the grassroots level, as an important part of China's socialist democratic political system, is a democratic form of grassroots participation in democratic politics, and also cannot be separated from the value orientation of the entity and the rigid operation of procedure. The grass-roots consultative democracy emphasizes and respects the procedure, and considers that the procedure is a necessary hard demand for the stability and authority of the grass-roots consultative decision. Procedure is the inevitable requirement of effective operation of grassroots consultative democracy. The construction of grassroots deliberative democracy is conducive to the realization of stability and authority of negotiation decision-making, achieving the true and orderly participation of the public, ensuring the harmonious coexistence of multiple societies, and improving the system efficiency of grassroots consultative democracy. The democratic process at the grass-roots level is a unified body composed of the main elements, the institutional elements and the mechanism elements. According to the proportion of constituent elements in the process of deliberative democracy in grass-roots units and the difference between the functions of each element, the growth path of grassroots consultative democracy can be divided into three categories: endogenous, exogenous and inclusive. The process of deliberative democracy at the grassroots level is rooted in the deep realistic foundation of grass-roots consultative body, the continuous improvement of democratic consciousness, the continuous improvement of grass-roots consultative democracy system and the continuous improvement of grass-roots consultative democracy platform. But at the same time should also recognize that grassroots deliberative democracy has just started, the deliberative democracy at the grass-roots level organizational procedures, carry out procedures, implementation procedures and other aspects exist common problems, specific performance issues and grassroots deliberative consultation body determination procedures is not reasonable, individual action ability of inequality and social inequality constraints influence to carry out the negotiation of procedural fairness, the implementation of stagnation and reduces the effectiveness of negotiation to implement aliasing. The main reason for its problems lies mainly in the inadequate supply ability of grassroots managers at the grassroots level in deliberative democracy, the backward construction of the legal system at the grassroots level, the imposition of historical and cultural constraints on individual political participation. Generally speaking, the process of grassroots deliberative democracy construction involves a wide range. If we want to achieve seamless docking between deliberative democracy and grassroots democratic governance, we need to further improve and improve the effectiveness of procedural construction for grassroots consultative democracy. One is to define the subject role of grassroots deliberative democracy programs, clear all levels of government at the grassroots democratic consultation procedures in the leading role, the role of grassroots cadres in grassroots deliberative democracy program in the core of the grassroots deliberative democracy at the grassroots level in the program for grassroots social organizations in the unique role of deliberative democracy. The two is to improve the construction of the mechanism of deliberative democracy at the grassroots level in the original program, the program introduced a more reasonable and comprehensive representative formation mechanism, network participation mechanism and supervision mechanism, reasonable grafting existing grassroots deliberative democracy framework, contain the effects of various unequal factors of grassroots democratic consultation. Three, we must strengthen the system construction of deliberative democracy at the grassroots level, strengthen the institutional rationality of the deliberative democracy program at the grassroots level, give full play to the macro regulatory role of the system, strengthen the institutional authority of the deliberative democracy program at the grass-roots level, and play the micro regulatory role of the system. The process of deliberative democracy at the grass-roots level is the development process of coordinating various factors' dynamic development, and must be deeply integrated into grass-roots governance, so that we can continue to develop in practice.
【學位授予單位】：山東師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D621

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前6條

1 ;Operable Democracy[J];Beijing Review;2012年23期

2 陽煜琳;丁漩;;“Deliberative Democracy”的創(chuàng)新解析[J];科技創(chuàng)新導報;2009年31期

3 李;;協(xié)商民主不能解決所有問題[J];當代社科視野;2012年05期

4 HUOSHENG TAN;;Deliberative Democracy in China: A Sociology of Knowledge Perspective[J];Economic and Political Studies;2013年01期

5 顏旭;;試論中英文語境中的“協(xié)商”概念——兼議Deliberative Democracy一詞的中文譯名[J];四川省社會主義學院學報;2010年04期

6 韓冬梅;;西方協(xié)商民主的概念與特征解析[J];中國政協(xié)理論研究;2009年01期

相關會議論文 前1條

1 Joseph Fewsmith;;人民內部矛盾的解決:協(xié)商民主有用嗎?(英文)[A];北京論壇（2011）文明的和諧與共同繁榮--傳統(tǒng)與現(xiàn)代、變革與轉型：“協(xié)商民主與社會和諧”政治分論壇論文及摘要集[C];2011年

相關重要報紙文章 前1條

1 胡潤忠;畢塞特的協(xié)商民主概念解析[N];學習時報;2007年

相關碩士學位論文 前5條

1 Miriam Tardell;[D];復旦大學;2014年

2 柏劍波;中國特色協(xié)商民主體系多層構建研究[D];河北師范大學;2016年

3 鞠俊俊;村莊協(xié)商民主的運行機制研究[D];西北農林科技大學;2016年

4 薛穎;中國基層協(xié)商民主程序化建設研究[D];山東師范大學;2017年

5 趙翊君;協(xié)商實踐與精神的價值[D];北京外國語大學;2015年

，

本文編號：1346036