党的十八届三中全会把推进国家治理体系和治理能力现代化与完善和发展中国特色社会主义制度共同作为全面深化改革的总目标。没有基层治理体系和治理能力的现代化就不会有国家治理体系和治理能力的现代化。深化县级政府机构改革，切实转变县级政府职能，提高县级政府效能，建设规模适度、结构合理、素质优良的基层公务员队伍对于推进基层治理体系和治理能力现代化具有十分重要而深远的意义。 目前，国内关于机构改革的研究，多集中在宏观、总量方面的研究，立足点多集中在中央及省、市级的层面，对于基层政府的机构改革研究较少，故本文的创新性立足于县级政府机构改革，通过政府政策决策过程这一创新视角，从机构设置、职能转变、编制运行三个角度为切入路径，以J市A区为个案，运用调研访谈、文本资料等数据资料方式展开单案例分析，试图梳理地方政府机构、职能、编制改革存在的深层次的问题，找到政策过程对县级政府机构改革的作用和影响机理，进而从完善政策过程的角度提出政策建议，探索县级政府机构改革走出困境的有效路径。本研究核心结论如下： 在县级政府机构改革问题分析方面，与全国其它地区相比，J市A区县级政府机构改革所表现出的问题既有相似性，也有其本身的特殊性。在机构设置方面，难以做到因地制宜；政府工作部门所属事业机构数量膨胀；政府工作部门内设机构设置不规范。在职能转变方面，形式化问题突出；执行落实不到位；政府职能不完整。在人员编制方面，行政机关公务员数量虽得到严格控制，但通过增加事业人员甚至聘用公益性岗位来弥补公务员数量不足的问题比较普遍，给政府工作部门的行政合法性、工作连续性、干部队伍建设带来较大影响；公务员队伍的年龄、知识结构不合理；“官”多“兵”少问题突出；公务员正常补充机制不健全，建立一支与基层治理体系和治理能力现代化相适应的公务员队伍还面临诸多体制机制和现实困境。 微观决策过程的不健全是造成县级政府机构改革困境的重要原因。从决策主体看，纵向政府间决策地位层层递减；从决策制定看，协商沟通机制、察觉机制、监督制约机制不健全；从决策执行看，变通多，缺乏监管，遗留问题重重；从决策评估看，缺乏科学合理的评估和反馈机制。 突破县级政府机构改革困境需要改进相关的微观决策过程：合理划分各级的决策边界，提高县级的话语权；建立开放多元的科学决策机制；建立严格、规范、有效的决策执行体系；建立健全决策评估反馈制度。
The Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee has set modernization of governance system and capacity as the supreme goal to promote the modernization of national governance system and governance capacity and to improve and develop the socialist system with Chinese characteristics. This cannot be realized without deepened reform of county-level government. To improve the function and efficiency of county-level government and to build a team of reasonable size and high quality play a significant role in realizing the modernization of system and governance. Therefore, more attention should be paid to the reform of government at county level. At present, domestic researches on institutional reform are more concentrated on the level of state and provincial level rather than county-level governments. This paper sheds emphasis on the institutional reform of county-level governments by using A District in J city as an individual case and making analysis from three angles, which respectively are the set-up of institution, the transformation of government function and adjustment of staffing. Interviews, documentation and other forms of data are used in this paper, aiming to locate the deep-seated problems and find the right mechanism in policy-making, while making suggestions to find the effective path to get out of the current dilemma. The main conclusions of this paper are as follows. Compared with other areas of China, though sharing similarities, A District of J city has its particular problems. Customization of the set-up of institutions cannot be realized at county-level. The quantity of government affiliated institutions increases rapidly, some of which show a lack of legal consciousness and supervision and intensifies the burden of financial support. The management of county-level government is not as ideal as expected and the transformation of governmental function is not well recognized at county level. The total number of civil servants is strictly controlled, but it is very common to recruit personnel in of government affiliated institutions or some contract workers, which can replenish the understaffed situation. This has a disputed effect on the legitimacy and continuity of the whole legion. The personnel are not scientifically deployed and the structure is poorly balanced, which could be worsened by low overall quality of some employees and a defective promotion mechanism. We are confronted with a realistic predicament in establishing a legion of high-quality grassroots personnel and realizing the modernization of county-level governance. The imperfect microeconomic decision-making process is an important reason for the plight of the county-level government institutional reform. From the level of decision-making body, the decreasing of the importance from the higher government to the lower one. From the level of decision-making, a large number of shortcomings exist in the lack of coordination, transparency, supervision and communication.From the implementation of the decision, the more flexibility, the lack of regulation, the reversion of cause and effect and the redundancy become the most important problems. From the level of decision assessment, the main trouble lies in the lack of reasonable scientific assessment and feedback mechanisms. To improve the microeconomic decision-making process should be the priority for a break of the county-level government reform. This can be solved by practicing the following methods: to clear up the decision-making rights among different levels; to improve the county-level governments’ rights; to establish reasonable decision-making systems; to form a effective executive system and to create a perfect feedback aids of decision-making system.
