Search

Since the late 1970s, Singapore has been an important policy reference for China. Some Chinese policymakers viewed Temasek, its government holding company, as a model for state asset management. They studied Singapore's approach, but ultimately chose a different institutional design when establishing the State-Owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC) in 2003. China's engagement with Temasek subsequently concentrated on corporate governance, specifically boards of directors in state-owned enterprises (SOEs). Yet despite the Temasek model's appeal, its influence in China was limited by the far greater size and indebtedness of the state sector; the weaker role of firm performance in asset and capital allocation; SOEs' numerous social and welfare functions; lack of willingness to augment firm autonomy; and divergent interpretations of the Temasek model and its reference value. "Policy collage" by Chinese policymakers explains the existence of formal similarities between China and advanced capitalist economies without fundamental convergence in function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses the puzzle of the politics of social policy formation by two post-communist authoritarian regimes in China and Russia. It argues that two interrelated dimensions—which we term the pillars of power and policy—shape social policymaking and change in authoritarian regimes and support authoritarian regime stability. The pillar of power involves autocrats' bargains with the public and elites, while the policy pillar includes bureaucratic and ideational processes. The latter are understood as the way policy actors perceive problems, choose solutions, and frame their policy choices. To demonstrate this empirically, the article analyzes and compares Chinese and Russian housing policies between 1990 and 2020. We find that despite bureaucratic competition within the policy pillar, neoliberal policy beliefs have guided policy while statist measures served to support—in China—and deepen—in Russia—the neoliberal approach focused on private homeownership. Yet, neoliberal measures have been channeled in ways that underpinned and adjusted the authoritarian regime bargains with different segments of the public and the elite within the pillar of power. Policy framing to match social cultural ideas was used in both countries to support public acceptance of the neoliberal measures while underlining the state's care for people's housing needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Civic organizations have long been heralded for promoting voluntarism and civic participation, yet observational studies, facing endogeneity concerns, have struggled to solidify the causal underpinnings of the neo-Tocquevillian theory. Furthermore, empirical examination of their recruitment efficacy relative to state entities, particularly in crises or authoritarian settings, remains scarce. Our survey experiment in COVID-period China provides a twofold crucial case study. By embodying both the "most likely case" of effective state-led mobilization and the "least likely case" of potent civic organization efforts, it offers unique analytical leverage and insights. Civic appeals significantly boosted volunteer inclinations, whereas governmental outreach had minimal or even negative effects. This civic boost was stronger among those with less social and political trust and channeled by heightened political efficacy and active citizenship norms. Our findings shed light on the pivotal roles of civic organizations, even in authoritarian settings featuring embryonic civil societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A significant body of research examines the Chinese government'smass atrocities against Uyghurs and various forms of state repression in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. However, scholars do not clearly address the interplay of traditional and technological repertoires of repression in the region. This article presents a focused, well-documented treatment of how traditional and technological repression interact in the Chinese government's policies toward Uyghurs. Using a novel techno-docility approach, it shows that the government adopts a complex, pervasive, and all-encompassing form of repression to create obedient citizens and a unitary society. The article also highlights the increasingly dangerous and intricate nature of repression, which crosscutsmultiple disciplines and hence is best addressed through interdisciplinary efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership is a huge free trade pact which was signed in November 2020 after eight years of laborious talks and deliberations by 15 Asia-Pacific countries. It was ratified on January 1, 2022. Besides 10 ASEAN member countries, the pact includes China, Australia, Japan, South Korea, and New Zealand. However, despite the long negotiations, India withdrew from the pact in November 2019. To explore why, I use the "two-level game" perspective offered by Robert Putnam. The main argument is that by themselves neither domestic nor international/structural factors can account for India's exit; but the enmeshment of both provides a comprehensive treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]