The transfer of eco-city concepts to China: A selective and gradual policy transfer style?

Giulia C. Romano
{"title":"The transfer of eco-city concepts to China: A selective and gradual policy transfer style?","authors":"Giulia C. Romano","doi":"10.1177/23996544241232514","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To explain the poor results of several international collaborative projects dedicated to exploring eco-city concepts in China, some scholars pointed out that Chinese policymakers operate a form of cherry-picking that prefers technical knowledge to policy proposals. This approach is consistent with the hypothesis of a presumed Chinese style of policy transfers, according to which Chinese policymakers learn from abroad selectively and gradually. This study aims to test this hypothesis by analyzing one of these eco-city collaborations: the transfer of “Careful Urban Renewal” to the city of Yangzhou. Through a longitudinal study that looked at policy developments over the period 2003–2019 and a focus on the “demand side” of policy mobilities, it illustrates that transfers concerned several policy aspects, going beyond technical recommendations. This disconfirms the hypothesis of a consistent policy transfer style, as no specific policy preference could be spotted. Rather, the analysis of the policy process illustrated that different policy transfer styles emerged in the period considered. Variations in policy transfer style can be ascribed to the willingness, motivations, and interests of specific individuals, in particular city party secretaries and local bureaucrats, as well as to the room of maneuver and resources these actors possess, in turn, determined by the institutional structures in which they operate. Situational factors also led to variations. While this single case study cannot encompass all variations of policy transfer style, it is nonetheless hoped that this research inspires more longitudinal studies, which in turn can contribute to a promising discussion in policy studies and urban studies.","PeriodicalId":507957,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23996544241232514","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

To explain the poor results of several international collaborative projects dedicated to exploring eco-city concepts in China, some scholars pointed out that Chinese policymakers operate a form of cherry-picking that prefers technical knowledge to policy proposals. This approach is consistent with the hypothesis of a presumed Chinese style of policy transfers, according to which Chinese policymakers learn from abroad selectively and gradually. This study aims to test this hypothesis by analyzing one of these eco-city collaborations: the transfer of “Careful Urban Renewal” to the city of Yangzhou. Through a longitudinal study that looked at policy developments over the period 2003–2019 and a focus on the “demand side” of policy mobilities, it illustrates that transfers concerned several policy aspects, going beyond technical recommendations. This disconfirms the hypothesis of a consistent policy transfer style, as no specific policy preference could be spotted. Rather, the analysis of the policy process illustrated that different policy transfer styles emerged in the period considered. Variations in policy transfer style can be ascribed to the willingness, motivations, and interests of specific individuals, in particular city party secretaries and local bureaucrats, as well as to the room of maneuver and resources these actors possess, in turn, determined by the institutional structures in which they operate. Situational factors also led to variations. While this single case study cannot encompass all variations of policy transfer style, it is nonetheless hoped that this research inspires more longitudinal studies, which in turn can contribute to a promising discussion in policy studies and urban studies.
生态城市概念向中国的转移:有选择的渐进式政策转移?
一些学者指出,中国的政策制定者采取的是一种 "挑肥拣瘦 "的方式,他们偏好技术知识而非政策建议。这种做法与假定的中国式政策转移假设相一致,即中国政策制定者有选择地、循序渐进地向国外学习。本研究旨在通过分析这些生态城市合作中的一项:"谨慎的城市更新 "向扬州市的转移来验证这一假设。通过对 2003-2019 年间的政策发展进行纵向研究,并重点关注政策流动的 "需求侧",本研究表明,政策转移涉及多个政策方面,而不仅仅是技术建议。这与政策转移风格一致的假设不符,因为无法发现具体的政策偏好。相反,对政策过程的分析表明,在所考虑的时期内出现了不同的政策转移风格。政策转移风格的变化可归因于特定个人,尤其是市委书记和地方官员的意愿、动机和利益,以及这些行为者所拥有的回旋余地和资源,而这又是由他们所处的制度结构所决定的。形势因素也导致了差异。虽然这项单一的个案研究不能涵盖政策转移风格的所有变化,但我们希望这项研究能激发更多的纵向研究,从而为政策研究和城市研究领域的讨论做出贡献。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信