王蒼龍

郭忠華(2016).公民身份的核心問題.北京：中央編譯出版社.共352頁.

書評

公民身份的涵義、變遷與本土化
——評《公民身份的核心問題》

王蒼龍*

郭忠華(2016).公民身份的核心問題.北京：中央編譯出版社.共352頁.

作為現(xiàn)代政治學的重要概念之一，“公民身份”(Citizenship)具有悠久的歷史，可一直追溯到古希臘、羅馬時期，并在近代隨啟蒙思潮和資本主義而發(fā)展，綿亙至今已兩千五百余載。二十世紀中后期以來，隨著新社會運動的興起和全球化的發(fā)展，公民身份的涵義日趨復雜，層級日趨多元，成為一個“不僅充滿爭論，而且還變得高度擴散”的概念(Fahrmeir，2007：1)。在這種情況下：(1)如何理解公民身份？(2)如何理論化當代公民身份復雜和多元的局面？另外，雖然公民身份在中國的產(chǎn)生和發(fā)展只是近百年的事情，但隨著中國學界對西方公民身份理論的翻譯和介紹*集中翻譯和介紹西方公民身份理論的著作可參考郭忠華和肖濱共同主編的“西方公民理論書系”。該書系于2007年至2009年間陸續(xù)出版九冊，其中既包括公民身份的入門性著作(如《公民身份》《何謂公民身份》等)，也包括公民身份的專題性著作(如《公民身份：女性主義的角度》《文化公民身份》等)。以及中西方學者對公民身份在中國本土實踐的挖掘和探討*相關(guān)論文集著作如：郭忠華主編的《中國公民身份：歷史發(fā)展與當代實踐》、肖濱和郭忠華主編的《公民身份研究：第1卷》、郭忠華和郭蘇建主編的Theorizing Chinese Citizenship等。，中國本土化的公民身份研究已經(jīng)呈現(xiàn)發(fā)展態(tài)勢。那么：(3)如何理解中國的公民身份？

對上述三個研究問題，郭忠華的《公民身份的核心問題》(引用只注頁碼)進行了有益的回應、總結(jié)和探索。除導論對全書內(nèi)容進行綜述以外，全書分為四部分共十二章。第一部分闡述了公民身份的理論基礎(chǔ)，包括四個章節(jié)：第一章介紹了公民身份概念的基本輪廓、核心要素、歷史流變和獲得方式；第二章闡明了公民身份概念的核心內(nèi)涵、擴展內(nèi)涵及其隱含的變遷機制；第三章探討了公民身份的兩個理論傳統(tǒng)，即公民自由主義(Civic Liberalism)和公民共和主義(Civic Republicanism)；第四章重點關(guān)注公民身份研究的理論框架、五種研究進路以及中國公民身份研究范式的建構(gòu)問題。第二部分探討了公民身份的思想資源,包括三個章節(jié)：第五章闡發(fā)了梁啟超和韋伯有關(guān)中西方現(xiàn)代公民身份的起源問題；第六章分析了馬克思、涂爾干和韋伯關(guān)于勞動分工與個人自由的關(guān)系問題；第七章專門論述了馬克思有關(guān)人權(quán)和公民權(quán)的思想。第三部分的主題是公民身份與民族國家的關(guān)系,包括四個章節(jié)：第八章批判分析了公民國家認同的動態(tài)變化、建立基礎(chǔ)和形成方式；第九章反思了民族主義啟蒙性的條件和范圍,討論了公民身份導向的民族主義的侵略性；第十章論述了作為公民權(quán)利重要組成部分的社會權(quán)利的發(fā)展脈絡(luò)、當代困境和發(fā)展趨勢；第十一章則把視角轉(zhuǎn)向中國,從“翻譯現(xiàn)代性”角度探討了“國民”概念在清末民初時的涵義變化及其潛含的民族國家想象。第四部分(只有第十二章一個章節(jié))的重點是公民身份的發(fā)展展望,它闡明了過去幾十年公民身份所發(fā)生的涵義和層次的變化,并說明了當代多元公民身份的發(fā)展走向。

下面,我將按照上述三個研究問題的次序?qū)υ撝M行評述。

一、如何理解公民身份？

作者對公民身份的定義是“個體在政治共同體中的正式成員身份以及由此形成之權(quán)利、義務、情感、行為等”(第3頁)。該定義揭示了公民身份的五個核心內(nèi)涵,即國籍、權(quán)利、義務、德性和行動(第52-59頁)。作者進一步指出,有三組對立統(tǒng)一關(guān)系對于理解公民身份至關(guān)重要,即公民身份：(1)到底是一國之內(nèi)的還是超越國界范圍的；(2)到底是靜態(tài)的還是動態(tài)的；(3)到底是賦權(quán)性的還是支配性的(第32頁)。它們構(gòu)成我在這一節(jié)的論述框架。

(一)民族國家還是超(亞)民族國家？

作者明確將公民身份與民族國家關(guān)聯(lián)起來。他指出,“公民身份是相對于國家而言的”(第18頁),是“個體與民族國家之間的契約關(guān)系”(第10、28頁),是個體在“某個民族國家的成員資格”(第201頁)。他不僅將“國籍”視為公民身份的基本要素(第22頁)和核心內(nèi)涵(第54頁),而且把民族國家作為現(xiàn)代公民身份起源的動力之一(第38-45頁)。但是,公民身份只能以民族國家為存在單位嗎？作者給出的回答是否定的。一方面,由于公民的個體行動與國家的結(jié)構(gòu)制約彼此交錯,所以國家認同的劃分是模糊的、多元的；另一方面,階級斗爭、全球化和多元文化群體的出現(xiàn)導致公民的國家認同表現(xiàn)出動態(tài)性(第202-206頁)。作為結(jié)果,公民的國家認同已經(jīng)在范圍上超越了民族國家的界限(第203頁),呈現(xiàn)出以“民族國家公民身份”為核心,“亞國家公民身份”(包括“城市公民身份”和“聯(lián)邦單位公民身份”)和“超國家公民身份”(包括“地區(qū)公民身份”和“世界公民身份”)同步發(fā)展的格局(第214-215、307-314頁)。

論及公民身份與國家認同的關(guān)系,不能忽視民族主義的作用。作者在第九章中指出(第236-237頁)：第一,由于公民身份兼具包容性與排斥性,所以民族主義的啟蒙性只能局限在本民族內(nèi)部,一旦超越這一邊界,民族主義就可能變得很有排斥性；第二,由于公民身份與國家主權(quán)并非對立關(guān)系,所以不能認為公民身份只能催生民族主義的啟蒙性,或者國家主權(quán)只能催生侵略性。雖然作者在這里細化了分析的對象,但他在論述時有意無意地將公民身份的“包容性”等同于民族主義的“啟蒙性”。雖然二者有概念上的重疊處,但并不能等同。換言之,除了有“包容的啟蒙”以外,是否存在“排斥的啟蒙”或“啟蒙的排斥”呢？畢竟,公民身份理念完全有可能通過話語和實踐的操作成為排斥他者族群的意識形態(tài)。

(二)靜態(tài)還是動態(tài)？

上述對公民身份的定義采用的是靜態(tài)視角,但作者指出,只有從動態(tài)的角度我們才能看到公民身份的變化過程(第33頁)。這種動態(tài)性主要體現(xiàn)在公民身份的行動和實踐上(第29頁)。本書尤其重視恩靳·艾辛(Engin Isin)在這方面的貢獻(第29-31、53、57-58、65頁)。艾辛論證了“公民身份行動”(Acts of Citizenship)的概念,并將它與“公民身份行為”(Actions of Citizenship)區(qū)分開來：后者指的是已經(jīng)取得公民身份的個體按照公民身份的制度規(guī)定而從事的“例行化”(Routinized)的行為,這些行為是公民身份制度再生產(chǎn)的基本途徑,但不會創(chuàng)設(shè)新的公民身份制度；前者是一種能夠催生新的公民主體的行動,能夠通過表達訴求而創(chuàng)設(shè)新的公民身份場所,為公民身份增加新的內(nèi)容(第65-66頁)。從這個角度出發(fā),公民身份行動的主體未必是那些已經(jīng)獲得公民身份的個體,他(她)也可以是其他在制度上沒有取得公民身份的個體(第30頁)。

盡管作者把“行動”列為公民身份的核心內(nèi)涵之一(第二章),并在論述公民身份與國家認同(第八章)和民族主義(第九章)的關(guān)系時強調(diào)動態(tài)視角的重要性,但他在闡述公民身份研究的理論框架(第84頁)時卻忽略了“行動”的維度。在這個框架里,作者把公民身份研究的基本問題循序歸納為背景、主體、內(nèi)容、場所和深厚五個方面,借此對某一特定的公民身份類型進行宏觀的、綜合的描述和分析。不過,這套框架的建構(gòu)雖然也借鑒了艾辛(Isin,2009)提出的公民身份研究的五個維度,卻剔除了“行動者”和“行動”兩個維度。作者并未給出這樣做的具體理由。這導致作者提出的理論框架動態(tài)性不足,無法展示和分析公民身份的行動性和創(chuàng)設(shè)性。

(三)支配還是賦權(quán)？

支配與賦權(quán)的關(guān)系主要體現(xiàn)在公民身份研究進路上(第86-96頁)。首先,自上而下的分析路徑認為,公民身份本質(zhì)上不是一種賦權(quán)性的制度,而是統(tǒng)治階級自上而下進行政治控制的手段,是一種統(tǒng)治階級策略(第31頁)。第二,自下而上的分析進路強調(diào)外來者對居住國公民身份制度所造成的緊張關(guān)系,關(guān)注公民制度在外來者的抗爭(體現(xiàn)在公共論證、協(xié)商、交流、爭取等方面)中逐步變化的過程(第90-91頁)。第三,上下結(jié)合的進路認為公民身份并不單純是統(tǒng)治階級授予或者底層階級抗爭的結(jié)果,而是兩者互動的產(chǎn)物(第92-94頁)。作者指出,這三種路徑“從某種程度上解釋了當今多元公民身份出現(xiàn)的緣由”,因為新型公民權(quán)利類型的出現(xiàn)和公民身份概念的復雜化趨勢與20世紀中后期出現(xiàn)的大量新社會運動存在著內(nèi)在的關(guān)聯(lián)(第92頁)。

支配與賦權(quán)的關(guān)系在作者對馬克思、涂爾干和韋伯三位經(jīng)典思想家的探討中也有所暗示(第六章),之所以這樣說是因為,它構(gòu)成三者所分析的人類自由狀態(tài)變遷的動力,展示出公民身份的(被)塑造過程。我以馬克思的觀點為例予以說明。馬克思(下面的論述見于第147-153頁)的分析著眼于資本主義的“自然分工”體系對個人形成的支配機制。所謂“自然分工”是指僅存在于階級社會的分工,它以社會的生產(chǎn)力和生產(chǎn)關(guān)系為基礎(chǔ),是個人被迫的強制勞動?！白匀环止ぁ笨偸欠沼谔厥饫娑枪餐?特殊利益支配和壓迫著個人,導致分工越發(fā)達,個體與其勞動的異化程度越高。為了擺脫自然分工帶來的資本主義異化,馬克思寄希望于無產(chǎn)階級抗爭：通過自下而上的暴力革命,打碎舊的國家機器,建立無產(chǎn)階級專政,廢除私有制、階級、剝削和國家等造成異化的社會基礎(chǔ),實現(xiàn)真正的人類自由。

二、如何理論化公民身份的當代變化？

(一)多元公民身份及其解釋

在第二章,作者指出公民身份內(nèi)涵正在發(fā)生擴展,包括性別、親密、環(huán)境、性、種族、區(qū)域、代際、企業(yè)、網(wǎng)絡(luò)等被納入(第62頁)。面對公民身份涵義的復雜化趨勢,作者一方面肯定了“每一種新型公民身份都在某一個領(lǐng)域拓展了公民身份的外延”,另一方面則堅持認為,該趨勢并沒有使公民身份的基本內(nèi)涵發(fā)生根本性變化,后者依然主導著公民身份的話語(第62頁)。那么,我們應該如何來理論化公民身份的當代變化呢？

在第十二章,通過把公民身份的涵義劃分為地位、情感和行動三個基本方面,作者提出了一個“多元公民身份的涵義框架”(第317頁,簡稱“框架”),以期把復雜化的公民身份內(nèi)涵納入其中。但是,如果我們把“框架”與作者提出的“公民身份內(nèi)涵的基本層次”(第59頁,簡稱“層次”)進行比較,我們會發(fā)現(xiàn)作者在對待公民身份核心要素時存在不同的處理方式。在“層次”中,作者實際上把公民身份劃分成兩個種類：一是動態(tài)的、過程的、實踐的公民身份(即“公民身份實踐”),一是靜態(tài)的、地位的、法律-政治的公民身份(即“正式成員資格(國籍)”)。在這里,作者突出了“行動”和“國籍”兩個要素。但是在“框架”中,作者雖然突出了“行動”要素并把它作為三個基本方面之一,但把“國籍”要素放在次一級里,即作為“情感”方面里的“認同”的一部分。作者并未解釋這一處理方式的差異性。在筆者看來,一個可能的原因是,作者在提出公民身份的五種“核心要素”時忽略了“行動”要素是與其他四種要素在不同時期、不同階段被公民身份研究所重視的事實。具言之,“行動”視角帶來的轉(zhuǎn)型發(fā)生在二十世紀中后期,這個時期正是作者所分析的公民身份的內(nèi)涵得以“擴展”的時期。也就是說,作為“核心要素”的行動可能同時也是公民身份內(nèi)涵“擴展”時期的核心之所在。

(二)主體性：多元公民身份的內(nèi)在連貫性

復雜化的公民身份有何內(nèi)在連貫性？盡管作者沒有明確討論這個問題,但他在書中多處暗示我們：“主體性”可能是這一內(nèi)在連貫性的核心。作者指出,公民身份必須具有相應的主體,尤其當從“行動”視角來探討公民身份時,主體問題將變得愈加復雜(第4頁)。在傳統(tǒng)的法律-政治公民身份概念中,“主體性”以及人類關(guān)系一直被忽略(易林,2015:91)。但是,伴隨著公民身份研究的文化轉(zhuǎn)向,“主體性”議題的重要性日益增加。國際移民潮和全球化催生了多元文化少數(shù)族群,這直接挑戰(zhàn)了原有的法律-政治維度的公民身份,而應對這一挑戰(zhàn)意味著必須對多元文化政治主體重新進行思考。

有兩種立場值得注意：以金里卡(Will Kymlicka)為代表的自由社群主義立場認為,應該把民族政治多元性帶來的文化身份看作基本固定的身份,這些身份需由國家接納,以此提高文化少數(shù)族群的公民地位(Kymlicka & Norman,2000)；以史蒂文森(Nick Stevenson)為代表的文化社會學立場認為,應該把(文化)公民身份看作日常經(jīng)歷中由協(xié)商和話語(溝通或交流)建構(gòu)出來的地位,是有關(guān)日常經(jīng)驗、學習過程和賦權(quán)話語的實踐(Stevenson,2001)。后一種立場把“文化”的范圍從“少數(shù)族群”擴展到所有的文化群體,并把每個人都看做“文化”的公民(Vega & Hensbroek,2010:245-246)?？傊?文化的公民身份有助于發(fā)現(xiàn)被法律-政治的公民身份長期掩蓋的公民“主體性”,通過將自我塑造為一個富有美德和倫理的文化公民主體(Stevenson,2010；易林,2015),使追求更多主體、更大范圍、更深程度的平等變得可能。

三、如何對待中國公民身份及其研究？

公民身份的本土化研究是本書論述的第三個重要問題,對此我以三個子問題進行評述：(1)中國的公民身份是如何被建構(gòu)的？(2)如何理解中國公民身份？(3)中國公民身份研究如何開展？

首先評述第一個問題。在第五章中,作者以東方主義為視角分析了韋伯和梁啟超有關(guān)公民身份或國民思想的相關(guān)論述。韋伯認為,現(xiàn)代公民身份只能從西方的“共同體”(Commune)城市中產(chǎn)生,因為它具有別的城市類型所不具備的結(jié)構(gòu)性條件,如自由而平等的關(guān)系、市民權(quán)的出現(xiàn)和“兄弟盟約”的形成、軍事自主性(第120頁),缺乏這些條件的東方社會無法產(chǎn)生現(xiàn)代公民身份(第122-127頁)。類似地,梁啟超在西方與中國之間建構(gòu)了一系列二元對立概念,包括獨立與奴隸、權(quán)利與義務、自治與依賴、公德與私德、冒險與畏縮、進取與滿足等,并指出中國現(xiàn)代國家建立的根本出路在于改造國民的“奴隸性”,引入西方的“公民性”(第131-137頁)。

對于第二個問題,作者借由“翻譯現(xiàn)代性”視角考察了清末和民初的知識分子把“Citizen”“Citizenship”翻譯為“國民”的語義差異性?！皣瘛痹谇迥r期(1899—1914)意味著一種“國家主義”國民,目標旨在建立具有主權(quán)的現(xiàn)代民族國家；在民初時期(1914—1919)則轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)橐环N“個人主義”國民,目標旨在建立以功利主義為基礎(chǔ)的現(xiàn)代自由主義國家(第273頁)。總之,這種經(jīng)由翻譯而呈現(xiàn)的“國民”語義的差異表征了兩種不同版本的現(xiàn)代民族國家想象(第298頁)。

關(guān)于第三個問題,作者強調(diào)不能照搬套用西方公民身份研究路徑,對中國公民身份的研究需要立足于本土經(jīng)驗,建構(gòu)符合中國國情的分析范式(第100頁)。他從四個方面論述中國公民身份研究的特殊性(第101-104頁)：從發(fā)展動力來看,中國公民身份的發(fā)生和發(fā)展是一個公民抗爭與政府賦權(quán)相互融合的結(jié)果；從發(fā)展軌跡來看,中國公民身份有著不同于西方國家的發(fā)展軌跡；從層級結(jié)構(gòu)來看,中國公民身份是一個以國家公民身份作為主導、地方公民身份漸次得到發(fā)展的格局；從內(nèi)在取向來看,中國公民身份研究必須結(jié)合制度架構(gòu)與思想情感兩個方面。

四、結(jié)語

在這篇書評中,我以“如何理解公民身份”、“如何理論化公民身份的當代變化”和“如何對待中國公民身份及其研究”三個問題作為論述框架,評述了郭著的主要觀點和研究發(fā)現(xiàn),并做了一些延伸性的討論。在本書中,作者從“民族國家還是超(亞)民族國家”、“靜態(tài)還是動態(tài)”和“支配還是賦權(quán)”三組對立統(tǒng)一的關(guān)系詳細闡述了自己對公民身份的理解。面對公民身份涵義復雜化和層次多元化的趨勢,作者提出了自己的理論化解釋,并暗示了貫穿多元公民身份的內(nèi)在連貫性——公民“主體性”。此外,本書還對中國公民身份的起源、解釋以及研究的開展進行了富有創(chuàng)造性的論述?？傊?面對上述三個宏觀問題,本書給出了富有啟發(fā)意義的回應,做出了自己有價值的貢獻。

當然,郭著不乏需要批評和改進的地方,例如：對公民身份的理解比較偏重于“民族國家與超(亞)民族國家”這一組關(guān)系,對另外兩組關(guān)系的重視程度不夠；對公民身份核心要素地位的處理存在前后矛盾的嫌疑；對多元公民身份的“主體性”的闡述不夠詳細；部分章節(jié)內(nèi)容存在重復之處。但總的來看,作為一本系統(tǒng)論述公民身份且部分論及中國公民身份的專門著作,本書仍然具有不能被替代的前沿意識和學術(shù)價值。它所論及的“核心問題”既是對現(xiàn)有公民身份研究的創(chuàng)造性總結(jié),也是未來(中國)公民身份研究的前瞻性鋪墊。因此,對于關(guān)心公民身份乃至政治-社會科學的學者們來說,郭著都值得一讀。

參考文獻

德里克·希特(2007).何謂公民身份.郭忠華譯.長春：吉林出版集團有限責任公司．

郭忠華主編(2014).中國公民身份：歷史發(fā)展與當代實踐.上海：格致出版社．

郭忠華(2016).公民身份的核心問題.北京：中央編譯出版社．

基思·福克斯(2009).公民身份.郭忠華譯.長春：吉林出版集團有限責任公司.

露絲·里斯特(2010).公民身份：女性主義的視角.夏宏譯.長春：吉林出版集團有限責任公司.

尼克·史蒂文森主編(2007).文化與公民身份.陳志杰譯,潘華凌校.長春：吉林出版集團有限責任公司．

肖濱、郭忠華主編(2015).公民身份研究：第1卷.上海：格致出版社．

易林(2015).關(guān)系、行動與倫理：當代公民身份研究中的文化轉(zhuǎn)向.載肖濱、郭忠華主編《公民身份研究：第1卷》.上海：格致出版社.

Fahrmeir,A.(2007).Citizenship:TheRiseandFallofaModernConcept.New Haven and London:Yale University Press．

Guo,Z.H.& Guo,S.J.Eds.(2015).TheorizingChineseCitizenship.Lanham:Lexington Books．

Isin,E.F.(2009).Citizenship in Flux:The Figure of the Activist Citizen.Subjectivity,29:367-388．

Kymlicka,W.& Norman,W.(2000).CitizenshipinDiverseSocieties.Oxford:Oxford University Press．

Stevenson,N.(2001).CultureandCitizenship.London:Sage Publications．

Stevenson,N.(2010).Cultural Citizenship,Education and Democracy:Redefining the Good Society.CitizenshipStudies,14(3):275-291．

Vega,J.& Van Hensbroek,P.B.(2010).The Agendas of Cultural Citizenship:A Political-theoretical Exercise.CitizenshipStudies,14(3):245-257．

JPA Journal of Public Administration,Vol.9 No.3,2016

●SYMPOSIUM:Perceptions of Corruption:Empirical Studies in Five Cities Across the Strait

Introduction:Public Perceptions,Survey Analysis and Corruption Studies

Measuring and Explaining Public Perception of Corruption:An Empirical Analysis of Taipei and Kaohsiung Cities

Zhili Yu & Wenzhong Zhuang

AbstractScholarly interest in the problem of corruption has grown rapidly over the past few decades.Studies on integrity assessment by both academic and practical communities are also widespread.Current integrity assessments,such as the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) published by Transparency International (TI),have greatly enhanced our understanding of the problem of corruption.But they have also been criticized for methodological shortcomings.One such shortcoming is the failure to take into consideration the respondent’s tolerance for corruption.In order to fill the void of the previous research,this paper develops a refined measurement of corruption tolerance and uses two telephone surveys to collect first hand data from Taipei (a random sample of 1,069 valid respondents) and Kaohsiung (a random sample of 1,071 valid respondents).Based on this data,this paper identifies,describes,and explains variations in corruption tolerance among different socio-economic groups,and makes theoretical and methodological contributions to the study of corruption.

Key WordsCorruption Perception;Corruption Tolerance;Integrity Governance

Tolerance of Corruption and Social Engagement in Controlling Corruption:Evidence from Hong Kong

Hanyu Xiao & Ting Gong

AbstractThis study explores citizens’tolerance of corruption,namely the extent to which citizens accept corruption.Studies on corruption tolerance not only reveal the causes of corruption embedded in a society and its culture,but also have significant policy implications for containing corruption in bottom-up ways through social engagement.Using Hong Kong as a case,this research explores how to measure tolerance of corruption and what determines tolerance levels.Three measurements are used to gauge the level of tolerance:general tolerance of corruption,corruption tolerance in specific situations,and citizens’willingness to report corruption.Based on the data from an original survey of 1,025 Hong Kong citizens in 2015,this research finds a very low level of corruption tolerance in Hong Kong.Regression analysis further shows that education significantly reduces citizens’tolerance for corruption.Personal experience with corruption and age are also important factors affecting citizens’attitudes towards corruption.

Key WordsTolerance of Corruption;Anti-Corruption Strategy;Hong Kong

Public Perception of Corruption & Folklore of Corruption:A Study Based on a Survey on the Public Perception of Urban Residents in C City

Baishun Yuan

AbstractAs one of the approaches for measuring corruption,public perception of corruption and its indicators are frequently used.However,public perception of corruption is essentially a kind of folklore of corruption.The public’s perception of the extent of corruption is almost always based on exaggeration or fantasy,not actual experience of corruption.The prevalence of the folklore of corruption in certain societies can be measured mainly through public perception of corruption.The existence of the folklore of corruption is confirmed by the 925 questionnaires collected during a survey conducted of urban residents of C City,China.Unlike similar studies,this paper found no apparent link between the folklore of corruption and the age,education and income of the respondents.However,personal experience with corruption can be linked to age,education and income.Respondents with corruption experience also exaggerated the level of corruption and minimized the effectiveness of anti-corruption efforts.Therefore,any fight against corruption must focus on reducing the occurrence of corruption,the experience of corruption,and the prevalence of corruption．

Key WordsPublic Perception of Corruption;Folklore of Corruption;Measuring Corruption;Anti-Corruption Policy

●SYMPOSIUM：Corruption Measurement,Multi-recognition and the Optimization of Clean Government PolicyIntroduction

Xing Ni

Measuring Corruption:A New Framework including Corruption Situation,Anti-corruption Performance and Corruption Risk

Yong Guo & Wei Song

AbstractMeasuring corruption is not only an essential theoretical issue but also an important basis for anticorruption policy making.Based on the current literature and the practices of different levels of governments in China and abroad,this study discusses certain key issues in measuring corruption and proposes a new theoretical framework which includes corruption situation,anti-corruption performance and corruption risk.This article argues that this three-dimensional framework could help better explain a given corruption/anticorruption situation,and provide more comprehensive indicators for corruption measurement．Key WordsMeasuring Corruption;Corruption Situation;Anti-corruption Performance;Corruption Risk

How Do Anti-corruption Efforts Affect Public Perception of Corruption？—Evidence from Guangdong Province in China

Zongfeng Sun & Litianqing Yang

AbstractThe topic of “perception of corruption” has become popular among scholars and practitioners in recent years.Integrity managers must make clear the relationship between anti-corruption efforts and the public perception of corruption.In the extant literature,there is no inquiry on how anti-corruption efforts affect public perceptions of corruption.This paper investigates how the public’s perception of corruption changes when leading cadres are found to be corrupt.This study uses the corruption investigations of two Municipal Party Committee Secretaries in Guangdong Province in 2014 as a case.Using a propensity score matching model,we find that compared to those citizens living in a city where their “first in command” was not investigated,those citizens whose “first in command” was investigated will on average perceive the level of corruption to be 2.3 (range 0-100) higher.This is primarily because the public does not necessarily see the investigation of a Municipal Party Committee Secretary as a signal of increased anti-corruption efforts but rather just the rise of corruption itself.This finding contributes to determining the appropriate factors leading to bias in corruption perception,which are important both theoretically and practically．

Key WordsAnti-corruption Effort;Corruption Perception;Propensity Score Matching

Measuring the Subjective Perceptions toward ICAC:A Survey Study on DC Members in Hong Kong

Li Li

AbstractLittle attention has been paid to the perceived effectiveness of anticorruption agencies.This study analyzed data collected from a mailing survey of District Councilor (DC) Members in Hong Kong to explore how the city’s political elite perceived the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) in recent years.The findings include the following:1) the ICAC received higher scores for its effectiveness than its independence;2)there are significant differences in DC members perceptions when their ages and political affiliations are considered;and,3) more attention should be paid to the perceived effectiveness of the ICAC,especially toward the political elite．

Key WordsPerceived Effectiveness;ICAC;DC Members;Elite;Hong Kong

Governor Turnover,Government Regulation and Bribery

Houjian Li & Shuo Ma

AbstractPromoting effective governance is one of the urgent problems of China’s economic transition.From the perspective of provincial governors,and using survey data provided by the World Bank about the institutional quality of Chinese manufacturing enterprise operations,this paper analyses and evaluates the effects of governor turnover and government regulation on company bribes.The results show a company’s bribery behaviors will increase when political power is transferred from the departing governor to the new governor.Similarly,a company will need to pay more bribes in order to cope with government regulation.Furthermore,government regulation will increase bribery behaviors if governors are appointed more frequently.However,once political power is transferred,bribery behaviors will be drastically reduced.This paper provides micro-empirical evidence that is crucial to developing a deeper understanding of corruption in China．

Key WordsGovernors’Turnover;Government Regulation;Firm Bribes;Corruption Governance

●ARTICLES

Exploring the Attention Allocation Mechanism of Chinese Political Elites:Based on the 2614 Written Directive from the Mao Zedong Chorology Biography

Sicheng Chen & Qingguo Meng

AbstractThe attention allocation of decision-makers is one of central issues in policy process research.In this paper,we propose the quasi-lottery model to explain the attention allocation of Chinese political elites.When the official title of political elites is fixed,the importance of issues,the severity of problems and the political elites’preferences are the three factors that determine attention allocation.However,the problem driven mechanism and the preference driven mechanism are actually produce the attention.Under the problem driven mechanism,different departments compete with each other to draw the attention of political elites.Those with more important issues and more severe problems can finally draw the most attention.When a preference driven mechanism is effective,the match between the issues and the political elites ’preferences are the only factors that matter.The limited attention of political elites is a mix of both mechanisms.A problem driven mechanism is the daily mechanism,while a preference driven issue would always extrude the limited policy space.We use the written directives of political elites as the measurement of their attention and try to illustrate the attention allocation pattern of Mao based on 2614 written directive from his chorology biography.We also use the written directives which related to policy of foreign affairs,criminal law,education and health care to support the hypothesis derived from the quasi-lottery model.We believe the quasi-lottery model could contribute to lifting the veil off the Chinese policy process.

Key WordsAttention;Written Directive;Issue Importance;Problem Severity;Political Elites’Preference

●BOOK REVIEWS

Citizenship:Connotations,Transition,and Sinicization—A Review ofTheCoreIssuesofCitizenship

Canglong Wang

Ting Gong

Government Integrity Perception:Hierarchical Variation and Explanation:Based on 2015 Annual National Survey on Government Integrity

Xing Ni & Zhu Li

AbstractGovernment integrity perception is an important way to understand the behaviors of government.Existing literature has little discussion of the hierarchical variation in this perception when the public considers the different levels of government.Based on the 2015 Annual National Survey on Government Integrity,we find that “central high-local low” hierarchical variations exist in China.Using multi-level random intercept model analysis,we find that there are at least three reasons that the citizens may perceive the central government to have less integrity than local governments.First,with the rise of local economic development and the increasing quality of local government public services,people are more inclined to accept local government.Second,the higher the tolerance of corruption in local government,the more probable the traditional “good central-local evil” image will be reversed.Third,as anti-corruption enforcement information becomes more widely available,citizens have begun considering the failures of the central government to properly supervise the local governments and prevent corruption in the first place.In addition,a citizen’s perception of corruption will vary depending on their source of information about the corruption.This article not only plays an important role in explaining the hierarchical variations in perceptions of government integrity,but also solves the problem of differential item functioning to some extent．

Key WordsGovernment Integrity Perception;Hierarchical Variation;Multilevel Models;Differential Item Functioning

* 王蒼龍，英國愛丁堡大學社會學系，博士研究生。