大数据驱动政府决策智能化的协同演进逻辑——基于技术驱动与治理调适的分析框架
Collaborative Evolution Logic of Big Data-Driven Intelligent Government Decision-Making—A Framework of Technological Drive and Governance Adaptation
摘要: 大数据与人工智能正驱动政府决策向智能化转型,成为全球治理现代化的重要议题。当前研究显示,该领域在国内外均呈现出从“技术赋能”到“风险反思”再到“制度构建”的阶段性演进特征,但因制度环境差异,其研究重心有所不同。国外研究较早聚焦于算法问责、伦理框架与法律适配,注重个体权利与程序正义;国内研究则更强调国家战略引领下的整体智治、场景创新与治理效能,体现出技术应用与治理体系深度融合的本土路径。基于此,研究进一步提出“技术迭代–治理适应”协同演进框架,指出政府决策智能化并非单纯的技术引入过程,而是技术能力与治理体系在持续互动中动态调适的进程。未来研究可在深化“技术–制度”互动机制、开展过程追踪与情境化分析、构建兼顾多价值的综合评估体系、以及探索资源差异条件下的包容性实施路径等方面持续推进,以推动形成更稳健、可信且适应性强的智能决策生态。
Abstract: Big data and artificial intelligence are driving the transformation of government decision-making toward intelligence, making it a critical issue in global governance modernization. Current research reveals that this field exhibits a stage-based evolution from “technology empowerment” to “risk reflection” and then to “institutional construction” both domestically and internationally. However, due to differences in institutional environments, research priorities vary. International studies have long focused on algorithmic accountability, ethical frameworks, and legal adaptation, emphasizing individual rights and procedural justice. In contrast, domestic research prioritizes holistic smart governance, scenario-based innovation, and governance efficiency under national strategic guidance, reflecting a local pathway characterized by the deep integration of technological application and governance systems. Building on this, the study further proposes a “technological iteration—governance adaptation” collaborative evolution framework, arguing that intelligent government decision-making is not merely a process of technology introduction but a dynamic adjustment process in which technological capacity and governance systems continuously interact. Future research should deepen the understanding of “technology-institution” interaction mechanisms, employ process-tracing and contextualized analysis, develop comprehensive evaluation systems that balance multiple values, and explore inclusive implementation pathways under varying resource conditions, thereby fostering a more robust, trustworthy, and adaptive intelligent decision-making ecosystem.
文章引用:徐利芳. 大数据驱动政府决策智能化的协同演进逻辑——基于技术驱动与治理调适的分析框架[J]. 现代管理, 2026, 16(7): 126-133. https://doi.org/10.12677/mm.2026.167144

参考文献

[1] https://www.gartner.com/en/information-technology/glossary/big-data
[2] Margetts, H. and Dunleavy, P. (2013) The Second Wave of Digital-Era Governance: A Quasi-Paradigm for Government on the Web. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[3] Luna-Reyes, L.F. and Gil-Garcia, J.R. (2014) Digital Government Transformation and Internet Portals: The Co-Evolution of Technology, Organizations, and Institutions. Government Information Quarterly, 31, 545-555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[4] 孟天广. 数字治理生态: 数字政府的理论迭代与模型演化[J]. 政治学研究, 2022(5): 13-26, 151-152.
[5] 魏巍, 郑功玥. “技术-制度”协同演化视角下政府监管数字化转型——基于国外文献综述研究[J]. 长白学刊, 2026(1): 119-132.
[6] Metcalf, J., Moss, E., Watkins, E.A., Singh, R. and Elish, M.C. (2021) Algorithmic Impact Assessments and Accountability. Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 3-10 March 2021, 735-746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[7] Micheli, M., Ponti, M., Craglia, M. and Berti Suman, A. (2020) Emerging Models of Data Governance in the Age of Datafication. Big Data & Society, 7, 1-15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[8] Valdenegro-Toro, M. and Stoykova, R. (2024) The Dilemma of Uncertainty Estimation for General Purpose AI in the EU AI Act. arXiv: 2408.11249.
[9] Wise, A.E. and Lipsky, M. (1981) Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. Michigan Law Review, 3, 285-302.
[10] Bovens, M. and Zouridis, S. (2002) From Street‐Level to System‐Level Bureaucracies: How Information and Communication Technology Is Transforming Administrative Discretion and Constitutional Control. Public Administration Review, 62, 174-184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[11] Tangi, L., Janssen, M., Benedetti, M., et al. (2020) Barriers and Drivers of Digital Transformation in Public Organizations: Results from a Survey in the Netherlands. In: Viale Pereira, G., et al., Eds., Electronic Government, Springer, 42-56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[12] Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S. and Tinkler, J. (2006) Digital Era Governance: IT Corporations, the State, and e-Government. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[13] Janssen, M. and van den Hoven, J. (2015) Big and Open Linked Data (BOLD) in Government: A Challenge to Transparency and Privacy? Government Information Quarterly, 32, 363-368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[14] 蒲攀, 马海群. 大数据时代我国开放数据政策模型构建[J]. 情报科学, 2017, 35(2): 3-9.
[15] 周文泓, 夏俊英, 谢玉雪. 我国地方政府开放数据的进展、问题与对策[J]. 图书馆论坛, 2018, 38(7): 72-79.
[16] 邹伟, 李娉. 技术嵌入与危机学习: 大数据技术如何推进城市应急管理创新?——基于健康码扩散的实证分析[J]. 城市发展研究, 2021, 28(2): 90-96.
[17] 吴俊杰, 郑凌方, 杜文宇, 等. 从风险预测到风险溯源: 大数据赋能城市安全管理的行动设计研究[J]. 管理世界, 2020, 36(8): 189-202.
[18] 郑保章, 冯湜. 大数据背景下的隐私保护问题研究——以新冠肺炎疫情防控中的个人信息使用为视角[J]. 学习与探索, 2021(4): 74-78.
[19] 颜佳华. 提升政府治理算法决策公平性的机制与路径[J]. 行政论坛, 2022, 29(3): 34-40.
[20] 詹国辉. 迈向整体智治: 数字政府一体化的内在逻辑与实践进路[J]. 贵州师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2025(6): 97-106.
[21] 吴玉霞, 刘欢. 数治幻觉: 基层数字化治理中的效能悖论与生成机制——基于B市的案例研究[J]. 公共管理学报, 2025, 22(2): 36-48, 169-170.
[22] 郑戈. 人工智能立法的价值取向与模式比较[J]. 交大法学, 2025(6): 32-46.
[23] 付新华. 全球人工智能立法的多元趋势与中国模式[J]. 交大法学, 2025(6): 60-73.
[24] 王娟, 汤书昆. 生成式信息隐私鸿沟伦理风险探讨[J]. 科学学研究, 2025, 43(6): 1293-1301.
[25] Busuioc, M. (2020) Accountable Artificial Intelligence: Holding Algorithms to Account. Public Administration Review, 81, 825-836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] 杨菁, 刘俊娜. 人民性的实现: 城市社会治理人机协同路径与公共决策模型研究[J]. 学术研究, 2025(6): 67-75, 99.
[27] 江小涓. 分布式AI治理: 技术制度博弈与社会政府协同[J]. 学术月刊, 2025, 57(10): 5-13.
[28] 王佳怡, 洪博, 孙梦航, 等. 无缝隙政府: 部门协作的数字融合策略——基于中新天津生态城数据跨部门共享实践的个案研究[J]. 城市观察, 2025(5): 144-159, 164.
[29] 李江, 王佳祥. 数字技术驱动城市基层统合治理的运作机制与优化路径——基于“理念-能力-场景”框架的分析[J/OL]. 西华师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版): 1-14. https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.16246/j.cnki.51-1674/c.20251106.001, 2026-07-08. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[30] 郑磊. 数字治理的效度、温度和尺度[J]. 治理研究, 2021, 37(2): 5-16, 2.