![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
As development is no longer simply conceived of as economic growth, but also as encapsulating human development, the role of the developmental state must be rethought. Focusing on the state’s ability to deliver collective goods such as welfare has become an important task for developing and developed nations alike, and nowhere is this more important than in China. Consequently, intimate connections between the political and industrial elites are no longer sufficient and may actually be counterproductive to the success of the developmental state. Diverging from traditional developmental states, China shows that incorporation of new stakeholders is not premised on principles of human development. The novelty that China brings to re-thinking and re-articulating a new developmental state framework is that the development state of the twenty-first century can create new alliances such as with non-governmental organisations to meet human development objectives, but substantive change with regards to how the state is organised is not a precondition.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful for the valuable feedback received at the Developmental States Beyond East Asia Workshop, 5 June 2015, at Newcastle University, UK. During the different stages of writing the paper, Jesse Ovadia and Jewellord Nem Singh offered insightful comments and suggestions; my sincere thanks for their time and careful reading. I am also thankful for the constructive feedback offered by the anonymous reviewers.
Notes
1. Evans and Heller, “Human Development, State Transformation.”
2. See Huang, “Politics of Social Welfare Reform.”
3. White, “Developmental States and Socialist Industrialisation.”
4. Westphal, “Republic of Korea’s Experience.”
5. Amsden, Asia’s Next Giant.
6. Haggard, “Institutions and Growth in East Asia,” 64.
7. Chibber, Locked in Place.
8. Ibid., 7.
9. Evans, Embedded Autonomy.
10. Leftwich, “Beyond Institutions.”
11. Hsueh, China’s Regulatory State.
12. Howell, “Reflections on the Chinese State.”
13. Ibid.
14. Ibid., 292.
15. Hsu, State of Exchange.
16. Stubbs, “What Ever Happened”; Wu, “Taiwan’s Developmental State.”
17. I thank an anonymous reviewer for noting the utility of the inclusive growth paradigm. Ideas of inclusive growth are embodied in that of human development, as the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Human Development Report 2016 notes: ‘Investing in human priorities is intended to reach those who lack basic social services such as education and health care that are essential for enhancing human capital so that these people can not only be part of inclusive growth, but also enhance their capabilities, which are intrinsically valuable’ (108).
18. Haq, Reflections on Human Development.
19. Sen, “Foreword,” vii.
20. Leftwich, “Developmental States, Effective States,” 4.
21. Peng, “‘New’ Social Investment Policies.”
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
24. Peng, “Social and Political Economy of Care.”
25. Ibid., 642.
26. Peng, “‘New’ Social Investment Policies,” 158.
27. Park, “Labor Regulation and Economic Change.”
28. Kwon, “Transforming the Developmental Welfare States,” 10.
29. Ibid.
30. Singh and Ovadia, this issue.
31. Hasmath and Hsu, “Isomorphic Pressures, Epistemic Communities.”
32. For example, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) in 2011 dedicated US$17 billion to the programme areas under its Strategic Goal of Governing Justly and Democratically: promoting human rights, democratic governance, civil societies and broad-based economic growth, amongst others. See USAID, Foreign Operations FY 2011.
33. See Green and Matthias, “NGOs – A Policy Panacea”; Henderson, “Alternative Service Delivery”; and Leonard, “When Both States and Markets Fail.”
34. See Bratton, “Politics of NGO Relations in Africa”; and Diamond, “Rethinking Civil Society.” See also Mercer’s review and critique of the NGO literature that equates and/or associates NGOs with democratisation: Mercer, “NGOs, Civil Society and Democratization.”
35. Najam, “Understanding the Third Sector,” has identified at least 47 different acronyms in reference to NGOs. Lewis and Kanji have made modifications: Lewis and Kanji, Non-Governmental Organizations and Development. For a concise treatment of the term NGO and its history, see Lewis, “Nongovernmental Organizations and History.”
36. World Bank, “Bank’s Relations with NGOs,” 2.
37. UN Economic and Social Council, Resolution and Decision.
38. Lewis, “Nongovernmental Organizations and History.”
39. Lewis and Kanji, Non-Governmental Organizations and Development, 13.
40. Ibid.
41. See Oi, “Role of the Local State.”
42. Evans and Heller, “Human Development, State Transformation.”
43. Brandsen and Pestoff, “Co-production, the Third Sector,” 496.
44. See Stubbs, “The East Asian Developmental State.”
45. Evans and Heller, “Human Development, State Transformation.”
46. Ibid.
47. Shang and Wu, “Changing Approaches of Social Protection.”
48. Duckett, Chinese State’s Retreat from Health.
49. Liu, Rao, and Hsiao, “Medical Expenditure and Rural Impoverishment.”
50. Wagstaff et al., “Extending Health Insurance”; You and Kobayashi, “New Cooperative Medical Scheme.”
51. Jia and Su, Final Report on Government Procurement.
52. Savas, Priviatization.
53. Jing and Savas, “Managing Collaborative Service Delivery.”
54. Strathdee, “Outsourcing and the Provision,” 63.
55. Giddens, Third Way.
56. Jagusztyn, “Social Services Outsourcing.”
57. Shih, “New Mode of Public–Private Welfare.”
58. Hsu, “China’s Development.”
59. Jia and Su, Final Report on Government Procurement.
60. Pu, “Reform and Innovations.”
61. Wu, He and Simon, “Capacity Development,” 18.
62. Teets and Jagusztyn, “Evolution of a Collaborative Governance Model.”
63. My thanks to the anonymous reviewer for noting the importance of GONGOs as another stakeholder in SSO.
64. Jagusztyn, “Social Services Outsourcing.”
65. Ibid., 8.
66. Jing, “From Stewards to Agents?”
67. Evans and Heller, “Human Development, State Transformation,” 28.