Dual decentralization and fragmented authoritarianism in governance : crowding out among social programmes in China
Document Type
Journal article
Source Publication
Public Administration and Development
Publication Date
8-2016
Volume
36
Issue
3
First Page
185
Last Page
197
Publisher
Wiley
Keywords
China, crowding out, dual decentralization, fragmented authoritarianism, social assistance, unemployment insurance
Abstract
In this paper, we use city-level datasets of social assistance programmes over 280 cities between year 2003 and 2011 to verify the existence of the crowding out between social assistance programmes and unemployment insurance in China. In other words, the expansion of social assistance programmes is associated with a reduction in the enrolment of unemployment insurance. With verifying the existence of the crowding out, this article argues that the crowding out is a result of an ineffective coordination across government departments. In the process of ‘dual decentralization,’ in which the central government has delegated welfare provision responsibility to local governments, the misalignment of incentive and institutions between central and local governments explains the ineffective coordination. Different from many studies in the literature, this paper presents an adverse consequence of China's bureaucratic incentive system in social policy implementation. Also, while the conceptual framework ‘fragmented authoritarianism’ has highlighted the policy ineffectiveness in the economic policy area, this paper contributes to this literature by illustrating the policy ineffectiveness in the social policy areas.
DOI
10.1002/pad.1760
Print ISSN
02712075
E-ISSN
1099162X
Publisher Statement
Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Access to external full text or publisher's version may require subscription.
Full-text Version
Accepted Author Manuscript
Language
English
Recommended Citation
Qian, J., & Mok, K. H. (2016). Dual decentralization and fragmented authoritarianism in governance: Crowding out among social programmes in China. Public Administration and Development, 36(3), 185–197. doi: 10.1002/pad.1760