The productivity and political radicalism of the Chinese cooperative movement1

IF 5.5 1区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Pei Lu , Yuan Liu
{"title":"The productivity and political radicalism of the Chinese cooperative movement1","authors":"Pei Lu ,&nbsp;Yuan Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.chieco.2025.102357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The productivity and political incentive of the Chinese cooperative movement are still in controversy. Theoretically, the cooperative brings both scale effect and monitoring cost, and the free exit rights reduce the monitoring cost and raise the net revenue, but the radicalism lowers the effort input and the net benefit for insufficient labor incentives. Meanwhile, the provincial leaders with lower Party ranks will behave more radically in cooperative movement for promotion incentives. Using the provincial participation rate of all kinds of cooperatives from 1950 to 1956, we find that the temporary mutual aid groups perform the same as household farming; the regular mutual aid groups, elementary cooperatives, and advanced cooperatives experience increasing output loss. The Party secretaries of alternate members and non-members behave more radically in cooperative movement and thus are more likely to be promoted than the Party secretaries of full members. We confirm that the cooperatives had already triggered a productivity decline before Great Lead Forward that was controversial between Lin(1990) and Kung (1993), and we also clarify the disputes on the political radicalism in authoritarian China between Kung and Chen(2011) and Yang et al.(2014).</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48285,"journal":{"name":"中国经济评论","volume":"90 ","pages":"Article 102357"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中国经济评论","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1043951X2500015X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The productivity and political incentive of the Chinese cooperative movement are still in controversy. Theoretically, the cooperative brings both scale effect and monitoring cost, and the free exit rights reduce the monitoring cost and raise the net revenue, but the radicalism lowers the effort input and the net benefit for insufficient labor incentives. Meanwhile, the provincial leaders with lower Party ranks will behave more radically in cooperative movement for promotion incentives. Using the provincial participation rate of all kinds of cooperatives from 1950 to 1956, we find that the temporary mutual aid groups perform the same as household farming; the regular mutual aid groups, elementary cooperatives, and advanced cooperatives experience increasing output loss. The Party secretaries of alternate members and non-members behave more radically in cooperative movement and thus are more likely to be promoted than the Party secretaries of full members. We confirm that the cooperatives had already triggered a productivity decline before Great Lead Forward that was controversial between Lin(1990) and Kung (1993), and we also clarify the disputes on the political radicalism in authoritarian China between Kung and Chen(2011) and Yang et al.(2014).
中国合作化运动的生产力与政治激进性
中国合作社运动的生产力和政治激励仍然存在争议。理论上,合作社既具有规模效应,又具有监督成本,自由退出权降低了监督成本,提高了净收益,但激进主义由于劳动激励不足,降低了劳动投入和净收益。与此同时,省部级较低的领导为了获得晋升激励,会在合作运动中表现得更为激进。利用1950 - 1956年各省各类合作社的参与率,我们发现临时互助组的表现与家庭农业相当;普通互助会、初级合作社和先进合作社的产出损失越来越大。候补党员和非党员的党委书记在合作运动中表现得比较激进,因而比正式党员的党委书记更容易得到提拔。我们证实,在林(1990)和龚(1993)之间存在争议的“大跃进”之前,合作社已经引发了生产率下降,我们还澄清了龚和陈(2011)以及杨等人(2014)之间关于威权中国政治激进主义的争议。
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
中国经济评论
中国经济评论 ECONOMICS-
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
4.40%
发文量
380
期刊介绍: The China Economic Review publishes original works of scholarship which add to the knowledge of the economy of China and to economies as a discipline. We seek, in particular, papers dealing with policy, performance and institutional change. Empirical papers normally use a formal model, a data set, and standard statistical techniques. Submissions are subjected to double-blind peer review.
×
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