基層政府間條塊關(guān)系變遷研究

　文獻(xiàn)綜述

　一、關(guān)于條塊關(guān)系的表現(xiàn)形式和類(lèi)型的研究

　關(guān)于條塊關(guān)系表現(xiàn)形式的研究，馬力宏和謝慶奎分別從兩個(gè)角度進(jìn)行分析，具有一定的代表性。

　馬力宏的觀點(diǎn)是，條塊關(guān)系主要是通過(guò)以下種形式具體表現(xiàn)出來(lái)一是“上級(jí)職能部門(mén)（條條與下級(jí)地方政府塊塊之間的關(guān)系”。條條與塊塊的關(guān)系，是我國(guó)條塊關(guān)系中最主要的形式。條與塊，即指上級(jí)的職能部門(mén)與下級(jí)政府。兩者雖然在行政級(jí)別上屬于平級(jí)，如海關(guān)總署和廣東省政府，然而上級(jí)職能部門(mén)行使的是上級(jí)政府的命令和意志，這使其在實(shí)踐的管理中往往高于下級(jí)政府而處于指導(dǎo)的位置。

　二是“上級(jí)政府職能部門(mén)與下級(jí)政府職能部門(mén)之間的關(guān)系。即上級(jí)條條與下級(jí)條條之間的關(guān)系”。上、下級(jí)政府職能部門(mén)之間是領(lǐng)導(dǎo)與被領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的關(guān)系，盡管直觀上說(shuō)它僅是純粹的條條關(guān)系，但由于每一層級(jí)政府均由職能部門(mén)組合而成，即上級(jí)政府的職能部門(mén)體現(xiàn)了上級(jí)政府的意志，它與下級(jí)政府職能部門(mén)之間也就變相演變成條塊關(guān)系了。

　三是“上級(jí)政府與下級(jí)政府之間的關(guān)系。這是條塊關(guān)系的核心”。之所以把上下級(jí)政府之間的關(guān)系視作條塊關(guān)系的核心，是由于不論條條自身有何種的利益或影響，其首先代表的是其所在層級(jí)政府和其利益。條條的利益無(wú)疑和其所在的政府是一致的，因此，條條的影響愈大，其所代表層級(jí)政府對(duì)下級(jí)政府的作用亦成正比地增強(qiáng)。

　謝慶奎則從分析我國(guó)不同性質(zhì)和功能的“條條”的角度來(lái)對(duì)條塊關(guān)系進(jìn)行劃分。他認(rèn)為中國(guó)的條條主要有以下三種情況：

　第一種，以塊為主的條條。條條中的各個(gè)部門(mén)同時(shí)也是各級(jí)政府的組成部分，這些部門(mén)以本級(jí)政府領(lǐng)導(dǎo)為主，以對(duì)口上級(jí)部門(mén)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)為輔。如農(nóng)業(yè)局、民政局、工業(yè)局。

　第二種純粹的條條。條條中的部門(mén)由本系統(tǒng)上級(jí)部門(mén)派出，其所有的業(yè)務(wù)、

　在編人員、工資福利均受上級(jí)部門(mén)直管，政府只負(fù)責(zé)協(xié)管。海關(guān)便屬于此類(lèi)的條條。我國(guó)這類(lèi)的部門(mén)還有審計(jì)、公安、監(jiān)察、國(guó)家安全、地震、統(tǒng)計(jì)、稅務(wù)、銀行、鐵路、郵電、電力、商品檢驗(yàn)等。

　第三種，以條為主的條條。比如國(guó)有中型企業(yè)和事業(yè)單位，其對(duì)上由上級(jí)政府或政府主管部門(mén)歸口管理，地方下級(jí)政府只負(fù)責(zé)協(xié)助管理。

　各種條塊關(guān)系正是在以上所述的條條關(guān)系與塊塊關(guān)系的結(jié)合中產(chǎn)生的：

　第一類(lèi)的條條與本級(jí)政府之間是業(yè)務(wù)指導(dǎo)關(guān)系，較易處理。

　第二類(lèi)屬于最難于處理、最為復(fù)雜的條塊關(guān)系。條條中的下級(jí)部門(mén)在人、財(cái)、物上均受令于條條中的上級(jí)部門(mén)，其和同級(jí)政府之間關(guān)系淡薄，故條塊關(guān)系處理起來(lái)也比較難以協(xié)調(diào)和控制。

　第三類(lèi)，涉及國(guó)有企事業(yè)單位的主管部門(mén)和協(xié)辦部門(mén)之間的關(guān)系，和本文關(guān)系不大，略。

　關(guān)于條塊關(guān)系的類(lèi)型，馬力宏認(rèn)為，與不同層級(jí)相聯(lián)系，條塊關(guān)系可以分為中央與省、省與市縣以及縣與鄉(xiāng)的條塊關(guān)系等三大類(lèi)型。而根據(jù)政府體制中集權(quán)與分權(quán)程度的不同，條塊關(guān)系可劃分為：

　一是“條塊分割型”。條條與塊塊在公共管理中既有聯(lián)系又有排斥，條與塊的結(jié)合不能有機(jī)統(tǒng)一時(shí)，必然導(dǎo)致條塊分割。條塊分割型又區(qū)分為以條為主導(dǎo)的條條管理型和以塊為主導(dǎo)的塊塊管理型兩種。前者主要體現(xiàn)在由中央集權(quán)為主導(dǎo)，中央或相關(guān)上級(jí)職能部門(mén)垂直領(lǐng)導(dǎo)本系統(tǒng)派出或下屬機(jī)構(gòu)，各層級(jí)的地方政府無(wú)法對(duì)其施加作用或影響；后者則體現(xiàn)在以地方分權(quán)為主導(dǎo)，中央將相當(dāng)程度上的人、財(cái)、物權(quán)下放至地方，并不再予以干預(yù)。

　二是“條塊結(jié)合型”。其中又包含兩種類(lèi)型：一是以條為主的條塊結(jié)合。主要指在需全國(guó)統(tǒng)一統(tǒng)籌、專(zhuān)業(yè)性強(qiáng)的領(lǐng)域，必須實(shí)行以條為主的條塊管理。二是以塊為主的條塊結(jié)合。指在上一種類(lèi)型之外的領(lǐng)域，絕大部分應(yīng)實(shí)行以塊為主條塊結(jié)合。這種類(lèi)型充分兼顧了塊塊主動(dòng)積極性的發(fā)揮和條條以規(guī)范合理途徑發(fā)揮自身作用、便于中央或上級(jí)政府有效地進(jìn)行宏觀調(diào)控等兩方面的作用。

　二、關(guān)于“條塊體制”問(wèn)題的相關(guān)研究

　有學(xué)者較早研究了中國(guó)條塊體制的形成原因和表現(xiàn)形式，認(rèn)為條塊體制是一種政府結(jié)構(gòu)形式，是層級(jí)制與職能制的相互結(jié)合，體現(xiàn)了國(guó)家行政管理中科層間的權(quán)

　威關(guān)系，同時(shí)受到國(guó)家結(jié)構(gòu)形式的影響。條塊體制多存在于單一制國(guó)家和集權(quán)制國(guó)家。條塊關(guān)系主要表現(xiàn)為上級(jí)職能部門(mén)條條與下級(jí)地方政府塊塊之間的關(guān)系、上級(jí)職能部門(mén)與下級(jí)職能部門(mén)之間的關(guān)系、上級(jí)政府與下級(jí)政府之間的關(guān)系三種。

　謝慶奎在研究中國(guó)政府府際關(guān)系時(shí)，提出“改善和理順政府部門(mén)之間的府際關(guān)系，一要有規(guī)范，少一點(diǎn)隨意性二要減少垂直關(guān)系，多一點(diǎn)指導(dǎo)關(guān)系三要分權(quán)，直至走向地方自治”。他認(rèn)為條條部門(mén)的類(lèi)型主要有三種一是條塊結(jié)合，以塊為主的機(jī)構(gòu)二是條塊結(jié)合，以條管為主的機(jī)構(gòu)三是國(guó)有企事業(yè)單位，上級(jí)條條部門(mén)主管業(yè)務(wù)，地方塊塊政府管黨群關(guān)系。

　林尚立認(rèn)為條塊關(guān)系之間具有三方面的矛盾。第一，權(quán)力關(guān)系中的集中與分散的矛盾第二，行政關(guān)系上的政策之間的矛盾第三，財(cái)政上的分權(quán)與分錢(qián)之間的矛盾。

　朱光磊認(rèn)為“職責(zé)同構(gòu)”長(zhǎng)期存在是導(dǎo)致條塊矛盾產(chǎn)生的主要制度根源 而周振超進(jìn)一步深挖條塊體制產(chǎn)生的根源，認(rèn)為“軸心輻射模式”為特征的國(guó)家整合方式導(dǎo)致了職責(zé)同構(gòu)，而職責(zé)同構(gòu)又導(dǎo)致條塊矛盾的產(chǎn)生。

　除此之外，還有一些博士論文對(duì)條塊體制問(wèn)題略有涉及，但基本不超出上述幾位學(xué)者的論述。這些學(xué)者從靜態(tài)的、宏觀的制度結(jié)構(gòu)角度，對(duì)我過(guò)行政管理體制中存在的“條塊關(guān)系”進(jìn)行了深入而精辟的研究，對(duì)我們認(rèn)識(shí)條塊體制具有十分重要的價(jià)值。但是這些研究大都采取傳統(tǒng)的制度研究方法，從靜態(tài)結(jié)構(gòu)的類(lèi)型學(xué)角度進(jìn)行規(guī)范層面的探討，局限是一方面缺乏科學(xué)的實(shí)證研究加以證明，二是難以揭示“條塊關(guān)系”在我國(guó)政治過(guò)程中的具體運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)。

　外文文獻(xiàn)譯文

　政府間關(guān)系沖突和尼日利亞第四共和國(guó) 的資源控制 Ojo，John Sunday M.A.英國(guó)利茲大學(xué)政治與國(guó)際研究學(xué)院。

　2013 年 9 月 21 日收到，2014 年 3 月 14 日接受，2014 年 3 月出版

　1 政府間關(guān)系概念化 政府間關(guān)系的起源植根于美國(guó)聯(lián)邦制。它出現(xiàn)在 19 世紀(jì)，當(dāng)時(shí)各級(jí)政府之間存在著許多需要合作的問(wèn)題。政府間關(guān)系是解決政治體制內(nèi)問(wèn)題的政治協(xié)同作用。政府間關(guān)系的概念吸引了許多政治學(xué)者。政府間關(guān)系包括各級(jí)政府在政策和方案上的統(tǒng)一。然而，政府間關(guān)系沒(méi)有普遍的定義。不同的學(xué)者根據(jù)他們不同的看法和各自領(lǐng)域中現(xiàn)有的政治制度來(lái)界定。政府間關(guān)系必須被視為一個(gè)國(guó)家政治單位之間相互作用的媒介。它可以定義為實(shí)現(xiàn)共同目標(biāo)的多層次政府之間的關(guān)系。政府間關(guān)系原則必須被視為一種政治協(xié)同作用，以補(bǔ)充各級(jí)政府為國(guó)家政治制度生存所作的努力。其目的本質(zhì)上是互補(bǔ)的，因?yàn)槠湎嗷ヂ?lián)系的目的是在規(guī)定的政治和憲法安排框架內(nèi)相互幫助。根據(jù) Lawson（2011）引用的 Ogunna（1996:350），政府間關(guān)系（IGR）指的是“兩個(gè)或多個(gè)政府層面之間相互作用、合作和相互依賴(lài)的復(fù)雜模式”，從這些定義可以推斷，IGR 指的是在兩個(gè)或多個(gè)政府層面之間發(fā)生的各種活動(dòng)或相互作用。他是一個(gè)國(guó)家內(nèi)不同級(jí)別的政府。政府間關(guān)系的組合和排列也是政府間關(guān)系的一個(gè)國(guó)家。重要的是要指出，在政府間關(guān)系中，各級(jí)政府都有獨(dú)立和獨(dú)特的作用要發(fā)揮；例如，地方政府有獨(dú)立的作用要發(fā)揮，以期實(shí)現(xiàn)共同的目標(biāo)，造福于整個(gè)國(guó)家。Abdullahi（2009:75）認(rèn)為，語(yǔ)言起源以及政府間關(guān)系（IGR）的精確定義仍然很難確定。然而，我們今天所接受的政府間關(guān)系的最充分描述歸功于威廉·安德森·迪爾·賴(lài)特。IGR 這個(gè)術(shù)語(yǔ)已經(jīng)成為學(xué)者、公職人員和普通公民的基本詞匯，特別是在美國(guó)，它強(qiáng)調(diào)了“穿辦公室衣服”的人之間的互動(dòng)。雖然人們普遍認(rèn)為人類(lèi)是負(fù)責(zé)任的，事實(shí)上，他們執(zhí)行政府之

　間的關(guān)系，但金融已成為這些互動(dòng)中最關(guān)鍵的要素。IGR 的這一重要特征，即財(cái)政關(guān)系在美國(guó)和大多數(shù)其他聯(lián)邦制度中都占有非常重要的地位。

　上述觀點(diǎn)意味著，政府的目的不能孤立地實(shí)現(xiàn)，沒(méi)有各級(jí)政府之間的政治和經(jīng)濟(jì)互動(dòng)，就需要相互關(guān)系來(lái)促進(jìn)和促進(jìn)政府政策和方案，以維持良好的治理。因此，政府間關(guān)系可以定義為政治空間內(nèi)各級(jí)政府之間的相互作用。必須有相互作用；否則，政府政策和計(jì)劃將徹底失敗。為了實(shí)現(xiàn)政府的目標(biāo)和目標(biāo)，聯(lián)邦政府和地方政府必須相互作用。Nkwoji，（2013）認(rèn)為，政府間關(guān)系與擁有聯(lián)邦行政系統(tǒng)的州有關(guān)，其中聯(lián)邦、中央或國(guó)家政府與主要的次國(guó)家單位（省、地區(qū)或州）之間的關(guān)系在憲法中正式規(guī)定。這是為了促進(jìn)聯(lián)邦、州和地方各級(jí)政府之間的和平與和諧，促進(jìn)合作而非競(jìng)爭(zhēng)性聯(lián)邦的出現(xiàn)，解決農(nóng)村和城市貧困問(wèn)題。Iyi（2013）認(rèn)為，國(guó)際、國(guó)家和地方各級(jí)政府之間的相互關(guān)系是一個(gè)古老的問(wèn)題。其中一些相互關(guān)系以最非正式的方式出現(xiàn)，而另一些則是正式的。從形式上講，通過(guò)一些不同程度的書(shū)面條約，這些相互關(guān)系被適當(dāng)?shù)刂贫然�。在�?lián)邦政府中，政府間關(guān)系有多種類(lèi)型。這些關(guān)系的整體范圍更廣。這些是聯(lián)邦聯(lián)盟中存在的政府間關(guān)系的主要類(lèi)型。

　2 以下系統(tǒng)被歸類(lèi)為垂直關(guān)系 聯(lián)邦-州關(guān)系：這可以定義為州政府和聯(lián)邦政府在政策實(shí)施方面的相互作用。

　聯(lián)邦-地方關(guān)系：這種關(guān)系在每一個(gè)聯(lián)邦政治制度中并不常見(jiàn)，它可以被稱(chēng)為聯(lián)邦政府和地方政府之間的相互作用。

　當(dāng)?shù)胤秸�府面臨超出國(guó)家政府正常化能力范圍的自然災(zāi)害時(shí)，就會(huì)發(fā)生這種情況。一個(gè)典型的例子是最近聯(lián)邦政府對(duì)奧約州的干預(yù)，當(dāng)時(shí)有洪水影響了尼日利亞奧約州的一些地方政府中的更多民眾。因此，聯(lián)邦政府通過(guò)州政府的政治機(jī)構(gòu)分配了一些資金來(lái)解決這個(gè)問(wèn)題。

　聯(lián)邦-州-地方關(guān)系：這通常發(fā)生在像尼日利亞這樣的國(guó)家，在那里聯(lián)邦政府決定通過(guò)州政府的政治渠道與地方政府聯(lián)系。聯(lián)邦政府在沒(méi)有通過(guò)州政府渠道的情況下直接與地方政府聯(lián)系是不尋常的。

　州-地方關(guān)系：州政府和其管轄范圍內(nèi)的地方政府之間存在這種關(guān)系。一個(gè)很好的例子就是地方政府和州政府之間的聯(lián)合賬戶(hù)。

　 3 它們的特征是水平關(guān)系 狀態(tài)-狀態(tài)關(guān)系：這需要一個(gè)狀態(tài)和另一個(gè)狀態(tài)之間的相互作用。當(dāng)兩個(gè)國(guó)家屬于一個(gè)政黨時(shí)，有時(shí)是可能的。

　這一關(guān)系的主要目的是聯(lián)合資源以實(shí)現(xiàn)發(fā)展目標(biāo)。一個(gè)典型的例子是尼日利亞拉多克 Akintola 大學(xué)的聯(lián)合所有權(quán)，該大學(xué)由奧森州政府和奧約州政府建立。

　地方-地方關(guān)系：當(dāng)兩個(gè)或兩個(gè)以上的地方政府聚集在一起開(kāi)始一個(gè)特定的項(xiàng)目或計(jì)劃時(shí)，這是適用的。

　為了應(yīng)對(duì)可能不受司法管轄的危險(xiǎn)環(huán)境危害，這是非常必要的。一個(gè)很好的例子就是傳染病的發(fā)生，它可能無(wú)法識(shí)別邊界。因此，受影響地方政府的聯(lián)合合作有必要提供補(bǔ)救措施，以應(yīng)對(duì)威脅。在一個(gè)國(guó)家的聯(lián)邦政治范圍內(nèi)，也存在著一種非正式的政府間關(guān)系。這包括該國(guó)地緣政治區(qū)之間的區(qū)域關(guān)系。尼日利亞產(chǎn)油國(guó)州長(zhǎng)論壇就是一個(gè)很好的典型例子。它也可能以政黨的形式出現(xiàn)，例如人民民主黨（PDP）各州州長(zhǎng)論壇。從上述分析中可以看出，政府間關(guān)系是聯(lián)邦制度中的政治必要性。因此，政府間的合作對(duì)于公民的普遍福利的順利運(yùn)行和提高已成為當(dāng)務(wù)之急。

　4 定義的沖突 在社會(huì)的每一種人際關(guān)系中，沖突都是不可避免的。沖突可以定義為兩個(gè)或多個(gè)當(dāng)事方之間的分歧、不一致。它涉及社會(huì)、經(jīng)濟(jì)或政治價(jià)值觀的多樣性觀點(diǎn)。根據(jù) Heitler（2012 年）的研究，在任何情況下，事實(shí)、愿望或恐懼都會(huì)相互吸引或推動(dòng)參與者，或者在不同的方向上發(fā)生沖突。沖突可以被定義為具有相反需求、想法、信念、價(jià)值觀或目標(biāo)的人之間的斗爭(zhēng)或競(jìng)爭(zhēng)（基金會(huì)聯(lián)盟）。它是一種開(kāi)放的狀態(tài)，經(jīng)常是持久的戰(zhàn)斗；戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。它也是不相容或?qū)α⒌娜�、思想或興趣之間的不和諧狀態(tài)(自由辭典/沖突）。沖突是指當(dāng)一個(gè)群體中的一個(gè)或多個(gè)成員的信仰或行為在另一個(gè)群體中產(chǎn)生某種形式的摩擦、分歧或不和諧（維基百科，2013 年）。

　5 政府間關(guān)系的決定因素 在每一個(gè)政治制度中，無(wú)論是聯(lián)邦制、邦聯(lián)制還是單一制，政府部門(mén)之間的政府間關(guān)系都有政治上的必要性。在一個(gè)聯(lián)邦州，各級(jí)政府在憲法框架內(nèi)履行職能時(shí)存在平等的傾向。各級(jí)政府將自己視為政府事務(wù)管理和綜合管理的平等伙伴。在一個(gè)統(tǒng)一的政府體系中，存在著強(qiáng)大的中心和薄弱的組成單位。而權(quán)力通常被強(qiáng)加于人。然而，在一個(gè)邦聯(lián)國(guó)家，中央通常很弱，組成單位總是強(qiáng)于中央。在一個(gè)邦聯(lián)制度中，每個(gè)單位都被授予自治權(quán)，他們決定是留在工會(huì)還是退出工會(huì)。聯(lián)邦政府間關(guān)系并不意味著每一次的合作，它可以是談判和沖突的形式。這種關(guān)系的性質(zhì)必須與該聯(lián)盟的政治條件相一致。聯(lián)邦有不同的類(lèi)型，即集中式聯(lián)邦和合作式聯(lián)邦。

　尼日利亞就是一個(gè)典型的集中聯(lián)邦。因此，任何聯(lián)邦州的政府間關(guān)系通常都是由這種社會(huì)的動(dòng)態(tài)決定的。在每一個(gè)政治制度中，政府間關(guān)系的決定因素是多種多樣的。

　以下是：

　聯(lián)邦的政治進(jìn)程：這是指在該國(guó)實(shí)行的政黨制度。在世界范圍內(nèi)，有兩種類(lèi)型：一方制和多方制。在多黨制的政治體制中，反對(duì)黨在一切活動(dòng)中都傾向于對(duì)執(zhí)政黨進(jìn)行制約。這個(gè)制度證明了孟德斯鳩的制衡思想是正確的，因?yàn)榻^對(duì)權(quán)力絕對(duì)腐敗。

　多黨制鼓勵(lì)反對(duì)黨制止執(zhí)政黨的過(guò)分行為。然而，一黨制帶來(lái)了專(zhuān)制、壟斷的政府。社會(huì)性質(zhì)：社會(huì)性質(zhì)是指社會(huì)的性質(zhì)和社會(huì)構(gòu)成。例如，在一個(gè)宗教和文化價(jià)值豐富的普魯里族社會(huì)。在這樣的社會(huì)里，人們對(duì)政治形勢(shì)的感知是不同的，因此，每個(gè)群體都互相懷疑，這種懷疑總是表現(xiàn)在政治內(nèi)部的政府間關(guān)系中。社會(huì)憲法：憲法是一系列關(guān)于如何治理一個(gè)政治團(tuán)體的基本法律、規(guī)則和原則，無(wú)論是書(shū)面的還是非書(shū)面的、法律的還是法律上的。憲法安排總是決定政府間關(guān)系的管理。例如，在尼日利亞這樣的聯(lián)邦憲法中，各級(jí)政府的自治權(quán)通常在憲法中得到維護(hù)。他們認(rèn)為自己在政治上是平等的伙伴。而統(tǒng)一憲法則以極弱的組成單位將權(quán)力強(qiáng)加于人。聯(lián)邦的體制結(jié)構(gòu)：這涉及到國(guó)家的結(jié)構(gòu)安排。重要的是，財(cái)政實(shí)力總是決定著單位的政治實(shí)力。政治內(nèi)部不同制度的資源配置更好地解釋了這種單位的活力和力量。公民的政治行為：政治行為強(qiáng)調(diào)人們對(duì)政治問(wèn)題的認(rèn)知。人民之間的態(tài)度也決定著政府間的關(guān)系。

　6 尼日利亞第四共和國(guó)政府間關(guān)系沖突與資源控制問(wèn)題研究 政府間關(guān)系（1GR）描述了一個(gè)國(guó)家內(nèi)各級(jí)政府之間或各級(jí)政府之間發(fā)生的活動(dòng)或互動(dòng)的范圍。它涵蓋了它們之間關(guān)系的組合和排列。尼日利亞聯(lián)邦多年來(lái)發(fā)生的事件表明，聯(lián)邦政府在政府間關(guān)系中對(duì)政府間關(guān)系的主導(dǎo)地位過(guò)高，這是不恰當(dāng)?shù)�，現(xiàn)有的政府間政策協(xié)調(diào)機(jī)制和機(jī)構(gòu)非常薄弱，需要改進(jìn)和加強(qiáng)（Lawson，2011 年）。尼日利亞政府間關(guān)系的性質(zhì)一直是一個(gè)矛盾的性質(zhì)。多年來(lái)，不同級(jí)別的政府出于某種原因一直在爭(zhēng)論不休。準(zhǔn)確地說(shuō)，第四共和國(guó)的政治管理以尼日利亞政治聯(lián)盟內(nèi)部的政府間關(guān)系沖突為特征。許多州已將聯(lián)邦政府告上法庭，以挑戰(zhàn)其憲法管轄權(quán)。在第四共和國(guó)，法院對(duì)聯(lián)邦政府的行為或不作為提出了各種各樣的挑戰(zhàn)，這在資源控制、地方政府創(chuàng)建和聯(lián)邦政府的管轄權(quán)方面是顯而易見(jiàn)的。各種人之間的突出沖突。

　 以下外文文獻(xiàn)原文：

　An X-ray of Inter-governmental Relation conflicts and resource control in the fourth Republic in Nigeria Ojo, John Sunday M.A. School of Politics and International studies University of Leeds, United Kingdom. Received 21 st September, 2013, Accepted 14 th March, 2014, Published March 2014

　1 Intergovernmental relation conceptualized The origin of intergovernmental relation is rooted in American federalism. It emerged in the 19 th century when there were numerous problems among the various levels of government which necessitate cooperation. Inter-governmental relation is a political synergy to resolve problems within a political system. The concept of

　intergovernmental relation has attracted many scholars of politics. Intergovernmental relation embraces togetherness in policy and programme of different levels of government. However, there is no universal definition of intergovernmental relation; various scholars defined it in accordance with their varying perceptions and existing political systems in their domain. Intergovernmental relationship must be seen as a medium of interaction among the political units in a country. It could be defined as relationship between multi-level governments for the achievement of common goals. The principle of intergovernmental relation must be seen as a political synergy to complement the effort of each level of government for the survivability of the nation’s political system. Its purpose is complementary in nature because the purpose of its inter-connectedness is to assist each other within the framework of stipulated political and constitutional arrangements. According to Ogunna (1996:350) cited in Lawson (2011) intergovernmental relations(IGR) refer to ‘the complex pattern of interactions,cooperation and inter-dependence between two or more levels of government.’ From these definitions, it can be inferred that IGR refers to the gamut activities or interactions which takes place between and among the different levels of government within a country. Also covered by IGR are the combinations and permutations of relationships among these levels of government with in a country. It is important to state that in IGR, each level of government has an independent and unique role to play;for example, the local level has an independent role to play with the view to achieving common goals to the benefit and well-being of the entire country. Abdullahi,(2009:75) posited that philological origin as well as the precise definition of intergovernmental relations (IGR)has remained quite elusive. However, the fullest characterization of intergovernmental relations as we have accepted them today is credited to William Anderson Deil Wright. The term IGR, which has become an essential vocabulary of scholars, public officials, and ordinary citizens, particularly in America, lay emphasis on interactions among human beings ‘clothed with office’.While it is accepted that human beings are responsible and in fact they carry out the relations between governments, finance has emerged as the most critical

　element of these interactions. This important feature of IGR, viz. fiscal relations, has assumed a very important position in the American as in most other federal systems. The above view implies that the purpose of government cannot be achieved in isolation without political and economic interaction among the levels of government, it require mutual relationship to foster and promote governmental policies and programme for the sustenance of good governance. Therefore intergovernmental relation could be defined as interaction among the various levels of government within a political space. There must be interaction; otherwise there would be total failure of government policies and programmes. The federal-state and local government must interact with each other in order to achieve governmental goals and objectives. Nkwoji, (2013) opines that Intergovernmental relations is associated with states having a federal administrative system where the relationship between the federal, central or national government and major sub-national units (province, region or state) are formally spelt out in the constitution. This seek to promote peace and harmony among the levels of government which are the federal, state and local government, to enhance the emergence of co-operative rather than competitive federation and to solve the problem of rural and urban poverty. Iyi (2013) claims that the issue of interrelations between and among governments at international, national and local levels is an old one. Some of such interrelations come about in most informal ways while others are formal. In the formal sense, the interrelations are duly institutionalized through some forms of written treaties of differing magnitudes. In a federal state, there are various types of intergovernmental relation. These relationships are wider in scope in its entirety. These are the major types of intergovernmental relations that exist across federal unions.

　The following systems are categorized as vertical relations Federal-State relationships: This may be defined as interaction between the state government and the federal government in terms of policy implementations. Federal-local relationship: This type of relationship is not common in every

　federal political system, it could be referred to as interactions between the federal government and the local government. It’s always occur when local government is facing natural disasters which beyond the capacity of the state government to normalize. A typical example of this is recent federal government intervention in Oyo state when there was flood which affected larger populace in some local governments of Oyo state in Nigeria. As a result of this, the federal government allotted some funds through the political instrumentality of state government to address the problem.

　Federal-State-Local relationships: This is usually occurs in a country like Nigeria where the federal government decides to relate with the local government through the political channel of the state government. It becomes unusual for the federal government to directly relate to the local government without passing through the channel of state government. State-local relationships: This exists between the state-government and local government within its own jurisdiction. A good example of this is joint account between the local government and state government.

　These are characterized as horizontal relationship State-state relationship: This entails interactions between a state and another. It is occasionally possible when two states belong to a political party.

　The major aim of this relationship is to jointly pool resources together to achieve developmental goals. A typical example of this is joint ownership of Ladoke Akintola University in Nigeria which was established by Osun and Oyo state governments.

　Local-local relationship: This is applicable when two or more local government come together to embark on a particular project or programme.

　It is very necessary in order to combat dangerous environmental hazard that might not recognized jurisdictionally bounded. A good example of this is occurrence of epidemic disease which may not recognize boundary. It is therefore necessary for joint collaborations of the affected local governments to provide remedial measures in combating the menace. There is also an informal intergovernmental relationship

　within the federal political spectrum of a nation. This includes regional relationship among the geo-political zone of the country. A very good typical example of this is forum of governors of oil producing states in Nigeria. It might also come in form of political party such as forum of the governors of People Democratic Party (PDP) states. Importing from the foregoing analysis, intergovernmental relations is a political necessity in a federal system. Therefore, it becomes imperative for government collaborations for the smooth running and enhancement of the general welfare of the citizenry.

　Conflict defined Conflict is inevitable in every interpersonal relationship in the society. Conflict may be defined as disagreement, discordance between two or more parties. It entails diverse views about social, economic or political values in a society. According to Heitler (2012) conflict exists in any situation where facts, desires or fears pull or push participants against each other or in divergent directions. Conflict may be defined as a struggle or contest between people with opposing needs, ideas, beliefs, values or goals (Foundation Coalition.org). It is a state of open often prolonged fighting; a battle of war. It is also a state of disharmony between incompatible or antithetical persons, ideas or interest (the free dictionary.com/conflict). Conflict refers to some form of frictions disagreements or discords arising within a group when the beliefs or actions of one or more members of another group (Wikipedia, 2013).

　DETERMINANTS

　OF

　INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATION In every political system be it federal, confederal or unitary there is a political necessity for intergovernmental relations among the sphere or units of government. In a federal state, there is tendency of equality among the levels of government to perform their functions within the constitutional framework. Each level of government sees itself as equal partner in the management and general administration of governmental affairs. In a unitary system of government, there is strong centre with

　weak constituent units. While the power is usually arrogated to the central authority. However, in a confederal state, the centre is usually very weak, the constituent units are always stronger than the centre. In a confederal system, every unit is granted autonomy, they decide whether to stay in the union or to back out. Intergovernmental relation in a federal state does not mean cooperation in every times, it can be in form of bargaining and conflict. The nature of the relationship must be in accordance with the political condition in that federation. There are different types of federation, namely; centralized federation and cooperative federation. A typical example of centralized federation is Nigeria. Consequently, intergovernmental relation in any federal state is usually determined by the dynamics of such society. There are various determinants of inter-governmental relations in every political system.

　These are the following; The political process in the federation: This is refers to the political party system in operation in the country. All over the world, there are two types, namely; one party system and multi-party system. In multi-party political system, there is tendency for opposition party to check the ruling party in all its dealings. This system justified Montesquieu ideology of check and balances because absolute power corrupt absolutely. The multi party system encourages opposition party to check the excesses of the ruling party. However, the single party system brings about despotic and monopolistic government. The character of the society: The character of the society implies the nature and social composition of that society. For instance, in a pluri-ethnic society where religious and cultural values abounds. In such society, the people perceive political situation in a different manner, therefore every group is suspicious of one another and such suspicious is always manifested in intergovernmental relation within the polity. The constitution of the society: Constitution is a series of fundamental law, rules and principles, written or unwritten, legal or extra-legal, concerning how a political community is to be governed. The constitutional arrangement always determines the management of intergovernmental relation. For instance in a federal constitution like Nigeria, autonomy of the different

　levels of government is usually uphold in the constitution. They see themselves as equal partner in the polity. While the unitary constitution embrace arrogation of power to the centre with very weak constituent units. The institutional structure in the federation: This involves structural arrangement of the country. Importantly, financial strength always determines the political strength of the unit. The resource allocation of different institution within the polity better explain the vibrancy and strength of such unit. The political behavior of the citizens: The political behavior emphasizes people perception towards political issues. The attitude of the people towards one another is also determining the intergovernmental relation.

　Examination of Intergovernmental Relation Conflicts and resource control in the fourth Republic in Nigeria Intergovernmental Relations (1GR) describes the gamut of activities or interactions that takes place between or among the different levels of government within a country. It covers the combinations and permutations of relationship among them. Events over the years in Nigeria"s federation have shown the over-dominance of the federal government in relation to IGR, which is not proper, the existing mechanisms and institutions for intergovernmental policy coordination are very weak and need to be improved and strengthened (Lawson, 2011). The nature of inter-governmental relation in Nigeria has been a conflictual one. Over the years, different levels of government have been at loggerheads for one reason or the other. To be precise, the political administration of fourth republic characterized with intergovernmental relation conflicts within Nigerian political union. Many states have taken federal government to court to challenge its constitutional jurisdiction. In the fourth republic, there were various instigation in the court of law to challenge the actions or omissions of federal government which were evident in resource control, local government creation and jurisdictional power of federal government. The prominent conflicts among the various.

相關(guān)熱詞搜索：外文 條塊 變遷