IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/asseca/v7y2020i3p325-348.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Audience Costs and China’s South China Sea Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory J. Moore
  • Christopher B. Primiano

Abstract

China’s island building in the South China Sea has received considerable attention from scholars, the media and policy-related officials in recent years. In this article, we conduct a survey to assess the opinions of Chinese university students as it regards their views of any moves by the Chinese government to retreat from its island building and the South China Sea claims due to international pressure. Since China has laid claim to much of the South China Sea via its ‘nine-dash line’, if it were to reverse course and retreat from its man-made islands or remove military installations, how would that play out domestically? Would the Chinese government incur audience costs for doing so? We hypothesise that it would. More specifically, we find it likely that Chinese university students would seek to hold their government accountable for claims to the South China Sea that it has made recently, making it more difficult for the government to retreat from or otherwise adopt a more flexible policy on the South China Sea if it chose to do so. The findings are significant for the audience costs literature, Chinese foreign policy, and South China Sea territoriality studies, in addition to having important policy implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory J. Moore & Christopher B. Primiano, 2020. "Audience Costs and China’s South China Sea Policy," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 7(3), pages 325-348, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:7:y:2020:i:3:p:325-348
    DOI: 10.1177/2347797020962635
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2347797020962635
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2347797020962635?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hollyer, James R. & Rosendorff, B. Peter & Vreeland, James Raymond, 2015. "Transparency, Protest, and Autocratic Instability," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 109(4), pages 764-784, November.
    2. Weeks, Jessica L., 2008. "Autocratic Audience Costs: Regime Type and Signaling Resolve," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 35-64, January.
    3. Weiss, Jessica Chen, 2013. "Authoritarian Signaling, Mass Audiences, and Nationalist Protest in China," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(1), pages 1-35, January.
    4. Jack S. Levy & Michael K. McKoy & Paul Poast & Geoffrey P.R. Wallace, 2015. "Backing Out or Backing In? Commitment and Consistency in Audience Costs Theory," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(4), pages 988-1001, October.
    5. King, Gary & Pan, Jennifer & Roberts, Margaret E., 2017. "How the Chinese Government Fabricates Social Media Posts for Strategic Distraction, Not Engaged Argument," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(3), pages 484-501, August.
    6. Joshua D. Kertzer & Ryan Brutger, 2016. "Decomposing Audience Costs: Bringing the Audience Back into Audience Cost Theory," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(1), pages 234-249, January.
    7. Kurizaki, Shuhei & Whang, Taehee, 2015. "Detecting Audience Costs in International Disputes," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 69(4), pages 949-980, October.
    8. Weeks, Jessica L., 2012. "Strongmen and Straw Men: Authoritarian Regimes and the Initiation of International Conflict," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 326-347, May.
    9. King, Gary & Pan, Jennifer & Roberts, Margaret E., 2013. "How Censorship in China Allows Government Criticism but Silences Collective Expression," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(2), pages 326-343, May.
    10. Danny Hayes & Matt Guardino, 2011. "The Influence of Foreign Voices on U.S. Public Opinion," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(4), pages 831-851, October.
    11. Tomz, Michael, 2007. "Domestic Audience Costs in International Relations: An Experimental Approach," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 61(4), pages 821-840, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eryan Ramadhani, 2019. "Is Assertiveness Paying the Bill? China’s Domestic Audience Costs in the South China Sea Disputes," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 6(1), pages 30-54, April.
    2. Xiaojun Li & Dingding Chen, 2021. "Public opinion, international reputation, and audience costs in an authoritarian regime," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(5), pages 543-560, September.
    3. Matthew Hauenstein, 2020. "The conditional effect of audiences on credibility," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(3), pages 422-436, May.
    4. Greg Chih-Hsin Sheen & Hans H. Tung & Wen-Chin Wu, 2024. "Tell me the truth? Dictatorship and the commitment to media freedom," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 36(1), pages 37-63, January.
    5. Matthew Wilson & Carla Martinez Machain, 2018. "Militarism and Dual-Conflict Capacity," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 156-172, January.
    6. Stephan Haggard, 2014. "Liberal Pessimism: International Relations Theory and the Emerging Powers," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 1-17, January.
    7. Erin Baggott Carter & Brett L. Carter, 2021. "Propaganda and Protest in Autocracies," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 65(5), pages 919-949, May.
    8. Daniel L. Nielson & Susan D. Hyde & Judith Kelley, 2019. "The elusive sources of legitimacy beliefs: Civil society views of international election observers," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 685-715, December.
    9. Emilie Frenkiel & Anna Shpakovskaya, 2019. "The Evolution of Representative Claim-Making by the Chinese Communist Party: From Mao to Xi (1949–2019)," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 208-219.
    10. Vipin Narang & Caitlin Talmadge, 2018. "Civil-military Pathologies and Defeat in War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(7), pages 1379-1405, August.
    11. Iacus Stefano M. & Salini Silvia & Siletti Elena & Porro Giuseppe, 2020. "Controlling for Selection Bias in Social Media Indicators through Official Statistics: a Proposal," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 36(2), pages 315-338, June.
    12. Appel, Benjamin J & Croco, Sarah E, 2024. "Democratic Backsliding and Foreign Policy," Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, Working Paper Series qt8s31h6c9, Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California.
    13. Axel Michaelowa, 2021. "Solar Radiation Modification ‐ A “Silver Bullet” Climate Policy for Populist and Authoritarian Regimes?," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S1), pages 119-128, April.
    14. Lauren L. Ferry & Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Christina J. Schneider, 2020. "Catch me if you care: International development organizations and national corruption," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 767-792, October.
    15. Meckling, Jonas & Nahm, Jonas, 2019. "The politics of technology bans: Industrial policy competition and green goals for the auto industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 470-479.
    16. Alyssa K Prorok & Deniz Cil, 2022. "Cheap talk or costly commitment? Leader statements and the implementation of civil war peace agreements," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(3), pages 409-424, May.
    17. Thomas Zeitzoff, 2018. "Does Social Media Influence Conflict? Evidence from the 2012 Gaza Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(1), pages 29-63, January.
    18. Melissa Carlson & Barbara Koremenos, 2021. "Cooperation Failure or Secret Collusion? Absolute Monarchs and Informal Cooperation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 95-135, January.
    19. Aaron R Kaufman, 2020. "Implementing novel, flexible, and powerful survey designs in R Shiny," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-15, April.
    20. Ekaterina Zhuravskaya & Maria Petrova & Ruben Enikolopov, 2020. "Political Effects of the Internet and Social Media," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 415-438, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:7:y:2020:i:3:p:325-348. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.