PUBLIC POLICY IN HYBRID REGIMES: A REVIEW
Keywords:
рublic policy, hybrid regime, authoritarianism, citizen participation, civil society, ChinaAbstract
This review systemizes contemporary, mostly foreign, academic literature, devoted to the development of public policy in hybrid and authoritarian regimes, as well as to the interaction of citizens, civic associations and authorities within the process of public policy-making. The academic interest in this topic is growing, mostly due to the development of participatory practices in non-democracies, especially in China, which is now becoming a popular object of analysis. The researchers emphasize the constant transformation of the Chinese public policy and a variety of participation channels, open for citizens, non-profit organizations and expert communities. It gives an opportunity to adapt existing Western theories to the analysis of hybrid regimes, as well as to develop a new conceptual apparatus. Despite the significant growth of theoretical and empirical knowledge on that topic, the research agenda still has some avenues for development. Firstly, an important issue is the analysis of institutional effects of citizen participation, the interrelation of its information, legitimation and imitation functions in a non-democratic context. Secondly, it is also relevant to study the success factors of such initiatives, and their potential both as a source of regime stability and public policy democratization. In the review we attempt to formulate these problems and possible empirical ways to deal with them. In particular, a promising step could be the application of models and hypotheses, derived from the Chinese case, to other countries, as well as to cross-national comparative studies. DOI: 10.17072/2218-1067-2020-2-142-150References
Богданова, Е. А. (2006) Обращения граждан в органы власти как опыт отстаивания своих интересов в условиях позднесoветского общества (1960‒1970-е гг.): дис. … канд. социол. наук. Санкт-Петербург. [Bogdanova, E. A. (2006) Citizens’ Appeals to Public Authorities as a Practice of Defending Interests in the Conditions of the Late Soviet Society (1960‒1970s) [Obrashcheniya grazhdan v organy vlasti kak opyt otstaivaniya svoikh interesov v usloviyakh pozdneso-vetskogo obshchestva (1960‒1970-e gody)]. Dis. kand. sotsiol. nauk. St. Pe-tersburg. (In Russ.)].
Кабанов, Ю. (2018) ‘Что скрывается за «фаса-дом»? Исследовательская программа электронного участия в недемократических странах’, Вестник Пермского университета. Политология, 3, сс. 50–66. [Kabanov, Ju. (2018) ‘What’s Beyond the Façade? The Research Program of E-Participation in Non-Democracies’ [Chto skryvaetsja za «fasadom»? Issledovatel’-skaja programma jelektronnogo uchastija v nedemokraticheskih stranah], Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Politologija, 3, рр. 50–66. (In Russ.)].
Кононенко, П. Б. (2015) ‘Информационная открытость парламентов субъектов Российской Федерации: экспериментальный анализ’, Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 4: История. Регионоведение. Между-народные отношения, 1, сс. 99–110. [Kononenko, P. B. (2015) ‘Information Openness of the Parliaments of the Sub-jects of the Russian Federation: Experi-mental Analysis’ [Informacionnaja otkry-tost’ parlamentov sub’ektov Rossijskoj Federacii: jeksperimental’nyj analiz], Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstven-nogo universiteta. Serija 4: Istorija. Re-gionovedenie. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheni-ja, 1, рр. 99–110. (In Russ.)].
Политическая система КНР (1990). 100 вопросов и ответов. Москва, Издательство политической литературы. [Politiches-kaia Sistema KNP (1900). Political Sys-tem of the PRC (1990). 100 Questions and Answers [100 Voprosov I Otvetov]. Moskva, Izdatel’stvo politicheskoi litera-ture. (In Russ.)].
Almén, O. (2016) ‘Local participatory innova-tions and experts as political entrepre-neurs: The case of China’s democracy consultants’, Democratization, 23(3), 478–497. DOI: 10.1080/13510347.2014.982107.
Alshaikh, A. A. B. (2019) ‘Citizen Participation in Saudi Arabia: A Study of the Ministry of Labour’, Asian Affairs, 50(1), 112–123. DOI: 10.1080/03068374.2019.1567105.
Ananyev, M., & Poyker, M. (2018) Information Acquisition and Projecting Invincibility in Authoritarian Elections. Available at SSRN. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2712064.
Ayana, A. N., Arts, B., & Wiersum, K. F. (2018) ‘How environmental NGOs have influ-enced decision making in a ‘semi-authoritarian’state: The case of forest policy in Ethiopia’, World Development, 109, 313‒322.
Bahry, D., & Silver, B. D. (1990) ‘Soviet citizen participation on the eve of democratiza-tion’, American Political Science Review, 84(3), 821‒847. DOI: 10.2307/1962768.
Beismann, K. (2016) The Engaged Dictator: A Global Perspective on Deliberative Poli-tics and Stability in Autocracies (Draft). URL: https://ecpr.eu/Filestore/PaperPro-posal/d56609b7-2997-4738-9ed2-73b959d0bf1a.pdf.
Böhmelt, T. (2014) ‘Political opportunity struc-tures in dictatorships? Explaining ENGO existence in autocratic regimes’, The Journal of Environment & Development, 23(4), 446-471. DOI: 10.1177/1070496514536396.
Brancati, D. (2014) ‘Democratic authoritarian-ism: Origins and effects’, Annual Review of Political Science, 17, 313‒326. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-052013-115248.
Brooker, P. (2013) Non-democratic regimes. Mac-millan International Higher Education.
Cai, Y. (2004) ‘Managed participation in China’, Political Science Quarterly, 119(3), 425‒452. DOI: 10.2307/20202390.
Cai, Y., & Zhou, T. (2019) ‘Online Political Par-ticipation in China: Local Government and Differentiated Response’, The China Quarterly, 1‒22. DOI: 10.1017/S0305741019000055.
Chen, J. (2012) ‘Who participates in collective petitions in rural China?’, Journal of Chinese Political Science, 17(3), 251‒268. DOI: 10.1007/s11366-012-9201-7.
Chen, J. (2016) Useful Complaints: How petitions assist decentralized authoritarianism in China. Rowman & Littlefield.
Chen, J., & Xu, Y. (2017) ‘Information manipu-lation and reform in authoritarian re-gimes’, Political Science Research and Methods, 5(1), 163‒178. DOI: 10.1017/psrm.2015.21.
Chen, J., & Xu, Y. (2017) ‘Why do authoritarian regimes allow citizens to voice opinions publicly?’, The Journal of Politics, 79(3), 792‒803. DOI: 10.1086/690303.
Chen, J., Pan, J., & Xu, Y. (2016) ‘Sources of authoritarian responsiveness: A field ex-periment in China’, American Journal of Political Science, 60(2), 383‒400. DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12207.
Dalmasso, E. (2018) ‘Participation without repre-sentation: Moroccans abroad at a time of unstable authoritarian rule’, Globaliza-tions, 15(2), 198‒214. DOI: 10.1080/147
2017.1396713.
Dimitrov, M. K. (2014a) ‘Tracking public opin-ion under authoritarianism’, Russian His-tory, 41(3), 329‒353.
Dimitrov, M. K. (2014b) ‘What the party wanted to know: Citizen complaints as a “barom-eter of public opinion” in communist Bulgaria’, East European Politics and So-cieties, 28(2), 271‒295. DOI: 10.1177/0888325413506933.
Dimitrov, M. K. (2015) ‘Internal government assessments of the quality of governance in China’, Studies in Comparative Inter-national Development, 50(1), 50‒72. DOI: 10.1007/s12116-014-9170-2.
Dukalskis, A., & Gerschewski, J. (2017) ‘What autocracies say (and what citizens hear): Proposing four mechanisms of autocratic legitimation’, Contemporary Politics, 23(3), 251‒268. DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2017.1304320.
Froissart, C. (2019) ‘From outsiders to insiders: the rise of China ENGOs as new experts in the law-making process and the build-ing of a technocratic representation’, Journal of Chinese Governance, 4(3), 207‒232. DOI: 10.1080/23812346.2019.1638686.
Geddes, B. (1999) ‘What do we know about de-mocratization after twenty years?’, Annu-al review of political science, 2(1), 115‒144. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.115.
Gel’man, V., & Starodubtsev, A. (2016) ‘Oppor-tunities and constraints of authoritarian modernisation: Russian policy reforms in the 2000-s.’, Europe-Asia Studies, 68(1), 97‒117. DOI: 10.1080/09668136.2015.1113232.
Gerschewski, J. (2013) ‘The three pillars of sta-bility: legitimation, repression, and co-optation in autocratic regimes’, Democra-tization, 20(1), 13‒38. DOI: 10.1080/13510347.2013.738860.
Göbel, C. (2011) ‘Authoritarian consolidation’, European political science, 10(2), 176‒190. DOI: 10.1057/eps.2010.47.
Goebel, C., & Lambach, D. (2008) ‘Charting the Dark Side of the Moon: Regime Respon-siveness, Authoritarian Consolidation and the (In-) Stability of Authoritarian Regimes’, рaper prepared for the ECPR panel “Challenges to Comparative Poli-tics”, IPSA World Congress of Political Science, Santiago de Chile, July 12‒15.
Guriev, S., & Treisman, D. (2019) ‘Informational autocrats’, Journal of Economic Perspec-tives, 33(4), 100‒127. DOI: 10.1257/jep.
4.100.
He, B. (1994) ‘Dual roles of semi‐civil society in Chinese democratisation’, Australian Journal of Political Science, 29:1, 154‒
, DOI: 10.1080/00323269408402285.
He, B. (2014) ‘Deliberative culture and politics: The persistence of authoritarian deli-beration in China’, Political Theory, 42(1), 58‒81. DOI: 10.1177/0090591713509251.
He, B. (2019) ‘Deliberative participatory budget-ing: A case study of Zeguo Town in Chi-na’, Public Administration and Develop-ment, 39(3), 144‒153. DOI: 10.1002/pad.1853.
He, B., & Thøgersen, S. (2010) ‘Giving the peo-ple a voice? Experiments with consulta-tive authoritarian institutions in China’, Journal of Contemporary China, 19(66), 675‒692. DOI: 10.1080/10670564.2010.485404.
He, B., & Wagenaar, H. (2018) ‘Authoritarian deliberation revisited’, Japanese Journal of Political Science, 19(4), 622‒629. DOI: 10.1017/S1468109918000257.
He, B., & Warren, M. E. (2011) ‘Authoritarian deliberation: The deliberative turn in Chinese political development’, Perspec-tives on politics, 9(2), 269‒289. DOI: 10.1017/S1537592711000892.
Henry, L. A. (2012) ‘Complaint-making as politi-cal participation in contemporary Russia’, Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 45(3‒4), 243‒254. DOI: 10.1016/j.post-comstud.2012.06.010.
Hurst, W., Liu, M., Liu, Y., & Tao, R. (2014) ‘Reassessing collective petitioning in ru-ral China: civic engagement, extra-state violence, and regional variation’, Com-parative Politics, 46(4), 459‒482. DOI: 10.5129/001041514812522798.
Jann, W., Wegrich, K. (2007) ‘Theories of the Policy Cycle’, in: Fischer, F., Miller, G. S., Sidney, M. S. (Eds). Handbook of Public Policy Analysis. Theory, Politics, and Methods. New York: CRC Press, 43‒63.
Jayasuriya, K., & Rodan, G. (2007) ‘Beyond hy-brid regimes: more participation, less contestation in Southeast Asia’, Democ-ratization, 14(5), 773‒794.
Jiang, J., & Wallace, J. (2017) Informal institu-tions and authoritarian information sys-tems: Theory and evidence from China. Available at SSRN 2992165. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2992165.
Kornreich, Y. (2019) ‘Authoritarian responsive-ness: Online consultation with “issue publics” in China’, Governance, 32(3), 547‒564. DOI: 10.1111/gove.12393.
Li, H., Lo, C. W. H., & Tang, S. Y. (2017) ‘Non-profit policy advocacy under authoritari-anism’, Public Administration Review, 77(1), 103‒117.
Li, W., & Weible, C. M. (2019) ‘China’s Policy Processes and the Advocacy Coalition Framework’, Policy Studies Journal. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12369.
Libman, A., & Kozlov, V. (2017) ‘The legacy of compliant activism in autocracies: post-Communist experience’, Contemporary Politics, 23(2), 195‒213. DOI: /10.1080/13569775.2016.1206275.
Liu, D. (2018) ‘Advocacy channels and political resource dependence in authoritarianism: Nongovernmental organizations and en-vironmental policies in China’, Govern-ance. DOI: 10.1111/gove.12431.
Lorentzen, P. (2014) ‘China's strategic censor-ship’, American Journal of Political Sci-ence, 58(2), 402‒414. DOI: 10.1111/ajps.
Lussier, D. N. (2011) ‘Contacting and complain-ing: political participation and the failure of democracy In Russia’, Post-Soviet Af-fairs, 27(3), 289‒325. DOI: 10.2747/1060-586X.27.3.289.
Minzner, C. F. (2006) ‘Xinfang: an alternative to formal Chinese legal institutions’, Stan. J., Int’l l., 42, 103.
Nathan, A. (2003) ‘China's Changing of the Guard: Authoritarian Resilience’, Journal of Democracy, 14 (1), 6‒17. DOI: 10.13
/jod.2003.0019.
Niu, P., & Wagenaar, H. (2018) ‘The limits of authoritarian rule: policy making and de-liberation in urban village regeneration in China’, Japanese Journal of Political Sci-ence, 19(4), 678‒693. DOI: 10.1017/S1468109918000294.
Owen, C. (2016) ‘A genealogy of kontrol’ in Russia: From Leninist to neoliberal gov-ernance’, Slavic Review, 75(2), 331‒353. DOI: 10.5612/slavicreview.75.2.331.
Paik, W. (2018) ‘The Institution of Petition and Authoritarian Social Control in Contem-porary China’, Issues & Studies, 54(02), 1850005. DOI: 10.1142/S1013251118500054.
Pan, J., & Chen, K. (2018) ‘Concealing Corrup-tion: How Chinese Officials Distort Up-ward Reporting of Online Grievances’, American Political Science Review, 112(3), 602‒620. DOI: 10.1017/S0003055418000205.
Porshnev, A. (2018) ‘Success Factors of Electron-ic Petitions at Russian Public Initiative Project: The Role of Informativeness, Topic and Lexical Information’, in: Inter-national Conference on Social Informatics (pp. 243‒250). Springer, Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-01159-8_23.
Qiaoan, R., & Teets, J. C. (2019) ‘Responsive Authoritarianism in China--a Review of Responsiveness in Xi and Hu Admin-istrations’, Journal of Chinese Political Science, 1‒15. DOI: 10.1007/s11366-019-09640-z.
Su, Z., & Meng, T. (2016) ‘Selective responsive-ness: Online public demands and gov-ernment responsiveness in authoritarian China’, Social science research, 59, 52‒67. DOI: S0049089X16302071.
Teets, J. (2018) ‘The power of policy networks in authoritarian regimes: Changing envi-ronmental policy in China’, Governance, 31(1), 125–141.
Teets, J. C. (2013) ‘Let many civil societies bloom: The rise of consultative authori-tarianism in China’, The China Quarterly, 213, 19‒38. DOI: 10.1017/S0305741012001269.
Toepfl, F. (2018) ‘Innovating consultative au-thoritarianism: Internet votes as a novel digital tool to stabilize non-democratic rule in Russia, New media & society, 20(3), 956‒972. DOI: 10.1177/1461444816675444.
Truex, R. (2017) ‘Consultative authoritarianism and its limits’, Comparative political studies, 50(3), 329‒361. DOI: 10.1177/0010414014534196.
Tsai, L. L., & Xu, Y. (2018) ‘Outspoken insiders: Political connections and citizen partici-pation in authoritarian China’, Political Behavior, 40(3), 629‒657. DOI: 10.1007/s11
-012-9201-7.
Uldanov, A. (2019) ‘Policy advice in an authori-tarian environment: urban transport poli-cies in Moscow and Beijing (2010–2017)’, Policy Studies, 1‒17. DOI: 10.1080/01442872.2019.1581158.
von Soest, C., & Grauvogel, J. (2017) ‘Identity, procedures and performance: how author-itarian regimes legitimize their rule’, Contemporary Politics, 23(3), 287‒305. DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2017.1304319.
Wallin, P. (2014) Authoritarian collaboration: Unexpected effects of open government in-itiatives in China (Doctoral dissertation, Linnaeus University Press).
Wang, S. (2008) ‘Changing models of China’s policy agenda setting’, Modern China, 34(1), 56‒87. DOI: 10.1177/009770040
Yang, Z. (2013) ‘Fragmented authoritarianism’–the facilitator behind the Chinese reform miracle: A case study in central China’, China Journal of Social Work, 6(1), 4‒13. DOI: 10.1080/17525098.2013.766622.
Zhuang, M., Zhang, X., & Morgan, S. L. (2018) ‘Citizen–media interaction in China’s lo-cal participatory reform: a contingent par-ticipation model’, Journal of Contempo-rary China, 27(109), 120‒136. DOI: 10.1080/10670564.2017.1363025.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The author grants the Publisher of the journal (Perm State University) the right to use their article in the journal, as well as to include the text of the abstract, the full text of the article and information about authors in the "Russian Science Citation Index" (RSCI).
The author agrees to the processing of personal data.
The right to use the journal as a whole belongs to the Publisher and acts indefinitely on the territory of the Russian Federation and beyond in accordance with cl. 1260 of the Russian Federation Civil Code.
There is no author's fee paid for providing the above rights by the author.
The author of the article included in the journal retains the exclusive right to it, regardless of the Publisher's right to use the journal as a whole:
a. The authors retain their copyrights to the article and transfer the right of the first publication along with the article to the journal, while also licensing it on the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to distribute this article with the obligatory indication of authorship of the article and reference to the original publication in this journal.
b. The authors retain the right to enter into separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive dissemination of the version of the text published by this journal (for example, post it in a university archive or publish it in a book), with reference to the original publication in this journal.
c. d. Authors are allowed to post their text on the Internet (for example, in a university archive or on their personal website) before and during the review process by this journal, as this can lead to a fruitful discussion and to higher number of the references to this published work (Please refer to The Effect of Open Access).
Submission of an article by the author implies that they agree for it to be used by the Publisher on the above conditions and to be included in the RSCI system. It also implicates that the author is aware of the terms of its use. The information about the author sent to the Publisher, including by e-mail, is also considered as such consent.
The editorial board posts the full text of the article on the Perm State University site: http://www.psu.ru and in the OJS system at http://press.psu.ru
The publication fee is not collected and fees are not paid. The author's copy is sent to the author to the address provided by them.
