IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rgovxx/v8y2023i1p34-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governance, legitimacy, and decision-making capability of the Chinese national social security fund-against the backdrop of international comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Yujie Gan

Abstract

To deal with the pension crisis, many countries have established the ‘Public Pension Reserve Funds (PPRFs)’. The Chinese government has also established the Chinese National Social Security Fund (NSSF), a typical PPRF to deal with the Chinese pension crisis. This paper focuses on the governance issues of the Chinese NSSF. More specifically, it focuses on the NSSF’s board to determine its decision-making capabilities, during which I will talk about the expertise and representation issues in the NSSF. The paper found that, first, the NSSF’s board may have more symbolic significance than substantive powers, which may be the result of the government’s endorsement of the legitimacy of the NSSF. Second, we found that the representation and expertise tension that prevail in Western pension funds governance also exist in China’s NSSF, and the analytical framework for this tension is also applicable to the discussion of Chinese cases. Third, through international comparison, we infer that an efficient board of directors might be a necessary condition for the pension funds’ good performance, but not a sufficient condition.

Suggested Citation

  • Yujie Gan, 2023. "Governance, legitimacy, and decision-making capability of the Chinese national social security fund-against the backdrop of international comparison," Journal of Chinese Governance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 34-55, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rgovxx:v:8:y:2023:i:1:p:34-55
    DOI: 10.1080/23812346.2021.1879452
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/23812346.2021.1879452
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/23812346.2021.1879452?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:rgovxx:v:8:y:2023:i:1:p:34-55. 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/rgov .

    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.