中国公民社会规制中的权威学习:走向多层次框架

Q2 Social Sciences
Bertram Lang
{"title":"中国公民社会规制中的权威学习:走向多层次框架","authors":"Bertram Lang","doi":"10.1177/186810261804700306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How do authoritarian governments learn? What kind of events and experiences can lead them to adopt more or less restrictive policies towards social actors? And, how are such lessons from others' experiences integrated into new policies? These questions have been addressed and answered quite differently from various disciplinary perspectives, focusing either on international dynamics such as “authoritarian diffusion” or on domestic policy learning. This article seeks to integrate different perspectives on authoritarian learning by proposing a typological framework of positive and negative learning from three distinct sources: authoritarian peers, democratic countries, and subnational policy experiments. I argue that such a comprehensive framework better accounts for both the relative importance and for the interaction of different kinds of learning in national-level policy processes. To illustrate the framework's added analytical value, I use an exemplary case study of recent legislative changes to China's civil society policy, which have been alternatively interpreted as part of an authoritarian “wave” or as another step in incremental domestic learning processes.","PeriodicalId":37907,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Chinese Affairs","volume":"68 1","pages":"147 - 186"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Authoritarian Learning in China's Civil Society Regulations: Towards a Multi-Level Framework\",\"authors\":\"Bertram Lang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/186810261804700306\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"How do authoritarian governments learn? What kind of events and experiences can lead them to adopt more or less restrictive policies towards social actors? And, how are such lessons from others' experiences integrated into new policies? These questions have been addressed and answered quite differently from various disciplinary perspectives, focusing either on international dynamics such as “authoritarian diffusion” or on domestic policy learning. This article seeks to integrate different perspectives on authoritarian learning by proposing a typological framework of positive and negative learning from three distinct sources: authoritarian peers, democratic countries, and subnational policy experiments. I argue that such a comprehensive framework better accounts for both the relative importance and for the interaction of different kinds of learning in national-level policy processes. To illustrate the framework's added analytical value, I use an exemplary case study of recent legislative changes to China's civil society policy, which have been alternatively interpreted as part of an authoritarian “wave” or as another step in incremental domestic learning processes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37907,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Current Chinese Affairs\",\"volume\":\"68 1\",\"pages\":\"147 - 186\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Current Chinese Affairs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/186810261804700306\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Current Chinese Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/186810261804700306","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

专制政府如何学习?什么样的事件和经历会导致他们对社会行为者采取或多或少的限制性政策?如何将别国的经验教训融入新政策?这些问题已经从不同的学科角度得到了截然不同的解决和回答,要么侧重于国际动态,如“威权扩散”,要么侧重于国内政策学习。本文试图通过提出来自三个不同来源的积极和消极学习的类型学框架来整合关于权威学习的不同观点:权威同行、民主国家和地方政策实验。我认为,这样一个全面的框架更好地说明了不同类型的学习在国家级政策过程中的相对重要性和相互作用。为了说明该框架的附加分析价值,我使用了中国公民社会政策最近立法变化的典型案例研究,这些变化被解释为专制“浪潮”的一部分,或者被解释为国内渐进式学习过程的又一步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Authoritarian Learning in China's Civil Society Regulations: Towards a Multi-Level Framework
How do authoritarian governments learn? What kind of events and experiences can lead them to adopt more or less restrictive policies towards social actors? And, how are such lessons from others' experiences integrated into new policies? These questions have been addressed and answered quite differently from various disciplinary perspectives, focusing either on international dynamics such as “authoritarian diffusion” or on domestic policy learning. This article seeks to integrate different perspectives on authoritarian learning by proposing a typological framework of positive and negative learning from three distinct sources: authoritarian peers, democratic countries, and subnational policy experiments. I argue that such a comprehensive framework better accounts for both the relative importance and for the interaction of different kinds of learning in national-level policy processes. To illustrate the framework's added analytical value, I use an exemplary case study of recent legislative changes to China's civil society policy, which have been alternatively interpreted as part of an authoritarian “wave” or as another step in incremental domestic learning processes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Current Chinese Affairs
Journal of Current Chinese Affairs Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Current Chinese Affairs is an internationally refereed academic journal published by the GIGA Institute of Asian Studies, Hamburg. The journal focuses on current developments in Greater China. It is simultaneously published (three times per year) online as an Open Access journal and as a printed version with a circulation of 1,000 copies, making it one of the world’s most widely read periodicals on Asian affairs. The Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, unlike some other Open Access publications, does not charge its authors any fee. The Journal of Current Chinese Affairs reaches a broad international readership in academia, administration and business circles. It is devoted to the transfer of scholarly insights to a wide audience. The journal is committed to publishing high-quality, original research on current issues in China in a format and style that is accessible across disciplines and to professionals with an interest in the region. The editors welcome contributions on current affairs within Greater China, including Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. Submissions can focus on emerging topics and current developments as well as on future-oriented debates in the fields of China''s global and regional roles; political, economic and social developments including foreign affairs, business, finance, cultural industries, religion, education, science and technology; and so on.
×
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