IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v36y2018i5p897-915.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Paths to (de)centralization: Changing territorial dynamics of social policy in the People’s Republic of China and the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Béland
  • Philip Rocco
  • Shih-Jiunn Shi
  • Alex Waddan

Abstract

Drawing on the existing welfare state literature, this article offers a comparative analytical framework to account for the territorial dynamics of social policy in the United States and the People’s Republic of China, two countries that are most dissimilar in terms of political regime but that may exhibit similar territorial patterns of social policy fragmentation. A promising way to explore such patterns, we argue, is to analyze how changes in the architecture of major governing institutions affect the territorial dimension of social policy. In the United States, state governments and a territorially-organized federal legislature have increasingly accommodated national political parties. These two parties have turned the politics of social policy into a debate over the boundaries of national or state governance of social policy, resulting in multi-level governance frameworks. In the People’s Republic of China, the partisan dimension is absent, but strong economic pressures on the central bureaucracy have made devolution a functional imperative and have given local governments increasing leverage when bargaining with the center.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Béland & Philip Rocco & Shih-Jiunn Shi & Alex Waddan, 2018. "Paths to (de)centralization: Changing territorial dynamics of social policy in the People’s Republic of China and the United States," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(5), pages 897-915, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:36:y:2018:i:5:p:897-915
    DOI: 10.1177/2399654417725527
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2399654417725527
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2399654417725527?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. Thelen,Kathleen, 2004. "How Institutions Evolve," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521546744, November.
    2. Chung, Jae Ho, 2000. "Central Control and Local Discretion in China: Leadership and Implementation during Post-Mao Decollectivization," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198297772, Decembrie.
    3. Huang, Yasheng, 1996. "Central-local relations in china during the reform era: The economic and institutional dimensions," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 655-672, April.
    4. Shiuh-Shen Chien & Ian Gordon, 2008. "Territorial Competition in China and the West," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1), pages 31-49.
    5. Linda Chelan Li, 2010. "Central‐local relations in the people's Republic of China: Trends, processes and impacts for policy implementation," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(3), pages 177-190, August.
    6. Thelen,Kathleen, 2004. "How Institutions Evolve," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521837682, November.
    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. Коршунов И. А. & Гапонова О. С., 2017. "Непрерывное Образование Взрослых В Контексте Экономического Развития И Качества Государственного Управления," Вопросы образования // Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 4, pages 36-59.
    2. Ilana Shpaizman, 2020. "The end–means nexus and policy conversion: evidence from two cases in Israeli immigrant integration policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(4), pages 713-733, December.
    3. Paul Ryan & Howard Gospel & Paul Lewis, 2007. "Large Employers and Apprenticeship Training in Britain," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 45(1), pages 127-153, March.
    4. Anke Hassel, 2014. "Adjustments in the Eurozone: Varieties of Capitalism and the Crisis in Southern Europe," Europe in Question Discussion Paper Series of the London School of Economics (LEQs) 6, London School of Economics / European Institute.
    5. Yannis Papadopoulos, 2018. "How does knowledge circulate in a regulatory network? Observing a European Platform of Regulatory Authorities meeting," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 431-450, December.
    6. Victoria Johnson & Walter W. Powell, 2015. "Poisedness and Propagation: Organizational Emergence and the Transformation of Civic Order in 19th-Century New York City," NBER Working Papers 21011, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Viola, Lora Anne, 2008. "WHO says competition is healthy: How civil society can change IGOs [Die WHO sagt: Wettbewerb ist gesund. Wie Zivilgesellschaft IGOs verändern kann]," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2008-307, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    8. Ji-Whan Yun, 2016. "The Setback in Political Entrepreneurship and Employment Dualization in Japan, 1998–2012," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 54(3), pages 473-495, September.
    9. Daniel Béland & Michael Howlett & Philip Rocco & Alex Waddan, 2020. "Designing policy resilience: lessons from the Affordable Care Act," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 269-289, June.
    10. Norlander, Peter & Erickson, Christopher, 2022. "The Role of Institutions in Job Teleworkability Before and After the Covid-19 Pandemic," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1172, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    11. Erkko Autio & Saurav Pathak & Karl Wennberg, 2013. "Consequences of cultural practices for entrepreneurial behaviors," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 44(4), pages 334-362, May.
    12. Busemeyer, Marius R., 2011. "Varieties of cross-class coalitions in the politics of dualization: Insights from the case of vocational training in Germany," MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/13, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    13. Dicks, Alexander & Levels, Mark, 2022. "NEET during the School-to-Work Transition in the Netherlands," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 25-55.
    14. Paul Ryan & Uschi Backes-Gellner & Silvia Teuber & Karin Wagner, 2012. "Apprentice pay in Britain, Germany and Switzerland: institutions, market forces, market power," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0075, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    15. Alejandro Portes, 2006. "Institutions and Development: A Conceptual Reanalysis," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 32(2), pages 233-262, June.
    16. Geys, Benny, 2010. "War casualties and US presidential popularity: A comparison of the Korean, Vietnam and Iraq war," Discussion Papers, Research Professorship & Project "The Future of Fiscal Federalism" SP II 2010-05, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    17. DiVito, Lori, 2012. "Institutional entrepreneurship in constructing alternative paths: A comparison of biotech hybrids," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 884-896.
    18. John L. Campbell & Ove K. Pedersen, 2007. "Institutional competitiveness in the global economy: Denmark, the United States, and the varieties of capitalism," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(3), pages 230-246, September.
    19. Seamus McGuinness & Luis Ortiz, 2016. "Skill gaps in the workplace: measurement, determinants and impacts," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 253-278, May.
    20. Daron Acemoglu & James A. Robinson, 2008. "Persistence of Power, Elites, and Institutions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 267-293, March.

    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:envirc:v:36:y:2018:i:5:p:897-915. 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.