No abstract

This study proposes a moderated mediation model to understand how social media use influences political polarization through two competing mechanisms and how such mechanisms are conditioned by political tolerance. The model was tested with a survey of 1,200 Hong Kong residents after the prolonged Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill movement. We found that social media use was positively correlated with attitudinal and affective polarization. Such polarizing effects were channeled through politically motivated selective avoidance, but there were noticeable depolarizing effects induced by increased network heterogeneity. More importantly, political tolerance could further amplify the depolarizing effects of social media use. In contrast, political tolerance cannot counteract the polarizing effect of social media use channeled through selective avoidance.

No abstract

草地是中国最大的陆地生态系统，占国土面积的 41.7%，具有固碳释氧、调节气 候、涵养水源、防风固沙等多种生态功能 [1] 。为应对严重的草地退化形势，退牧还草工程 于 2003 年启动，目前已覆盖 13 省区的 279 个县 (旗) 。该工程涉及禁牧、休牧、轮牧、 围栏封育、舍饲圈养、退化草地治理、人工草地建设、生态移民、草原补奖等一系列措 施，对广大牧区产生了长远深刻的影响。但时至今日，困扰草原牧区的"三牧"问题 (牧区生态退化、牧业成本攀升、牧民生计困难) 依然严峻 [2][3][4] 。鉴于"禁而不止" "休而 不息" "监管虚化"等问题突出，2021 年中央"一号文件"再次提出要进一步完善草原 补奖政策，稳步恢复草原生态环境。 绩效评价作为衡量政府目标与现实差距、发现问题并促进政策优化的重要工具，在 新一轮政策周期，如何利用该工具实现退牧还草工程的提质增效成为迫切需要思考的问 题。退牧还草工程绩效不彰的原因已被广泛讨论，其根源在于，作为政策被动接受者、 有限理性经济人和主观能动者的农牧民因为自身利益与政府进行着持续博弈 [5,6] 。因此， 只有切换到农牧民和基层政府两个核心利益相关群体视角，才能更好辨识问题症结所 在。目前，已有部分学者考虑从政府、农牧民视角评价工程绩效 [7][8][9] ，但总体较少，且少 有人同时考虑双方的意见并比较其异同。作为中国首个国家公园，三江源国家公园具有

Government response to public opinion is essential to democratic theory and practice. However, previous research on the relationship between public opinion and government attention predominantly focuses on western societies. Little is known about such relationship in nonwestern or nondemocratic societies. Drawing upon time-series data of public opinion polls and government press releases, this study examines the dynamic relationships between public opinion and government attention in posthandover Hong Kong. The findings reveal that the responsiveness of the Hong Kong government to public opinion varies across issue domains and is constrained by the political power from the central government in Beijing.