2006 2010 * 5 2006 2010 3 D630. 1 A 1674-2486 2012 03-0113 - 31 1 * TJTJ10-6514 1 3 113
Beasley 1994 47 Vedung 1997 117 2006 2011 2009 258 2007 2008 2009 2008 2009 2010 2006 2008 2007 2004 2006 2007 Rice & Sumberg 1997 Denhardt & Denhardt 2000 Vigoda 2000 Stipak 1979 Brown & Coulter 1983 Percy 1986 2011 114
2009 2011 2006 1 1 115
2009 2011 1 2 3 1 2 3 3 31 2006 2010 5 3 5 3 12006 2010 2 5 1 2 3 2010 2011 2010 2011 116
3 1 3 5 2 2006 154 3 70 3 33 2007 2009 6 5 154 1 2005 3 30 2005 2006 9 4 2007 2 2006 2009 http / /www. gov. cntest2006-07 /25 /content_344709. htm 2010 117
1 1 SPSS Multiple response 2 1 3 GDP GDP GDP 1 2 3 118
119
3 1 2 3 WORD SPSS 3 20 30 120
55 1 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 9 10 3 4 2010 10 20 2003 1 2010 2010 2011 2003 2011 2011 121
3 2010 2010 2010 2010 12 3 2010 122
1 1 123
1 1 124
2 1 2 154 2 970 6. 30 3 368 2. 39 7 148 0. 96 5 146 0. 95 9 56 0. 36 38 18 0. 12 54 602 3. 91 2 133 0. 86 17 15 0. 10 55 134 0. 87 15 111 0. 72 26 1 2 2 1 125
58 0. 38 36 37 0. 24 46 28 0. 18 50 86 0. 56 28 1 922 12. 48 1 626 4. 06 1 GDP 154 1. 00 1 150 0. 97 4 134 0. 87 16 151 0. 98 3 37 0. 24 47 486 3. 16 4 75 0. 49 31 144 0. 94 12 133 0. 86 18 63 0. 41 35 71 0. 46 32 27 0. 18 19 27 0. 18 52 181 1. 18 12 57 0. 37 37 124 0. 81 20 136 0. 88 6 36 0. 23 18 36 0. 23 48 41 0. 27 17 41 0. 27 44 59 0. 38 16 45 0. 29 42 14 0. 09 56 890 5. 78 4 413 2. 68 5 147 0. 95 7 119 0. 77 22 147 0. 95 8 110 0. 71 15 28 0. 18 51 3 0. 02 58 79 0. 51 29 157 1. 02 13 148 0. 96 6 9 0. 06 57 126
210 1. 36 9 142 0. 92 13 20 0. 13 53 48 0. 31 41 1 220 9. 92 2 569 3. 69 3 153 0. 99 2 131 0. 85 19 103 0. 67 27 113 0. 73 24 69 0. 45 33 191 1. 24 10 135 0. 88 14 56 0. 36 39 273 1. 77 8 145 0. 94 11 76 0. 49 30 52 0. 34 40 187 1. 21 11 119 0. 77 23 68 0. 44 34 496 3. 22 5 383 2. 49 6 146 0. 95 10 123 0. 80 21 45 0. 29 43 40 0. 26 45 29 0. 19 49 113 0. 73 14 113 0. 73 25 6 12. 48 127
2009 20 80 90 GDP 2005 2 4 GDP GDP 1 0. 88 3 1 GDP 1 1 GDP 3 3 8 1 2 11 1 2010 128
4 5 6 7 8 13 22 5 3 14 7 5 5 12 60 1 1 2 1 2008 129
3 4 31 2010 12 1 31 A + A A - B 4 6 A + 5 A 1 22 125 A + 125 100 A 100 75 A - 75 B 2008 130
16 A - 4 B 2010 1 19 1 5 A + B 3 8 A + B 3 131
3 A + 0. 77 0. 00 0. 47 0. 40 0. 67 0. 87 0. 03 0. 27 0. 37 0. 47 0. 63 A 0. 38 0. 00 0. 17 0. 29 0. 46 0. 54 0. 17 0. 46 0. 04 0. 50 0. 71 A - 0. 28 0. 16 0. 16 0. 21 0. 43 0. 38 0. 31 0. 59 0. 08 0. 33 0. 39 B 0. 10 0. 25 0. 10 0. 05 0. 40 0. 10 0. 55 0. 65 0. 10 0. 20 0. 45 3 132
1 2 WORD 4 3 4 10 181 26 709 154 18 592 2 253 9 072 154 5 304 11. 83% 48. 53% 154 28. 60% 146 1 023 148 359 0. 93% 4. 50% 148 1. 96% 6 016 19 903 154 12 178 25. 80% 83. 62% 154 65. 68% 10 181 26 709 18 592 3 1 2010 2 2010 3 133
48. 53% 28. 60% 83. 62% 65. 68% 1. 96% 1 359 6 1 2 3 5 3 134
5 A + A A - B 12 19 65 16 112 40. 0% 79. 2% 81. 3% 80. 0% 72. 7% 18 5 15 4 42 60. 0% 20. 8% 18. 8% 20. 0% 27. 3% 30 24 80 20 154 100. 0% 100. 0% 100. 0% 100. 0% 100. 0% 2008 3 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 3 135
2 3 154 2006 2006 12 17 2007 2008 4. 8% 2007 136
GDP 154 12 8% 1 10 1 2 3 2008 1 12 2010 2009 2008 2010 2008 2008 2007 2007 2006 2006 2006 2006 137
5 1 2 138
3 139
2008 GDP 2008 140
2010.. 7. 2007.. 5. 2011.. 30.. 2008.. 6.. 2006.. 1 12. 2011.. 5. 2008.. 5. 2010.. http / /www. jiangsu. gov. cngzcywsdc /201010 /t20101018_503136. htm. 2010. 2011.. 1 21.. 1 10. 2007. 2008. 2010.. 6.. 3.. 3 6. 2011.. 1 8. 2011.. 141
3. 2008.. 12 16. 2007.. 2. 2004.. 3. 2009.. 1. 2007.. 3. 2006.. 1 7. 2011.. 1 26. 2009. 2008.... 4. 2003. 12 32. 1 20. 2006.. 6. 2009.. 2. 2006.. 4. 2006.. 6. 2010.. 2. 2008.. 1. 2009. 2011..... 1 27. 2010.. http / /district. ce. cn / zg /201012 /14 / t20101214_22048355. shtml. 2005.. 1. 2009.. 1. Beasley K. 1994. Self - Assessment A Tool for Integrated Management. Cheltenham Stanley Thornes Publishers Ltd. 142
Brown B. & Coulter P. B. 1983. Subjective and Objective Measures of Police Service Delivery. Public Administration Review 43 1 50-58. Denhardt R. B. & Denhardt J. V. 2000. The New Public Service Serving Rather than Steering. Public Administration Review 60 6 549-557. Percy S. L. 1986. In Defense of Citizen Evaluations as Performance Measures. Urban Affairs Review 22 1 66-83. Rice T. M. & Sumberg A. F. 1997. Civic Culture and Government Performance in the American States. The Journal of Federalism 27 1 99-114. Stipak B. 1979. Citizen Satisfaction with Urban Services Potential Misuse as a Performance Indicator. Public Administration Review 39 1 46-52. Vigoda E. 2000. Are You Being Served The Responsiveness of Public Administration to Citizens' Demands An Empirical Examination In Israel. Public Administration 78 1 165-191. Vedung E. 1997. Public Policy and Program Evaluation. Brunswick & London Transaction Publishers. 143
ARTICLES Real Estate Regulations From Administrative Control to Interest Adjustment Goal Displacement by Informal Rules and Transformation of Real Estate Regulation Model Zhikui Xie & Kingkwun Tsao 86 Abstract Facing speculative rise in property prices since 2004 the Central Government has promulgated regulative policies concerning land finance taxation credit welfare housing and real estate transactions among many others. However local governments have used all kinds of informal rules to have goal displacement which targets at these regulative policies enacted from the Center and leads to policy failure. The roots of using informal rules to have goal displacement lie in the imbedded political and economical incentives caused by the current institutional settings of real estate regulations. Hence the real estate regulations must be transformed from an organizational and administrative one to an interest - and beneficial - oriented one. These measures include improved policies of real estate sector reformed financial policies performance criteria and evaluations towards the local governments and improved administrative regulations such as using penalties in land management system. Key Words Real Estate Regulations Goal Displacement Informal Rules Institutional Settings Local Governments A Study of the Self - evaluation of Provincial Government Performance from the Perspective of Government Work Report An Analysis of the Provincial Governmental Work Reports from 2006 to 2010 Guangxi Zhu & Dongri Jin 113 Abstract Self - evaluation is an important method of government performance evaluation. Government work reports are crucial documents to examine the features of such self - evaluations. On the basis of an analysis of the formulation process and the main contents of provincial government work reports from 2006 to 2010 this paper discusses the following three questions how do provincial governments conduct self - evaluation What criteria are adopted in self - evaluation What can be learned from the evaluation results The 181
paper begins with analyzing the status quo and deficiencies of provincial government self - evaluation. Suggestions are then made on how to improve the quality of the provincial government performance self - evaluation. Key Words Provincial Government Performance Evaluation Self - evaluation Work Report A Study of the Impacts of New Public Management on Social Services in Hong Kong Kinglun Ngok & Zhuoyi Wen 144 Abstract Since the welfare state crisis in 1970s the New Right has sought to alleviate public finance burden by marketization of social services. Government purchasing social services has been used as a main form of marketizatiion under the the doctrines of New Public Management NPM. In doing so value for money accountability and customer first among others have been practiced in managing government purchasing social services. This NPM reform has brought fundamental changes in social services in the western welfare state. Hong Kong established a funding system entitled Lump Sum Grant Subvention System' LSGSS at the turn of the century. The study will examine how the LSGSS has changed the financial resources and political power of the subvented NGOs. Based on the experience of Hong Kong the paper tries also to provide some implications for social services development in mainland China. Key Words New Public Management Social Services Welfare Governance Non - governmental Organization BOOK REVIEW The Political Logic of Market Penetration Chunrong Liu 167 SUMMARY OF DOCTORAL DISSERTATION Endowment and Network Research on Influential Factors of Drug Regulatory Performance through Bureaucratic Autonomy Perspective Yinglian Hu 174 182