行政问责存在体制内外两种问责途径，该项研究依据抽样的2003年至2013年国内发生的183个网络问责事件、65个公众问责事件和155个等级问责事件，对体制外的网络（公众）问责与体制内的等级问责在发展状况、问责内容、处理结果等方面进行比较，以检测前者是否能够产生“异体”问责作用。检验结果显示，公众参与问责活动已经进入持续发展阶段，在问责内容上对于官员“权力行使”和“职业行为”有较好的监督力度，并产生了较为严厉的处理结果，弥补了等级问责的不足，其根本原因在于公众参与问责活动的主体具有较好的体制外独立性，网络问责成为主要方式，以“火警”问责功能，弥补了等级问责“巡警”问责功能的不足。%According to content analysis of the 65 cases of public accountability,183 cases of network accountability and 155 cases of hierarchical accountability,this article adopts the comparative research method to compare the public accountability activity with hierarchical accountability in order to test the ‘external effectiveness’of public accountability activity in development,content,and punishment results.On the basis of the results,public accountability activity has obtained continuous development and demonstrated more effect of oversight role of ‘exercise of power and behavior of officials’than hierarchical accountability.The primary cause of this effectiveness is that the public are allograft actors and give the oversight role of fire alarm instead of police patrol.The sustained development of public accountability activity requires government to encourage the participation of citizen groups and civil society organization and give the guide of institutionalization.
展开▼
