Central Protectionism in China: The “Central SOE Problem” in Environmental Governance

Eaton, Sarah; Kostka, Genia

doi:10.1017/s0305741017000881

Cited by 101 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…5-7) [74][75][76]. While environmental targets have become more important in recent years, local decision-makers continue to prioritize economic growth over environmental sustainability [77]. In addition, the cost of developing a waste management infrastructure can be burdensome.…”

Section: "National Effective/local Sabotage" Narrative Remains Largelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Local Nuances of Authoritarian Environmentalism: A Legislative Study on Household Solid Waste Sorting in China

Wang

Jiang

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Faced with an unprecedented increase in the amount of solid waste, China aims to tighten its waste management regulation. Corresponding local policy experiments are encouraged. This study explores China’s authoritarian environmentalism through an examination of local legislations on Household Solid Waste (HSW) sorting. We present a full picture of relevant local legislation from five key dimensions: local legislative outputs, local standards of HSW classifications, reward and penalty provisions, the use of the social credit system and duties imposed on local governments. We then compare policy-making models based on the experience of Shanghai and Guangzhou. We find China’s HSW sorting policy has been dominated by the central state. The local lawmaking process is generally non-transparent and non-participative. When attempting to mobilize the public, local policymakers emphasize educating the public about “how to” instead of “why to sort wastes”. Also, while the central waste management policies are generally undermined locally, some sub-national governments do demonstrate a strong commitment to push the national policy through. Multiple factors account for this pattern. Though civic engagement did emerge in certain localities where civil society was relatively active, authoritarian environmentalism will continue to prevail in China in the near future.

show abstract

Section: "National Effective/local Sabotage" Narrative Remains Largelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Local Nuances of Authoritarian Environmentalism: A Legislative Study on Household Solid Waste Sorting in China

Wang

Jiang

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While most scholarly research and policy analyses attribute the poor environmental outcomes in China to the implementation gap, it is important to redirect attention to the central government's tacit approval of selective implementation by local governments. “Central protectionism” of SOEs shirking environmental regulations sends a signal of the priority of economic growth over environmental protection (Eaton & Kostka, ).…”

Section: Strengths and Weaknesses Of Igps In China And The United Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Back to the future: Can Chinese doubling down and American muddling through fulfill 21st century needs for environmental governance?

Zhao

Young

et al. 2020

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At the close of the last millennium, prominent thinkers projected that the political systems of leading economies would converge during the coming years. Yet, research has shown that China and the United States have developed distinctive institutionalized governance processes (IGPs) to address environmental issues. Can these distinctive processes persist in turbulent times? In reality, the two countries seem to be decoupling in their economic ties and diverging in political pursuit. Under the current circumstances, what can we say about the ability of the two systems to meet emerging environmental challenges of the 21st century? We argue that neither system is likely to experience fundamental change during the foreseeable future. Current developments are highlighting differences between goal‐based governance strategies prominent in China and the rule‐based strategies of the United States. As the urgency of solving transcendent problems like climate change rises and political tensions grow, it is essential to work with divergent systems to address common problems.

show abstract

“…Second, the boundary between the government and private sector in China is fuzzier and their relationship more intimate, because the state's presence in the market is still much greater than in other advanced capitalist countries. The heaviest polluters in China are usually stateowned enterprises (SOE) in key pillar industries (Eaton and Kostka 2017). This leads to tricky situations for environmental governance.…”

Section: Information and Environmental Governance In Contemporary Chinamentioning

confidence: 99%

Information, technology, and digitalization in China’s environmental governance

Kostka

Zhang

Shin

2019

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on the relationship between information, technology, and environmental governance in the current Information Age has gained momentum in recent years. Nevertheless, much theoretical, empirical, and normative issues remain seriously under-explored. Existing studies also tend to be predominantly based on contexts, experiences, and lessons in advanced democratic societies. What the rapid developments in new information technologies, data, and information networks might mean for environmental politics and governance in non-democratic contexts remains even more elusive. This special issue brings together some of the latest research in the context of contemporary China to shed light on some of these fundamental issues. We argue that the role of information has evolved over time as dominant approaches to environmental regulation have shifted. Yet, findings in this special issue show that how it has manifested in China thus far has been anything but straightforward. While a few parallels can be drawn between advanced democratic countries and China, many of the predictions made about the effects of data and information technologies have not been borne out in China. We raise several questions as a fruitful avenue for further research.

show abstract

Central Protectionism in China: The “Central SOE Problem” in Environmental Governance

Cited by 101 publications

References 25 publications

Local Nuances of Authoritarian Environmentalism: A Legislative Study on Household Solid Waste Sorting in China

Local Nuances of Authoritarian Environmentalism: A Legislative Study on Household Solid Waste Sorting in China

Back to the future: Can Chinese doubling down and American muddling through fulfill 21st century needs for environmental governance?

Information, technology, and digitalization in China’s environmental governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About