重庆社会科学

社会治理共同体的提出是对当前社会治理问题研究的新视角,是我们党对社会治理规律认识深化的结果,同时也是我国从强国家-弱社会向强国家-强社会过渡的需要。从理论源起看,"共同体"指一种社会关系,社会性才是其本质属性;从性质和特征看,社会治理共同体是基于地缘和利益,多元协商共治的生命有机体。社会治理共同体可以从其治理意愿、治理能力和治理渠道三个方面来分析其构建的可行性。首先,社会治理共同体重要主体之一公民的社会治理意愿与其社会满意度、权利水平及政府服务法治化水平密切相关,当前中国公民社会治理意愿不强也不弱;其次,社会治理能力与政府提供社会公共物品水平、公民公平参与社会治理水平及社会组织的建设水平等密切相关,当前政府公共物品供给能力较强,但公民有效参与度较低,社会组织法治化、专业化水平也较低;最后,公民合法化参与的程度较高,但其在社会事务中的参与渠道仍然有限,因此既要加强制度建设,提高社会治理的法治化水平,又要推出新颖、有效的公民治理参与形式。

The proposal of the social governance community is a new perspective on the current social governance issues and a result of the deepening of our Party's understanding of the laws of social governance. At the same time, it is also the need for China to transition from a strong country-a weak society to a strong country-a strong society. From the source point of view, "community" refers to a kind of social relations, and social is its essential attribute; In terms of nature and characteristics, the social governance community is a living organism based on geography and interests, multivariate consultation and co-governance. The social governance community can analyze the feasibility of its construction from three aspects: its will, ability and channel of governance. First of all, the will of citizens to govern society, an important body of the social governance community, is closely related to their level of social satisfaction, their level of rights, and the level of government services under the rule of law. At present, the will of Chinese citizens to govern society is not strong or weak. Secondly, the ability of social governance is closely related to the level of public goods provided by the government, the level of equal participation of citizens in social governance, and the level of construction of social organizations. At present,the government has a strong capacity of supply for public goods, but the effective participation of citizens is low, social organizations are also less law-based and specialized. Finally, the level of citizens 'participation in legalization is relatively high, but its participation in social affairs is still limited. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the system construction and improve the level of social governance and to introduce new and effective forms of participation.