IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cposxx/v43y2022i3p464-482.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Government strategies in addressing three protests against PX plants in urban China: comparing cases using a most-similar-system design

Author

Listed:
  • Yanwei Li
  • Yi Liu
  • Joop Koppenjan

Abstract

This article explains variations in the strategies Chinese local governments apply to address protests against the planning, construction, or operation of paraxylene (PX) plants. We present an analytical framework that identifies government strategies and explanatory conditions. Using a most-similar-system design (MSSD), we compared government strategies adopted by three city governments – Dalian, Xiamen and Kunming – in coping with these protests. In response to PX protests, the Kunming and Dalian municipality continued construction or operation of the PX plant; in contrast, the Xiamen municipality relocated the plant. Our comparative analysis showed that the preference of higher level governments and national mass media, as well as perceived costs, are key conditions explaining these differences. Overall, we conclude that Chinese local governments, due to contradictory pressures and lock-ins, have little room to respond to citizens’ concerns during protests. In our conclusion, we compared our findings with those of an earlier application of QCA on a broader set of cases, including those analyzed here, to validate our findings and clarify the added value of MSSD.

Suggested Citation

  • Yanwei Li & Yi Liu & Joop Koppenjan, 2022. "Government strategies in addressing three protests against PX plants in urban China: comparing cases using a most-similar-system design," Policy Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(3), pages 464-482, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:cposxx:v:43:y:2022:i:3:p:464-482
    DOI: 10.1080/01442872.2019.1624710
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01442872.2019.1624710
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01442872.2019.1624710?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cposxx:v:43:y:2022:i:3:p:464-482. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cpos .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.