The Studies Of The Classification Reform Of Public Institutions Of Guizhou Province

Reform of public institutions is a primary task for government. In2002, Chinaput forward to classify directions of public institutions reform, but it has been hard toeffectively boost all the time. Guizhou Province, as its economy is less developed inChina, not only faces the tasks of reform based on types, but also involves problemsof insufficiency public institutions. To promote the reform based on types in Guizhouprovince, it is necessary to set the relationships among different departments in order,to improve the organization structures, to accelerate the development of publicinstitutions, and to satisfy the demands of social development. Therefore, it is of greatimportance to discuss the basic thoughts, the organizing measures and classificationprinciples of classifying reform in Guizhou. It is also related to achievegreat-leap-forward development in GuiZhou, an important issue of simultaneouslyentering into well-to-do society with other regions in our country.In this paper, with the retrospective reviews and remarks to the PublicInstitutions’ management in China, I represent the evolution course of Guizhou’Public Institutions in history, make diagnoses to its development, and try my best tofind out the concrete thoughts and ways to promote the Classification Reform, so thatwe can set examples in Public Institutions Reform for other provinces which also liesin the southwest of China.In this paper, we draw the main conclusions as follows. It is of great necessity topromote the reform course with the thought which is leaded by the government,joined by the social entities to establish the Chinese characteristic institutions, withthe thoughts which are “from top to bottom, proposed systematically, promotedgenerally”, with the rules which are established by the government. By the way, It isalso very important to strengthen the organizational guarantees, to classify the socialinstitutions scientifically, to standardize the institution settings, to straighten out therelationships among departments, to define the institutions’ responsibility clearly, andto gradually improve public-service-distinguishing abilities and levels in the lessdeveloped areas. Finally, we wish to form basic service priority, supply levels, andreasonable layout structures, to moderate features of the fair public service system.