Modernity and Post-Modernity in the Governance Theory
郁建兴,刘大志
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3785/j.issn.1008-942x.2003.02.001
2003-01-01
Abstract:The rise of governance and global governance is a signal that we are continuously making hard efforts to pursue a good public life and political order. Today, when postmodernism is having more and more impact on politics, we can also perceive modernity interwoven with postmodernity in governance theory not only through analyzing the complicated relationship between governance and the traditional political discourses such as democracy, bureaucracy, but also through discussing two branches of the governance theory itself: global governance and local governance.The debate about direct democracy and indirect democracy indicates a dilemma which has puzzled us for a long time. That is, we have to face an unavoidable tension between providing citizens opportunities to take part in politics and making timely decisions to solve problems efficiently when we are going to design any political system. The rise of the governance theory can be viewed as a trial breakthrough in such a democracy dilemma. Governance theory doesn't discard representative democracy entirely but amends it by increasing the elements of direct democracy within a framework of representative democracy. After all, representative democracy as a great achievement in the development of modernity reflects the great advances of mankind and it indicates that we can depend on our reason to organize a good public life in a large domain successfully. At the same time, governance tends to have greater esteem for direct democracy, as does postmodernism. This direct democracy mode advocated by governance theory, however, is not exactly the referendum in ancient Greece. It is such a mode that people can widely take part in the local or community affairs and make decisions or even implement decisions by themselves.As far as bureaucracy is concerned, both the governance theory and postmodernism consider it as an outdated concept of modernity. In the postindustrial society, complexity, contingency and differentiation are increasing more dramatically than ever before. The idea that we ca achieve a grand goal in controlling or administrating the whole society totally only by depending on such single means as government or market is becoming more and more problematic. Bureaucracies will no longer work well. Nevertheless, governance theory and postmodernism regard complexity, contingency and differentiation as normal and given circumstances in which we establish systems and make decisions, not obstacles that must be overcome. So, decentralization, autonomy, network governance and business methods in public administration are necessary. On the other hand, governance can't throw away bureaucracy absolutely, for most organizations participating in governance have to deal with specialization and cooperation, harmony and control when bureaucracy may be a good choice.Global governance that faces many unprecedented handicaps tries to build up an ambitious universal theory based on such basic concepts as global civil society, world democracy, global identity and international NGOs to develop a desirable global political mode. Such grand narrative told by global governance is one of the typical characteristics of modernity. On the contrary, local governance is a type of a small narrative, which trends to do some regional and trivial empirical researches on governance instead of exploring a uniform governance mode or governance framework that can work well in any circumstances. So, local governance reflects more characteristics of postmodernity, such as pragmatism and differentiation. Finally, governance theory that is deeply affected by postmodernism may lead to an anxious sequence such as the end of politics.