A view from behavioral political economy on China's institutional change
AbstractA behavioral political economy framework is built on the basis of prospect theory to explain the induced and imposed institutional changes during China's market reform, giving special attention to the integrated effects of economic and political institutions. According to prospect theory, how rulers frame their decisions — in the prospects of gains or losses, influences how much risk they will take. China's market reform has been largely framed in the prospects of economic gains, for which the continuously growing private sector is the driving force. China's central government adopts a growth-oriented incremental reform that coincides with the prediction of prospect theory.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal China Economic Review.
Volume (Year): 23 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/chieco
Behavioral economics; China; Incremental reform; Institutional change; Political economy;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics; Underlying Principles
- D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
- O43 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Institutions and Growth
- P26 - Economic Systems - - Socialist Systems and Transition Economies - - - Political Economy
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. " Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
- Hehui Jin & Yingyi Qian & Barry Weingast, 1999.
"Regional Decentralization and Fiscal Incentives: Federalism, Chinese Style,"
99013, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- Jin, Hehui & Qian, Yingyi & Weingast, Barry R., 2005. "Regional decentralization and fiscal incentives: Federalism, Chinese style," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(9-10), pages 1719-1742, September.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
7656, David K. Levine.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
- Qian, Yingyi & Roland, Gerard, 1998.
"Federalism and the Soft Budget Constraint,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1143-62, December.
- Yingyi Qian & Barry R. Weingast, 1997.
"Federalism as a Commitment to Reserving Market Incentives,"
Journal of Economic Perspectives,
American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 83-92, Fall.
- Yingyi Qian & Barry R. Weingast, 1997. "Federalism as a Commitment to Preserving Market Incentives," Working Papers 97042, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- Mikhail Filippov, 2005. "Riker and Federalism," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 93-111, 06.
- Olivier Blanchard & Andrei Shleifer, 2000.
"Federalism With and Without Political Centralization. China versus Russia,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1889, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Olivier Blanchard & Andrei Shleifer, 2001. "Federalism With and Without Political Centralization: China Versus Russia," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 48(4), pages 8.
- Olivier Blanchard & Andrei Shleifer, 2000. "Federalism with and without Political Centralization: China versus Russia," NBER Working Papers 7616, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Yingyi Qian & Chenggang Xu, 1993. "Why China's economic reforms differ: the M-form hierarchy and entry/expansion of the non-state sector," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 1(2), pages 135-170, 06.
- Maskin, Eric & Qian, Yingyi & Xu, Chenggang, 2000.
"Incentives, Information, and Organizational Form,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 359-78, April.
- Eric Maskin & Yingyi Qian & Chenggang Xu, 1999. "Incentives, Information, and Organizational Form," Working Papers 99009, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- Eric Maskin & Yingyi Qian & Chenggang Xu, 1997. "Incentives, Information, and Organizational Form," Working Papers 97034, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- Yingyi Qian & Chenggang Xu, 1993. "Why Chinas Economic Reforms Differ: The M-Form Hierarchy and Entry/Expansion of the Non-State Sector," CEP Discussion Papers dp0154, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- Jean-Jacques Laffont, 1988. "Fundamentals of Public Economics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121271, December.
- Chenggang Xu, 2011. "The Fundamental Institutions of China's Reforms and Development," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(4), pages 1076-1151, December.
- Justin Yifu Lin, 1989. "An Economic Theory of Institutional Change: Induced and Imposed Change," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 9(1), pages 1-33, Spring/Su.
- Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-61, November.
- Mueller,Dennis C., 2003. "Public Choice III," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521894753, October.
- Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65, pages 135.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.