در جست و جوی معنای حکمرانی؛ از کلان روایت‌ها تا خرده روایت‌ها

به‌موازات فراگیری مفهوم حکمرانی در علوم گوناگون، این واژه در دهه‌های اخیر توجه گسترده‌ای را در عرصه‌های عمومی و بین‌المللی به خود جلب کرده است. گرچه ابهام در تعریف، خود زمینه‌ساز محبوبیت و کاربست بیشتر آن شده است، اما به نظر می‌رسد ضروری است با بررسی نقاط اشتراک و افتراق مجموع تعاریف صاحب‌نظران مطرح که به تبیین این مفهوم پرداخته‌اند، صورت‌بندی دیگری از این مفهوم با هدف تلاشی برای گره‌گشایی از ابهام معنایی آن ارائه کرد. در این پژوهش تلاش شده تا مهم‌ترین تعاریف ارائه شده در خصوص مفهوم حکمرانی در بخش عمومی گردآوری و با روش تحلیل مضمون به تجزیه و تحلیل آن‌ها پرداخته و سپس کلان‌روایت و خرده‌روایتی برای تبیین این مفهوم ارائه شود. در امتداد یافته‌های پژوهش، حکمرانی را می‌توان بدین‌گونه تعریف کرد: «حکمرانی چه در حوزه‌های گوناگون موضوعی نظیر محیط‌زیست، سلامت، اقتصاد و چه در مقیاس‌های مختلف از حکمرانی خُردِ محله‌ای تا حکمرانی جامعه جهانی که در همگی این موضوعات و مقیاس‌ها امکان طرح و بررسی دارد، به فرآیند قاعده‌گذاری و راهبری کلانِ امور مشتمل بر تعیین ارزش‌های منسجم، اهداف متعالی و خط‌مشی‌ها، متقاعدسازی، حمایت و بسیج سرمایه‌ها و تدوین شاخص‌ها به منظور ارزشیابی تحقق، تغییر و یا توقف جهت‌گیری‌ها اشاره دارد. فرآیند راهبری می‌تواند به شیوه‌ها و سبک‌های گوناگون ترکیبی و یا مجزا نظیر استبدادی تا مردم‌سالارانه، بازارمحور یا شبکه‌ای، مبتنی بر فناوری‌های نو و دیجیتالی، متکی بر دیوان‌سالاری یا فن‌سالاری صورت گیرد». بااین‌حال این پژوهش ادعایی برای جامع و مانع بودن تعریف ارائه شده نداشته و ضرورت دارد پژوهش های دیگر به تبین ابعاد گوناگون در تعریف حکمرانی و ارائه تعاریف منسجم تر و کامل تر بپردازند

exploring the meaning of governance; from meta-narratives to sub-narratives

objective: in parallel with the widespread use of the concept of governance in various sciences, this term has attracted widespread attention in the public and international arenas in recent decades. although the ambiguity in the definition has itself paved the way for its greater popularity and application, it seems necessary to present another formulation of this concept by examining the points of commonality and difference of the definitions of prominent experts who have explained this concept, with the aim of trying to unravel its semantic ambiguity. with this aim, the present research has examined the various definitions provided by western scholars and, in an analytical-interpretative effort, while identifying the macro-narrative and micro-narrative in the definition of governance, has presented its definition by combining institutional, structural, process and functional perspectives on the concept of governance.method: this study has attempted to collect the most important definitions presented to explain the concept of “public governance” in the literature and analyzed and presented narratives to define it using the content analysis method. therefore, the basis for classifying data in this article is the position of the theme in the thematic network at three levels of basic, organizing, and global themes based on the method proposed by attride and stirling.findings: this study has presented a macro-narrative to explain the concept of “public governance” in the dual form of governance as internal transformation and regeneration of governments or governance as the development of governing styles beyond governments, which refers to two competing theoretical streams in explaining this term. in an attempt to bridge these two theoretical streams, it was argued that in a broad definition, governance is considered to be any type of political steering involving public and private actors, including traditional forms of government and various types of steering from hierarchical impositions to purely informational actions. however, in a narrow definition of governance, this concept applies only to political steering that uses non-hierarchical methods of guidance such as persuasion or negotiation, and that both private and public actors participate in the policy-making process. the narrow definition of the term governance explicitly contrasts with the traditional tools of hierarchical steering and complicates the analytical understanding of a wide range of decision-making and policy patterns. in order to better understand the types of steering styles, it is necessary to separate steering styles into government and governance. after that, a micro-narrative has also been expressed to categorize and formulate the concept of governance in four dimensions, governance as rules, steering, action and consequence of governing. in the conclusion, a relatively comprehensive definition of this concept has been presented by combining and integrating these perceptions constructively.conclusion: according to research findings, public governance can be defined as the process of rule-making and steering of governing affairs. this includes establishing coherent values, adjusting goals and policies, persuading, supporting and allocating resources, as well as evaluating outcomes to inform decisions, implement changes, or halt current directions. the rule-making and steering process may occur through various combined or separate approaches and styles, such as authoritarian or democratic governance, governance based on bureaucracy or technocracy, market-oriented methods or networks, and newer forms driven by algorithmic and technological innovations. furthermore, governance in the public sector can be planned and analyzed across diverse issue areas, including environmental, health, and economic domains, and ranges from micro-level neighborhood governance to global governance structures. however, this study does not claim to be comprehensive and restrictive of the definition provided, and there is still a need for research to explain the various dimensions in the definition of governance and provide more concise and complete definitions.