Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:39:02.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The limits of authoritarian rule: policy making and deliberation in urban village regeneration in China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 November 2018

Pu Niu  and
Hendrik Wagenaar
Pu Niu
Affiliation:
Department of Urban Studies and Planning, University of Sheffield
Hendrik Wagenaar*
Affiliation:
Policy Institute at King's College London
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The subject of this paper is the role of democratic deliberation as a policy instrument for district and local administrations in the urban village regeneration process. This paper contributes to a better understanding of the relationship between democratic deliberation and public policy making, and the theory of deliberative systems. Deliberation in the context of urban village regeneration is part of a complex, scalar, political-administrative system, with many actors whose activities are often not aligned. Although this configuration has authoritarian traits and operates largely without the protection of a strong and well-functioning rule of law, it is not all-sovereign. In fact, one of the most fascinating aspects of urban village deliberation is the way that reveals the limits of authoritarian rule in a modern national and international context. As we show, the Party encounters the same problems of technical, social, and institutional complexity, with the ensuing limits on vertical steering, as administrations in democratic countries. Using the case of Q village, we describe how hierarchical project management sits uneasily with village deliberation throughout the process. When officials attempt to curtail the legally mandated village deliberation process, they encounter stiff resistance and even a participation strike.

Type
Special Section, Authoritarian Deliberation Revisited (Edited by Baogang He and Hendrik Wagenaar)
Information
Japanese Journal of Political Science , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , December 2018 , pp. 678 - 693
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bächtiger, A, Niemeyer, S, Neblo, M, Steenbergen, MR and Steiner, J (2010) Symposium: toward more realistic models of deliberative democracy disentangling diversity in deliberative democracy: competing theories, their blind spots and complementarities. The Journal of Political Philosophy 18, 32–63.Google Scholar
Boyatzis, RE (1998) Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Charmaz, K (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Chung, H (2009). The planning of ‘villages-in-the-city’ in Shenzhen, China: the significance of the new state-led approach. International Planning Studies 14, 253–273.Google Scholar
Dewey, J (1954 [1927]) The Public and its Problems. Athens, OH: Swallows Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, JS (1990) Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fishkin, JS (2018) Democracy When the People Are Thinking: Revitalizing Our Politics Through Public Deliberation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hao, P, Sliuzas, R and Geerman, S (2011) The development and redevelopment of urban village in Shenzhen. Habitat International 35, 214–224.Google Scholar
He, B (2014) Deliberative culture and politics: the persistance of authoritarian deliberation in China. Political Theory 41, 58–81.Google Scholar
He, B and Thøgersen, S (2010). Giving the people a voice? Experiments with consultative authoritarian institutions in China. Journal of Contemporary China 19, 675–692.Google Scholar
He, B and Warren, ME (2011) Authoritarian deliberation: the deliberative turn in Chinese political development. Perspectives on Politics 9, 269–289.Google Scholar
He, S, Liu, Y, Webster, C and Wu, F (2009) Property rights redistribution, entitlement failure and the impoverishment of landless farmers in China. Urban Studies 46, 1925–1949.Google Scholar
Hin, LL and Xin, L (2011) Redevelopment of urban villages in Shenzhen, China–An analysis of power relations and urban coalitions. Habitat International 35, 426–434.Google Scholar
Ho, SPS and Lin, GCS (2003). Emerging land markets in rural and urban China: policies and practices. The China Quarterly 175, 681–707.Google Scholar
Keane, J (2017) When Trees Fall, Monkeys Scatter: Rethinking Democracy In China. London: World Scientific Europe Ltd.Google Scholar
Lin, Y and De Meulder, B (2012) A conceptual framework for the strategic urban project approach for the sustainable redevelopment of ‘villages in the city’ in Guangzhou. Habitat International 36, 380–387.Google Scholar
Lin, GCS and Ho, SPS (2005) The state, land system, and land development processes in contemporary China. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 95, 411–436.Google Scholar
Lindblom, CE (1965) The Intelligence of Democracy. Decision Making Through Mutual Adjustment. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Liu, L, Yang, F, Wei, H and Liu, H (2010) Investigation about the living condition of residents after the ‘urban village’ regeneration in Zhengzhou. Academic Journal of Jiangxi Agricultures 22, 209–212.Google Scholar
Lu, D (2015) Challenges and the way forward in China's new-type urbanization. Land Use Policy 55, 334–339.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, J, Chambers, S, Christiano, T, Fung, A, Parkinson, J, Thompson, D and Warren, M (2012) A systemic approach to deliberative democracy. In Parkinson, J and Mansbridge, J (eds), Deliberative Systems. Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–27.Google Scholar
Papadopoulos, Y (2012) On the embeddedness of deliberative systems: why elitist innovations matter more. In Parkinson, J and Mansbridge, J (eds), Deliberative Systems. Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 125–151.Google Scholar
Rollo, T (2017) Everyday deeds: enactive protest, exit, and silence in deliberative systems. Political Theory 45, 587–609.Google Scholar
Scott, J (1987) Weapons of the Weak. Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Wagenaar, H (2007) Governance, complexity, and democratic participation: how citizens and public officials harness the complexities of neighborhood decline. The American Review of Public Administration 37, 17–50.Google Scholar
Wagenaar, H (2011) ‘A beckon to the makings, workings and doings of human beings’: the critical pragmatism of john forester. Public Administration Review 71, 293–299.Google Scholar
Warren, ME (2011) Voting with your feet: exit-based empowerment in democratic theory. American Political Science Review 105, 683–701.Google Scholar
Zhang, L (2005) Migrant enclaves and impacts of redevelopment policy in Chinese cities. In Ma, LJC and Wu, FL (eds), Restructuring the Chinese City: Changing Society, Economy and Space. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Zhang, L, Zhao, S and Tian, J (2003) Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 27, 912–937.Google Scholar