论文部分内容阅读
透明化(transparency)是指对公众的信息供应,近年来,它的潜力已经在发达社会和发展中社会的治理改善方面引起越来越多的关注。在本文中,我们对透明化作为目的本身的演进以及作为解决不断增加的治理和政府绩效等实际问题的方法进行了概念描述和评估。在对四种不同类型的透明化进行描述之后,我们将集中关注最受社会科学家实证检验的类型,即旨在提高发展中国家公共服务和治理的水平的“透明化与责任化”(transparency and accountability,T/A)干预。透明化与责任化干预产生的结果毁誉参半:有些成就卓著,有些却影响甚微。应对透明化趋势,我们发展出了一个由五种理想型的透明化“范畴”(worlds),以便对这些不同的结果进行解释。基于透明化的改革很可能面临集体行动、政治阻力和长执行链(implementation chains)所形成的障碍。透明化与责任化干预更可能在阻碍较少的情境“范畴”中获得成功。我们发现16项针对透明化与责任化干预的实验性评估在很大程度上符合我们五种范畴(five-worlds)观点的理论预测。
Transparency refers to the provision of information to the public and in recent years its potential has drawn increasing attention in governance improvements in both developed and developing societies. In this article, we have conceptualized and evaluated the evolution of transparency as an end in itself and as a way of solving practical problems such as increasing governance and government performance. After describing the four different types of transparency, we will focus on the types of evidence most empirically tested by social scientists, namely, “Transparency and Accountability” to improve the level of public services and governance in developing countries transparency and accountability, T / A) intervention. The results of transparency and accountability intervention are mixed: some are outstanding and others are few. In response to the trend of transparency, we have developed a five-type transparent “worlds” that explain these different outcomes. Transparency-based reforms are likely to face the obstacles that collective action, political resistance and implementation chains pose. Transparency and accountability interventions are more likely to succeed in less-than-situational “categories.” We found that the sixteen empirical evaluations of transparency and accountability intervention largely fit the theoretical predictions of our five-worlds perspective.