Suchergebnisse

Since the new president of the United States Trump wield power people began to doubt the political situation, which thus led to the novel 1984 jump to the top in the list of the best seller. Public concern is that whether George Orwell's allegorical purpose will be realized. Definitely 1984 is known as an anti-totalitarian novel describing the ethical disorder, the revolting principles, the absurd disciplines and ideological deformation of the "Big Ocean" country under the domination of "Big Brother". People living there are forced to fall into ethical dilemma. They have changed their rational thoughts into irrational ones. Besides, they give up their identity of blood relatives and principles of making friends and empower irrationality to control humanity. This article intends to analyze the trauma made by the totalitarian government from the aspects of ethical consciousness.

This article interrogates the operating logic of China's street-level regulatory state, demonstrating that residents' committees (RCs) assume a role as regulatory intermediaries to enhance the efficiency of local governance. Using Shanghai's new recycling regulations as a case study, it explores the mechanisms by which RCs elicit not only citizens' compliance but also active participation. We show that the central mechanisms derive from the RCs' skilful mobilization of particular social forces, namely mianzi and guanxi, which are produced within close-knit social networks inside Shanghai's housing estates (xiaoqu). We advance three arguments in the study of China's emerging regulatory state. First, we show how informal social forces are employed in regulatory governance at the street level, combining authoritarian control with grassroots participation. Second, the focus on RCs as regulatory intermediaries reveals the important role played by these street-level administrative units in policy implementation. Third, we suggest that the RCs' harnessing of informal social forces is essential not only for successful policy implementation at street level but also for the production of the local state's political legitimacy. (China Q / GIGA)

Partial and perceived empowerment in the practice of public hearings, widely spreading across China since the late 1990s and still operating today, is puzzling. Citizens enjoy the right to participation, information, and formal equality but their political empowerment is constrained without the right to elect and dismiss officials there. This article examines the politics of 'authoritarian empowerment,' which combines partial empowerment and sophisticated control, and separates psychological empowerment from political empowerment. Through such a delicate combination and separation, citizens are partially empowered, paradoxically, to prevent their full empowerment. Our study is a supplement to the previous study of authoritarian deliberation (consultation) and phantom democracy, discloses the deficiency of the literature on local deliberative democracy in China, and enriches the literature on sophisticated authoritarian innovation in Southeast Asia. The article is based on documented research, interviews with 469 non-participants and 72 participants, and an in-depth case study in Shanghai.

AbstractAuthoritarian deliberation has been used widely to describe the specific form of deliberation developed in China. However, whether its practice will strengthen authoritarianism or lead to democratization remains unknown. In this study, we examine this question from the perspective of participants in public deliberation. Surveying the participants in participatory pricings held in Shanghai over the past 5 years, we find that participants' perception of deliberative quality has a statistically significant negative impact on their level of political activism, while their level of empowerment has a moderating effect on this negative relationship. In this light, Chinese deliberative practices characterized by high-quality deliberation and low-level empowerment are likely to have a demobilization effect; thus, they reinforce the authoritarian rules.

Building Information Modelling (BIM) has been adopted as the main technology in the construction industry in many developed countries due to its notable advantages. However, its applications in developing countries are limited. This paper aims to investigate factors which impact on BIM adoption in the construction industry. Twelve external variables were identified by an integrated TAM (Technology Acceptance Model) and TOE (Technology Organization Environment) framework and a systematic review of past studies. A survey was conducted in development, construction, design and consulting companies to investigate the impacts of these 12 external variables on BIM adoption. Using the interval Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method, retrieved 120 completed questionnaires were analysed. The "Requirements from national policies" was found to be the most significant driving variable of BIM adoption by investigated companies. A further simulation analysis revealed that the "Intention to Use" BIM varied significantly with the change of "Requirements from national policies", "Standardization of BIM", and "Popularity of BIM in the industry". The results lead to the conclusion that government incentives play critical roles in BIM adoption in China. Policy makers could put more efforts into motivation strategies, standardization measures, and BIM culture cultivation to promote BIM applications in the construction industry.

Building Information Modelling (BIM) has been adopted as the main technology in the construction industry in many developed countries due to its notable advantages. However, its applications in developing countries are limited. This paper aims to investigate factors which impact on BIM adoption in the construction industry. Twelve external variables were identified by an integrated TAM (Technology Acceptance Model) and TOE (Technology Organization Environment) framework and a systematic review of past studies. A survey was conducted in development, construction, design and consulting companies to investigate the impacts of these 12 external variables on BIM adoption. Using the interval Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method, retrieved 120 completed questionnaires were analysed. The "Requirements from national policies" was found to be the most significant driving variable of BIM adoption by investigated companies. A further simulation analysis revealed that the "Intention to Use" BIM varied significantly with the change of "Requirements from national policies", "Standardization of BIM", and "Popularity of BIM in the industry". The results lead to the conclusion that government incentives play critical roles in BIM adoption in China. Policy makers could put more efforts into motivation strategies, standardization measures, and BIM culture cultivation to promote BIM applications in the construction industry.

AbstractThe Global Justice Index is a multiyear research project conducted at the Fudan-IAS to conceptualize and measure each country's contribution to achieving greater global justice. In 2019, we completed our research project on first-year achievements, with the rankings of nation-states at the global level based on data from 2010 to 2017. This was published titled the "Global Justice Index Report" in Chinese Political Science Review (Vol. 5, No. 3, 2020). The "Global Justice Index Report 2020" is the second annual report based on our work analyzing data from 2010 to 2018, which was concluded in 2020. In order to better measure each country's performance and contribution to achieving greater global justice, compared to the first edition published in 2020, we have improved the model, added the refugee issue to expand the issue areas to 10, and added new indicators, regional analysis and comparison in this report. The report comprises five main sections. In the introduction, we discuss the development of the conceptual framework and evaluative principles to justify our selection of dimensions and indicators for measurement. Next, in the section of methodology, we discuss the production, normalization, and aggregation of the raw data and the generation of the final results. In the findings section, we report the data, indicators and our results for the ten issues, and provide regional comparisons. And then, in the following section we present the main results, and report the ranking of each country's contribution to achieving greater global justice. In the final section, we discuss the applications and limitations of the index, and its potential further research trajectories.

The Global Justice Index is a multiyear research project conducted at the Fudan-IAS to conceptualize and measure each country's contribution to achieving greater global justice. In 2019, we completed our research project on first-year achievements, with the rankings of nation-states at the global level based on data from 2010 to 2017. This was published titled the "Global Justice Index Report" in Chinese Political Science Review (Vol. 5, No. 3, 2020). The "Global Justice Index Report 2020" is the second annual report based on our work analyzing data from 2010 to 2018, which was concluded in 2020. In order to better measure each country's performance and contribution to achieving greater global justice, compared to the first edition published in 2020, we have improved the model, added the refugee issue to expand the issue areas to 10, and added new indicators, regional analysis and comparison in this report. The report comprises five main sections. In the introduction, we discuss the development of the conceptual framework and evaluative principles to justify our selection of dimensions and indicators for measurement. Next, in the section of methodology, we discuss the production, normalization, and aggregation of the raw data and the generation of the final results. In the findings section, we report the data, indicators and our results for the ten issues, and provide regional comparisons. And then, in the following section we present the main results, and report the ranking of each country's contribution to achieving greater global justice. In the final section, we discuss the applications and limitations of the index, and its potential further research trajectories.

The article "Global Justice Index Report", written by Yanfeng Gu.