Governance, legitimacy, and decision-making capability of the Chinese national social security fund-against the backdrop of international comparison

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Yu Gan
{"title":"Governance, legitimacy, and decision-making capability of the Chinese national social security fund-against the backdrop of international comparison","authors":"Yu Gan","doi":"10.1080/23812346.2021.1879452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract To deal with the pension crisis, many countries have established the ‘Public Pension Reserve Funds (PPRFs)’. The Chinese government has also established the Chinese National Social Security Fund (NSSF), a typical PPRF to deal with the Chinese pension crisis. This paper focuses on the governance issues of the Chinese NSSF. More specifically, it focuses on the NSSF’s board to determine its decision-making capabilities, during which I will talk about the expertise and representation issues in the NSSF. The paper found that, first, the NSSF’s board may have more symbolic significance than substantive powers, which may be the result of the government’s endorsement of the legitimacy of the NSSF. Second, we found that the representation and expertise tension that prevail in Western pension funds governance also exist in China’s NSSF, and the analytical framework for this tension is also applicable to the discussion of Chinese cases. Third, through international comparison, we infer that an efficient board of directors might be a necessary condition for the pension funds’ good performance, but not a sufficient condition.","PeriodicalId":45091,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Governance","volume":"8 1","pages":"34 - 55"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23812346.2021.1879452","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chinese Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23812346.2021.1879452","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract To deal with the pension crisis, many countries have established the ‘Public Pension Reserve Funds (PPRFs)’. The Chinese government has also established the Chinese National Social Security Fund (NSSF), a typical PPRF to deal with the Chinese pension crisis. This paper focuses on the governance issues of the Chinese NSSF. More specifically, it focuses on the NSSF’s board to determine its decision-making capabilities, during which I will talk about the expertise and representation issues in the NSSF. The paper found that, first, the NSSF’s board may have more symbolic significance than substantive powers, which may be the result of the government’s endorsement of the legitimacy of the NSSF. Second, we found that the representation and expertise tension that prevail in Western pension funds governance also exist in China’s NSSF, and the analytical framework for this tension is also applicable to the discussion of Chinese cases. Third, through international comparison, we infer that an efficient board of directors might be a necessary condition for the pension funds’ good performance, but not a sufficient condition.
中国国家社会保障基金的治理、合法性与决策能力——基于国际比较的背景
为了应对养老金危机,许多国家都建立了“公共养老金储备基金”。中国政府还建立了中国国民社会保障基金(NSSF),这是一个典型的PPRF,以应对中国的养老金危机。本文主要研究我国社保基金的治理问题。更具体地说,它侧重于全国社保基金董事会,以确定其决策能力,在此期间,我将讨论全国社保基金的专业知识和代表性问题。本文发现,首先,全国社保基金理事会的象征意义可能大于实际权力,这可能是政府认可全国社保基金合法性的结果。其次,我们发现西方养老基金治理中普遍存在的代表性和专业性张力在中国全国社保基金治理中也存在,这种张力的分析框架也适用于中国案例的讨论。第三,通过国际比较,我们推断一个高效的董事会可能是养老基金良好业绩的必要条件,但不是充分条件。
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
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
9
×
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