Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T16:23:41.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The formation of public-private partnerships in China: an institutional perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2015

Yanlong Zhang
Yanlong Zhang*
Affiliation:
Department of Organization and Management, Guanghua School of Management, Peking University, China E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study offers a sociopolitical perspective on the worldwide diffusion of liberalisation reforms in infrastructure industries. It unpacks the heterogeneity in the extent to which the private sector is allowed to participate in these industries through an analysis of the formation of public-private partnerships in Chinese cities. This study considers the effects of horizontal and vertical diffusion mechanisms on the adoption of different types of public-private partnerships in different infrastructure sectors. An analysis of projects with private participation in 333 Chinese cities between 1992 and 2008 reveals that the spatial effects appear to be significantly modulated when the influence from structurally equivalent peer cities are considered; moreover, the effects of the vertical diffusion mechanisms are moderated by the liberalisation index of the contract forms, and the horizontal diffusion mechanisms are moderated by the marketability of the infrastructure segments.

Keywords

diffusioninfrastructureinstitutional theorypublic-private partnership
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 35 , Issue 2 , August 2015 , pp. 329 - 354
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2015 

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

Akintoye, A., Beck, M. and Hardcastle, C. (2003) Public-Private Partnerships: Management Risks and Opportunities. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
Annez, P. C. (2007) Urban Infrastructure Finance from Private Operators: What Have We Learned from Recent Experience? In Peterson G. E. and Annez P. C. (eds.), Financing Cities: Fiscal Responsibility and Urban Infrastructure in Brazil, China, India, Poland and South Africa. New York: Sage Publications Inc, 307–338.Google Scholar
Bellier, M. and Zhou, Y. M. (2003) Private Participation in Infrastructure in China: Issues and Recommendations for the Road, Water, and Power Sectors. New York, NY: World Bank, International Finance Corporation.Google Scholar
Berry, F. S. and Berry, W. D. (1990) State Lottery Adoptions as Policy Innovations: An Event History Analysis. American Political Science Review 84(2): 395–415.Google Scholar
Berry, F. S. and Berry, W. D. (2007) Innovation and Diffusion in Policy Research. In Sabatier P. A. (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 307–362.Google Scholar
Burt, R. S. (1987) Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion Versus Structural Equivalence. American Journal of Sociology 92: 1287–1335.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. L. and Pedersen, O. K. (eds.) (2001) The Rise of Neoliberalism and Institutional Analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Dailami, M. and Klein, M. U. (1998) Government Support to Private Infrastructure Projects in Emerging Markets. World Bank Policy Research. Working paper No. 1868, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Daley, D. M. and Garand, J. C. (2005) Horizontal Diffusion, Vertical Diffusion, and Internal Pressure in State Environmental Policymaking. American Politics Research 33(5): 615–644.Google Scholar
Delmon, J. (2009) Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure: Project Finance, PPP Projects, and Risk. Washington, DC: Kluwer and PPIAF.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. (1983) The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review 48(2): 147–160.Google Scholar
Dobbin, F., Simmons, B. and Garrett, G. (2007) The Global Diffusion of Public Policies: Social Construction, Coercion, Competition, or Learning? Annual Review of Sociology 33: 449–472.Google Scholar
Dougherty, S.M. and McGuckin, R.H. (2008) The effects of federalism on productivity in Chinese firms. Management and Organization Review 4(1): 39–61.Google Scholar
Farquharson, E., Mastle, C. T. d., Yescombe, E. R. and Encinas, J. (2011) How to Engage with the Private Sector in Public-Private Partnerships in Emerging Markets. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
Fligstein, N. (1985) The Spread of the Multidivisional Form Among Large Firms, 1919–1979. American Sociological Review 50(3): 377–391.Google Scholar
Fourcade-Gourinchas, M. and Babb, S. (2002) The Rebirth of the Liberal Creed: Paths to Neoliberalism in Four Countries. American Journal of Sociology 108: 533–579.Google Scholar
Grimsey, D. and Lewis, M. K. (2004) Public Private Partnerships: The Worldwide Revolution in Infrastructure Provision and Project Finance. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Hammami, M., Ruhashyankiko, J.-F. and Yehoue, E. B. (2006) Determinants of Public-Private Partnerships in Infrastructure. Working paper, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Haunschild, P. R. and Miner, A. S. (1997) Modes of Interorganizational Imitation: The Effects of Outcome Salience and Uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly 42: 472–500.Google Scholar
Haveman, H. A., Rao, H. and Paruchuri, S. (2007) The Winds of Change: The Progressive Movement and the Bureaucratization of Thrift. American Sociological Review 72: 117–142.Google Scholar
Henisz, W. J., Zelner, B. A. and Guillen, M. F. (2005) The Worldwide Diffusion of Market-Oriented Infrastructure Reform, 1977–1999. American Sociological Review 70: 871–897.Google Scholar
Keister, L. A. (2002) Adapting to Radical Change: Strategy and Environment in Piece-Rate Adoption During China’s Transition. Organization Science 13(5): 459–474.Google Scholar
Knoke, D. (1982) The Spread of Municipal Reform: Temporal, Spatial, and Social Dynamics. The American Journal of Sociology 87(6): 1314–1339.Google Scholar
Krug, B. and Hendrischke, H. (2008) Framing China: Transformation and Institutional Change through Co-Evolution. Management and Organization Review 4(1): 81–108.Google Scholar
Lieberman, I. W. and Kirkness, C. D. (1998) Privatization and Emerging Equity Markets. World Bank Publications.Google Scholar
Montinola, G., Qian, Y. and Weingast, B. R. (1995) Federalism, Chinese Style: The Political Basis for Economic Success. World Politics 48(1): 50–81.Google Scholar
Mooney, C. Z. (2001) Modeling Regional Effects on State Policy Diffusion. Political Research Quarterly 54(1): 103–124.Google Scholar
NBS (2009) China Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Statistical Yearbook Press.Google Scholar
Peterson, P. E. and Rom, M. (1989) American Federalism, Welfare Policy, and Residential Choices. American Political Science Review 83: 711–728.Google Scholar
Ramamurti, R. (1999) Why Haven’t Developing Countries Privatized Deeper and Faster? World Development 27(1): 137–155.Google Scholar
Rogers, E. M. (1995) Diffusion of Innovations, 4th ed. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Sabatier, P. A. (2007) The Need for Better Theories. In Sabatier P. A. (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Savas, E. S. (2005) Privatization in the City: Successes, Failures, Lessons. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Seppala, O., Hukka, J. and Katko, T. (2001) Public-Private Partnerships in Water and Sewerage Services: Privatization for Profit or Improvement Service and Performance. Public Works Management Policy 6(1): 42–58.Google Scholar
Shipan, C. R. and Volden, C. (2006) Bottom-Up Federalism: The Diffusion of Antismoking Policies from U.S. Cities to States. American Journal of Political Science 50(4): 825–843.Google Scholar
Shipan, C. R. and Volden, C. (2008) The Mechanisms of Policy Diffusion. American Journal of Political Science 52(4): 840–857.Google Scholar
Simmons, B. A., Dobbin, F. and Garrett, G. (2006) Introduction: The International Diffusion of Liberalism. International Organization 60(4): 781–810.Google Scholar
Strang, D. (1990) From Dependency to Sovereignty: An Event History Analysis of Decolonization 1870–1987. American Sociological Review 55: 846–860.Google Scholar
Strang, D. and Meyer, J. W. (1993) Institutional Conditions for Diffusion. Theory and Society 22(4): 487–511.Google Scholar
Strang, D. and Soule, S. A. (1998) Diffusion in Organizations and Social Movements: From Hybrid Corn to Poison Pills. Annual Review of Sociology 24: 265–290.Google Scholar
Strang, D. and Tuma, N. (1993) Spatial and Temporal Heterogeneity in Diffusion. American Journal of Sociology 99(3): 614–639.Google Scholar
Su, M. and Zhao, Q. (2007) China: Fiscal Framework and Urban Infrastructure Finance. In Peterson G. E. and Annez P. C. (eds.), Financing Cities: Fiscal Responsibility and Urban Infrastructure in Brazil, China, India, Poland and South Africa. New York: Sage Publications Inc, 74–107.Google Scholar
Tiebout, C. (1956) A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures. Journal of Political Economy 64: 416–424.Google Scholar
Tolnay, S. E., Deane, G. and Beck, E. M. (1996) Vicarious Violence: Spatial Effects on Southern Lynchings, 1890–1919. American Journal of Sociology 102(3): 788–815.Google Scholar
Walker, J. L. (1969) The Diffusion of Innovations Among the American States. American Political Science Review 63(3): 880–899.Google Scholar
Wejnert, B. (2002) Integrating Models of Diffusion of Innovations: A Conceptual Framework. Annual Review of Sociology 28: 297–326.Google Scholar
Whiting, S. H. (2001) Power and Wealth in Rural China: The Political Economy of Institutional Change. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
World Bank (1994) World Development Report 1994: Infrastructure for Development. New York, NY: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank.Google Scholar
Zucker, L. G. (1987) Institutional Theories of Organization. Annual Review of Sociology 13: 443–464.Google Scholar