城市基层应急预案的协同性诊断研究——基于成都市三个市辖区预案文本的内容分析

A Study on the Synergy Diagnosis of Urban Grassroots Emergency Plans—A Content Analysis of Plan Texts from Three Municipal Districts in Chengdu

摘要: 城市基层应急预案的协同性设计缺陷已成为制约应急管理效能的突出问题。本研究以协同治理理论为视角，基于SFIC模型，构建了包含14个指标的三级编码体系，对成都市三个市辖区的14份应急预案文本进行系统的内容分析与协同性诊断。研究发现：预案文本总体协同性得分率仅为57.8%，处于中等偏低水平；其中冲突解决机制、承诺达成机制、合作历史评估三项指标完全缺失，协调权力赋予与中立性保障严重不足，呈现出资源识别、信息透明等技术性内容相对完善，而信任建设、权力赋予、冲突化解等高冲突领域集体失语的特征。成因可归结为制度供给不足、权力结构约束与编制者避责逻辑的相互强化。针对上述问题，从SFIC模型四维度提出了增设协同基础评估专节、赋予牵头机构实质协调权力、强制嵌入冲突解决阶梯规则、构建承诺达成闭环机制等优化对策。本研究为城市基层应急预案的协同性改进提供了可操作的诊断工具与修订路径。

Abstract: The lack of collaborative design in urban grassroots emergency plans has emerged as a critical challenge to emergency management performance. Drawing on collaborative governance theory and the SFIC model, this study develops a three‑tier coding framework with 14 indicators to systematically content‑analyze and diagnose collaboration in 14 plan texts from three districts of Chengdu. Findings show an overall collaboration score of only 57.8%, indicating a relatively low level. Specifically, conflict‑resolution, commitment‑reaching, and cooperation‑history assessment are entirely missing, while coordination authority and neutrality safeguards are severely inadequate. Technical aspects like resource identification and information transparency are relatively robust, yet high‑conflict domains—trust building, empowerment, and conflict resolution—remain collectively unaddressed. This deficiency stems from the interplay of insufficient institutional supply, structural power constraints, and compilers’ blame‑avoidance logic. To address these issues, this paper proposes, from the SFIC model’s four dimensions, measures including a dedicated collaborative‑baseline assessment section, substantive authority for lead agencies, mandatory stepwise conflict‑resolution rules, and a closed‑loop commitment mechanism. This study offers a practical diagnostic instrument and revision pathway for enhancing collaboration in urban grassroots emergency plans.