權(quán)力下放觀念的轉(zhuǎn)變翻譯

1、CHANGING CONCEPTS OF DECENTRALISATION權(quán)力下放觀念的轉(zhuǎn)變In its original sense of the transfer of powers from a central to a devolved jurisdiction,其原始意義上的權(quán)力轉(zhuǎn)移是從中央到地方分權(quán) 下放權(quán)限，Decentralization （分權(quán)）might be seen as a simple structural consequence of a re-allocation （重新分配）of functions（功 能）within government.其可能被視為一個

2、簡單的結(jié)構(gòu)性后果，即政府內(nèi)部功能的重新分配。The results of a real transfer of power, however, have profound implications for the state, central/local relations and the citizen.然而，真正權(quán)利移交的結(jié)果對國家、中央或地 方關(guān)系和公民都有深亥U的意義。Decentralization has been recommended inter alias a cure for cumbersome decision-making at the centre； 分權(quán)被推薦為是

3、治愈繁瑣決策的中心；as a means of achieving greater popular participation （參與）and of empowering （授 權(quán)）local communities; as an aid to planning, improved policy implementation and more effective delivery of services;作為一種實現(xiàn)更 大的大眾參與和賦予地方社區(qū)權(quán)利的手段；作為一個提高執(zhí)行政策和更有效地提供服務(wù)的援助規(guī)劃；as a way of generating additional resources;

4、 and, at its widest, as a necessary pre-condition for small-scale, ecologically sustainable, development. 作為一種產(chǎn) 生額外資源的方式;和作為一個小規(guī)模的、生態(tài)可持續(xù)發(fā)展的最廣泛的必要前提。If any of these goals were realized, the difficulty of undertaking; such reforms might be justified.如果這些目標(biāo)實現(xiàn)了，難以進行這種改革可能是合理的。As it is, decentralization

5、has often been the rock on which a considerable（相當(dāng)大的）burden（負(fù)擔(dān)）of expectations has been dashed, expectations which have been amplified by association （協(xié)會）with important political and social aspirations and with different schools of thought in public administration.正如，分權(quán)常被認(rèn)為是摻和在期望中的一塊具有相當(dāng)大負(fù)擔(dān)的巖石，導(dǎo)致在公共

6、行政中期望被那些有著重要政治 和社會抱負(fù)及不同派別思想的協(xié)會所放大。In addition, the emphasis given to the key features of the concept have changed over time, further confusing purpose and outcome. 此外，給予重視概念的主要特點已經(jīng)隨著時間的推移改變了，這進一步混淆的目的和結(jié)果。In the 1950s and I960s, notions of decentralization under lay attempts to create or recover indi

7、genous local government from colonial practice. 在 1950 和 1960 年，在分 權(quán)觀念下試圖建立或恢復(fù)從殖民到本土地方政府的實踐。In the 1970s, it was a central plank in the New Public Administration movements efforts to achieve greater responsiveness and responsibility.在 1970 年，在新公共管理運動的努力下它作為中央條款，實 現(xiàn)了更大的能力和責(zé)任。In the 1980s, it was emph

8、asized as an essential component of effective bottom-up planning;.在 1980 年代， 它強調(diào)了作為一個有效的“自下而上”計劃的重要組成部分。And in the 1990s, as I shall argue, the doctrines of New Public Management have resulted in a further redefinition of the concept, changing its application from a focus on territorial and structur

9、al concerns to a functional division between policy-making and execution.而在上世紀(jì)90年代，我認(rèn)為，新公共管理學(xué)說已導(dǎo)致其概 念進一步的重新界定，在政策制定和執(zhí)行之間，轉(zhuǎn)變了從領(lǐng)土集中和結(jié)構(gòu)關(guān)系向職能分工的應(yīng)用。Political, Economic and Organizational Constraints on Decentra政治at i經(jīng)濟和組織限制分權(quán)In the face of this kaleidoscope of promises and changing fashions, governments

10、have been understandably cautious about decentralization.面對這個萬花筒般的承諾和改變著的時尚，政府對于分權(quán)的謹(jǐn)慎是可以理解的。Few have ventured beyond limited devolution and most have retained effective control of key ministries and resources at the centre.彳艮少有人敢于冒險超越有限的權(quán)力下 放，保留了有效控制關(guān)鍵部門和資源中心。Where decentralization has occurred, eve

11、n under the wave of reforms induced by New Public Management, the suspicion persists that there must be immediate or future political, rather than economic or administrative, advantages to the new arrangements.當(dāng)權(quán)利下放的時候，甚至在新公共管理改革的誘發(fā)浪潮下，依然對現(xiàn)在或?qū)淼恼蝺?yōu)勢來 做新安排存在懷疑而不是經(jīng)濟或行政方面的優(yōu)勢。Governments have not always

12、 seen the diverse values of decentralization as positive; in its wider context, transfer of power from centre to locality may have serious repercussions for the social fabric of the state政府并不總是積極的看待分權(quán)的不同價值取向，在其 廣泛的背景，把中央的權(quán)利下放到地方已經(jīng)嚴(yán)重影響了國家的社會結(jié)構(gòu)。Three arguments appear to have been particularly persuasi

13、ve.三個觀點似乎特別有說服力。First, decentralization may accelerate fissionary tendencies.首先，權(quán)力下放可能加快分裂的傾向。In countries composed of different ethnic groups, in those with large areas or with secessionist movements, administrative reform of this nature may well contribute to festering local pressures for greater

14、autonomy and control over resources.在那些由不同人種組成的，國土面積大的或者有分裂主 義運動的國家，這種性質(zhì)的行政改革可能會更加惡化地方更大的自主權(quán)和對資源的控制壓力Under such circumstances, as Slater observes, the centralisation/decentralisation issue can become a predominant focus of societal conflict”.在這樣的情況下，據(jù)slater觀察發(fā)現(xiàn)“集權(quán)/分權(quán)問題會成為社會沖突的主要焦點”。In some cases, of

15、 course, pressure will build to the point where some devolution of power becomes imperative.在某些方面，當(dāng)然，壓力會建立在一些權(quán)力下放成為勢在必 彳亍的點上.In the interim, however, it is scarcely in the best interests of the centre to strengthen the periphery.然而，在此期間，它幾乎 是加強中央外圍的最佳利益點。Similarly, when a state is perceived to be un

16、der long-term threat either from external aggression or because of economic vulnerability, a more centralized system usually results.同樣，當(dāng)一個國家被認(rèn)為是處于長期的威脅下，這種威 脅可能是外部侵略或由于經(jīng)濟脆弱性，一個更加集中的體系通常會產(chǎn)生。Second social and economic values will have a direct impact on the centers willingness to countenanc（支持）decent

17、ralization. 第 二，社會和經(jīng)濟價值對中央支持分權(quán)的意愿有直接影響olf a society places emphasis on the redistribution of wealth, on planning in the interests of equity, on permitting the state to play a significant role in capital accumulation or maximizing economies of scale, then centralization may be the preferable option.如

18、果社會強調(diào)財富再分配、強調(diào)利益的公平分，允許國家在資本積累或規(guī)模經(jīng)濟最大 化中發(fā)揮重要的作用，那么中央集權(quán)或許會是更好的一個觀點。Particularly if it is linked with the power to tax locally, devolution may actually increase inequalities between richer and poorer communities with damaging consequences for unity. 特別是當(dāng)它與本地稅 收的權(quán)力有聯(lián)系時，權(quán)力下放可能實際上增加了富裕社區(qū)和平窮社區(qū)的不平等性，并對兩者的統(tǒng)一

19、帶來了破壞性的后果。If there is a consensus that public investments should be as widely and equitably distributed as possible, a political decision at the centre on the agreed sharing of benefits between regions is more likely to achieve that objective.如果能有一個共識，公共投資應(yīng)盡可能廣泛， 盡可能公平地分配，關(guān)于同意分享各地區(qū)利益的一個中央政治決策更可能實現(xiàn)這一

20、目標(biāo)。There is always, in any event, a tension between the actual and potential distribution of resources which is invariably associated with question of decentralization.在任何情況下，實際的和潛在的資源分配之間有著一種張力，而這種張力與權(quán)力下放總是相關(guān)的oIn command economies of those caught up in the process of rapid industrialization, moves

21、to divert resources to regional or local governments are likely to be countered by central politicians and officials who do not wish to see the national effort dissipated.在控制經(jīng)濟那些方面趕上了工業(yè)化的快速發(fā)展過程，轉(zhuǎn) 變到轉(zhuǎn)移資源到地區(qū)或地方政府，很可能會被不希望看到國家努力消退中央的政治家和官員所反駁皿other countries with small land areas, such as Hong Kong and

22、 Singapore, there may seem little apparent point in territorial decentralization if it simply creates more expensive layers of government while reducing the benefits of economies of scale.在其他領(lǐng)土小的國家如香港和新加坡，如果只是簡 單地創(chuàng)建更奢華的政府階層而減少了規(guī)模經(jīng)濟的利益，那么似乎看上去在領(lǐng)土的權(quán)力下放幾乎沒有明顯的特點。Third, there may be significant organiza

23、tional constraints on decentralization. 第三，應(yīng)該有重要的機構(gòu)組織來約束權(quán)力下放。 The organization of government itself may pose formidable obstacles to decentralization efforts.政府本身的組織可能會說 “權(quán)利下放 的成效有彳艮大的障礙”。A bureaucratic culture which is predicated on a shared set of values and goals and a centralized and hierarchica

24、l decision-making system may not be easily reformed and will certainly be vigorously defended.一個享有共同的價值觀和目標(biāo)的官僚文化和一個集中分層決策系統(tǒng)不可能會被輕易改革，并且肯定會被大力維護。For, in its purest sense. decentralization involves radical changes to the roles of local bureaucrats.因為，在其最純粹意義上，權(quán)力下放涉及到地方官員的角色徹底改變。Those local administrat

25、ors who saw themselves simply as implementers of central policies become, at least in theory, decision-makers in their own right, requiring a different set of skills.那些認(rèn)為自己是中央政策的實施者的人，至少在理論上，成為了以自己利益為主的決策者， 需要不同的技能。This may, in turn, result in a breakdown of those commonly shared values which previo

26、usly permeated and integrated the bureaucracy.這可能，反過來，導(dǎo)致了打破那些之前被滲透和綜合的官僚主義所共同分享的價值的障礙oAnother organizational factor which is usually important is that there is a paucity of available human resources for the additional demands which decentralization creates.其他組織通常重要的因素是，有那些權(quán)力下放造成的額外的人力資源需求的貧乏。There i

27、s often a justified assumption in public bureaucracies that skilled administrators will have a greater impact on the whole system if they remain at the centre.有一個關(guān)于公共官僚機構(gòu)的合理假設(shè)，熟練的管理者，如果他們?nèi)稳涣粼谥醒?，將會對整個系統(tǒng)產(chǎn)生更 大的影響。If they are transferred to regional or local governments, as the logic of decentralization

28、 requires, their impact is correspondingly less. 如果他們被轉(zhuǎn)移到地區(qū)或地方政府，作為權(quán)力下放的邏輯需求，其影響也是會相應(yīng)的減少。If they are retained at the centre, further recruitment is required in the locality which may be difficult,如果他們留在中央，需要在當(dāng)?shù)剡M一步招聘，這可能是很困難的，if talented officials are not available, and more expensive because the siz

29、e of the bureaucracy has been increased. 如果有才華的官員是不 可用的，則更昂貴，因為官僚主義的規(guī)模已增加。Premdas and Steeves quote a Vanuatu government document which notes that the Ximited national development funds available, the scarcity of trained administrators, planners and economists requires that the Central Government re

30、main responsible for overall planning, resource allocation, project control and implementation. Premdas 和 Steeves 弓|述 瓦努阿圖政府的文件，其中指出的“限制國家發(fā)展可用資金，缺少訓(xùn)練有素的管理者，規(guī)劃者和經(jīng)濟學(xué)家會要求中央政府保持 合理整體規(guī)劃，資源分配，項目控制和實施”。Vanuatu persisted in its plans for decentralization hut, as Premdas and Steeves, this involved considerab

31、le back tracking form the implication of devolved power-sharing.瓦努阿圖堅持其在權(quán)力下放的計劃，像 Premdas 和Steeves說的，這涉及相當(dāng)大的回溯法的形式下放權(quán)力分享的含義。New Public Management and DecentralizationNew Public Management approaches decentralization in a very different way from old public administration.新公共管理對于分權(quán)的理 解與舊公共管理有彳艮大的不同。Ra

32、ther than maximizing the political values of participation and responsiveness, New Public Management is more concerned with cost-effectiveness and with seeking to establish accountable units of management.而不是把參與 和響應(yīng)作為政治價值的最大化，新公共管理更關(guān)心的是成本效益和尋求建立負(fù)責(zé)任單位的管理This might well involve measures which appear t

33、o resemble traditional decentralizing strategies.這可能涉及似乎像傳統(tǒng)的分散策略的措施。These concerns with costs and with reducing political pressure on the centre are largely absent from the traditional public administration focus on decentralization. 這些對成本和減少在中心的政治壓力的關(guān)注在傳統(tǒng)的公共行政集中的分權(quán)中是沒有的。The objective in New Public

34、Management of retaining ultimate central control while devolving responsibility is well illustrated in Osbome and Gaeblers account of what they consider to be decentralization. They list four reasons for introducing decentralized institutions: that they are more flexible; that they are more effectiv

35、e than centralized institutions; that they are more innovative than centralized institutions; and that they generate higher morale, more commitment and greater productivity. These advantages, although not proven, are consistent with those usually offered in support of decentralization under old publ

36、ic administration. However, the measures to achieve these results still stress the overall control which must be exercised by the centre.In terms of traditional public administration values, decentralization was regarded as desirable whatever additional costs might result from its implementation. Ne

37、w Public Management holds, to the contrary, that the decentralization process ought to be resource neutral and that there should be trade-offs between centre and locality in respect of cost-effectiveness and the deconcentration of personnel from central ministries. It is, of course, a moot point whe

38、ther decentralization does in fact promote cast-savings.Countries which regard the bureaucracy as a shared community resource for public employment could well favor more decentralization without cutting; back on top-heavy central bureaucracies. 保留 基本中央控制的新公共管理的目標(biāo)和責(zé)任下放都已經(jīng)很好的在奧斯本和蓋布勒的關(guān)于什么是地方分權(quán)的解釋中被說明了

39、。他 們?yōu)橐M權(quán)力下放制度列出了四個理由：權(quán)力下放制度更靈活；比中央集權(quán)制更有效；能產(chǎn)生更高的士氣；有更多的承諾和更 高的生產(chǎn)力。這些優(yōu)勢，雖然沒有證明，卻與通常在權(quán)力下放的支持下提供的舊的公共行政的一致。然而，實現(xiàn)這些結(jié)果的措 施仍強調(diào)必須由中央全面控制。就傳統(tǒng)的公共管理價值觀而言，權(quán)力下放被認(rèn)為是可取的即使其實施可能會導(dǎo)致任何額外費用。 新公共管理認(rèn)為，與此相反，權(quán)力下放過程中，應(yīng)該是資源中立的，應(yīng)該權(quán)衡中心和地方之間成本效益與中央各部委的工作人 員的分散化。當(dāng)然，這是一個有爭議的問題關(guān)于權(quán)力下放是否確實節(jié)約了成本。國家作為一個在公共就業(yè)方面共享社會資源的 官僚主義，可以更有利于不削減更多

40、的權(quán)力下放以防回到頭重腳輕的中央官僚機構(gòu)。美特德蓋布勒 戴維奧斯本改革政府一一企業(yè)精神如何改革著公營部門Functional decentralization involves a transfer of powers and functions to lower levels of government or to other departments which had not previously exercised jurisdiction over the functional area. It differs from deconcentration in that powers a

41、re devolved rather than delegated. For example, under deconcentration, it may make administrative sense to permit passports to be issued in provincial capitals but that is a very different matter from allowing provincial-level officials to determine their own passport-issuing policies. Functional de

42、centralization involves identifying those functions which are more appropriately and effectively carried out elsewhere, either in other units or agencies al the centre or at the regional and local levels. In the field of public enterprise in some developed countries, functional decentralization has become so common place that some reformers have come to assume that it is the only way to organize