Comparative Study On Basic Public Service Institution Of The United States And Sweden

After more than30years’ reform and opening up, China’s economic developmenthas made remarkable achievements. People’s living standard has been greatlyimproved. Though the principal contradiction of our society between people’sgrowing material and cultural demand with the backward-social-production has notchanged, its forms have undergone profound changes. One of these is thecontradiction between the shortage of basic public goods and services with thecomprehensive and rapid growth of demand for them. In recent years, China’spromotion of equalization of basic public services has gained dramatic achievements.However, because of China’s spectacularly large area and population, as well as itsrelatively weak economic base, social construction has not been to the date. Somespecific institution settings is difficult to adapt to social changes. Public serviceinstitution is far from perfect, and basic public service equalization has not yet beenfully realized. This not only prevents the public service from functioning effectivelyas one of the four basic government functions, but also exacerbates social injustice,makes old issues which arose due to the planned economy era and new problemssurging in the reform process, such as regional disparities and the gap between richand poor and even more prominent, and hinders social harmony and stability.Economic reforms have reached a certain point. Social reforms have been brought tostrategic level in our country, and equalization of basic public services is the maincomponents. So the promotion of equalization of basic public services and otherrelated issues have become important concerns in academy in recent years.Theories on public service are voluminous abroad, and the practice of theequalization of public services in some countries has achieved significantly. However,due to the constraints of historical, economic, and social aspects, our governments atall levels have concerns mainly in economic growth and economic development,attentions to social dimensions and the achievement of the role government shouldplay in have not been enough in China. Public service is a new concern for domesticacademy, and the promotion of equalization of basic public services has also beenhighlighted by the government recently. Clearly, we lack domestic localized theorieson public services. The way to achieve equalization of public services, channels, andinstitutional construction work are also far from perfect. I expect that the research canprovide a reference for improving theories on public services through comparativestudy between countries.Domestically, not only the theories of public services are not yet mature, thepromotion work of the equalization of basic public services also has a lot to be desired.The United States and the Swedish have rather different public service institutions(from concept, design of the system to the objectives to be achieved, etc.), and theyare rather different from each other in some sense. But one thing they have incommon is that the two countries have done a good job in the equalization of publicservices, which means the goal of the design of the institution has been achieved basically. Public service institutions in the two countries have their own advantages,and they can act as references for the construction of the public service institution inChina.This study takes historical institutionalism and the public administration andpublic services of Marxism as the theoretical analytical framework. It focuses onbasic public service institutions of the United States and Sweden, their establishment,history and reasons for changes from historical institutionalism perspective, andsummarizes experiences we could learn for reforming and improving our basic publicservices. It holds that the reasons why basic public service institutions in the UnitedStates and Sweden are at present status are their respective institutional environments,values, histories and cultural traditions, and other factors closely related. Byresearching the history of the basic public service institution in China, in view of thenature of China’s socialist system environment and other factors, Sweden’s high levelsocial welfare and public service institution is the direction of our reform. However,taking into account the institution design and actual conditions of China, the authorputs it that China should build a hybrid public-service model between amarket-oriented public service model of the United States and a government-ledmodel of the Swedish. A comprehensive public service institution should include notonly governance and financial-right configuration, but also supervision of the publicservice. China could draw on experiences of the United States and Sweden in theseterms and embark its own path to basic public services which is adapt to China’snational conditions and benefits the overwhelming majority of the members ofsociety.Based on the research status on equalization of public services at home andabroad, especially comparative study between different countries, under the guidanceof the chosen theoretical framework, the author establishes and demonstrates thefollowing two hypotheses: firstly, the construction of the public service institution inChina should be based on its historical, social, economic, political, and institutionalenvironment; secondly, the socialist institution determines that we should construct agovernment-led mode and take the promotion of equalization of basic public servicesas current objective.This essay gives priority to qualitative methods, and mainly relies onliteratures,for example reading books on relevant issues. A comparative analysis ofpublic service institution s between the United States and Sweden is done, which mayserve the construction of the public service institution in China, especially thepromotion of equalization of basic public services.