中國大陸民眾社區權益表達行為與影響因素之分析

An Analysis of Citizens' Rationality on Community Participation in China

邇近20餘年來，中國大陸欲倡導社會創新與社區治理，盼強化基層治理能量。惟實際情況未見成效，民眾參與熱情不高、動力不足。相較文獻普遍關注基層投票與維權類型影響要因，有關群眾爲何選擇沉默，消極社區參與的研究相對少見。本文意欲分析當前中國大陸治理體制與社區發展背景下，居民在各類利益表達渠道上保持沉默的理性邏輯與背後結構限制。透由中國綜合社會調査（CGSS）全國面訪資料，本文透過理性選擇途徑與多層次模型的輔助，得到如下發現：（1）民眾在制度性動員和抗爭性社區參與兩種渠道上之成本及效益項考量，存在偏好結構上的異質性，其中欲求體現民主治理價值之變數僅在居民的抗爭性社區參與呈現顯著影響；（2）民眾的所得水準、受教育年限、及政黨身分，對於此二類型社區參與渠道的決策也影響各異，並也證實中國大陸社會情境下居民的社會經濟條件與政治身分背景確實將制約社區參與之理性偏好。本文另闢從居民社區參與沉默的分析，對於洞悉當代中國大陸社區治理內涵與社區參與渠道的改善，具重要參考價值。 Over the last two decades, Mainland China has promoted the policies of social innovation and encouraged its citizens to participate in community governance in order to improve the capacity of grassroots governance. However, in practice, these policies do not impassion citizens to engage more in community affairs or the process of interest articulation. Most existing literature has focused on the typologies and relevant factors influencing grassroots voting behaviors and rights protection actions, while scant literature has discussed the unique phenomenon of the ＂silent majority,＂ which examines why citizens are not willing to participate in community affairs or the process of interest articulation. This article explores the behavioral logic and constraints of why citizens are not willing to engage in the community interest articulation process under China's post-totalitarian authoritarian regime. Using the rational choice approach and multilevel modeling, this study employed data from the Chinese General Social Survey (CGSS). The analysis highlights several important results. First, the costs-benefits incentive structures are different when citizens make decisions on whether to participate in both the organized association community interest articulation process or the contentious community interest articulation process. The variable of 'democratic governance value' only influences citizens' participation in the process of contentious community interest articulation. Second, the socioeconomic variables of income, accumulated years of education, and party identity showed different effects on the two kinds of community interest articulation processes, thereby demonstrating that citizens' socioeconomic status under the context of China's governance do constrain their rationale in terms of choice preferences in community participation. This study enriches our understanding of citizens' community participation behavior and provides several clues for enhancing community governance capacities and designing public participation processes in Mainland China.

Over the last two decades, Mainland China has promoted the policies of social innovation and encouraged its citizens to participate in community governance in order to improve the capacity of grassroots governance. However, in practice, these policies do not impassion citizens to engage more in community affairs or the process of interest articulation. Most existing literature has focused on the typologies and relevant factors influencing grassroots voting behaviors and rights protection actions, while scant literature has discussed the unique phenomenon of the ＂silent majority,＂ which examines why citizens are not willing to participate in community affairs or the process of interest articulation. This article explores the behavioral logic and constraints of why citizens are not willing to engage in the community interest articulation process under China's post-totalitarian authoritarian regime. Using the rational choice approach and multilevel modeling, this study employed data from the Chinese General Social Survey (CGSS). The analysis highlights several important results. First, the costs-benefits incentive structures are different when citizens make decisions on whether to participate in both the organized association community interest articulation process or the contentious community interest articulation process. The variable of 'democratic governance value' only influences citizens' participation in the process of contentious community interest articulation. Second, the socioeconomic variables of income, accumulated years of education, and party identity showed different effects on the two kinds of community interest articulation processes, thereby demonstrating that citizens' socioeconomic status under the context of China's governance do constrain their rationale in terms of choice preferences in community participation. This study enriches our understanding of citizens' community participation behavior and provides several clues for enhancing community governance capacities and designing public participation processes in Mainland China.