Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T21:30:30.541Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adaptive Informal Institutions and Endogenous Institutional Change in China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2011

Kellee S. Tsai
Kellee S. Tsai
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University, ktsai@jhu.edu
Get access

Abstract

Under certain circumstances, the etiology of endogenous institutional change lies in the informal coping strategies devised by local actors to evade the restrictions of formal institutions. With repetition and diffusion, these informal coping strategies may take on an institutional reality of their own. The author calls the resulting norms and practices adaptive informal institutions because they represent creative responses to formal institutional environments that actors find too constraining. Adaptive informal institutions may then motivate elites to reform the original formal institutions. This contention is illustrated by three major institutional changes that have occurred in the course of China's private sector development since the late 1970s—the legalization of private enterprise, the admission of capitalists into the Chinese Communist Party, and the amendment of the state constitution to promote the private economy.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 59 , Issue 1 , October 2006 , pp. 116 - 141
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 2006

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

1 Fukuyama, Francis, “The End of History?,” National Interest 16 (Summer 1989)Google Scholar; Huntington, Samuel P., The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991)Google Scholar; O’Donnell, Guillermo and Schmitter, Philippe C., Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986)Google Scholar; and Pye, Lucian, “Political Science and the Crisis of Authoritarianism,” American Political Science Review 84 (March 1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Collier, David and Levitsky, Steven, “Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research,” World Politics 49 (April 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Diamond, Larry, “Thinking about Hybrid Regimes,” Journal of Democracy 13 (April 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Levitsky, Steven and Way, Lucan, “The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism,” Journal of Democracy 13 (April 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McFaul, Michael, “The Fourth Wave of Democracy and Dictatorship: Noncooperative Transitions in the Postcommunist World,” World Politics 54 (January 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Zakaria, Fareed, “The Rise of Illiberal Democracy,” Foreign Affairs (November-December 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Carothers, Thomas, “The End of the Transition Paradigm,” Journal of Demoocracy 13 (January 2002), 18Google Scholar; Wiarda, Howard J., “Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, and Comparative Politics: ‘Transitology’ and the Need for New Theory,” East European Politics and Societies 15 (September 2001), 486CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. Bunce, Valerie, “Rethinking Recent Democratization: Lessons from the Postcommunist Experience,” World Politics 55 (January 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 China Daily, December 14, 2005. A 2006 report issued by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences estimated that in five years the nonstate sector would account for three-quarters of China's GDP and 70 percent of the country's firms would be privately owned. See China Daily, September 22, 2006.

6 Moore, Barrington Jr., Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World (Boston: Beacon Press, 1966)Google Scholar.

7 Dickson, Bruce J., Red Capitalists in China: The Party, Private Entrepreneurs, and Prospects for Political Change (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003)Google Scholar; Pearson, Margaret M., China's New Business Elite: The Political Consequences of Economic Reform (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997)Google Scholar; and Tsai, Kellee S., Capitalism without Democracy: The Private Sector in Contemporary China (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2007)Google Scholar.

8 Mahoney, James, “Path Dependence in Historical Sociology,” Theory and Society 29 (August 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Lieberman, Robert C., “Ideas, Institutions, and Political Order: Explaining Political Change,” American Political Science Review 96 (December 2002), 703CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Thelen, Kathleen, How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States, and Japan (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. This notion of organizational appropriation may be traced back to Selznick's classic study of the Tennessee Valley Authority; Selznick, Philip P., TVA and the Grass Roots (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949)Google Scholar.

11 Arthur, Brian, Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; David, Paul, “Clio and the Economics of QWERTY,” American Economic Review 75 (May 1985)Google Scholar; and cf. Pierson, Paul, “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics,” American Political Science Review 94 (June 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 North, Douglass C., Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Pierson, Paul, “Not Just What, but When : Timing and Sequence in Political Processes,” Studies in American Political Development 14 (Spring 2000), 77CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Mahoney (fn. 8).

15 Pierson (fn. 13), 84.

16 On self-reinforcing versus self-undermining institutions, see Greif, Avner and Laitin, David, “A Theory of Endogenous Institutional Change,” American Political Science Review 98 (November 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Orren, Karen and Skowronek, Stephen, “Beyond the Iconography of Order: Notes for a ‘New Institutionalism,‘” in Dodd, Lawrence C. and Jillson, Calvin, eds., Tie Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1994)Google Scholar; and Schickler, Eric, Disjointed Pluralism: Institutional Innovation and the Development of the U.S. Congress (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994)Google Scholar.

18 Lieberman (fn. 9).

19 Ibid., 704. On political entrepreneurs as key sources of endogenous institutional change, see Sheingate, Adam, “Political Entrepreneurship, Institutional Change, and American Political Development,” Studies in American Political Development 17 (Fall 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Lieberthal, Kenneth G. and Lampton, David M., eds., Bureaucracy, Politics, and Decision-Making in Post-Mao China (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992)Google Scholar.

21 Lieberthal, Kenneth G. and Oksenberg, Michael, Policy Making in China: Leaders, Structures, and Processes (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988)Google Scholar.

22 Thelen (fn. 10).

23 Ibid., 292.

24 In the Chinese context, X. L. Ding refers to a similar phenomenon as “institutional amphibiousness.” Ding, , “Institutional Amphibiousness and the Transition from Communism: The Case of China,” British Journal of Political Science 24, no. 3 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 Powell, Walter W. and DiMaggio, Paul J., eds., The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991)Google Scholar.

26 Tsebelis, George, Nested Games: Rational Choice in Comparative Politics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990)Google Scholar.

27 Bates, Robert, “Contra Contractarianism: Some Reflections on New Institutionalism,” Politics and Society 16 (September 1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Berman, Sheri, “Ideas, Norms, and Culture in Political Analysis (Review Article),” Comparative Politics 33 (January 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Blyth, Mark, “Any More Bright Ideas? (Review Article),” Comparative Politics 29 (1997)Google Scholar.

28 For example, Harrison, Lawrence E. and Huntington, Samuel P., eds., Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress (New York: Basic Books, 2000)Google Scholar.

29 North (fn. 12), 91.

30 Helmke, and Levitsky, , “Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics,” Perspectives on Politics 2 (December 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Five types of informal institutions are identified in Lauth, Hans-Joachim, “Informal Institutions and Democracy,” Democratization 7 (Winter 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 This definition draws from Helmke and Levitsky (fn. 30, 727) but also includes public policies because they typically have institutional consequences. Pierson suggests: “[I]t makes good sense to think of public policies as important institutions. For the individuals and social organizations that make up civil society, public policies are clearly very central rules governing their interactions”; Pierson, Paul, Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), 165CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 Tsai, Kellee S., Back-Alley Banking: Private Entrepreneurs in China (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2002)Google Scholar.

33 For example, distinct cycles of crackdowns on local financial institutions such as trust and investment companies were apparent and corresponded with the broader policy reform cycles through the late 1990s, when Zhu Rongji was premier. Correspondence with Yi-feng Tao, November 10,2006.

34 Zuckoff, Mitchell, Ponzi's Scheme: The True Story of a Financial Legend (New York: Random House, 2005)Google Scholar.

35 Tain, Waikeung and Yang, Dali, “Food Safety and the Development of Regulatory Institutions in China,” Asian Perspective 29, no. 4 (2005)Google Scholar.

36 Cf. Greif and Laitin (fn. 16).

37 Pierson (fn. 31), 224–27.

38 The eight-employee limit has an ideological rationale: in Das Kafital (1867), Marx indicated that capitalist producers with more than eight employees were exploitative and surplus accumulating, while those with fewer than eight workers were nonexploitative household producing units.

39 For more detail, see Young, Susan, Private Business and Economic Reform in China (Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, 1995)Google Scholar.

40 Naughton, Barry, “Institutional Innovation and Privatization from Below,” American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings 84 (May 1994)Google Scholar.

41 Author interview with anonymous entrepreneur, Huizhou, Guangdong, October 16, 2002. As part of a larger project, I conducted interviews with more than three hundred Chinese entrepreneurs and officials over the course of 2001 to 2005. A list of interviewees is available in Tsai (fn. 7).

42 Author interview with anonymous entrepreneur, Nanjing, Jiangsu, October 10, 2002.

43 Parris, Kristin, “Local Initiative and National Reform: The Wenzhou Model of Development,” China Quarterly 134 (June 1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 Zhongguo tongji nianjian (China Statistical Yearbook) (various years).

45 On local variation in the use of red hat strategies and development of private property rights, see Oi, Jean and Walder, Andrew G., eds., Property Rights and Economic Reform in China (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1999)Google Scholar; and Whiting, Susan H., Power and Wealth in Rural China (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001)Google Scholar.

46 By the same token, Whiting (fn. 45) points out that local officials and entrepreneurs “shared a common interest in the security of shareholding cooperatives” as legitimate collective enterprises in localities that were dominated by genuine collective enterprises, as well as localities that were dominated by private businesses (pp. 163–64).

47 Oi, Jean C., Rural China Takes Off: Institutional Foundations of Economic Reform (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999)Google Scholar.

48 Author correspondence with anonymous government researcher, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing, November 19, 2006.

49 Beijing Review, November 9–15, 1987, cited in Malik, Rashid, Chinese Entrepreneurs in the Economic Development of China (Westport: Praeger, 1997), 15Google Scholar.

50 Beijing Review (July 18–24,1988), 6, cited in Malik (fn. 49)Google Scholar.

51 China State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC), Zhongguo siyingjingji nianjian (China Private Economy Yearbook) (various years).

52 For example, “Deng Liqun, Others, Criticize Jiang Zemin for Agreeing to Admit Capitalists into the CPC,” originally posted on http://www.renminbao.com on July 20,2001, translated text from FBis-China, July 28,2001.

53 Dickson (fn. 7).

54 Author interview with anonymous entrepreneur, Liangfeng, Hebei, August 20,2002.

55 SAIC, Private Economy Yearbook (2005).

56 These consultations “took place over a period of perhaps two years.” Fewsmith, Joseph, “Rethinking the Role of the CCP: Explicating Jiang Zemin's Party Anniversary Speech,” China Leadership Monitor 1 (Winter 2002), 3Google Scholar.

57 Yan, Li, “Qieshi jiaqiang fei gongyouzhi jingji zhuzhi dangjian gongzuo buduan guangda dang de gongzuo de fugai mian,” in SA1C, Zhongguo siyingjingji nianjian 2002–2004 (China Private Economy Yearbook) (Beijing: Zhonghua gongshang lianhe chubanshe, 2005), 107Google Scholar.

58 Ibid., 108.

59 As Whiting (fn. 45) points out, privatization of collectives was the result of changes in the fiscal system, the cadre evaluation system, and the national political economic environment. Furthermore, by 1999 the selling off of small and medium-size state-owned enterprises, announced at the 15th Party Congress in 1997, was gaining momentum.

60 Oi and Walder (fn. 45).

61 Clarke, Donald, Murrell, Peter, and Whiting, Susan, “The Role of Law in China's Economic Development,” The George Washington University Law School Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper no. 187 (2006)Google Scholar.

62 An, Yu, cited in “Constitutional Revision Requires Law Adjustment,” China Business Weekly, March 8, 2004Google Scholar.

63 Whiting (fn. 45), 299.

64 Lian Xisheng, former vice chair of the China Constitution Society, cited in “Amendments Protect Private Property,” China Business Weekly, January 4,2004.

65 Author correspondence with Scott Kennedy, University of Indiana-Bloomington, November 2, 2006.

66 Author correspondence with anonymous government researcher, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing, November 12,2006.

67 Business owners lobby for narrower, sector-specific issues such as setting industry standards and prices. Kennedy, Scott, The Business of Lobbying in China (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

68 Baum, Richard and Shevchenko, Alexei, “The State of the State,” in Goldman, Merle and MacFarquar, Roderick, eds., The Paradox of Post-Mao Reforms (Cambridge: Harvard Contemporary China Series, 1999)Google Scholar.