Chinese Journal of Sociology

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Political Risks and Decentralization: The Comparison of Three Models on Chinese Governance

  

  1. CAO Zhenghan, College of Economics, Zhejiang University
  • Online:2014-11-20 Published:2014-11-20
  • Contact: CAO Zhenghan, College of Economics, Zhejiang University E-mail:caozhenghan@aliyun.com

PDF

1356

Cited

3

Abstract: There are three models on the structure of Chinese governance, all taking account of the central government’s objectives about governance efficiency and political stability at the same time. They are the “administrative subcontract system” model by Zhou LiAn, the model of “centralized personal controls at the national level, and decentralized ruling over the people regionally” by Cao Zhenghan, and the “empire’s governance logic”  model by Zhou Xueguang. All three models have significant divergences in terms of whether the two objectives of efficiency and stability of  the central government can be compatible or not. Zhou LiAn and Cao Zhenghan argue that the two objectives are compatible in specific governance structure, which is not shared by Zhou Xueguang who argues that the coexistence of centralization and decentralization cannot lead to a stable structure and the two processes are subject to cyclical adjustment and cyclic fluctuation. And also, the analyses of the three models focus on different levels. The “administrative subcontract system” model and the “empire’s governance logic” model mainly discuss the governance structure and mechanism of the different levels of governments within the bureaucratic system, while the model of “centralized personal controls at the national level, and decentralized ruling over the people regionally” focuses on how the way of central government dealing with the public shapes the basic structure of decentralization. The divergences are caused by two reasons. First, these three models hold different assumptions about whether the rule over the military and the people can be separated. Second, there exists the disagreement about which one is the critical source of political risks between decentralization itself (e.g. the local governments’ behaviors as deviation, out of control, etc.) and the public (e.g. the public’s behaviors as protest, opposition, confrontation, etc.).

Key words: authoritarian regimes , decentralization , governance structure, political risks