Self-learning through teaching: Singapore's land development policy transfer experience in China

Abstract

As a rising market, China has attracted many transnational agents seeking to tap new resources and/or do business overseas. These agents include international governmental and non-governmental organizations, multi-national corporations, and foreign states. We propose a theoretical concept of 'self-learning through teaching' to empirically examine the process by which the government of Singapore does business via policy transfer in China, specifically in Suzhou and Tianjin. Most of the existing literature argues that Singapore has leveraged its experience of rapid economic growth to teach China how to pursue development. Our findings suggest that, in addition to providing China with the benefit of its experience, the Singaporean government has also selflearned a great deal through interaction with China in terms of the political complexities of conducting transnational business, such as how to improve budgeting control over land development, negotiating local interests, and coordinating central fragmentation.

Governing people, governing places: advancing the Protean environmental state in China

“…After the explosion, people who lived nearby to the blast site returned their houses to the government and come here [to the Eco-City] to buy houses. (Taxi driver B in his 40s who lives in Tanggu District) The property-led nature of development in the SSTEC has been remarked upon by other researchers (Chien et al, 2015;Xie et al, 2019b). What has become increasingly apparent is the pernicious way in which property development exacerbates inequality.…”

“…Although it is a national flagship project, the role played by the local state in shaping and reshaping of the development of SSTEC is significant and has become increasingly apparent as the project has progressed (Xie et al, 2019b). In SSTEC, the Sino-Singapore Tianjin Eco-City Investment and Development Co. (the SSTECID), which was co-established by China and Singapore as a 50-50 joint venture, serves as the lead master planner and developer (Chien et al, 2015;Pow, 2018;Zhang & de Jong, 2017). However, the Administrative Committee of SSTEC, although guided by a joint Working Committee formed by the governments of Singapore and China, is solely established by the Chinese local state, namely the Tianjin Municipal Government (at the provincial level) and its subordinated Tianjin Binhai New Area (TBNA) Government (sub-provincial level).…”

“…Being situated in the TBNA provides SSTEC access to preferential central government policies, including substantial tax reinvestment, and inclusion in the preferential 'voluntary forex settlement policy' for income repatriation under the State Administration of Foreign Exchange. These policies are deemed as crucial for attracting foreign companies to the SSTEC (Chien et al, 2015).…”

“…It is much better now. (Taxi driver B in his 40s who lives in Tanggu District,) Attention has also been given to the highly distinctive governance of the SSTEC (Chien et al, 2015) which are unlikely to be repeated elsewhere. We will, therefore, pay more attention to the regulatory and enhancement activities of the local state since these vividly illustrate the struggles to institutionalise an environmental state even in the promising circumstances of an eco-project.…”

“…We will, therefore, pay more attention to the regulatory and enhancement activities of the local state since these vividly illustrate the struggles to institutionalise an environmental state even in the promising circumstances of an eco-project. Studies show that the SSTEC has sought to manage long-standing market tensions between economic and environmental imperatives by widespread government interventions to make investments in environmental projects more financially attractive to developers or by regulating that higher environmental standards are required within the City (Chang et al, 2016;Chien et al, 2015;Neo & Pow, 2015). By utilising the PES framework, we can now go a stage further to critically examine how these competing economic and environmental imperatives are governed in practice.…”