{"title":"中国发展研究的实践社会科学方法论探讨","authors":"Liuyang Zhao","doi":"10.1177/00977004211002112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The basic facts of China’s economic development have called into question Western transition economic theory, most famously presented in the works of János Kornai. On the other hand, the three most representative approaches to explaining China’s development experience have variously emphasized the resource endowment structure, or the property rights system, or the incentive mechanism behind the behavior of local governments, as the key to China’s economic development. Although they focus on different dimensions of China’s economic practices, they ultimately converge on the logic of marketism as the explanation. The “social science of practice” approach proposed by Philip Huang is distinguished from these orthodox theories in that, first, it attends to the rise of the huge informal economy in China and reveals the historical roots of contemporary social inequality. This approach has three closely related characteristics: theoretical formulations based on analyses of paradoxical phenomena, a broad historical perspective on current problems, and the idea of substantive justice. The main significance of this approach lies not only in its insightful and practice-focused understanding of the key realities that have been ignored by mainstream theories, but, more importantly, in its multiple inspirations for constructing a social science theory that incorporates Chinese subjectivity.","PeriodicalId":47030,"journal":{"name":"Modern China","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/00977004211002112","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Social Science of Practice Approach to the Study of China’s Development: A Methodological Discussion\",\"authors\":\"Liuyang Zhao\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00977004211002112\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The basic facts of China’s economic development have called into question Western transition economic theory, most famously presented in the works of János Kornai. On the other hand, the three most representative approaches to explaining China’s development experience have variously emphasized the resource endowment structure, or the property rights system, or the incentive mechanism behind the behavior of local governments, as the key to China’s economic development. Although they focus on different dimensions of China’s economic practices, they ultimately converge on the logic of marketism as the explanation. The “social science of practice” approach proposed by Philip Huang is distinguished from these orthodox theories in that, first, it attends to the rise of the huge informal economy in China and reveals the historical roots of contemporary social inequality. This approach has three closely related characteristics: theoretical formulations based on analyses of paradoxical phenomena, a broad historical perspective on current problems, and the idea of substantive justice. The main significance of this approach lies not only in its insightful and practice-focused understanding of the key realities that have been ignored by mainstream theories, but, more importantly, in its multiple inspirations for constructing a social science theory that incorporates Chinese subjectivity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47030,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Modern China\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/00977004211002112\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Modern China\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00977004211002112\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern China","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00977004211002112","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Social Science of Practice Approach to the Study of China’s Development: A Methodological Discussion
The basic facts of China’s economic development have called into question Western transition economic theory, most famously presented in the works of János Kornai. On the other hand, the three most representative approaches to explaining China’s development experience have variously emphasized the resource endowment structure, or the property rights system, or the incentive mechanism behind the behavior of local governments, as the key to China’s economic development. Although they focus on different dimensions of China’s economic practices, they ultimately converge on the logic of marketism as the explanation. The “social science of practice” approach proposed by Philip Huang is distinguished from these orthodox theories in that, first, it attends to the rise of the huge informal economy in China and reveals the historical roots of contemporary social inequality. This approach has three closely related characteristics: theoretical formulations based on analyses of paradoxical phenomena, a broad historical perspective on current problems, and the idea of substantive justice. The main significance of this approach lies not only in its insightful and practice-focused understanding of the key realities that have been ignored by mainstream theories, but, more importantly, in its multiple inspirations for constructing a social science theory that incorporates Chinese subjectivity.
期刊介绍:
Published for over thirty years, Modern China has been an indispensable source of scholarship in history and the social sciences on late-imperial, twentieth-century, and present-day China. Modern China presents scholarship based on new research or research that is devoted to new interpretations, new questions, and new answers to old questions. Spanning the full sweep of Chinese studies of six centuries, Modern China encourages scholarship that crosses over the old "premodern/modern" and "modern/contemporary" divides.