中国地方政府发展能力指数报告（2018）

　　近年来，有关地方政府的研究报告日渐增加，根据研究方法的差异性可以将其分为三类。一类是以定性研究为主，侧重于描述性分析的研究报告;第二类是以定量研究为主，通过评价指标体系设计，对地方政府进行评价分析的研究报告；第三类是定性与定量兼具的综合性研究报告。本报告是《中国政府发展研究报告》的分报告，属于第二种类型，即以定量研究为主的研究报告。本报告由南开大学中国政府与政策科研团队撰写，在报告的内容设计上，为对于当年度各地方政府发展的理论研究成果、实践经验、现实困难与变革趋势等内容，进行系统梳理、重点思考与全面总结，突出年度各地地方政府发展的宏观走向，强调阶段性与连续性的统一。同时，本年的报告增加了年度热点分析的内容，选择了京津冀地区的9座样本城市展开分析，并结合京津冀协同发展的背景，对城市地方政府能力的协同发展问题进行了探讨。本书的出版为深入研究中国地方政府发展能力相关问题提供更加客观、翔实的一手数据资料。

　　翟磊，南开大学政府管理学院行政管理系副教授，南开大学MPA教育中心副主任，管理学博士。主要从事行政管理、项目管理方面的研究，累计发表论文20余篇，其中CSSCI共计8篇，ISTP收录4篇。

目录第一部分中国地方政府发展能力研究的理论分析第一章中国地方政府发展能力的相关研究进展·········································3一、地方政府评估报告的比较分析·····················································4二、各种评估中存在的共性问题·······················································14三、本研究的创新之处···································································
17第二章研究方法的改进与探索·····························································21一、研究框架的调整······································································21二、研究方法的改进······································································23第二部分中国地方政府发展能力评估结果综合分析第三章地方政府发展能力评估数据总体情况···········································33一、数据收集的总体情况································································33二、样本城市评估数据总体分析·······················································40第四章地方政府核心发展能力（一级指标）总体分析
·······························51一、地方政府核心发展能力综合绩效评价···········································51二、地方政府核心发展能力主观绩效评价···········································53三、地方政府核心发展能力重要性评价··············································70第五章地方政府发展能力的聚类分析····················································
75一、样本城市的聚类分析································································76二、四种类别城市的各级指标分析····················································78三、四种类别城市聚类分析的讨论····················································882中国地方政府发展能力报告（2018）第三部分中国地方政府发展能力评估结果特征分析第六章不同地区地方政府发展能力特征分析···········································93一、类型划分：不同地区的划分标准·················································93二、评估结果：东部地区优势明显、地区间能力结构不均衡···················95三、提升路径：缩小政府发展能力差距，促进区域均衡协调发展···········104四、结论···················································································
106第七章城市群地方政府发展能力分析··················································108一、类型划分·············································································108二、城市群的定义与划分······························································109三、城市群能力的现有研究综述······················································113四、数据分析··············································································116五、结论：“两化叠加”影响下的城市群差异···································125第八章不同人口规模城市政府发展能力特征分析···································
127一、类型划分：不同人口规模城市划分的标准···································127二、评估结果：城市人口规模与政府发展能力正相关··························130三、提升路径：差异性内控与互惠性共生的协力推进··························142四、结论···················································································145第四部分中国地方政府发展能力提升的热点问题第九章直辖市政府发展能力现状及提升路径·········································149一、问题提出：直辖市政府发展能力提升·········································149二、评估结果：总体呈两梯队分布··················································150三、提升路径：明确定位并完善政府在“元治理”中的作用
·················164四、结论···················································································169第十章副省级省会城市政府发展能力研究············································171一、问题提出：副省级省会城市及其政府发展能力提升·······················171二、评估结果：不同类型副省级省会城市政府发展能力存在差异···········177三、提升路径：分区域、分阶段提升政府发展能力·····························189四、结论···················································································191