今年是本刊创刊10周年!作为公共管理学科的专门学术期刊,本刊自2008年创刊起一直得到国内外学术界同仁的支持与认可.2018年本刊共刊发了61篇文章:专栏文章26篇、一般论文18篇、理论评述6篇、书评8篇、博士论文摘要3篇. 专栏是本刊的重要特色之一.2018年本刊共刊登了9个专栏,按发表的顺序具体选题如下:(1)跨学科视野:行为公共管理学;(2)因果推理;(3)学习贯彻党的十九大精神系列:住房保障与住房获得感研究专栏;(4)地方领导干部的激励机制与职业发展;(5)福利态度研究;(6)学习贯彻党的十九大精神系列:政治、治理与健康中国;(7)公共问题与国家应对策略;(8)研究方法与社会科学的因果性追求;(9)学习贯彻党的十九大精神系列:健康中国与卫生治理.

作为公共管理学科的专门学术期刊,本刊自2008年创刊起一直得到国内外学术界同仁的支持与认可.2017年本刊共刊发了66篇文章:专栏文章34篇、“青年学者工作坊”优秀论文1篇、一般论文13篇、理论评述6篇、书评7篇、博士论文摘要5篇. 专栏是本刊的重要特色之一.2017年本刊共刊登了7个专栏,具体选题包括:大数据与公共治理,土地政策,精准扶贫与社会救助,公共政策研究新视角,行政体制改革研究,经济发展、环境管制与国家治理,学习贯彻党的十九大精神系列:创新国家与创新政策.

我们知道,我国经过30年的社会经济变迁,其实对国家治理构成很大的挑战.我相信大家都意识到:需要一个适应经济社会变迁,重构整个国家的治理.十八届三中全会公报明确提出了要推动国家治理现代化,四中全会提出全面推进依法治国.我觉得不仅是建设法治政府,最好是法治国家、法治政府和法治社会一起建设.我也在学校做行政工作,我发现中国不仅是政府依法的问题,其实社会也需要建成法治社会,所以这块也非常关键.

作为公共管理学科的专门学术期刊,从2008年创刊起本刊一直得到国内外学术界同仁的支持与认可.2016年本刊共刊发了60篇文章:专栏文章36篇、“青年学者工作坊”优秀论文3篇、一般论文8篇、理论评述5篇、书评6篇、博士论文摘要2篇.

Since the 1999 budget reform, and for the first time in China, local people's congresses (LPCs) have begun to exert "the power of the purse." Based on our fieldwork and survey, we argue that while LPCs have strengthened their budgetary oversight since the reform, they continue to employ a strategy of "embeddedness." Although certain LPCs have become more contentious, they tend to veil contestations in bureaucratic negotiation in order to avoid uncontrollable budgetary conflicts. The strategy adopted by LPCs in budgetary oversight provides a case for examining the recent debate over the behaviour patterns of LPCs in legislative oversight.

作为公共管理学科的专门学术期刊，从2008年创刊起本刊一直得到国内外学术界同仁的支持与认可。2015年本刊共刊发了54篇文章：专栏文章29篇、一般论文13篇、理论评述6篇、书评6篇。

20世纪80年代,与其他的拉美国家一样,在国际债务危机的冲击下,智利财政不仅孱弱不堪,而且陷入财政危机.从20世纪80年代末开始,智利政府开始进行艰难的结构调整,并逐步改革预算管理制度.尤其是在2001年,智利建立了著名的结构性平衡规则并不断完善.正是由于这些改革,尤其是结构性平衡规则的实施,在2008年国际金融危机爆发时,智利财政非常稳健.更值得一提的是,依靠其雄厚的财力,智利政府实施了规模庞大的反周期财政政策,既减少了经济波动,又通过平滑财政支出的波动,确保公共政策持续性,进而确保了社会稳定.智利的财政治理经验在国际上引起了高度的关注.同时,也对中国下一步的财政预算改革具有极大的借鉴意义.

Recently,more and more scholars and politicians have begun to realize that the happiness of citizens must be the top goal of state governance. However,human society has as yet known little about how to improve citizens' happiness through governance and policy. Moreover,there has been debate on whether or not happiness must be the goal of governance. With this backdrop, the experience of Bhutan is noteworthy. In the 1970 s,Bhutan had clearly set forth the idea that the Bhutan state was to be governed for the purpose of improving the people's happiness. During the past four decades,the Bhutan government has successfully put this ideal of governance into practice and has developed a unique model of development and governance which has significantly enhanced the Bhutanese happiness.

Public debts as well as the fiscal risks associated with them have been a global concern for our time. This paper examines fiscal risks in China, particularly fiscal risks at the local (sub-national) government level. Under the current system of Chinese intergovernmental relations, local governments are precluded from borrowing and offering guarantees for any borrowing activity. However, almost all of them have become deeply involved in debt finance, mainly in the form of contingent liabilities. Although there will not be a debt crisis in China in the near future, certain risks are hidden in China's local debt. This article therefore recommends China reform its intergovernmental relations and formally grant authority to local governments to borrow so that they are subject to transparent debt market constraints.

随着财政收入增速放缓、支出结构变化以及政府债务到达历史最高水平,中国财政的转折点已经来临,未来中国政府的收支压力将会越来越大.中国各级政府必须适应预算环境的转变,改革预算模式,转变预算行为,既要逐步引入中长期预算,进行总额控制,又要提高资金的配置效率和支出绩效,提高财政管理水平,以确保财政可持续.

Strengthening the budgetary supervision of the local People's Congress is essential not merely to the deepening of budgetary reform but also to the improvement of the People's Congress system and socialist democracy. Budgetary supervision by the People's Congress comprises three elements: information, dialogue and enforcement. A national questionnaire survey based on these three elements shows that with the deepening of budgetary reform, the budgetary supervision of the People's Congress has undergone a shift from procedural to substantive oversight. Nevertheless, it still faces a number of challenges at local level. In the forthcoming reforms, budgetary supervision by the People's Congress should be strengthened to make local governments more accountable to the people.

<正>不丹是一个位于中国和印度之间的弹丸小国。然而,过去十多年,这个小国的治理与发展经验在国际社会的影响越来越大。2010年,哈佛大学政治学家波克教授(Bok,2010)出版了《幸福政治学》一书,一开篇就介绍了不丹的经验。美国哥伦比亚大学地球研究所所长、联合国秘书长顾问杰弗里·萨克斯(Sachs,2011)指出,在这个后金融危机的时代,我们需要认真思考我们经济

<正>为了提高中国公共行政学回应社会转型重大问题的能力,提升中国公共行政学在21世纪的学术地位,2012年12月1日至2日"21世纪中国公共行政学"研讨会在广东省顺德市成功举办。在研讨会中,来自国内和新加坡等地的二十名专家、学者围绕着中国公共行政学的研究取向、知识基础、研究方法、本土化与国际化关系等问题进行了热烈的讨论,共同展望了21世纪的中国公共

<正>2012年,《公共行政评论》进入创刊后的第五个春秋。在各方的悉心呵护与支持下,刊物与时俱进,茁壮成长。办一份学术刊物不易,办好一份高质量的学术刊物更属不易。明确的办刊宗旨、严格的标准和执行程序,以及学界同仁的认同和鼎力支持是本刊良好发展不可或缺的基础。在过去五年中,我们谨守本刊创刊时确立的办刊宗旨,即"倡导规范严谨的研究方法,提升公共行政研究质量,回应公共行政实践,建构公共行政学本土化理论,跟踪国

The development of Chinese social accountability illustrates that society itself is a powerful force for enhancing accountability. It can enable a form of societal control of the government in a non-electoral regime. However, the absence of competitive election has limited the development of social accountability in China. The Chinese case nevertheless helps improve our understanding of the role of society in accountability building.

Establishing an accountable government is a core issue for modern state governance. To achieve this goal, two fundamental questions need to be solved: (1) Who exercises power? (2) How should the power be exercised? To the first question, the electoral system offers a relatively good answer; to the second, the budgetary system offers the best answer. Through a historical and comparative analysis, this essay identifies three roads to political accountability: the European road of the nineteenth century, the American road from the founding of the United States to the reform of Progressive Era and the newly emerging Chinese road. This implies that the Western experience does not represent the only route toward political accountability. Compared with Western experience, China's state transformation since the 1980s is quite unique. A Chinese road is taking shape despite all the challenges ahead.

Since 1999,China started a budget reform with significant implications.The goal of the reform is to establish a modern public budgeting.After more than ten years of reform,significant achievements have been made.China has created a basic frame of modern public budgeting.However,there are many challenges ahead,such as power relations,comprehensive budget,aggregate control,performance budgeting,cash and debt management,and accounting reform.In the future,China must deep its efforts in budget reforms so as to create a modern public budgeting.

The China-Australia Public Administration Dialogue is a new collaboration between scholars and practitioners from across greater China (including Hong Kong and Taiwan) and Australia, aimed at deepening understanding of contemporary developments and issues in public policy and management. Built around a core group of participants, the Dialogue is hosting a series of workshops on particular themes with relevant experts presenting and debating papers which describe and analyse developments in China and Australia, allowing informed comparisons to be made and cross-border lessons to be learned. Selected papers and reports will be published in refereed journals including AJPA. The first workshop was held at Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou in June 2011 on the topic 'Putting Citizens at the Centre: Making Government More Responsive'. About 35 people participated including three senior Australian officials and two Australian academics, and Chinese scholars from nine universities across greater China and others from Singapore and the US; three senior officials from Guangdong Province also participated in a practitioners' forum with the Australians. The following report draws upon a background paper that guided the workshop and provides a useful framework for linking the papers published in this special issue of AJPA. There is currently a great deal of international interest in the idea of more citizens-focussed public services, yet the concept inevitably has different meanings in different contexts. This is particularly important in understanding how it is or might be pursued in such diverse countries as China and Australia. The interplay between three underlying forces or frameworks is important to the policy agenda involved. First, governments have the role of authoritative/decisive allocators of resources to deliver public services on behalf of the public. Second, markets serve as voluntary exchange frameworks serving people based upon their mutual self-interest. And thirdly, the wider community needs to be considered as a social or cultural context within which collective/group/individual preferences are formulated and expressed. This interplay includes: The importance of markets to allow people and businesses to pursue their own interests, the 'hidden hand' ensuring optimal or satisficing outcomes; The role of governments to facilitate the operation of markets, allocate funds to public goods and take various measures to address market failures, ensure the socially acceptable distribution of incomes and wealth, and ensure stability, all intended to be in the 'public interest'; and The role of community or communities in building culture, resilience, social capital and respect, as well as acceptance of some divergence, changing expectations and behaviours, and different and evolving philosophies. The extent of markets, and the corresponding roles and functions of government, is not a 'given' but is open to debate reflecting different philosophies and priorities and interests in the community; it is also influenced by global factors. The way markets and governments operate is also shaped by the way the wider community, and 'civil society', operates. In the West, 'democratic' institutional frameworks are intended to help citizens identify, debate and resolve these differences and to ensure government policies reflect the consensual or majority view of the 'public interest'. These liberal frameworks emphasise the role of people's representatives to whom governments are accountable and who, in turn, are accountable to the people. Through them, representative governments identify 'citizens needs', determine the policies and programs to address them, and are held accountable for the effectiveness of the policies and programs. 'Responsible government' involves more than this democratic process. It encompasses complying with the law and adhering to principles of good public management including impartiality and procedural fairness and a professionalism that gives citizens confidence of the consistency and quality of administration of government policies and programs, recognising the rights of citizens. In China, with a different tradition of governance, governments have increasingly sought to anticipate and be responsive to citizen and community needs, taking professional pride in performance and delivery. China is also a country in transition, its market economy developing rapidly over the last 30 years with corresponding changes in government roles and responsibilities which are continuing to evolve. The roles of government, the political frameworks and institutions, the means of professional administration, the intergovernmental arrangements and government-community relations still all differ in important ways from Australia's. There may be some common or familiar trends but much of the contextual fundamentals remains very different. Yet, in their different ways and with different applications and consequences, both countries are engaged in a journey intended to make government more responsive to citizens. This was a recurring theme at the workshop, with many papers and much of the discussion touching on the issues involved. Jun Ma's paper perhaps addresses this theme most directly. Ma's thesis about the rise of 'social accountability' in China suggests that, in the continuing absence of formal democratic processes, the emergence of social accountability is encouraging and promising, providing channels for citizens and/or civil society organisations to participate in the process of governing. Social accountability initiatives in China include the proliferation of non-government organisations and the increasing power and autonomy of the media, and various measures by different local governments to engage more with the public. Most of the initiatives have so far originated in civil society, partly for self-protection against the combination of mis-use of power by the state and the excess of the market system (the increased autonomy enjoyed by society as a result of market economy reform more recently being encroached, Ma suggests, by an alliance between the rich and the powerful). To be successful, Ma notes, social accountability initiatives need to be taken up and supported by the state. At this stage, however, few of the initiatives are coming from government, and the initiatives are yet to be institutionalised. Nonetheless, Ma seems optimistic that the citizens-centred services agenda in China may provide a substitute for, or even a pathway to, the 'upwards accountability' that is part of the fundamental governance framework in Australia and other Western democracies. For Australia, on the other hand, the current heightened interest in the idea of citizens-centred services is essentially to complement or supplement such 'upwards accountability'. The main aim of the agenda in Australia is to improve responsiveness to the needs and preferences of those receiving public services and thereby to improve the effectiveness of government programs. Yan Wu and Wen Wang also explore whether some of the citizens-centred initiatives in China may be improving the legitimacy of government. Their focus is on China's budgetary processes and the impact of recent participative budgeting initiatives in Wenling and Wuxi. They compare the different approaches taken in the two cities: one closely involving local People's Congresses which issue draft budgets to the public and hold rounds of consultations before deciding on budget allocations, and the other based on a more selective consultation process managed by lead agencies, which influences their choice of infrastructure projects to be funded. Wu and Wang suggest that such initiatives could improve the legitimacy of local government if they strengthen the role of the legislature (People's Congresses) in overseeing the executive, but note there has so far been little impact on higher levels of government in China. Over the last three decades in many Western countries there has been increasing emphasis on ways in which government administration can respond more directly to the needs and preferences of citizens, complementing basic 'upwards accountability' arrangements (to ministers, parliaments and representative institutions). China has also adopted more responsive modes of delivery in part, perhaps, as a consequence of rapid economic liberalisation and development. In both countries 'New Public Management' has been popular, emphasising results and performance and, particularly in Australia and some other Anglo-American countries, applying more business-like approaches to public management. These approaches included a firmer focus on results and performance, greater scope for managers to manage, flexibilities over financial allocation and human resources management, and more emphasis on 'customers' including through the use of service charters, systematic client feedback and formal consultation with clients and stakeholders. 'Customer focus' akin to private sector practice became an important element of management and organisational cultures, and was often enshrined in corporate strategies. More recently in the West, as problems emerged with attempting to treat clients of public programs as 'customers', and as demands for more citizens involvement in government increased, the agenda shifted and strengthened. The new agenda of 'downwards and outwards accountability' has been aimed at strengthening or 'thickening' the democratic process by extending citizens participation and engagement directly into policy-making and program administration, and improving responsiveness through greater use of third parties to deliver services. It is important to recognise there are tensions and trade-offs involved in addressing both 'upwards' and 'downwards and outwards' accountability. First, there is tension in the very terms 'customers', 'clients' and 'citizens'. Because the clients of many services have obligations as well as rights, the NPM treatment of them as 'customers' led at times to some serious problems. The very provision of taxpayer funded services makes the relationship with clients different to normal market relationships between businesses and their customers. More generally, the interests and preferences of clients and stakeholders are not necessarily consistent with the public interest. There may also be tensions between different policy aims that reliance on stakeholders and clients may distort. For example, allowing choice may be at the expense of equity when resources are limited, and expectations of quality and timeliness and easy access may not match the resources available. Also, 'public' priorities may not match the preferences of particular client groups or communities, and provisions targeted to certain groups can create perversions and unintended consequences. These tensions and trade-offs place an important constraint on 'downwards and outwards accountability' confirming the continued importance of 'upwards accountability' to determine the 'public interest'. Jie Gao provides an interesting example of Chinese initiatives to improve responsiveness in which an independently managed survey of citizens in various cities in Guangdong province has influenced authorities in one city (Foshan City) as they pursue their aim to build a 'clean, efficient and service-oriented' government. The city, which the survey suggests was already amongst the higher performing cities in Guangdong, increased its financial support in those areas where its performance attracted only a low level of citizen satisfaction, particularly in environmental protection and social support. It also drew on the survey to improve service delivery. While no doubt the city administration was influenced by other factors, Gao considers that Foshan City's experience supports the theory that the deepening of economic liberalisation reform and the rising power of the community will continue to push the authoritative Chinese state to implement policies and programs that effectively address citizens' needs. Guang Zhang also draws on a population survey to assess the extent to which budgetary allocations in China reflect the preferences of the people. In this case, he conducted a survey of young Chinese students in the city of Xiamen, suggesting this might reflect broader public opinion in modern China. The survey indicates that current budgetary allocations give more weight to economic development than these young people would prefer, and somewhat less to welfare and humanitarian objectives. Zhang concludes that the central leadership in China must realise that economic growth may not be enough to legitimise its rule, and that it needs to respond to citizens' demands for more resources for welfare and humanitarian functions. Nai-Ling Kuo examines how government officials in New Taipei City in Taiwan respond to citizen dissatisfaction about different programs. Kuo shows that low levels of satisfaction identified in twice-yearly surveys of citizens do not necessarily lead to budgetary cuts, because the budget allocation is also affected by the policy preferences of elected officials and by the intrinsic characteristics of a program. This does not mean that public officials comply with their supervisors' preferences regardless of the public interest, but that a more nuanced response to evidence of dissatisfaction may be appropriate taking into account both the short-term and longer-term public interest. By implication, Kuo confirms the importance of both 'upwards' and 'downwards and outwards' accountability in Taiwan. Western governments have been modifying their policy development processes over recent decades as more organisations have exercised influence and as many of these have enhanced their professional capacity including for research and communication. The policy process is arguably far more public and open to input/influence than ever before, including through the use of proactive approaches such as the issuing of papers for public response and involving stakeholders in reviews. An important question is whether this always leads to good policy. The oversight of policy processes has become more open particularly with reforms to freedom of information legislation and other administrative law. The media also play an important role in oversight and in raising issues of concern with public policy such as value for money, equity and accountability for performance. In Australia, the legislated processes used by the Productivity Commission over many years illustrate a model applied to greater or lesser extents across government in terms of public consultation, debate and negotiation. The Commission, to which Anthony Housego and Terry O'Brien are associated, conducts independent public reviews of policy issues referred to it by the Australian Government. Its processes usually involve: the issuing of an issues paper to promote informed discussion and to guide submissions from the public; publication of a draft report following consideration of submissions and hosted workshops of experts and stakeholders; and publication of a final report after consideration of responses to the draft. The government is then expected to announce its response to the Commission's final report and recommendations, usually after it has undertaken further consultations of its own and sought public service advice. This 'gold standard' approach is widely respected if not followed fully or consistently when government reviews other policies and programs. Most recently the Australian government accepted most of the recommendations of its Web 2.0 Taskforce recommending the use of interactive technology by public servants to engage with external experts and interest groups as they conduct policy research and develop policy advice. There are tensions in opening up the policy development process, however, as openness can make more difficult the task of government to address sensitive issues in the public interest. The glare of the media is not always conducive of careful deliberation or courageous rejection of sectional interests. Openness can also lead politicians to constrain frank and fearless advice that may lead to embarrassment. The issues here relate not only to ensuring both 'upwards' and 'downwards and outwards' accountability, but also to the importance of professional and impartial advice to government provided fearlessly and, if necessary, in confidence. In addition to participative policy development, more detailed program design to meet policy objectives can also be conducted in consultation or collaboration with stakeholders and citizens, or even through 'co-design'. Programs can also be designed to provide different degrees of bureaucratic control and/or choice by clients. The degree of command allocation versus market freedom can range from high to low, but often there is a particular mix of attributes: cash entitlements in welfare states, with no conditions on the use of the money, allow clients full choice over their spending with government control only by way of the eligibility criteria reflecting the program objectives; vouchers required to be spent for the particular purpose involved, may allow full choice of the provider of the relevant service or product; fundholding arrangements may facilitate a degree of choice and innovation depending on the precise details: the fund-holder may be given considerable discretion over the allocation of money to providers and/or clients may have considerable choice of provider; programs can also be designed to be 'supply driven' (where a given level of supply is determined by the cash available or number of subsidies or number of public employees involved) or 'demand driven' (where the take-up of a 'good' or subsidised provision is in the hands of the community, individuals or firms); and third-party service provision more generally can involve choice for clients, particularly if the clients can enhance the services through their own contributions. Colin Bridge provides a detailed description of initiatives by the Australian Department of Human Services to strengthen its engagement with clients in the design and management of the wide range of programs it manages. Bridge highlights how New Public Management has often translated to a rigid and narrow focus on performance management with insufficient weight on the outcomes for clients. The silo design of most government programs has also created a 'one-to-many' relationship between people in the community and government, where the 'many' is actually government. Bridge describes how DHS is trying to respond to the shift in community attitudes towards the expectation of more individualised, equitable service. It has developed a 'co-design' process which goes well beyond traditional consultation, and has led to a DHS service strategy based on four responsiveness themes: 'make it about me', 'connect me where it counts', 'be clear and simple' and 'give me flexibility'. As a result, DHS is linking services more to the life stages its clients are typically in, and is experimenting with various modes of communication including social media. China has yet to develop a systematic approach to engaging with clients and citizens, but there is a significant amount of experimentation and innovation, and increasing recognition of the importance of greater responsiveness. Kinglun Ngok focuses on the challenge of providing services to migrant workers in Guangzhou. There are more than 230 million mobile people in China, but the household registration system (hukou) leaves many without adequate access to public services as they are too far from their sending regions while their receiving regions do not have direct responsibility to support them. Ngok reports on a survey of migrant workers and government departments and other stakeholders involved in migrant worker issues. Service providers reported that in recent years Guangzhou departments have increasingly offered services to migrant workers and their families but most of the officials surveyed referred to difficulties with financing these services, providing adequate human resources and ensuring access to information and the services offered. Users surveyed reveal major gaps, many not being aware of services available from city governments and only a minority accessing them, with less than half of these reporting that they were satisfied. Very few know of or receive services from hometown governments, and most think city governments are more efficient and reliable. Ngok concludes that, while receiving cities like Guangzhou have realised the importance of providing services to migrant workers, their service provision has been handicapped by the existing fiscal system based upon household registration arrangements. Improvements in services are also dependent upon greater participation of the migrant workers in policy development, service planning and delivery. Yapeng Zhu presents the fascinating story of a political entrepreneur, Guo Shuqing, who led reform of housing in Guizhou province. Instead of the conventional Chinese model of incremental reform towards a private housing market over many years, with all the risks of continuing housing inequalities, Guo successfully implemented more radical reform in Guizhou involving lump sum compensation based on the estimated market value of the existing housing stock as well as public employees' past contributions, and a monthly subsidy paid as a component of employees' remuneration. This 'holistic model' was more equitable, market-oriented and efficient than the incremental approach. Zhu describes how Guo successfully achieved his policy innovation using a 'policy entrepreneurship framework'. Amongst the components of this framework, Zhu highlights Guo's social acuity and his understanding of policy issues and his engaging in policy conversations, how Gao defined the problem, his use of a pilot scheme and his civic engagement and building of a supporting coalition including amongst ordinary people through widespread public involvement and deliberation. Bennis Wai Yip So examines two frontline service systems in Taipei City in Taiwan and their two different approaches to learning about performance improvement, even though both use NPM-style performance management and are keen to improve responsiveness to client needs. So notes that policy learning in the case of Health Service Centres is mainly by the policymaking supervisory agency, strengthening upwards accountability. This is despite the outdoor orientation of the centres and the need for their staff to influence the mindset and behaviour of people to pay more attention to their long-term health interests. Paradoxically, the Household Registration Offices which provide very standard transactional services from their fixed locations, focus their attention on quality indicators, quantitative targets being a basic requirement that all must meet. For them, the learning is at the office level, strengthening outwards accountability without any negative effect on upwards accountability. So highlights the different logic each apply derived from their respective performance complexities that impose different kinds of performance controls and incentives. In addition to participative approaches to policy development and program design, program management processes and systems can be structured to promote citizens engagement and responsiveness. Two particular developments – the use of non-government organisations and exploiting new technology – are now commonly associated with the worldwide push for citizens-centred services. The use of third party providers was commonly associated with New Public Management, competition amongst them being seen to deliver greater efficiency. Not-for-profit NGOs are now seen to offer in addition greater responsiveness to clients' needs and preferences, so long as the arrangements involve a degree of fundholding flexibility and considerable discretion for individual case management. The emphasis has shifted somewhat from efficiency to effectiveness through greater responsiveness. Australia has long used non-government organisations to deliver publicly funded aged care and disability services. More recent reforms are aimed to improve outcomes in such complex areas as mental health and 'social inclusion' support for severely disadvantaged groups such as the homeless and remote Indigenous communities. These involve greater use of case management with more discretion given to those delivering the services and greater involvement by the individuals, families and communities concerned. Anthony Housego and Terry O'Brien describe Australia's not-for-profit sector which has been growing significantly in recent years, now accounting for over 4 percent of GDP. All levels of government are encouraging the development of an active NFP sector, recognising that NFP organisations add value not only by what they do but also by the way they work. Housego and O'Brien note, however, that the big expansion in the role of NFPs in delivering publicly funded services does present challenges including risks to NFP autonomy, limiting their advocacy roles and distracting them from their original purposes and strengths. There are lessons to be learned about the problems inherent in contracting with NFPs, and the problems relating to how such arrangements are implemented. Housego and O'Brien present two case studies – one on aged care and the other on disability care – drawing on Productivity Commission reviews conducted over the last two years. The Commission's recommended approach in both reviews is consistent with the view that governments should choose the appropriate model of engagement with NFPs for the purpose at hand. Zhibin Zhang and Chao Guo examine the advocacy activities of Chinese NFP organisations through a survey of executives from registered NFPs in three provincial level administrative divisions. They find that the intensity of advocacy amongst these registered NFPs is moderate and limited, and that the more they employ paid professional staff the less intense their advocacy effort and the lower the level of constituents' participation in organisational decision-making. Zhang and Guo identify a 'corporatist continuum' amongst registered NFPs from those featured by state dominance (government organised non-government organisations or GONGOs) to those characterised by societal corporatism (mainly grass-roots organisations). At both ends of this spectrum, the NGOs display higher levels of advocacy, the former having been created to institutionalise participation by particular interest groups that have emerged from market reforms, and the latter looking to hold the government more accountable for meeting their constituents' needs and interests. Zhang and Guo note an important limitation of their study in that it covers registered NFPs only, and not the rapidly expanding number of unregistered grassroots NFPs. Yijia Jing and Ting Gong study an interesting response by government agencies in Shanghai to the growing role of NFPs in China. The aim of this response, which they term 'managed social innovation', is not only to accommodate but also to promote and craft civil society initiatives. Jing and Gong identify the dilemma facing Chinese authorities as they accept a growing role for social organisations in the 'harmonious society' they now advocate: removing the dual management system (DMS) used for registering NGOs would create more space for the development of NFPs, but a degree of adversarial government-NFP relations would almost certainly emerge and need to be tolerated. The Shanghai initiative involves funding from welfare lottery revenue to a trusted Non-profit Incubator (NPI) which supports new NFPs focussed particularly on providing services to the elderly, the poor, the handicapped and children and youth. The NPI was contracted to implement a form of venture philanthropy helping NFPs to develop project proposals through to contract with the relevant government agency or company, and supporting, monitoring and evaluating implementation. Jing and Gong report that this 'managed social innovation' initiative has had some positive impacts, but that it also has limitations. In particular, while some unregistered NFPs have been assisted, the DMS still has a binding effect, and the involvement of public funding imposes inflexibilities on the NFPs and even causes conflicts. Future success in their view requires models that are more replicable than the current one, and the government's social regulation to be further relaxed. The citizens-centred agenda often includes making better use of new technology to integrate government services allowing variations in the mix of services and improvements in their responsiveness to the particular needs and preferences of different individuals or communities. In his paper, Bridge describes recent initiatives by the Department of Human Services in Australia. These include not only better integration of Australia's transactional services (for social security, welfare, health insurance, housing assistance, student support etc.) but the increased use of 24/7 on-line services and experiments with the use of social media. A recent government report indicated that by 2008 the internet had replaced contact in person as the most common way people make contact with government, and suggests it may be a myth that disadvantaged customers do not have access to on-line services. DHS is progressively simplifying and automating on-line services and customer interactions making it easier for customers to self-mamage. The integrated website and telephone service is organised around themes relevant to customers such as 'birth and adoption', 'studying and training' and 'living with illness or disability'. DHS is making more use of SMS contacts and secure on-line mail, and has been experimenting with Facebook and Twitter and establishing on-line communities to help develop services and disseminate advice. Mei Jen Hung assesses the practice of e-government in Taiwan from a citizen-centred perspective. Despite sustained government efforts, and a reputation for being amongst the top-ranked countries for commitment to use ICT to build better government, Taiwan faces significant take-up problems. Hung reviewed the problem by interviewing key government officials, business partners and academics. Her conclusions are that e-government in Taiwan has been supply driven rather than demand driven, and fails to consider changing the way the various services are delivered to citizens. Services are not sufficiently integrated and there is a risk averse culture in the public sector. Hung argues that a more bottom-up approach would allow greater citizen participation and encourage government to think seriously about re-designing and re-organising the way it works. This raises questions about the role of IT personnel in charge of designing and implementing e-government, and highlights the value of other public servants keen to use IT to promote equity, transparency and participation. Human elements, not technology, decide the quality of e-government services, she suggests. Hung also refers to competition and choice, and the importance of good public-private partnerships. While not addressed directly in any of the papers, regional or local structures can be established to support place management of combinations of services to ensure greater responsiveness to local community needs and priorities. These may be linked to a local level of government or be a decentralised administrative arrangement. To be effective they need some authority to influence separate agencies and their program managers, and they usually need some discretionary funds of their own. Examples in Australia include recent trials for Indigenous program delivery in remote communities, and regional economic development activities. Centrelink has also recently been experimenting with this approach with some small amounts of discretionary moneys available to local or regional managers to supplement the mainstream program moneys they administer. The local government arrangements in China described in several papers (eg Gao and Yu/Wang) offer opportunities for such place management, though they also identify challenges including the considerable variations in revenue raising capacity across China. The citizens-centred agenda may also be affected by the basic structure of relevant government agencies. For example, there may be potential advantages where agencies have a degree of independence from direct political control so that they can focus energy on service delivery and related expertise in working directly with citizens, rather than on upwards accountability. This assumes, of course, some separation of politics from administration, something that does not currently apply in China. Nonetheless a degree of professional independence and impartiality as well as service expertise can assist service quality and responsiveness, so long as there also remains sufficient 'upwards accountability' through the political process. More generally, many Australian agencies are designing their program management arrangements to align more easily with those used by individuals and businesses for their own purposes. Thus many more services can be accessed on-line and tax collections are increasingly integrated into business accounting systems to ensure seamless and minimal cost processes for collection. While not canvassed much at this workshop, it is important to recognise that the shift to greater engagement with citizens and stakeholders requires changes in public service culture, and the development of new skills and new systems. It may also require new organisational forms (moving away from the standard hierarchic departmental form) and involve networked governance – extensive chains or relationships of cross dependency where each actor brings some specific contribution to the policy exercise (resources, information, street-level presence, professional skills etc). These networks place considerable strain on traditional forms of management because they are typically unsteerable and raise new accountability issues. The public service in Australia and most other Western democracies has long lost any monopoly of advice on policy or of responsibility for management of public programs. The new demands placed on it require more openness and less anonymity, and willingness to share power and to work across boundaries. These impacts also have implications for politicians and their relationship with public servants, as the sharing of power is not just with the politicians and their myriad of advisers today, but with external groups who demand direct access to public servants and engagement with them. The shift in culture is reflected in the emphasis on 'leadership capabilities' as distinct from management skills in most public services around the world. As China responds to similar pressures for greater transparency and public participation in the policy process, but also more equitable and responsive service delivery, new distinctions between the roles of 'politicians' and professional administrators may emerge, the latter requiring the sorts of skills in relationship management now in demand in the West. New skills and aptitudes are particularly required in contract management, communications management and performance management. Arguably, a major change in the skill sets of those recruited into public service may be required : less the 'ideal bureaucrat' or the office-bound functionary and more the broker, the 'in-between' operator, the entrepreneur or diplomat, or the NGO motivator. Understanding of ethical issues including conflicts of interest has also become more important. New systems required include capacity to better link information and decision-making across agencies and with other jurisdictions and third parties. New budgeting arrangements may also be needed, and revised performance management and reporting arrangements. While the contexts are very different, there is a shared interest amongst Australian and Chinese governments in improving the responsiveness of public services to the needs and preferences of citizens and clients. Australia's more mature market economy and democratic process makes its citizens-centred agenda more of a complement to traditional approaches to upwards accountability, though it is nonetheless a very challenging agenda with significant tensions and trade-offs to be carefully addressed. In many respects, China's transition towards a more developed market economy makes its citizens-centred agenda a more fundamental one, underpinning broader political reform. The papers presented to this workshop and published in this issue of AJPA illustrate how seriously the agenda is being taken in China.

To modernize budgeting system is a challenge issue in many developing countries. To some scholars (Schick, 1998a, 1998b; Ma, 2009a), developing countries must first put into place basic budgetary controls before moving to more advanced models of budgeting. This approach of “basic first,” however, is questioned by others (e.g., Andrew, 2006). Drawing on China's recent budget reforms, this essay reconfirms the validity of the “basics first” approach. In China, budget reform since 1999 has begun to install budgetary controls for state finance, leading to an enhancement of budgeting capacity and financial accountability. However, governments at the same time have begun to be plagued by the unexpected problem of delays in spending and the accumulation of significant underexpenditures. Contrary to what many people may believe, we contend that this somewhat odd problem arises not because the new budgeting system has exercised too much control but rather because the new system is not yet effective in exerting budgetary controls.