![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
This study is concerned with understanding the dynamic behind participatory innovations in China. The case of China provides a contrast to the literature on participatory innovations in democracies. While participatory innovations in democratic countries are seen as a way to deepen and improve democracy, in China these innovations are to some extent developed in order to provide an alternative to electoral democracy. In this article I introduce the concept democracy consultant to describe expert political entrepreneurs involved in the development of participatory innovations. Research on local participatory innovation in China is abundant but the role that experts play in this process has previously not been analysed. Based on in-depth interviews with democracy consultants and local officials, the study finds that democracy consultants frequently act as bridges between central and local levels of government by providing expertise, information, legitimacy, and connections. This is especially true in localities where local leaders want to gain the attention of the central level but lack the required expertise and connections.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Sofia Ledberg, He Baogang, Dong Lisheng, and Jorgen Delman for useful comments at different stages of the manuscript.
Notes on contributor
Oscar Almén is a researcher at the Department of Government, Uppsala University. He specializes in Chinese politics, political participation, and political accountability. Recent publications include “Only the Party Manages Cadres: limit of Local People's Congress supervision and reform in China”, Journal of Contemporary China 22, no. 80 (2013): 237–254.
Notes
1. Ackerman, “Co-Governance for Accountability”; Selee and Peruzzotti, “Participatory Innovation”; Speer, “Participatory Governance Reform”; Goetz and Jenkins, “Reinventing Accountability.”
2. Wampler and Avritzer, “Participatory Publics”; Sintomer, Herzberg, and Röcke, “Participatory Budgeting in Europe”; Bassoli, “Participatory Budgeting in Italy.”
3. Previous research has argued that participatory and accountability reforms can be used to strengthen autocratic rule. See Rodan, “Accountability and Authoritarianism”; He and Thogersen, “Giving the People a Voice.”
4. When the name of the interviewee is obvious, the place and time of the interview is stated. Interviews with anonymous interviewees are cited according to interview number, date (year/month/day) and location where BJ is Beijing, SH is Shanghai, ZJ is Zhejiang, and JS is Jiangsu. A complete list of interviews is available from the author upon request.
5. Examples of previous research on local political participation innovations in China include: Saich and Yang, “Innovation in China's Local Governance”; Florini, Lai, and Tan, “China Experiments”; He and Thogersen, “Giving the People a Voice?”; He and Warren, “Authoritarian Deliberation.”
6. Dong, “‘Searching for a Direction,” 6; Thogersen, Elklit, and Dong, “Consultative Elections.”
7. Florini, Lai, and Tan, “China Experiments,” 67, mention elections of township government and party leaders in Jiangsu, Henan, and Yunnan provinces 2009–2010.
8. Almén, “Only the Party Manages Cadres.” For a contrasting view on the tension between local elections and the principle that the “party manages cadres” see Li, “Direct Township Elections,” 115.
9. He, “Civic Engagement.”
10. He and Thogersen, “Giving the People a Voice.” This view was also common among many of the democracy consultants.
11. Interview with democracy consultant 5BJ090331.
12. On the rule of avoidance see Li, “Political Localism Versus Institutional Restraints”; Bo, “The Institutionalization of Elite Management in China.” The regulations concerning cadre rotation were specified in 2006 in the CCP Central Committee document, ganbu jiaoliu.
13. Interview with head of organization working with political reform in China 3BJ090328.
14. Kingdon, “Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies,” 122; Schneider and Teske, “Toward a Theory of the Political Entrepreneur,” 737.
15. Polsby, “Political Innovation in America,” 174.
16. Sheingate, “Political Entrepreneurship,” 188; Polsby, “Political Innovation in America,” 166.
17. In recent years theories of policy entrepreneurs have also been used to understand policymaking in China. See Mertha, “China's Water Warriors”; Zhu, “Strategy of Chinese Policy Entrepreneurs in the Third Sector.”
18. Kingdon, “Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies,” 70.
19. Baumgartner and Jones, “Agendas and Instability in American Politics”; Roberts and King, “Transforming Public Policy,” 188; Sheingate, “Political Entrepreneurship,” 188.
20. Polsby, “Political Innovation in America,” 172.
21. Maasen and Weingart, “Democratization of Expertise?,” 4.
22. On the role of intellectuals and their relationship to the state in China, see for example Gu and Goldman, “Chinese Intellectuals Between State and Market”; Lee and Shen, “China: The Paradox.”
23. Zhu, “Policy Change and Expert Involvement in China”; Zhu, “Strategy of Chinese Policy Entrepreneurs in the third Sector.”
24. Tanner, “Changing Windows on a Changing China”; Wang, “Changing Models of China's Policy Agenda Setting”; Zhu, “The Influence of Think Tanks.”
25. Kingdon notes that “one nearly sure way for an academic to have short-run impact is to be in government.” Kingdon, “Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies,” 56.
26. Ibid., 117.
27. Ford Foundation has provided full financial support for the award.
28. In addition to the 10 winners there are a number of special awards.
29. Interview with democracy consultant 5BJ090331; Innovations and Excellence in Chinese Local Governance.
30. Interviews with democracy consultants 3BJ090328, 4BJ090330, 5BJ090331.
31. Wang, “Changing Models of China's Policy Agenda Setting,” 63–4; Zhu, “Policy Change and Expert Involvement in China,” 284.
32. He, “Consultancy,” 183.
33. Interviews with democracy consultants 5BJ090331, 7BJ090401.
34. Interview with democracy consultant 5BJ090331.
35. Interview with democracy consultant 5BJ090331.
36. Interview with Li Fan, Beijing, June 2009.
37. Interview with Cai Dingjian, Beijing April 2009.
38. Interview with democracy consultant 19ZJ131122.
39. Interview with democracy consultant 1SH090320.
40. Interview with democracy consultant 4BJ090330.
41. Interview with democracy consultant 17BJ131021.
42. Ibid.
43. Interview with democracy consultant 5BJ090331.
44. For more on the Buyun election see: Li, “The Politics of Introducing Direct Township Elections in China”; Cheng, “Direct Elections of Town and Township Heads in China.”
45. Tang Jianguang, “zhixuan xiangzhang.”
46. Li, “Chengfeng er lai,” 53–61.
47. Interview with Li Fan, Beijing 2009. This disagreement was confirmed by many other democracy consultants.
48. Interview with Li Fan, Beijing 2009; Li, “Direct Township Elections,” 99.
49. He, “Comparative Governance of State and Society”; Website of China Innovations Award. Accessed May 19, 2014. http://www.chinainnovations.org/index.php?m=content&c=index&a=show&catid=48&id=790.
50. Interview with democracy consultant 15ZJ090624.
51. Wu, “Zonghe kaoping,” 70.
52. This grade was given to the department of safety supervision (anquan jiandu ju) in 2008 as a consequence of a serious accident in connection with the building of Hangzhou's subway. Interview with head of the appraisal office 2013, 31ZJ131121.
53. Interview with head of the appraisal office 2009, 23ZJ090624.
54. Interview with head of the appraisal office 2009 and 2013: 23ZJ090624, 31ZJ131121; and democracy consultants: 10ZJ090507, 11ZJ090507, 15ZJ090624.
55. Interview with Hangzhou government officials: 22ZJ090608, 29ZJ130401, 23ZJ090624; and democracy consultants: 10ZJ090507, 15ZJ090624.
56. He and Thogersen, “Giving the People a Voice?”; Fishkin et al., “Deliberative Democracy in an Unlikely Place”; Interview with Baogang He, Shanghai, May 2009.
57. Interviews with Li Fan, Beijing, June 2009; He Baogang, Shanghai, May 2009; Leading government official Wenling city 26ZJ090428; Leading government official Xinhe town 27ZJ090429; Leading government official Zeguo town 30ZJ130322.