Collaborative Innovation of Social Governance under the Complex Network Structure Paradigm

Fan Ruguo, social governance is a large and complex system engineering. Due to the complexity and uncertainty of environmental and social affairs, the traditional government-led linear management model can not give effective explanations and solutions to complex social problems. It is necessary to introduce a new management paradigm, namely the complex scientific management paradigm. Complex system theory and social governance have an intrinsic fit, which can reveal the inherent mechanism and law of the complexity of social governance. Complex system theory shows that the more complex the system, the higher the system coordination requirements, the more significant the synergy effect. The complex world network system has a small world, no scale, community structure, preference connection and virtual and real "two-phase" topological paradigm, which has a direct and profound impact on social governance. Strengthening and innovating social governance requires analyzing the complex network structure and characteristics of the social system, establishing collaborative innovation mechanisms and institutional arrangements for social governance, and launching coordinated social governance. The theory of complex systems provides a new research paradigm for the study of social governance, which has important reference significance.

The report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China pointed out: "Strengthening social construction is an important guarantee for social harmony and stability. We must accelerate the improvement of the basic public service system, strengthen and innovate social management, and promote a harmonious socialist society from the height of safeguarding the fundamental interests of the overwhelming majority of the people. Construction. 'The Third Plenary Session of the 18th Party of the Party further proposed that to innovate the social governance system and improve the way of social governance, we must "adhere to system governance, strengthen the leadership of party committees, give play to the leading role of the government, encourage and support the participation of all sectors of society, and realize Government governance and social self-regulation, benign interaction of residents' autonomy. "2 This paper is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, a low-carbon evolution model of industrial clusters based on heterogeneous subject behavior and its simulation study (Approval No. 71271159).

1 Hu Jintao: "Strongly Struggling along the Road of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for the Complete Building of a Well-off Society--Report at the Eighteenth National Congress of the Communist Party of China", Beijing: People's Publishing House, 2012, 34th page.

2 "The Decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Comprehensively Deepening the Reform of Some Major Issues", Beijing: People's Publishing House, 2013, the collaborative innovation of social governance under the complex network structure paradigm, from social management to social governance, although there is only one word difference, However, it reflects the great innovation of the top design concept of social governance in China. Social governance is a large and complex system engineering, strengthening social governance, focusing on the systemic, complex, holistic and synergistic social governance, establishing a sound social governance structure, innovating social governance mechanisms, and achieving national governance systems and governance. The modernization of capabilities is an urgent task to strengthen the current social construction in China.

Practice has proved that under the circumstances of the comprehensive transformation of China's society and the complexity, uncertainty and coordination requirements of social governance, traditional social management theory can not provide effective interpretation and control measures for complex social governance issues. The proposed countermeasures are often palliative. Contemporary social governance has broken through the traditional linear model, and has moved toward a networked governance form, showing the characteristics of network, diversification, and self-organization. Social governance needs to change from the traditional administrative management model to the complex scientific management paradigm. Therefore, conscientiously study the various complex characteristics of social systems, and systematically, complexly think and complex network methods to think and grasp the mechanisms of social governance, organization and control, must fundamentally influence the social governance. Start with a global and fundamental problem, innovate the mechanism of social governance, and avoid the blindness and risk caused by experience alone.

The complex system theory is a holistic science that studies the complexity and nonlinear relationship of the system and the networked structure of the system. Introducing complex system theory into the framework of social governance analysis is a significant trend in the development of management theory and practice at home and abroad in recent years. 1 In China, the use of complex scientific theory to study the coping mechanism of emergencies, 2 the introduction of complex social network theory into the mechanism of mass event generation, found that there is a complex network structure of people in the process of group event generation and evolution, 3 It is a representative study. It is not difficult to find that complex system theory and social governance have an intrinsic fit, can reveal the inherent regularity of complex phenomena of social governance, help identify the real causes and mechanisms of the formation of social governance complexity, and provide a new research paradigm for social governance. . In addition, with regard to social governance, most of the research at home and abroad is carried out in a single-disciplinary field, and the research results in various fields are independent of each other and do not draw on each other. Lack of analysis from the perspective of multidisciplinary intersections leads to the formation of common results. . The main purpose of this paper is to try to transcend the current research status of social governance, and apply multidisciplinary theories and methods such as complexity science, synergy, management, and game theory to construct an integrated, multidisciplinary theoretical framework. Reveal the essential characteristics of the social system, and analyze the main problems of China's social governance and its collaborative innovation mechanism.

2 Li Mingqiang, Zhang Kai, Yue Xiao: “Study on the Complex Scientific Theory of Unexpected Events”, Journal of Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, 3 Wang Dahai, He Lijun, and Marhaba Shawti: “Complex Social Networks: Research on the Mechanism of Group Event Generation New I. Major Issues in Social Management in New China Over the past 60 years since the founding of New China, the party and the government have attached great importance to social management. Through long-term exploration and practice, China has established a social management work leadership system, established a network of social management organizations, formulated basic laws and regulations for social management, and initially formed a social management pattern of party committee leadership, government responsibility, social coordination, and public participation. Over the past 30 years of reform and opening up, in the face of profound changes in the economic system and social transformation, and profound adjustments in the pattern of interests, China’s social management still has many shortcomings in terms of ideas, systems, methods, methods and methods, and it is urgent to adapt to accelerate the transformation of economic development. The people need to actively participate in social and political life and ensure the long-term security needs of society.

First, equate social governance with government management. Social governance is a multi-agent collaborative management process, and it is not just a matter for the government. After more than 30 years of reform and opening up, China’s social structure has undergone profound changes, and there have been complicated and diversified social strata and complicated interests. There are a lot of corners in the process of government management that are not accessible to public power. In some areas. There is a phenomenon of “government failure” in the management performance; secondly, the goal of social governance is simplified to maintain stability. At present, Chinese society is in a period of frequent contradictions, and there are various conflicts of interest and value collision. Some people simplify the goal of social governance to maintain stability, simply emphasize public behavior and ideological obedience, and neglect the concept of social pluralism. Respect, listening to diversified interests, guiding different behavior patterns, and optimizing the overall function of society. As the overall function of society has not been optimized, the mechanism of coordinated promotion has not been fully established, and various social contradictions and problems are still “emerged”. Finally, the comprehensive goal of social governance is reduced to a single indicator of enriching the people and benefiting the people, as long as GDP goes up. The society is stable, and everything can be resolved through economic means. This one-sided cognition leads to insufficient attention to the public's cultural, environmental, informed, fair and other basic rights and interests in addition to economic rights. In addition, the lack of innovation in social management means and the gap in modern management cognition level can easily lead to social conflicts. Potential "butterfly".

First, the main structure of social governance is single. The extensiveness, complexity and uniqueness of social governance determine the need to mobilize diverse social forces to play a multi-level synergy. Although the government plays a leading role, it cannot replace the unique functions of other social entities. Second, social governance The organizational structure is not scientific. The current organizational structure of China's social governance is mainly characterized by division of departments, cross-functionality, multi-head management, and lack of coordination. Social affairs of the same nature are divided into different departments, and there are many political, individual, and mutual tactics. Forming a law enforcement vacuum, high coordination threshold, and high governance costs; at the same time, local government departments are subordinate to the corresponding level of government in the horizontal direction, and vertically belong to different higher authorities, forming a unique "Article" and "Chinese" Block "Fractal" phenomenon, this fractal structure has caused the low level of duplication of social governance collaborative innovation institutions under the complex network structure paradigm of social governance, the boundary is ambiguous, the administrative efficiency is not high, and the "Article"

Diversified social governance requires a variety of social governance methods and means. In China today, social governance is dominated by the state, supplemented by market management and social autonomy. The social autonomy model is very weak, and it is still dominated by administrative authority. Social governance is equated with social control. It is believed that strengthening and innovating social management is to strengthen the control of society. Once social contradictions and emergencies are encountered, there are habitually adopting methods and phenomena such as shackles, jealousy, pressure, etc. The social contradictions and the distraction of social differences, social governance presents the characteristics of things to do things, make up afterwards, lack of persistence, systemic and proactive "preventive" thinking.

At present, there are various social governance methods in different fields such as China's economy, law, administration, and ideology. The reason why there is no use, no use, no use, and insufficient use, and social governance model, social governance The lack of synergy is not unrelated. The current dynamic mechanism, incentive mechanism, interest balance mechanism, information interaction mechanism and coordination mechanism of China's social governance are incomplete, and the lack of systematic and effective comprehensive coordination has become an important factor restricting effective governance in all fields of society.

Social governance is inseparable from timely and effective information transmission and information interaction between multiple entities, and is inseparable from the extensive use of information systems and information technology. At present, the information network required for social governance in China is still very incomplete. The technology of information collection, detection and evaluation is still very backward. Government departments cannot quickly grasp the situation and respond in a timely manner. This seriously hinders the government's effective planning of social governance work. Organization, coordination and control have severely restricted the government's effective management of social issues such as mass incidents, atmospheric smog, and social grievances.

Since the original social management since the founding of New China has many of the above problems, we cannot govern society according to subjective expectations. On the contrary, in the face of such mistakes or mistakes in practice, people are increasingly aware today that traditional social management must conform to the needs of the realities of the country and the requirements of the times, and timely transform to modern social governance, and relevant research on social governance should also Starting from the system theory, paying attention to the systemicity, complexity, integrity and synergy of social governance, only the conclusions drawn from the systematic approach can provide realistic and rationality for the social governance practice in the overall pattern of social construction in China. And a persuasive analytical framework.

Second, the society is a complex network structure system that adapts to coordination. Social governance is a complex system engineering involving multiple levels of education, medical care, health, housing, social security and public safety. As a collection of people based on certain relationships, society is a complex network system with integrity, dynamics, hierarchy and adaptability. The scientific understanding of the essential characteristics of society is an important theoretical basis for our innovative social governance.

Society is a complex adaptive system (CAS) composed of human individuals, open dissipative, adaptive and self-organizing. In the preface to the first edition of Capital, Marx pointed out: "The present society is not a solid crystal, but an organism that can change and is often in the process of change." 1 Here, the organism implies that society is a systematic meaning.

Compared with the natural system, the social system is mainly composed of the adaptive agent with purpose and initiative. The adaptive subject and its interaction with the environment constitute the basic motivation of social development and evolution. In the view of John H. Holland, the proponent of the theory of complex adaptive systems, adaptability creates complexity. 2 The evolution of social systems, such as the emergence of new social levels, the emergence of innovation, etc., are emerging on the basis of adaptability. When social conditions, interest mechanisms, etc. change, the existing social system can not adapt to these changed conditions, start to stay away from equilibrium, in constant fission, conflict, coordination, and reconstruction, and the social system forms a dissipative structure. Self-organized to produce complex features such as Eturcation of social structure, Chaos and Fractal of social behavior. The complex adaptive characteristics of society make social governance must fully consider the impact of human adaptability and environmental conditions on social governance behavior.

In the social system, there are behavioral processes and functional mechanisms that constantly adapt to the environment, such as learning effects and synergistic mechanisms. With the change of time and space, the relationship between the structure, elements and elements of the social system will undergo adaptive changes. The social system presents complex nonlinear evolution and transformation. The transformation means the reorganization of system elements and the reconstruction of system stability. . Nonlinearity is mainly characterized by "ButterflyEffect", MultipleResponse, and Self-organized Critical. The "butterfly effect" is also called the sensitive dependence of the initial conditions, and the subtle differences in the initial conditions of the system may be rapidly amplified into a huge output of the system. Improper disposal of any link or factor in the system may release the “butterfly effect”, resulting in a systemic crisis or the emergence of new system features. The nonlinear effect spreads through the complex network structure of society, and phenomena such as social gatherings and rumors emerge, and complex social macroscopic behaviors emerge.

Synergistic thinking has a long history. In 1977, German scholar Hermann Haken conducted a systematic study of the synergy problem. He proposed the "Synergetics" theory to reflect the coordination and cooperation between complex systems and subsystems. Haken believes that "collaboration" is the coordination and complementation of the different components in the open system far from balance, self-organized to produce systematic ordered space-time structures and functions, or from a kind of 2 John * H. Holland: "Invisible Order - Adaptability Makes Complexity", Zhou Xiaomu, Han Hui Translated, Shanghai: Shanghai Science and Technology Education Press, 2000, p. 112.

3 Haken: "Advanced Collaborative Science", translated by Guo Zhi'an, Beijing: Science Press, 1989, p. 87.

Under the complex network structure paradigm, the social governance collaborative innovation order state moves toward a new higher order state behavior. The most striking feature of synergy is the mutual cooperation between subsystems, which enables the system to generate new system structures and functions that are not possible at the micro level. Collaboration is an important condition for self-organizing behavior.

The basic concept of synergy is the order parameter, which is also called the slow variable. The fast variables of the system stabilize the system in the old order, while the slow variables make the system out of the old order and move toward the new structure. They are interconnected and mutually constrained, showing a synergistic movement that manifests itself as a systematic self-organizing movement. Once the order parameters are self-organized within the system, they become dominant, dominate the evolution of the entire system, and form the overall movement of the direction. There are more than one order parameter of the system, and the competition and cooperation between the order parameters make the system have different self-organization forms. When the system is disturbed (micro fluctuation), there is competition between the order parameters. Finally, only one order parameter dominates the whole system, achieving a coordinated macroscopic situation (major fluctuation), forming a systematic order and orderly structure. The organization is orderly and functionally ordered, and the system presents self-organizing behavior characteristics. For example, whether the society can coordinate development depends on the strength of the core subject (order parameters) and the synergy between the various social subjects.

(3) Society is a complex network structure System network is an objective phenomenon that is common in nature and society. The infrastructure of all systems is a network.

Network theory was originally derived from sociological theory and was used to describe various relationships in society. Today, social governance under network conditions has begun to become more general.

The earliest proposed "small-world network model", 1 to describe the transition from a regular network to a random network. In 1999, Albert-Ldszl6Barabdsi and Reka Aber R6kaAlbert pointed out that the distribution of point connectivity of many real networks has a power law form. Since the power law distribution has no obvious feature length, this type of network is called a scak-free network. The network without these characteristics is called complex network. In recent years, the research on complex network systems has become a research hotspot in many subject areas. People are on biological networks, economic networks, computer networks, public opinion networks, transportation networks, diseases. In the research of network systems such as propagation networks, they are found to have the characteristics of complex networks. 3 Social systems have complex network paradigm characteristics different from regular networks or random networks, which have complex topologies and dynamic behaviors. It is composed of a large number of social nodes (point set V(G)) connected by mutual interaction (edge ​​set E(G)). In the social system, “nodes” are individuals or organizations, and “edges” represent various social relationships between people. Complex social networks consist of several interdependent and interacting intelligent social entities, and Interactions to highlight the overall structural characteristics of social systems. Complex networks, as a structural paradigm that reflects the connections between social subjects, provide a way for us to study the ways in which social subjects interact and the complexity of social governance. a new way.

In fact, the complex network structure paradigm of society is not only the necessary structure for social governance, but also the object of social governance, or an important mechanism that affects the performance of social governance. As a complex network system, society has complex features such as small world, scale-free, merit-based connection, robustness, vulnerability and community structure.

Small-WorldEffect means that in a social network, most nodes only have a small number of connections with other nodes, called LongRangeCorrelation. These small but highly aggregated nodes are in the same group. The role of social nodes plays a central role; at the same time, people tend to maintain frequent contact with their neighbors, acquaintances or colleagues, and are called "local contacts." This network with a large number of "local contacts" and "long-range connections" with a short average path and a large degree of point aggregation is called a "small world network." ScalefreeProperty means that when nodes (subjects) in a social network grow to a certain number, a few nodes have a large number of connections, and a large number of nodes only have a power-law distribution phenomenon of a small number of connections. 1 These nodes with different influences form different social neighborhoods (sub-networks), which have different roles and roles in the network, and have different effects on the functions of complex social networks. Preferential Attachment refers to the difference between the nodes in the social network and other nodes. The greater the influence, the greater the probability that the nodes will be connected to other nodes, and become stronger and stronger. Matching features are similar to the phenomenon of "rich people get rich". The optimal connection mechanism reflects the inequality and competition between the subjects. RobustProperty means that the number of general social nodes is far more than that of the central node. Some or some of these general nodes disappear randomly, and will not affect the structure and order of the whole society. Strong anti-risk ability. (a) FragilityProperty Collaborative innovation of social governance under the complex network structure paradigm means that the central node plays a dominant role in the social network, and other nodes match these nodes in the same direction, forming a high dependence on them. When there is a problem with the central node, the social network is vulnerable. (b) Robustness of complex social networks (a) and vulnerability (b) Community Structure characteristics (CommunityStructure) features that there are many sub-networks in a complex social network, and the nodes within these sub-networks are closely related to each other. There are more connections, and the relationship between nodes between sub-networks is relatively sparse. Such a subnetwork consisting of nodes of the same nature and of the same type is called a "community structure."

As can be seen from the above, society is a complex network system that is particularly worthy of study. The complex relationship between the various elements within the social network constitutes the internal driving force for social development.

Another important feature of the social system is its "two-phase" nature. If the government-led and government-recognized social organization or social relationship is the “reality” of the social system, then there is an informal structure in the way of social coordination with social governance. Informal social organizations formed by individual or group relationships or ties (Tles), such as the Internet, clan, fellowships, etc., which are the “virtual phase” of the social system. These “virtual phases” are "Increased influence or control, expand the scope of "reality" activities, and expand the boundaries of "reality." Without the existence of these “virtual phases”, “reality” sometimes makes it difficult to play its due role. For example, the emergence of the Internet provides an informal and virtual social space structure for human social activities and information exchange. It is the embodiment of the real society in cyberspace, communication and information transmission through the Internet, and the real society. Governance is undoubtedly of epoch-making significance.

Third, collaborative social governance - the inherent requirements of China's social governance as a complex network system, the degree of diversity and complexity of the real society will continue to improve with the development of society and social transformation, which makes social governance become One of the most complex organizational management issues.

At this stage, on the one hand, traditional social problems such as natural disasters, infectious diseases and poverty still exist. On the other hand, along with the great transformation of society, new social contradictions and problems such as polarization between the rich and the poor, environmental degradation and public opinion spread Increasingly, the complexity of social governance has increased, and the requirements for the coordination of various social forces have increased significantly.

However, due to the complexity, relevance and uncertainty of environmental and social events, any social governance subject cannot have all the knowledge, tools, resources and capabilities needed to solve the above complex social problems. He organizes the management model with the government as the single management subject, and can not dominate the complex social governance activities in all directions. To a certain extent, there are realistic defects of high cost, low efficiency and low social response. Therefore, to achieve the optimization of social functions and the multiplication of social governance benefits, it is necessary for diversified social subjects to be highly collaborative in complex activities, to establish a synergy mechanism for social governance, and to achieve a self-organized order of social governance. (eg) self-organizing evolution mechanism artificial coordination mechanism social synergy mode under the complex network structure paradigm social governance collaborative innovation social governance needs synergy, that is, collaborative social governance. Collaborative social governance refers to the interaction between the social governance subjects and the various subsystems of the society. Through the non-linear and non-ordering and self-organizing functions of the social system, the various elements of the social system are disordered and chaotic. The relative normative structural form is integrated to form the self-organization state of the macro-temporal structure or the ordered functional structure of the social system, resulting in the overall effect of social governance that cannot be achieved by a single social entity. The so-called self-organization refers to the process of the system changing from chaotic disorder to time-space ordered structure. Here, "self" means the "spontaneity" of behavior, and "organization" refers to the competition and coordination between various behaviors and processes in the system to make the system evolve into an orderly structure. Collaborative social governance is a spontaneous and self-organizing collective action process with tacit cooperation and orderly interaction among the subjects. Through the collective self-organizing behavior, the maximization of the utility of social governance resource allocation and the improvement of the overall function of the social system are The important innovation of social management concepts, methods, paths and mechanisms is an important manifestation of the modernization of social governance capabilities. Social governance through the overall coordination, the coupling between the functions of each subsystem (Couplmg), so that the overall function of the system is multiplied, called the synergy effect of social governance. Practice has proved that the more complex the system, the more synergistic the synergy is.

(II) The Necessity of Complex System Theory and Cooperative Social Governance In a new social subsystem that is constantly emerging, and the system structure, behavior and relationship are increasingly complex, the government will face increasingly frequent management failures and uncontrollable Social issues, management behaviors are often postponed to equity issues due to efficiency issues. Therefore, it is necessary to study the complexity of social governance as a systematic one. 1 This is the mission of social management practice that complex system theory needs to play.

According to the theory of complex systems, the more complex the system, the higher the requirements for system coordination. Collaborative social governance is a typical self-organization process, which involves the formation of a complex network of multi-social subjects and the formation and promotion of social self-organization governance capabilities. It demonstrates the increasing autonomy and adaptability of social entities and systems at all levels. The expansion of various roles in social networks. In the social governance network, the subjects are connected to each other to form a complex network structure. Through decentralization and learning, collaborative cooperation makes social governance innovation on the edge of chaos. 2 The main body of social governance assists in the multi-objectives of social governance, maintains a good order of social development, and optimizes social functions. It has obvious self-organization characteristics. The original social management based on command, regulation and suppression is an act produced by the government and his organization. For example, it may have certain effects in a short period of time, but it lacks a lasting and stable effect. The formation of self-organizing governance ability of society is the fundamental driving force for coordinated social governance. Collaboration not only emphasizes cooperation, but also emphasizes competition. It pursues systematic cooperative behavior based on competition. Competition is the premise and basis of synergy. If there is only competition, the system will be disintegrated; if there is only synergy, the system will be in a "locked" state because of stability.

1 Cheng Siwei, Editor: "Exploration of Complexity Science (Proceedings)", Beijing: Journal of Democracy and Construction, 1999, p. 34.

2 Iprigo Gin, Istange: "From Chaos to Order - A New Dialogue between Man and Nature", Zeng Qinghong, Shen Xiaofeng, Shanghai: Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 1987, p. 226.

(III) Game Analysis of Multi-agent Collaboration in Social Governance The emergence and evolution of society is generated by the game between social subjects. In essence, social governance research should analyze the composition of social subjects and their mutual game, the complex system structure of society and their collaborative governance mechanisms. This is also the main content of this paper. Below, we start from the game theory and optimization theory to assume that the coordination time is t., the end time is, and its duration is. We use Xi(t)ex;eRm to represent the social existence state level of subject i at time t. This state variable changes continuously with time. Si(t) indicates that subject 1 is raising X(t) at time t. Resources invested. The instantaneous reward for each subject 1 at time t is ai, which represents the net benefit when the social presence state level of subject i is Xi(t), and CiSi(t) represents the investment cost of subject i.

Since the subjects can have synergistic effects in terms of resources, technology and talents, the change of the social existence state level Xi() of the subject i can be expressed as: + into 1, and 1/2 indicates the synergy between subjects. Next, the positive influence of the main body j on the Xi(t) of the main body i, and X 1/2 represents the positive influence of the main body i on the Xj(1) change of the main body j under the synergistic effect between the main bodies. Therefore, the overall benefit of cooperation is equal to the sum of the cooperative benefits of the three types of subjects. For the solution of (2), we can get the following Bellman equation: 1 + into the value function.

1 Yang Rongji, Peter Luoxiang, Li Yizhi: "Dynamic Cooperation - Cutting-edge Game Theory", Beijing: China Market Press, pp.

Collaborative Innovation of Social Governance under the Complex Network Structure Paradigm Through the above analysis, we can find that when the three types of subjects all participate in the synergy, the overall return value of social governance changes continuously with the development of time, and the synergistic instantaneous return value The degree of change depends on the discounted value of the overall instantaneous reward at each point in time, and the contribution of the optimal change of all the subject states in the whole to the overall return value; the return value at the end of the synergy is equal to all the subjects in the whole The sum of the discounted values ​​of the rewards finally obtained has a positive value for social governance.

4. Constructing a multi-center self-organizing collaborative governance network in China's society () Multi-center self-organizing network collaborative governance structure of the society Network centrality (Centrality) is one of the most important concepts in complex network analysis to reflect the subject in the network. Have the influence. For a large and complex social network, the heterogeneous heterogeneous subjects have different positions in the network structure, and their importance is different. Nodes with large network aggregation and central location are far more important than nodes located at other locations. This feature determines that social governance needs to establish a multi-center self-organizing collaborative network structure between entities, and gather together through synergy. Heterogeneous social governance thoughts and behaviors complement each other's strengths, realize the coupling and synchronization of social governance behaviors, and achieve self-organization of social governance. In 2009, Nobel Prize-winning economist Elmor Ostrom believed that in the case of “government failure” and “market failure”, social governance should give full play to the governance function of social organizations. Governing society through self-organization of society itself, and conducting "Polycentric Governance". 1 A self-organizing society should be a “multi-center synergy”

Society.

Division of labor and specialization are prerequisites for social synergy, which makes synergy more meaningful. In China, the main bodies of social governance are the government, social organizations and the public. They are related to each other and assume corresponding social governance functions in different social professional fields. Among them, the government is the core body of the social network, and it is in a dominant position of overall coordination and coordination. The social organization is characterized by a “community structure”, which is second only to the government, and the public is the basic node type. This structural feature of the social governance subject determines that China's social governance needs to establish a multi-center self-organizing collaborative network governance structure centered on the government and social organizations, rather than from the top down, simply Eleanor Ostrom : "The Governance of Public Affairs - The Evolution of Collective Action Systems", translated by Yu Xunda and Chen Xudong, Shanghai: Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 2012, p. 45.

Relying on the government's "single-centralism" governance structure. The former emphasizes horizontal collaboration of the network, while the latter focuses on vertical synergy.

The original social management with the government as the main body of management is a non-negotiating top-down management method that is guaranteed by state coercion, which objectively blocks the interaction and game, compromise and coordination between the public and the government. Ignoring the end of social governance, we need to activate the alliance between the various subjects in the network. In fostering the growth of social organizations, we cannot give solutions to social problems according to different situations, and promote social harmony more efficiently and strategically. And progress. The various social affairs involved in social governance are generally common things that are related to social individuals. They have the characteristics of “publicity” and “popularity”. To solve these social problems, it is necessary to fully mobilize and publicize the public and social organizations outside the government. The role. Otherwise, the government and social organizations, the public's lack of coordination, lack of training in social self-organization governance, social governance will eventually be a stagnant water, it can be seen that social governance requires horizontal coordination and communication between the government and social organizations, the public. Only vertical synergy and horizontal synergy support each other to form a multi-level, three-dimensional social governance complex network topology. (For example, to achieve multi-agent synergy in social governance and establish a multi-center self-organizing collaborative network structure, the key is that the government can encourage and accommodate the participation of different social governance entities, and play their role as the central node of social governance to achieve society. Self-organized “emergence” of social participation methods and governance methods. Social governance can neither be superstitious to the government nor superstitious in the market, the concerted participation of the public and social organizations, and sometimes its unique advantages are more worthy of attention than the functions of the government and the market.

（二）社会治理网络中的多主体自组织协同社会系统的复杂网络结构特征说明，社会治理需要向以社会组织和公众为主体、社会自主管理为核心的自组织、协同治理模式转型。近年来，随着中国社会组织开始慢慢发育，计划经济时期以“单位制”为主的社会治理模式已难以适应新的社会结构和社会组织发展的时代要求，在社会转型与有效治理过程中政府的“错位”、促进社会组织、社会公众的健康发育、理性成长，又应该及时有效地把社会组织和复杂网络结构范型下的社会治理协同创新公众有机融入到社会治理网络中来，实现社会治理的协调有序发展。

社会组织是基于某种共同的社会目标而以一定方式自觉结成的群体集合。改革开放30多年来，我国的社会组织开始在不同的社会领域发挥独具特色的管理作用，改变了公众在单位制解体后盘散沙的“自由电子”状态，成为优化政府行为的重要协调和辅助力量。社会组织通过联结政府与公众，充分利用自身的社会资源和专业技术优势为社会服务，减轻了政府管理社会的负担，扩大了公众对社会事务的知情度和参与度。虽然各类社会组织在功能、目标和服务能力上往往有很大的差异性，但作为复杂社会网络中的一种“社团结构”，其内部却具有很强的同质性，这种特性决定如果多种社会组织为实现共同的社会治理目标相互协同，就能更好地发挥彼此服务社会、维护稳定的作用。

作为社会治理最广大的主体，社会公众是复杂社会网络最基本的构成要素，是社会信息最直接、最灵敏的感知者、提供者，是社会联系最广泛的承载者，他们在复杂社会网络中通过各种途径和方式自组织地参与社会事务、管理社会事务。公众参与社会治理，既行使了公民的权利，又有利于履行公民的义务。

伴随着社会的发展，人们的社会需求越来越多样化、精细化，社会的网络化结构范型比传统的科层组织更有适应性和灵活性，可对各种社会需求和突发事件作出灵活反应。这就要求改变政府包揽一切、无所不能的做法，逐步将微观的社会服务与管理职能转移给各类社会组织，提升社会治理方式的多样性和有效性。同时，复杂社会网络的“小世界”结构特征的客观存在，使得公民能够方便地加入到各种社会组织之中，扩大社会治理的覆盖面，弥补政府管理行为所涉及不到的层面或角落，增强社会治理的时效性。2008年汶川大地震时，广大社会组织、民间团体及个人积极参与抗震救灾工作，与政府主导的应急救灾机制实现了无间隙良性互动，不约而同、自组织地进行有序的救灾活动，弥补了政府救灾的不足。

五、协同社会治理的复杂网络范型分析复杂网络既是社会治理的载体，又是社会治理的条件和机制。社会的复杂网络结构范型对优化社会治理行为，推进社会治理体系和治理能力现代化有着深刻的影响。

社会网络既不是规则网络，也不是随机网络，而是小世界和无标度网络。小世界特征意味着网络较短的平均路径和较高的聚集度，平均路径长度表示信息和资源交互时间的长度，无标度特征则意味着网络是非均匀的。①社会网络的小世界和无标度拓扑结构，有利于谣言、文化、疾病、信息在网络中的迅速传播或及时遏止。

研究表明，在小世界网络和无标度网络中，谣言的传播远远快于在其他网络中的速度，而且小世界网络的“长程连接”和无标度网络中的中心人物在谣言传播中作用巨大，这意味着只要少量改变几个中心节点的“长程连接”，就可以显著地改变网络的结构和功能。2003年，SARS病毒的有效控制就是很好地利用了社会网络这一结构特征的典型案例。

在社会治理中，获取社会治理信息、防止群体性事件、遏制疾病和谣言传播的路径越长，时间也越长，反映也越慢，效率也越低；反之，路径越短，反映就越快，效果就越好。为此，可以充分利用社会网络的“小世界”特征，对现有不适合于协同的社会治理流程进行梳理、重构，通过“流程再造”（ProcessReengmeermg），改变社会治理的“平均路径长度”和主体聚集度的大小，减少管理层次，免除决策中的繁文缛节，形成便于信息快速传递及减少信息扭曲与时滞、有利于协同的扁平化管理流程，迅速传递有价值的信息或快速抑制有害舆论、谣言、疾病的扩散危害。

比如，成立具有权威性的社会治理工作领导机构（提高政府的聚集度），重新设计社会治理的沟通、信息传递、危机处理等执行流程（缩短平均路径长度），形成简单易懂的信息沟通与指挥结构，优化管理流程，推动中心主体间的合作；按照决策、执行、监督相协调的要求，科学设置组织机构，理顺各种条块关系，解决管理层次多、流程冗长、职能交叉、责权分离等问题，以最快的时间、最短的路径、最快的响应、最权威的信息，形成强有力的协同行为和应急反应能力，化解问题或矛盾，稳步提高社会治理的水平。

（二）复杂社会网络的“社团结构”与社会治理一般而言，在社会系统中，社会主体往往具有多样化的需求，他们很少以个体形式来表达自己的诉求，更多是以社会网络中特有的“社团结构”（组织、机构、利益集团）形式出现。这是由于相较于复杂的社会整体行为而言，个体的行为只是个弱小、单的行为。若他们基于相同的利益偏好、共同的价值观结成社会组织，形成“安全共同体”，共同参与到与自身利益相关的社会决策和利益分配之中，以集合的方式表达价值诉求，形成有组织、有秩序的利益表达，就能增强自我谈判的能力，实现自身的安全感、归属感和社会价值。比如，在拆迁引发的群体性事件中，随着舆论的形成和谣言的传播，社会网络中处于“离散”和“弱势”地位的拆迁户（节点）迅速集结成一个个具有“社团结构”的维权群体，这些群体本质上是一些利益群体，他们以“社团结构”的形式向政府和舆论表达自身的诉求。此外，事件中复杂网络结构范型下的社会治理协同创新还存在着以政府为主体的管理部门利益群体、以开发商为主体的商业利益群体、以拆迁户为主体的维权利益群体和以媒体为主体的舆论群体，他们构成一个利益关系网络。在每一个群体内存在处于核心节点的人，他们的行为影响或决定着该群体的行为选择模式。社会网络的动力作用使得不同群体之间相互作用，形成群体之间的利益博弈或群体抗争，最终引发群体性事件的发生。

社会的复杂网络结构范型表明，一方面，社会治理需要逐步向以社区组织为主体、社会自主管理为核心的自组织、协同治理模式转型。在这过程中，社区、公共载体，协同社会治理需要特别重视发挥它们的作用。在社会治理体制和机制上通过采取“以块为主、条块结合”的原则，充分发挥诸如城乡基层自治组织（居委会、村委会）、社区、社会团体等“块”在协调利益、维护秩序方面的作用，把政府管理社会事务的大量权力和资源下移给它们，实现管人管事相结合、责权利相统一，政府做好统筹、协调和资源整合工作。比如，在全国文明社区武汉百步亭，群众充分发动起来管理社区，每三个百步亭人中就有一个志愿者，充分发挥社区党组织、居民自治组织、各级志愿者组织这些“社团结构”的作用，形成了社区志愿者中心一志愿服务工作站一楼栋志愿者服务小组、特色志愿服务队、小小志愿服务队的三级志愿服务网络生起大的邻里纠纷，没有出现个未成年人犯罪，令全国的参观者叹服。①“条块结合”是复杂社会网络结构范型特征的表现，体现的是分层治理，它既突出横向监督、指导的关系，层次分明、职责清晰，有利于形成协同社会治理的整体合力。

另一方面，要实现社会治理的目标，对处于权力位置的主体进行有效的制约是关键。当前，一些社会治理决策及其执行存在被处于权力位置的利益集团所主导的现象。这些利益集团基于利益、市场等因素结成“社团结构”，成为阻挠党全面深化改革、促进社会和谐发展的现实障碍。要稳步有序地推进社会治理创新，必须以强大的政治勇气和理论智慧、强有力的政策措施打破利益集团利益固化的藩篱，打破其内部的“社团结构”，坚决反对一些利益集团“闹利益”，克服部门利益的掣肘，建立起对利益集团的制度性约束，使其逐步走向市场化、现代化和规范化。然而，利益集团往往会凭借自己的强势地位，利用各种手段、借口来阻扰有悖于自身利益的社会改革，一般社会公众虽然有加强和优化社会治理的强烈需求，但缺少必要的资源和影响力，无法将自身的诉求通过社会网络通道转化为现实政策，结果是，制约利益集团的行为本身又受到利益集团的制约，有效率的社会治理被剔除，无效率的社会治理“均衡”却得以长期存在，形成“劣币驱逐良币”的局面，难以实现社①向清顺：《武汉百步亭发动群众管社区》，《楚天都市报》2013年11月19曰。

会公平与正义。

基于此，在社会治理中，研究复杂社会网络中的“社团结构”是了解整个社会网络的结构与功能，分析社会网络整体与局部的关系和特征，分析和把握其发展态势，优化社会治理的重要途径。

复杂社会网络的“鲁棒性”“脆弱性”与社会治理复杂社会网络表现出来的鲁棒性说明，在社会系统中有相当部分处于基层的公众、社会组织相对于政府而言似乎是“冗余”（Redundancy）的，它们对保持社会系统的结构和功能稳定似乎远不如那少部分起核心作用的主体重要，但这些主体的存在是非常有价值的。它们是社会系统容错能力的基础，也是社会治理多样性的保证，对社会治理功能的多样化不可或缺。比如，互联网刚被“生产”出来时，人们并不以为然，因为它们并不是新古典经济学所推崇的效率最高、最“完美”、最权威的社会组织形式。然而，互联网技术改变了时空和地域概念的传统特征，逐渐开启了一种全新的社会结构、社会形态、人际关系和生活方式，今天在虚拟社会治理方面已具有非同一般的价值。再比如，在改革开放之前，我国施行高度集权、指令性调控的计划经济模式，切非公有制经济均被当作资本主义“尾巴”割掉，否认其他经济成分存在的必要性、合理性。①实践证明，没有中小企业的发展，中等收入人群就无法扩大，就业机会就会极大地减少，社会和谐就要大打折扣。

复杂社会网络的鲁棒性、冗余性表明，维持现有社会有序结构和功能的根本途径是保证现有社会结构中那些影响力大（聚集度高），在社会系统中发挥中心作用的社会主体、社会结构不被删除。在协调社会治理中，它表现为充分发挥政府对社会治理的作用，把握社会治理的目标、方向和路径，提高社会治理效果；同时，积极激发、培育和规范各类社会组织和公众参与社会治理的积极性和主动性，增强社会治理的活力。社会组织的民间性特征，以及结构灵活、成员异质性大、包容性强等特点，使其贴近社区、了解民情，能够及时了解和表达基层群体的意愿和诉求，有利于提高社会治理的广泛性，降低社会的震荡；充分发挥社会公众的作用，相信人民群众，增强社会网络系统的鲁棒性与社会治理的稳定性和冗余性，而不是把人民群众看作对立面、“不明真相”的群体来压制和约束。

（四）复杂社会网络节点的择优连接与社会治理在复杂社会网络中，参与社会治理的主体会根据个人的目标函数自发地与邻域中的主体进行择优连接，也会被其他主体连接，形成自己的网络聚集度（影响力）和在①范如国：《制度社会网络系统的网络弹性及演化特征分析》，《武汉大学学报（社会科学复杂网络结构范型下的社会治理协同创新网络中的权力位置，进而产生与其网络位置相对称的社会影响，获得自己的利益优势或社会治理“话语权”由于择优连接的客观性，一些具有较大聚集度（影响力）的主体，往往成为其他主体择优连接的对象，最终处于社会网络的中心位置，拥有较大的社会影响力，决定着社会治理的内容、方向和结果，我们可以充分利用这一特征来加强和创新社会治理。2009年起，北京市将团市委、市妇联、市科协等30个人民团体确定为社会治理网络中的“枢纽型”节点，由这些“枢纽型”节点再分门别类地与民间社会组织连接，先后联系到24000多个民间组织，扭转了民间组织一盘散沙的局面，较好地解决了对民间组织的管理问题。①但是在我国社会转型时期，地方政府为了发展本地经济，也存在着与大企业、开发商、国外投资者“交朋友”的强烈“选择偏好”，个别官员因地方经济的发展而在“官场”网络结构中的话语权也随之增强。

为了防止利益输送及官场腐败，我们就必须要割断官商之间这种紧密的“选择偏好”。

在复杂社会网络内，基于“生存”的本能和“生存得更好”的欲望，主体之间存在同向匹配特征，每一个社会主体只熟悉与其相邻的社会邻域网络中主体的行为和情感模式，在这些模，往往会择优选择自己认为“最好的”、模仿“最成功的”。近年来，年轻人争相报考公务员，就是公务员这一制度安排对年轻人产生的一种“偏好连接”现象，它说明公务员职位相较于市场竞争而言在年轻人心中是一种较“优”的选择。这是种既正常又不正常的现象。说它正常，是由于个国家的公务员系统需要吸纳优秀、充满朝气的青年为国家服务；说它不正常，是因为当青年人争相考公务员时，客观表明“权力寻租”存在一定程度的生存空间，当前的分配机制存在一定的问题，社会的创新创业激情锐减，部分年轻人攀附权力，只愿借助体制优势分享蛋糕，而不愿自主创业为社会积累做大蛋糕。

当然，择优连接在带来社会治理的突变，导致新的社会准则、社会秩序、社会特征和社会功能涌现的同时，也可能造成社会治理的路径依赖。比如，作为全球市场网络中的重要主体，欧美国家在市场体制上取得的现代公司治理等些成功经验，成为我国择优学习的公司制度。这择优连接在相当程度上影响并决定了我国市场经济体制改革的内容、方向，即建立所谓的“现代企业制度”。目前，在我国千篇律实行的“现代企业制度”就是一种路径依赖，缺乏中国企业的自主创新性。

六、构建中国社会治理协同创新机制机制是指做事的制度以及方法或者是制度化了的方法。社会治理协同创新机制，是将社会复杂网络系统的各个要素（子系统）进行系统优化、整合、调节与控制，①邓伽、付潇冰：《公众参与社会管理成时代潮流制度壁垒亟待破除》，中国新闻网，实现社会治理目的所应遵循的制度性安排和规则。协同社会治理强调社会多主体之间协调互动的机制和体系，关注的是社会政治、利益和治理系统的复杂协同机制。

（―）社会治理协同创新机制构建的基本要求1.多元主体建立共同的协同创新意愿。社会系统学派认为，任何协同系统都包含三个基本要素：协同意愿、共同目标和信息沟通。①协同意愿是异质性个人行为有机协作的关键；共同目标是达成协同意愿的前提；协同作用和协同意愿通过信息沟通相互联系，形成动态的协同过程。为实现协同社会治理，多元主体需要建立共同的协同创新愿景，对协同创新的使命形成统的认识，这样才能展开相应的协同创新行动。在我国社会治理实践中，本来密不可分的社会治理被人为地分割为“各自为政”的行为，各治理主体都是按照自己的治理绩效要求来采取相应的治理行为，这种局面不改变，协同社会治理就是纸上谈兵。

2.微观主体形成共同的利益基础。协同社会治理除了需要统的意愿，还需要微观主体的积极参与。微观主体之间产生行为协同的基础是具有共同的利益，这是协同社会治理的前提。国内外的实践证明，协调多元利益是实现协同社会治理的关键。改革开放以来，我国不同利益主体之间的矛盾时有发生，如何科学地调整利益关系，形成共同的利益基础，成为当前协同社会治理的难点。

3.以系统序参量为主要依据构建协同机制。在社会治理中，影响和支配协同社会治理方向和效果的序参量主要有：目标的一致性程度、利益的分配和共享、信息共享，这些因素对社会治理协同产生直接而决定性的影响。为了能够构建必要的机制促进社会的协同治理，应当根据序参量的特点和要求来选择确定协同机制，反映社会治理系统中各子系统间存在的本质联系，通过对治理重点准确清楚的把握，来提高协同社会治理的针对性；同时，通过序参量来构建协同机制，可以降低治理的复杂性，有效降低协同过程中的风险。

4.尊重差异协同原理。社会系统发展的根本原因在于系统构成要素和结构的层次性、差异性和协同性。系统内部各要素之间、子系统与要素之间、子系统之间协调一致的行为，产生系统的整体目标和特质，其整体协同效应的内因在于系统内部的差异性。协同绝不意味着消灭差异，但要防止过度差异。在社会治理中，各个社会主体的利益永远不可能完全一致，存在差异性是必然的。计划经济体制下以行政管理为主、追求同质性的社会管理思维，实践证明是低效的治理模式。

（二）构建社会治理的协同创新机制根据上述关于构建社会治理协同创新机制的基本要求，从复杂网络理论和协同①许国志：《系统科学》，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2000年，第29页。

复杂网络结构范型下的社会治理协同创新学等理论出发，构建社会治理协同创新机制，主要体现为以下内容。

1.社会治理多元主体复合的协同创新机制。社会系统的多层次复杂网络结构表明，协同社会治理首先需要建立起多元主体之间纵向及横向复合的协同创新机制，这是协同社会治理的主要序参量。通过社会治理网络中各主体、各层次围绕社会治理目标的协同行动，才能提升社会网络的容错能力，实现社会治理的“帕累托改进”

及社会整体功能的优化。在我国，随着全能型政府格局被部分打破，政府进行管理职能和组织结构上的创新，逐渐实现与市场融合，社会组织也逐渐拥有可以支配的社会资源和工具，开始通过参与社会治理积极支持、监督国家的政治权力和政府的行政权力。当前，针对政府公权力对其他社会治理主体具有很强的“挤出效应”，导致其生长缓慢，生存空间狭窄，建立社会治理多元主体复合协同机制的关键是要突破制度性障碍，通过制度创新，清楚规范政府权力，保护社会权力，培养具有自组织能力的多元主体，围绕社会主义社会的治理目标展开充分的协同行动。

在社会治理网络系统中，政府作为核心主体，要发挥与主导地位相匹配的作用，做好对其他社会治理主体的培育和平台搭建工作。对于公共权力的活动边界，政府要有所为有所不为。比如在自然灾害面前，政府能够提供资金帮助、实施救援，但政府无法提供诸如受灾人群的心理辅导、社会关系的重建等微观的灾害救治服务，而社会组织在一定程度、一定领域中能够替代、补充政府的某些功能，这在实质上是公权力与公民权利之间竞合博弈的结果，而不是“零和博弈”。关系协调得好，就可以发挥社会组织积极管理社会的作用；如果处理不当，就有可能诱发社会不稳定的“蝴蝶效应”。

2.社会治理公众参与的“多中心协同治理”机制。在社会的复杂网络结构中，作为社会网络结构中最基础的层级，公众具有强烈参与社会治理的愿望和动力，这就要求社会治理必须重心下移，重视公众的参与权，尊重公众的主体地位。

公众参与社会治理本质上是社会自组织能力的体现。中国的改革开放所带来的社会结构转型，催生了公众主体意识和参与意识的发育，当代中国现代社会日益增强的动态复杂性，显著地推进了公众参与社会治理的形成和发展，政府的施政需要得到公众的认可和参与，公众则更多地希望通过听证会、电视问政、网络等多种途径，积极参与与生活密切相关的公共政策制定及相应的社会治理活动，可以说，没有公众参与，协同社会治理就失去了协同的对象和基础，治理的效果也会大打折扣。

近年来，国内些大型工业项目在与公共舆情的对垒中屡屡败北（如广东鹤山核燃料项目事件），原因就在于公众没有实质性地参与政府决策，从而表现出天然的质疑，面对政府味机械地强调工业项目的“绝对安全”，公众却本能地产生怀疑，双方的心理环境的要求。面对我国社会基层矛盾的激化，政府在社会治理方面明显存在着通过优化政府的组织结构，拓宽公众的参与渠道，建立开放的行政决策与执行中公众参与的制度，建立多样化的议事机构，从立法和制度上确立一套公众的参与程序，将政府“我决策你执行”的传统路径，拓展为“公众参与”的多中心协同治理合作形式，有助于政府与群众彼此了解对方的愿望和诉求，最大限度地增强社会共识；同时，有助于建立公共服务管办分离的制度化机制，政府不断增加向社会组织购买公共服务的比重，理顺政府管理部门与公共服务供给主体之间的关系，提高科学管理水平，在多中心协同治理下，社会系统逐步走向有序化，涌现出良好的自我组织、自我管理及自我服务的能力。

3.社会治理资源整合协同机制。社会治理离不开强有力的资源保证。社会治理资源整合是把社会治理系统中稀缺的、现实和潜在的、具有不同性质和来源的资源进行激活、配置与耦合，使其具有较强的系统性、协调性和价值性

Applicable area 18~32m²

High Purification Air Cleaner,Small Air Purifier,Air Purifier For Smoke,Portable Air Purifier For Office

Leeyo Pilot Electric Technology Co., Ltd , https://www.nbleeyo-pilot.com