本文所研究的主要问题是城市基层社区的碎片化与有效治理问题。尽管政府推行了诸多强化社区管理的政策措施，如“社区建设”、“议行分设”、“项目制管理”和“网格化管理”等，但城市基层社区治理的实际效果却十分有限，社区民众的满意度仍然较低，究竟是什么原因导致了这一现象的发生？为什么在同一社区内部，不同片区在其公共服务和管理方面差别如此之大？为此，笔者选择了Y市的M厂和Z村作为田野工作地点，对其逐渐分化形成的4个社区进行了实证研究。本文发现：在经济社会转型过程中，城市基层社区在其社会空间结构、利益结构和权力结构方面已经碎片化，这加剧了社区发展的不平衡，带来了严重的社会政治后果，导致社区的有效治理难以实现。随着市场改革的启动，国家放弃了总体性的社会管理模式。由于单位制解组、住房商品化改革、劳动力市场的建立以及土地城市化等多元机制的复杂作用，传统社会管理模式失去了整合基层社区的经济基础，城市基层社区结构逐渐碎片化。社区的碎片化是一种城市发展中的过渡现象，产生了较为严重的社会政治后果。社区民众的政治态度和公民参与出现了高度分化，以致社区内部难以达成共识。社区的有效治理难以实现主要是由于三个方面的原因造成的：第一，社区居委会的治理能力相对有限；第二，社区参与和互动相对缺乏；第三，社区发展和管理政策难以获得社区不同阶层民众的一致认同和支持。尽管基层政府难以依靠自身力量实现社区的整合与有效治理，但通过建立和完善社区的利益表达和协调机制，充分发挥市场在配置资源过程中的重要作用，充分发挥社区的自组织功能，整合现有的各种组织资源，笔者认为，城市基层政府有能力在一定程度上化解现有的社区碎片化问题，缓解社区的阶层分化及其潜在冲突，从而实现积极有效的社区治理，重整碎片化的社区。社区的碎片化，其本质上是在社会发展和转型过程中政府、市场和社会三者之间的关系调整变化的结果。为了应对这些挑战和风险，在短期内，政府应该重点关注社会中下阶层群体聚居社区的公共服务，提供基本公共产品，最大限度地回应社会中下层群体的物质利益诉求，化解引起潜在矛盾和冲突的隐患；从中长期来看，政府应该理顺与市场、社会的关系，进一步加强基层民主建设，推进和完善社区自治制度，推进有序的社区参与，建立更加有效的利益表达和协调机制，充分发挥市场力量、社会力量和社区自组织功能，从而走向以改善社会、良性互动为目标的，更为积极有效的社区治理模式。
Although the grassroot government makes initiatives to strengthen the community management with many strategies and policies, such as the “Community Building”, the “Project Management”, “Yi Xing Fen She” or the “Grid Management”, the public shows lower satisfactions with the performance of governance in the community. How to explain this phenomenon? Why the difference is so huge among the sections in the same community? Is it possible for the government to give responds to the public effectively in the micro-political level? This paper tries to answer these questions with the case study on the differentiation and governmance of the four communities in the Y city. In this case study, I find out that it is because of the community has been fragmented by the diverse dynamics in the socio-economic transition that explains why the effective governance of community is hard to be realized. In such fragmented communities, the grassroot government fails to respond to or balance the growing divided public appeals，which are the economic interests from lower classes or the citizenship claims from the higher classes. Because of the disorganization of the urban danwei system or the rural production team, the commercialization of urban housing, the establishment of the labour market, and the urbanization of rural land, the urban community has been fraqmented in its socio-spatial structure, interest structure and power structure.The freqmentation of community results in many severe social or political consequences. The political attitude or behavior is beginning to be divided. On the one hand, the higher class tends to own higher civic awareness and to take routined civic participations. On the other hand, the lower class tends to own the authoritarian values and to take the radical civic participations. It is to be worried about the government can not afford the lower classs’s economic security or meet the higher class’s political appeals. In the process of “community building” policy, the city government has set up a complicated management system, and the grassroot government has to set up a diverse model of governance in order to manage the challenges from the fragmentation of community. However, the real effects are very limited. Lack of human resourses, financial capacity, powers of management, and the public participation or interaction, the grasroot government is very hard to achieve the goals of good governance. Meanwhile, different social status group shows divided oppions and supports on the community development policy and social management policy.In conclusion, I argue that the fragmentation of community is the main reason why the grassroot government fails to make effective governance. Indeed, the fragmentation of community is resulted by the changing institution and social structure in the higher level. However, the grassroot government has the capacities to reorganize the fragmental community and realize the positive effective governance through integrating the recent orgniztion resources, market forces and social organizations, and rebuilding the cooperation among the government, market and society. To meet the challenges given by the divded poltical attitudes and civic participation, I suggest that in this paper the government shoud provide the foundamental services for the lower classes in the short term and the institutional supplies for the higher classes in the long term. Only reform the local system and increase the positive interaction between the people and the local government, can we eliminate the roots of the conflicts and realize the effective governance of community.
