| As the continuous exposure of drawbacks of ?prefecture-level city-govern-county? system, in addition of the deep-going of Chinese reform, reform of city-county administrative system has been a hot topic these years. Since 2002, some cities of different provinces of China have been named to be experimental units to implement province-govern-county financial system. And then in 2005, to carry out province-govern-county system reform nationwide was released on a Central document, which also pointed out that the reform could started by financial system. Since then, China has been pushing the reform step by step. While in the meantime, other adjustment schemes of administrative division like ?turn-county-to-district? which is promoted by the prefecture government and ?upgrade-county-to-city? strived by the county government,both of which has been taking place since the foundation of the PRC, are taking place as well. Put the diversity of different cities? and counties? social economic development level, history, culture, region, etc. aside, and only considering of the average development level of China?s society and economy, this article is trying to figure out which route of city-county administrative division reform is the best, by using of the thought of John W. Kingdon?s ?policy stream? and AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process).Analyzing what moved the issue of city-county administrative division reform onto the public policy agenda in the thought of John W. Kingdon?s ?policy stream?, some points were drawn. As for the ?problem stream?, first, wide gaps between cities and counties on households? average income, GDP, infrastructures, public services, etc. do great harm to social stability and economic sustainable development. Second, cities-counties contradictions and conflicts caused by their fighting for interest can hurt local stability and development. Third, the ?planned? feature of city-govern-county system exposed when implementing policies of agriculture, farmer and rural area, strategies of urban-rural integration and balancing, while some spontaneous innovative practices of ?expanding power of strong counties? and ?strengthening counties by expanding their power? turned out to be fairly successful, which made people, especially decision-makers, pinned their hopes on reform. In the aspect of ?alternative stream?, based on the practice and experience in Chinese history, potent alternatives such as ?province-govern-county? reform, ?turn-county-to-district?, ?upgrade-county-to-city? were put forward, which laid a solid foundation for administrative division reform being moved onto public policy agenda. In terms of ?political stream?, city-county administrative division reform is a difficulty China must overcome in the crucial era of its social transformation and political restructuring. Discontent from county government and their residents also plays a role of catalyst in moving the reform onto public policy agenda.There are lots of views thinking that in a country filled with diversity and complexity like China, in consideration of differences of society, culture, geography, development status, history, etc., different regions should implement different city-county administrative division institutions. However, that could be a great challenge for the managers, no matter on law making, commanding or managing, as China is such a large country. Put all those elements of diversity aside and focus on the alternatives only, in the fourth section of this article, taking advantage of AHP, resulted that ?province-govern-county? is the best alternative. At last, combine Chinese reality and the result of the AHP, conclusion that the route of Chinese administrative division reform should be while in implementing ?province-govern-county? reform, regions which are eligible should ?turn-county-to-district? or ?upgrade-county-to-city? at the same time was drawn. And in order to maximize the effect of reforms of city-county administrative division, some suggestions were put forward. |
PDF Full Text Request