ZHANG Jian;LI Xin;JIANG Ling;

• 1:School of Government
• 2: Central University of Finance and Economics
• 3:School of Public Policy and Management
• 4: Tsinghua University

Abstract：

Selecting appropriate policy instruments to achieve specific policy goals constitutes a crucial theme in public policy research. Current studies on policy instruments in China often exhibit a tendency to uncritically apply Western theoretical frameworks, failing to deeply comprehend and elucidate the theoretical logic of policy instrument selection and its distinctive practices within China's unique governance system. This paper attempts to construct a multi-level nested theoretical framework for policy instrument selection, encompassing three dimensions: the choice of policy instrument types, the selection of design features for policy instruments, and the holistic adjustment of policy instrument choices. It further analyzes the logic of policy instrument selection embedded within China's indigenous governance context. The study finds that policy instrument selection is a dynamic process that comprehensively considers multiple factors—including the attributes and interrelationships of the instruments themselves, government governance models and preferences, government resources and capacities, and the characteristics of target groups—to achieve a multi-level nested “goal-instrument” matching relationship. Specifically, the selection of policy instrument types is problem-oriented, focusing on the effectiveness of instruments in achieving policy objectives; the selection of design features for policy instruments is results-oriented, emphasizing the implementation of instruments in realizing policy targets; and the holistic adjustment of policy instrument choices is relationship-oriented, highlighting the systemic coordination of instruments in fulfilling policy aims. The logic of policy design shaped by China's state institutions and governance system provides unique value guidance, a richer array of type options, stronger institutional resilience, and greater adjustment space for policy instrument selection, manifesting distinctive Chinese characteristics in policy practice. Future research needs to deepen the understanding of the foundational theories and institutional logic underlying policy instrument selection within China's distinctive political system, strengthen studies on the design features of policy instruments and the holistic adjustment of policy instrument choices, and promote in-depth case analyses and systematic comparative research grounded in China's governance practices. Moreover, it is crucial to explore the systemic impact of emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, on the selection of policy instruments. The marginal contribution of this paper lies in constructing the multi-level nested theoretical framework for policy instrument selection. This framework enriches the explanatory mechanisms for understanding policy instrument choice and offers new perspectives and directions for comprehending the underlying logic of policy instrument selection in China.

Key Words： multi-layered nested;policy instrument selection;policy design;theoretical framework

Abstract:

Keywords:

Foundation: 国家自然科学基金面上项目“政策一致性的理论框架、动态测度与作用机制：以企业数字化绿色化协同转型发展为例”(项目批准号:72574248),“政策组合对企业创新行为的作用机制与情境模拟”(项目批准号:72074239)资助

Authors: ZHANG Jian;LI Xin;JIANG Ling;

References：

• 埃莉诺·奥斯特罗姆，罗伊·加德纳，詹姆斯·沃克.2011.规则、博弈与公共池塘资源[M].王巧玲，任睿，译.西安：陕西人民出版社.Ostrom E,Gardner R,Walker J.2011.Rules,games and public common-pool resources[M].Wang Q L,Ren R,trans.Xi'an:Shaanxi People's Publishing House.(trans.into Chinese) 陈昭.1985.论我国中央银行的两大政策工具[J].中央财政金融学院学报，(3):19-22.Chen Z.1985.On the two main policy instruments of our central bank[J].Journal of Central University of Finance & Economics,(3):19-22.(in Chinese) 陈振明.2015.政策科学教程[M].北京：科学出版社.Chen Z M.2015.Tutorials on policy science[M].Beijing:Science Press.(in Chinese) 陈振明.2017.党中央治国理政政策思想与中国特色政策科学理论构建[J].中国行政管理，(2):6-11.Chen Z M.2017.Policy thoughts embodied in the CPC Central Committee's governance and construction of policy sciences with Chinese characteristics[J].Chinese Public Administration,(2):6-11.(in Chinese) 冯川.2024.试点政策的可错性与可推广性——一个关于政策试验“盆景化”的解释框架[J].政治学研究，(2):206-219,263.Feng C.2024.The fallibility and extensibility of policy:A framework for explaining why policy experiments evolve into bonsai[J].CASS Journal of Political Science,(2):206-219,263.(in Chinese) 贺东航，孔繁斌.2019.中国公共政策执行中的政治势能——基于近20年农村林改政策的分析[J].中国社会科学，(4):4-25,204.He D H,Kong F B.2019.Political potential energy in the implementation of Chinese public policy—An analysis based on the forestry reform policy of the last two decades[J].Social Sciences in China,(4):4-25,204.(in Chinese) 何艳玲.2025.当前人民群体结构的深度重塑与大治理观的确立[J].探索与争鸣，(1):73-90,178-179.He Y L.2025.Deep reshaping of the people's group structure and the establishment of a grand governance perspective[J].Exploration and Free Views,(1):73-90,178-179.(in Chinese) 何艳玲，肖芸.2021.问责总领：模糊性任务的完成与央地关系新内涵[J].政治学研究，(3):114-126,163-164.He Y L,Xiao Y.2021.Accountability power dominates:The completion of ambiguous tasks and the new connotation of central-local relationship[J].CASS Journal of Political Science,(3):114-126,163-164.(in Chinese) 黄萃，任弢，李江，等.2015.责任与利益：基于政策文献量化分析的中国科技创新政策府际合作关系演进研究[J].管理世界，(12):68-81.Huang C,Ren T,Li J,et al.2015.Responsibilities and benefits:A study on the evolution of intergovernmental co-operation on science and technology innovation policies in China based on quantitative analysis of policy literature[J].Journal of Management World,(12):68-81.(in Chinese) 李强彬，支广东，李延伟.2023.中央推进政策试点的差异化政策工具选择逻辑——基于20个案例的定性比较分析[J].公共行政评论，16(1):161-180,200.Li Q B,Zhi G D,Li Y W.2023.The choice logic of differentiated policy tools for central government promotion of policy pilots:A qualitative comparative analysis of 20 cases[J].Journal of Public Administration,16(1):161-180,200.(in Chinese) 李瑞昌.2021.基于“政策关系”的政策知识体系论纲[J].学术月刊，53(3):73-84.Li R C.2021.An outline of policy knowledge system based on policy relations[J].Academic Monthly,53(3):73-84.(in Chinese) 李鑫，姜玲，张剑.2023.单打独斗还是互利共赢?来自新能源汽车推广应用试点城市碳减排效应的证据[J].城市发展研究，30(8):90-99.Li X,Jiang L,Zhang J.2023.Fighting alone or seeking mutual benefits?Evidence from carbon emission reduction effect of new energy vehicle promotion and application pilot cities[J].Urban Development Studies,30(8):90-99.(in Chinese) 王宏伟，周光辉.2023.对口支援：破解大国非均衡性难题的创新实践[J].南京社会科学，(1):70-80.Wang H W,Zhou G H.2023.Pairing assistance:An innovative practice to solve the disequilibrium problem of large-scale countries[J].Nanjing Journal of Social Sciences,(1):70-80.(in Chinese) 王浦劬，汤彬.2019.当代中国治理的党政结构与功能机制分析[J].中国社会科学，(9):4-24,204.Wang P Q,Tang B.2019.An analysis of the party-government structure and functional mechanism of contemporary Chinese governance[J].Social Sciences in China,(9):4-24,204.(in Chinese) 徐东涛.2024.条块关系：理解中国府际关系的一个核心概念[J].治理研究，40(3):34-44,158.Xu D T.2024.The bar block relationship:A core concept of China's intergovernmental relations[J].Governance Studies,40(3):34-44,158.(in Chinese) 杨发明.1996.国外环境政策工具的经济分析[J].环境科学进展，4(1):63-68.Yang F M.1996.Economic analysis of foreign environmental policy instruments[J].Chinese Journal of Environmental Engineering,4(1):63-68.(in Chinese) 臧雷振，任婧楠.2023.从实质性政策工具到程序性政策工具：国家治理的工具选择[J].行政论坛，30(2):85-93.Zang L Z,Ren J N.2023.From substantive policy instruments to procedural policy instruments:The choice of instruments in state governance[J].Administrative Tribune,30(2):85-93.(in Chinese) 张剑，黄萃，叶选挺，等.2016.中国公共政策扩散的文献量化研究——以科技成果转化政策为例[J].中国软科学，(2):145-155.Zhang J,Huang C,Ye X T,et al.2016.Study on China's public policy diffusion based on the quantitative analysis of policy documents:A case study on policies promoting commercialization of scientific and technological achievements[J].China Soft Science,(2):145-155.(in Chinese) 中共中央文献研究室.十八大以来重要文献选编(上)[M].北京：中央文献出版社，2014:497. 周光辉，陈玲玲.2022.巡视巡察：应对规模治理“失察难题”的长效机制[J].行政论坛，28(1):5-16.Zhou G H,Chen L L.2022.Patrol inspection:A long-term mechanism to deal with the “oversight problem” of scale governance[J].Administrative Tribune,28(1):5-16.(in Chinese) Capano G,Engeli I.2022.Using instrument typologies in comparative research:Conceptual and methodological trade-offs[J].Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis:Research and Practice,24(2):99-116. de Bruijn H,Porter A L.2004.The education of a technology policy analyst—to process management[J].Technology Analysis & Strategic Management,16(2):261-274. Dermont C,Ingold K,Kammermann L,et al.2017.Bringing the policy making perspective in:A political science approach to social acceptance[J].Energy Policy,108:359-368. Flanagan K,Uyarra E,Laranja M.2011.Reconceptualising the ‘policy mix’ for innovation[J].Research Policy,40(5):702-713. Gunningham N,Sinclair D.1999.Regulatory pluralism:Designing policy mixes for environmental protection[J].Law & Policy,21(1):49-76. Hall P A.1993.Policy paradigms,social learning,and the state:The case of economic policymaking in Britain[J].Comparative Politics,25(3):275-296. He L S,Dai Y X,Guo Y.2025.Aligning behavioral assumptions underlying policy instruments:A principle for designing policy mixes targeting behavioral change[J].Public Administration,103(4):1178-1201. Hood C.1983a.Using bureaucracy sparingly[J].Public Administration,61(2):197-208. Hood C C.1983b.Tools of government[M].London:Red Globe Press. Howlett M.1991.Policy instruments,policy styles,and policy implementation:National approaches to theories of instrument choice[J].Policy Studies Journal,19(2):1-21. Howlett M,del Rio P.2015.The parameters of policy portfolios:Verticality and horizontality in design spaces and their consequences for policy mix formulation[J].Environment and Planning C:Government and Policy,33(5):1233-1245. Howlett M,Kim J,Weaver P.2006.Assessing instrument mixes through program- and agency-level data:Methodological issues in contemporary implementation research[J].Review of Policy Research,23(1):129-151. Howlett M,Ramesh M,Capano G.2024.The role of tool calibrations and policy specifications in policy change:Evidence from healthcare reform efforts in Korea 1990-2020[J].Journal of Asian Public Policy,17(1):1-20. Howlett M,Giest S,Mukherjee I,et al.2025.New policy tools and traditional policy models:Better understanding behavioural,digital and collaborative instruments[J].Policy Design and Practice,8(1):121-137. Kemp R,Pontoglio S.2011.The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments—A typical case of the blind men and the elephant?[J].Ecological Economics,72:28-36. Mukherjee I,Guha P.2024.Policy-takers and policy calibrations:Exploring the demand side of micro-level policy design choices[J].Policy Design and Practice,7(2):191-209. Rogge K S,Reichardt K.2016.Policy mixes for sustainability transitions:An extended concept and framework for analysis[J].Research Policy,45(8):1620-1635. Salamon L M.1981.Rethinking public management:Third-party government and the changing forms of government action[J].Public Policy,29(3):255-275. Schneider A,Ingram H.1990.Behavioral assumptions of policy tools[J].The Journal of Politics,52(2):510-529. Schneider A,Ingram H.1993.Social construction of target populations:Implications for politics and policy[J].American Political Science Review,87(2):334-347. Sheffer L,Loewen P J,Lucas J.2024.Long-term policymaking and politicians' beliefs about voters:Evidence from a 3-year panel study of politicians[J].Governance,37(2):395-410. Virani A,Bali A S,Cashore B,et al.2024.The design roots of policy problems:Unpacking the role of procedural tools in design fitness and resilience[J].Public Administration,102(1):302-317. Webber D J.1986.Analyzing political feasibility:Political scientists1 unique contribution to policy analysis[J].Policy Studies Journal,14(4):545-553. Zhang J,Li X,Liu X Y,et al.2024.International evaluation of the National Natural Science Foundation of China:A process of evaluation-enabled policy transfer[J].Journal of Asian Public Policy,17(3):541-564. Zhu X F,Zhao H.2021.Experimentalist governance with interactive central-local relations:Making new pension policies in China[J].Policy Studies Journal,49(1):13-36.
• (1)战略性政策目标是特定政策领域中的长远愿景和战略意图,如“生态文明建设实现新进步”;策略性政策目标是战略目标的具体化,用以指导资源分配与行动规划,如“主要污染物排放总量持续减少”;操作性政策目标是策略目标的具体化,是对执行主体与目标群体的具体要求或明确的行动方案,如“2025年地级及以上城市空气质量优良天数比率提高到87.5%”。