Policy Networks and Policy Paradigm Shifts: urban housing policy development in China
In: Journal of contemporary China, Band 22, Heft 82, S. 554-572
ISSN: 1469-9400
6 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Journal of contemporary China, Band 22, Heft 82, S. 554-572
ISSN: 1469-9400
In: Journal of contemporary China, Band 22, Heft 82, S. 554-572
ISSN: 1067-0564
A recent trend in policy scholarship is to explain policy changes and paradigm shifts by focusing on the features and interactions of policy networks. This paper aims to contribute to the current literature by exploring how policy networks affect policy paradigmatic change in China with reference to urban housing policy development. It is argued that both exogenous and indigenous factors can be attributed to the difficulties of paradigm replacement. The closed policy network in the housing field delimits the choices of policy instruments and hinders paradigmatic shifts. Contrary to mainstream studies, exogenous shocks are identified as serious handicaps to significant policy changes. (J Contemp China/GIGA)
World Affairs Online
In: The Pacific review, Band 19, Heft 1, S. 39-62
ISSN: 0951-2748
Since 1979, housing reforms in China have been seen as successive state efforts to improve urban governance. The idea is that the state has all along failed to deliver housing efficiently and equitably through the work units and that it is believed that only through the recommodification of housing could the housing problem be ultimately resolved. The housing monetarization policy (HMP) was thus launched in 1998 to replace the long-standing in-kind housing subsidy under the old welfare housing system. The policy aims at providing workers with cash subsidies as part of their wage package to enable them to buy or rent their homes from the market. The purpose of this paper is to explain the implications of the HMP through a neoliberal urbanization perspective. Through the case study of Guiyang, it is argued that while the HMP is successful in improving certain historical housing inequalities, it does not primarily aim at eradicating housing inequalities. HMP has in fact led to more rather than less horizontal inequities. In addition, it is argued here that a market housing system is leading towards increasing urban poverty, greater social polarization and spatial segregation. To improve governance, China needs to keep neoliberal urbanization in check and pay serious attention to its adverse consequences during economic transformation. (Pac Rev/GIGA)
World Affairs Online
In: The Pacific review, Band 19, Heft 1, S. 39-61
ISSN: 1470-1332
In: Series on Contemporary China, Vol. 26
Introduction: the quest for a balanced economic growth and social development- ideas and practices promoting social cohesion in greater China / Ka Ho Mok, Ka Kuen Leung, Yeun Wen Ku Social cohesive efforts to meet youth development needs in Tin Shui Wai, Hong Kong / Sandra K.M. Tsang, Yiu Kong Chu In search of harmonious society in China: a social policy response / Kinglun Ngok, Yapeng Zhu Social cohesion in a divided society: lessons from Taiwan's welfare politics / Yeun Wen Ku One country, two cities: a comparison of perceived cohesion in Guangzhou / Simon T.M. Chan, Sammy W.S. Chiu, Marcus Y.L. Chiu Governing a global city in the context of political transition / Tai Lok Liu Embracing the market: examining the consequences for education, housing, and health in Chinese cities / Ka Ho Mok, Yu Cheung Wong, Richard M. Walker, Xiulan Zhang Urban governance from below: a case study of Kaohsiung, Taiwan / Shiuh Shen Chien, Yeiling Wu Elderly poverty and old-age pension reform in Hong Kong: issues and prospects / Ernest Chiu, Lisanne Ko Is welfare restructuring and economic development in post-19097 Hong Kong in search of a cohesive society? / Maggie Lau, Ka Ho Mok Economic development and household economic well-being in urban China / Xiulan Zhang, Terry Lum, Yuebin Xu The fragmentation of the old-age security system: the politics of pension reform in Taiwan / Shih Jiunn Shi
World Affairs Online
The Crisis of Welfare in East Asia adopts a unique and critical perspective on contemporary social welfare policies in East Asia. This edited volume reflects on current welfare theories and challenges the dominant productivist ideology that over-emphasizes the influence of work and family