林迪芬

• 1:厦门大学公共事务学院

摘要(Abstract)：

制度语法是一种解剖制度结构和内容的分析工具。自1995年问世以来,制度语法工具已经在多个研究议题和不同政策领域中得到较为广泛的应用,日益成为公共管理学科富有潜力的分析工具之一。本文首先考察了制度语法工具的产生背景,接着概述了制度语法工具的核心要件——ADICO句法,以及辅助要件——规则类型学和制度层次学。新近的研究主题主要集中在对制度语法工具的理论修正与拓展、编码系统的完善、实证案例分析等方面。在此基础上,本文建议未来应加强制度语法工具的理论研究,应推动制度语法工具与其他理论框架的结合。此外,制度文本的编码技术还需持续更新,研究数据来源应进一步丰富。最后,本文提出在中国情境下开展制度语法工具研究的意义和建议。

关键词(KeyWords)： 制度语法工具;制度表述;ADICO句法;规则类型学;制度层次学

Abstract:

Keywords:

基金项目(Foundation): 国家留学基金管理委员会国家建设高水平大学公派研究生项目（项目批准号:201806310051）资助

作者(Author): 林迪芬

参考文献(References)：

• B.盖伊·彼得斯.2011.政治科学中的制度理论:“新制度主义”[M].王向民,段红伟译.上海:上海人民出版社,6-11.Peters B G.2011.Institutional theory in political science:“The new institutionalism”[M].Wang X M,Duan H W,trans.Shanghai:Shanghai PeoplePublishing House.(in Chinese)
• 郭台辉.2019.语言的政治化与政治的语言化---政治学方法论的“语言学转向”问题[J].政治学研究,(4):66-76.Guo T H.2019.Language in politics and politics in language:Linguistic turn in political methodology[J].CASS Journal of Political Science,(4):66-76.(in Chinese)
• 黄萃,吕立远.2020.文本分析方法在公共管理与公共政策研究中的应用[J].公共管理评论,2(4):156-175.Huang C,Lv L Y.2020.The application of text analysis to public management and policy research[J].China Public Administration Review,2(4):156-175.(in Chinese)
• 李文钊.2016a.制度多样性的政治经济学---埃莉诺·奥斯特罗姆的制度理论研究[J].学术界,(10):223-237,328.Li W Z.2016a.The political economics of institutional diversity-Research on Elinor Ostrominstitutional theories[J].Academics,(10):223-237,328.(in Chinese)
• 李文钊.2016b.制度分析与发展框架:传统、演进与展望[J].甘肃行政学院学报,(6):4-18.Li W Z.2016b.System analysis and development framework:Tradition,evolution and prospect[J].Journal of Gansu Administration Institute,(6):4-18.(in Chinese)
• 李文钊.2017.论作为认知、行为与规范的制度[J].公共管理与政策评论,6(2):3-18.Li W Z.2017.On institutions of the cognition,behavior and norm[J].Public Administration and Policy Review,6(2):3-18.(in Chinese)
• 王洛忠,都梦蝶.2020.环境政策中的规制机制:基于“限塑令”的制度语法学分析[J].中国行政管理,(5):79-85.Wang L Z,Du M D.2020.Regulatory mechanisms in environmental policies:An analysis of institutional grammar based on“Plastic Limit Orders”[J].Chinese Public Administration,(5):79-85.(in Chinese)
• 杨志云.2015.政府间合作协议的有效性检视[J].行政管理改革,(4):41-45.Yang Z Y.2015.Effectiveness review of intergovernmental cooperation agreements[J].Administration Reform,(4):41-45.(in Chinese)
• 马奇J G,奥尔森J P.2011.重新发现制度:政治的组织基础[M].张伟,译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店.March J G,Olsen J P.2011.Rediscovering institutions:The organizational basis of politics[M].Zhang W,trans.Beijing:SDX Joint Publishing Company.(in Chinese)
• 臧志军.2013.职业教育国家制度的比较研究[D].上海:华东师范大学.Zang Z J.2013.A comparative study of national vocational institutions[D].Shanghai:East China Normal University.(in Chinese)
• Basurto X,Kingsley G,Mcqueen K,et al.2010.A systematic approach to institutional analysis:Applying Crawford and Ostromgrammar[J].Political Research Quarterly,63(3):523-537.
• Brady U,Basurto X,Bennett A,et al.2018.Institutional analysis of rules-in-form coding guidelines[R].ASU:Center for Behavior,Institutions and the Environment:1-25.
• Carter D P,Weible C M,Siddiki S N,et al.2016.Integrating core concepts from the institutional analysis and development framework for the systematic analysis of policy designs:An illustration from the US National Organic Program regulation[J].Journal of Theoretical Politics,28(1):159-185.
• Clement S,Moore S A,Lockwood M.2015.Authority,responsibility and process in Australian biodiversity policy[J].Environmental and Planning Law Journal,32(2):93-114.
• Crawford S E S,Ostrom E.1995.A grammar of institutions[J].American Political Science Review,89(3):582-600.
• Dunlop C A,Kamkhaji J C,Radaelli C M.2019.A sleeping giant awakes?The rise of the institutional grammar tool (IGT) in policy research[J].Journal of Chinese Governance,4(2):163-180.
• Espinosa S.2015.Unveiling the features of a regulatory system:The institutional grammar of tobacco legislation in Mexico[J].International Journal of Public Administration,38(9):616-631.
• Feiock R C,Weible C M,Carter D P,et al.2016.Capturing structural and functional diversity through institutional analysis:The mayor position in city charters[J].Urban Affairs Review,52(1):129-150.
• Frantz C K,Purvis M K,Savarimuthu B T R,et al.2016.Modelling dynamic normative understanding in agent societies[J].Scalable Computing:Practice and Experience,16(4):355-380.
• Frantz C K,Siddiki S.2021a.Institutional grammar 2.0:A specification for encoding and analyzing institutional design[J].Public Administration,99(2):222-247.
• Frantz C K,Siddiki S N.(2021b-06-20)[2021-06-27].Institutional grammar 2.0 codebook[EB/OL].https://arxiv.org/pdf/2008.08937.pdf.
• Ghorbani A,Bravo G.2016.Managing the commons:A simple model of the emergence of institutions through collective action[J].The International Journal of the Commons,10(1):200-219.
• Hall P A,Taylor R C R.1996.Political science and the three new institutionalisms[J].Political Studies,44(5):936-957.
• Heikkila T,Weible C M.2018.A semiautomated approach to analyzing polycentricity[J].Environmental Policy and Governance,28(4):308-318.
• Lien A M,Schlager E,Lona A.2018.Using institutional grammar to improve understanding of the form and function of payment for ecosystem services programs[J].Ecosystem Services,31:21-31.
• Lien A M.2020.The institutional grammar tool in policy analysis and applications to resilience and robustness research[J].Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability,44:1-5.
• Novo P,Garrido A.2014.From policy design to implementation:An institutional analysis of the new Nicaraguan Water Law[J].Water Policy,16(6):1009-1030.
• Ostrom E.2005.Understanding institutional diversity[M].Princeton,NJ:Princeton University Press.
• Peters B G.1999.Institutional theory in political science:The“New Institutionalism”[M].London and New York:Wellington House.
• Rice D,Siddiki S,Frey S,et al.2021.Machine coding of policy texts with the institutional grammar[J].Public Administration,99(2):248-262.
• Schneider A,Ingram H.1988.Systematically pinching ideas:A comparative approach to policy design[J].Journal of Public Policy,8(1):61-80.
• Siddiki S,Weible C M,Basurto X,et al.2011.Dissecting policy designs:An application of the institutional grammar tool[J].Policy Studies Journal,39(1):79-103.
• Siddiki S,Basurto X,Weible C M.2012.Using the institutional grammar tool to understand regulatory compliance:The case of Colorado aquaculture[J].Regulation&Governance,6(2):167-188.
• Siddiki S,Lupton S.2016.Assessing nonprofit rule interpretation and compliance[J].Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly,45(4S):156S-174S.
• Siddiki S,Heikkila T,Weible C M,et al.2019.Institutional analysis with the institutional grammar[J].Policy Studies Journal,doi:10.1111/psj.12361.
• Smajgl A,Izquierdo L R,Huigen M.2008.Modeling endogenous rule changes in an institutional context:The adico sequence[J].Advances in Complex Systems,11(2):199-215.
• Vannoni M.2021.A political economy approach to the grammar of institutions:Theory and methods[J].Policy Studies Journal,doi:10.1111/psj.12427.
• Vatn A.2005.Institutions and the environment[M].Northampton,MA:Edward Elgar.
• Watkins C,Westphal L M.2016.People dontalk in institutional statements:Amethodological case study of the institutional analysis and development framework[J].Policy Studies Journal,44(S1):S98-S122.
• Witting A.2017.Ruling out learning and change?Lessons from urban flood mitigation[J].Policy and Society,36(2):251-269.
• (1)“制度语法工具”在英文学术界还有其他两种表述方式,即制度的语法(the Grammar of Institutions)或制度语法(the Institutional Grammar,IG),本文遵循当前学界较为通用的表述版本——制度语法工具(the Institutional Grammar Tool,IGT)。
• (1)关于新制度主义经典流派的划分,Peters(1999)提出“七分法”,即规范制度主义、理性选择制度主义、历史制度主义、经验制度主义、社会学制度主义、利益代表制度主义和国际制度主义七个流派。本文遵循学界影响力较大且通用的“三分法”,即理性选择制度主义、历史制度主义和社会学制度主义(Hall and Taylor,1996)。
• (1)对政策设计存在两种理解:作为动词的“政策设计”是指政策理念或政策方案的形成过程;作为名词的“政策设计”是指实现政策目标的逻辑,即政策内容和结构(Schneider and Ingram,1988)。本文所指的“政策设计”侧重于后一种含义。类似地,“制度设计”可以理解为制度内容和机构,或者说是制度文本。
• (1)有关制度语法工具的操作编码手册、教学视频以及更多相关信息和资源,可参阅“制度语法研究倡议”, https://institutionalgrammar. org/resources/。