From "Legitimate Self-Regarding Needs" to "Public-Oriented Provision"

Defining government responsibilities is a fundamental issue in public administration research. Existing studies discuss government functions from perspectives such as functional division, public service delivery, and public value, but they seldom ask a more fundamental question: what is the internal logic through which government responsibilities originate from basic human needs, and how should tensions among different dimensions of responsibility be balanced? Starting from the concept of "real human beings," this paper proposes an analytical framework of "legitimate self-regarding needs — public-oriented provision — government responsibilities." Legitimate self-regarding needs are not selfishness, but rather people's legitimate pursuit of safety, development, dignity, capability, and space for choice under the condition of not harming others or public order. Based on this, the paper identifies eleven governance dimensions and integrates them into a three-tier structure of "subsistence needs — developmental needs — existential needs." The paper further argues that four structural tensions exist within this framework — security vs. freedom, prosperity vs. beauty, convenience vs. equity, and care vs. empowerment — and that the core capacity of governance lies in managing these tensions dynamically. A "context-weight" dynamic calibration model is proposed, specifying different configurations of management, steering, and service functions in crisis, normal, and transitional contexts. Two case studies — Zhejiang's "maximum one visit" reform and Beijing's "handling complaints upon receipt" — are used to demonstrate the framework's diagnostic capacity. This framework translates the people-centered development philosophy into actionable analytical dimensions and offers a new theoretical instrument for service-oriented government construction and public service evaluation.