有能力的监督、务实的参与和不干涉的指导:中国政府官员在管理公共服务提供中的非营利组织时的三个偏好

IF 2.9 4区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Yanwei Li, Ying Cao
{"title":"有能力的监督、务实的参与和不干涉的指导:中国政府官员在管理公共服务提供中的非营利组织时的三个偏好","authors":"Yanwei Li, Ying Cao","doi":"10.1177/09520767221124368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Governments’ preferences for governing non-profit organizations (NPOs) are a relevant but understudied issue for governance scholars. Using Q methodology, this study investigates Chinese government officials’ preferences for governing NPOs that deliver public services. We identified three government preferences: capable supervision, pragmatic engagement, and hands-off steering. We found different theoretical perspectives identified in the literature combine with one another to formulate these government preferences for governing NPOs. A key implication is that the Chinese state predominantly prefers the traditional public administration perspective, although it pragmatically borrows useful ingredients from other steering perspectives simultaneously. We recommend that governments, when governing NPOs, seriously address the configurations of governance strategies.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Capable supervision, pragmatic engagement, and hands-off steering: Three preferences of Chinese government officials for governing non-profit organizations in public service delivery\",\"authors\":\"Yanwei Li, Ying Cao\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09520767221124368\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Governments’ preferences for governing non-profit organizations (NPOs) are a relevant but understudied issue for governance scholars. Using Q methodology, this study investigates Chinese government officials’ preferences for governing NPOs that deliver public services. We identified three government preferences: capable supervision, pragmatic engagement, and hands-off steering. We found different theoretical perspectives identified in the literature combine with one another to formulate these government preferences for governing NPOs. A key implication is that the Chinese state predominantly prefers the traditional public administration perspective, although it pragmatically borrows useful ingredients from other steering perspectives simultaneously. We recommend that governments, when governing NPOs, seriously address the configurations of governance strategies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Policy and Administration\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Policy and Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767221124368\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Policy and Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767221124368","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对于治理学者来说,政府对治理非营利组织的偏好是一个相关但研究不足的问题。本研究采用Q方法,调查了中国政府官员对管理提供公共服务的非营利组织的偏好。我们确定了三种政府偏好:有能力的监督、务实的参与和放手的指导。我们发现,文献中确定的不同理论观点相互结合,形成了政府对治理非营利组织的偏好。一个关键的含义是,中国政府主要倾向于传统的公共行政视角,尽管它同时从其他指导视角借鉴了有用的成分。我们建议各国政府在治理非营利组织时,认真处理治理战略的配置问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Capable supervision, pragmatic engagement, and hands-off steering: Three preferences of Chinese government officials for governing non-profit organizations in public service delivery
Governments’ preferences for governing non-profit organizations (NPOs) are a relevant but understudied issue for governance scholars. Using Q methodology, this study investigates Chinese government officials’ preferences for governing NPOs that deliver public services. We identified three government preferences: capable supervision, pragmatic engagement, and hands-off steering. We found different theoretical perspectives identified in the literature combine with one another to formulate these government preferences for governing NPOs. A key implication is that the Chinese state predominantly prefers the traditional public administration perspective, although it pragmatically borrows useful ingredients from other steering perspectives simultaneously. We recommend that governments, when governing NPOs, seriously address the configurations of governance strategies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Public Policy and Administration
Public Policy and Administration PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
18
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Public Policy and Administration is the journal of the UK Joint University Council (JUC) Public Administration Committee (PAC). The journal aims to publish original peer-reviewed material within the broad field of public policy and administration. This includes recent developments in research, scholarship and practice within public policy, public administration, government, public management, administrative theory, administrative history, and administrative politics. The journal seeks to foster a pluralistic approach to the study of public policy and administration. International in readership, Public Policy and Administration welcomes submissions for anywhere in the world, from both academic and practitioner communities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信