We Asked You: Public Opinion and Consultation in China

Dimitar D. Gueorguiev, Sinan Chu
{"title":"We Asked You: Public Opinion and Consultation in China","authors":"Dimitar D. Gueorguiev, Sinan Chu","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2941699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"China’s leaders describe their system of rule as “consultative democracy”, whereby the public, forbidden from organizing on matters of politics, is encouraged to participate on issues of policy. In particular, citizens are routinely solicited for input on upcoming policy debates. But are public inputs incorporated into policy outputs or is it all ‘window-dressing’? In pursuit of an answer, we employ an online survey designed to measure public preferences on a range of policies recently debated by China’s National People’s Congress (NPC). Next, we compare final policy decisions, based on whether or not they were opened for public consultation, for evidence of convergence between public opinion and policy choices. Our findings suggest that consultation is associated with more popular policy choices. To check for robustness, we pair our measures of policy preference with latent measures of ideology from our survey, and outside surveys, to extrapolate a predicted ’public opinion’ for the broader Chinese constituency. While we cannot discount the possibility that topics were selectively opened to public input, closer examination of public opinion distributions does not support this interpretation.","PeriodicalId":285469,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Institutions & Political Power in Transitional Economies (Topic)","volume":"98 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Institutions & Political Power in Transitional Economies (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2941699","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

China’s leaders describe their system of rule as “consultative democracy”, whereby the public, forbidden from organizing on matters of politics, is encouraged to participate on issues of policy. In particular, citizens are routinely solicited for input on upcoming policy debates. But are public inputs incorporated into policy outputs or is it all ‘window-dressing’? In pursuit of an answer, we employ an online survey designed to measure public preferences on a range of policies recently debated by China’s National People’s Congress (NPC). Next, we compare final policy decisions, based on whether or not they were opened for public consultation, for evidence of convergence between public opinion and policy choices. Our findings suggest that consultation is associated with more popular policy choices. To check for robustness, we pair our measures of policy preference with latent measures of ideology from our survey, and outside surveys, to extrapolate a predicted ’public opinion’ for the broader Chinese constituency. While we cannot discount the possibility that topics were selectively opened to public input, closer examination of public opinion distributions does not support this interpretation.
《问你:中国的民意与协商
中国领导人将他们的统治体系描述为“协商民主”,即禁止公众在政治问题上组织起来,鼓励公众参与政策问题。特别是,在即将到来的政策辩论中,公民经常被征求意见。但是,公共投入是否被纳入政策产出,或者这一切都是“粉饰门面”?为了寻找答案,我们采用了一项在线调查,旨在衡量公众对中国全国人民代表大会(NPC)最近讨论的一系列政策的偏好。接下来,我们比较最终的政策决定,基于它们是否公开征求公众意见,以证明民意和政策选择之间的趋同。我们的研究结果表明,咨询与更受欢迎的政策选择有关。为了检验稳健性,我们将政策偏好的衡量标准与我们的调查和外部调查中潜在的意识形态衡量标准相结合,以推断出更广泛的中国选民的预测“民意”。虽然我们不能排除有选择地向公众开放话题的可能性,但对公众舆论分布的更仔细研究并不支持这种解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信