The rise of major metropolises across China since the 1990s has been a double-edged sword: although big cities function as economic powerhouses, concentrated urban growth can worsen regional inequalities, governance challenges, and social tensions. Wary of these dangers, China’s national leaders have tried to forestall top-heavy urbanization. However, urban and regional development policies at the subnational level have not always followed suit. China’s Urban Champions explores the development paths of different provinces and asks why policymakers in many cases favor big cities in a way that reinforces spatial inequalities rather than reducing them.
Kyle Jaros combines in-depth case studies of Hunan, Jiangxi, Shaanxi, and Jiangsu provinces with quantitative analysis to shed light on the political drivers of uneven development. Drawing on numerous Chinese-language written sources, including government documents and media reports, as well as a wealth of field interviews with officials, policy experts, urban planners, academics, and businesspeople, Jaros shows how provincial development strategies are shaped by both the horizontal relations of competition among different provinces and the vertical relations among different tiers of government. Metropolitan-oriented development strategies advance when lagging economic performance leads provincial leaders to fixate on boosting regional competitiveness, and when provincial governments have the political strength to impose their policy priorities over the objections of other actors.
Rethinking the politics of spatial policy in an era of booming growth, China’s Urban Champions highlights the key role of provincial units in determining the nation’s metropolitan and regional development trajectory.
2 有用 王亚军 2019-12-30 19:27:08
读了前三章。作者想解释为什么中国有些省份会采取倾向大城市的发展策略,而有些省份会采取更均衡的发展策略。作者提出的解释是中央、省和县市的权力均衡。作者认为中央和地方并不期望发展不均衡,而省里会希望支持更有发展潜力的城市。所以,当省政府的权力更强的时候,一个省更可能采取不均衡的发展策略。一些问题:第一,很多定义并不清楚,什么算作省政府比较强势?作为一个其主官随时可以被中央调换的层级,我很难想象其强势与... 读了前三章。作者想解释为什么中国有些省份会采取倾向大城市的发展策略,而有些省份会采取更均衡的发展策略。作者提出的解释是中央、省和县市的权力均衡。作者认为中央和地方并不期望发展不均衡,而省里会希望支持更有发展潜力的城市。所以,当省政府的权力更强的时候,一个省更可能采取不均衡的发展策略。一些问题:第一,很多定义并不清楚,什么算作省政府比较强势?作为一个其主官随时可以被中央调换的层级,我很难想象其强势与否会有比较大的variation。第二,很难说投资最大的城市是一个强势省最好的策略,即便山东、广东、江苏这样的省强势,其最大的几个城市都很难说谁更值得投资。第三,当然,分析不够严谨,写作比较啰嗦。 (展开)
0 有用 ca7thy 2022-01-26 14:16:09
intro, the balance of power between different government levels and the relative economic performance of a province that affect which spatial development model emerges. Hunan, jiangxi, shaanxi, jiangs... intro, the balance of power between different government levels and the relative economic performance of a province that affect which spatial development model emerges. Hunan, jiangxi, shaanxi, jiangsu. other provinces appendix A; states in Brazil and India, Appendix B. (展开)
0 有用 维特利D吉米昂 2022-08-22 23:24:23 中国香港
有点过于普通了
0 有用 小裁缝 2019-08-01 00:16:49
封面不错 but长沙是中国的urban champion?
1 有用 暮兮云 2020-07-07 11:36:46
这本书由作者的博士论文修改而来,记得没错的话补了陕西的案例。两个解释变量还挺直觉的,用四个省之间的controlled comparison来验证解释变量的作用,也算是比较有说服力。细读的话,几个省份的细节里藏有一些有趣的信息。但总体来说就是……很不刺激。理性选择框架看似价值无涉、安全可靠,但多大程度上加深了我们对权力-空间关系的理解?梳理数十年间各级政府五光十色的空间政策、描述每一次虚实不明的转... 这本书由作者的博士论文修改而来,记得没错的话补了陕西的案例。两个解释变量还挺直觉的,用四个省之间的controlled comparison来验证解释变量的作用,也算是比较有说服力。细读的话,几个省份的细节里藏有一些有趣的信息。但总体来说就是……很不刺激。理性选择框架看似价值无涉、安全可靠,但多大程度上加深了我们对权力-空间关系的理解?梳理数十年间各级政府五光十色的空间政策、描述每一次虚实不明的转向,是否反而掩盖了最值得研究的主要矛盾?研究具体政策和制度的社会科学学者,既要超越政策表象看到一般性(不限于external/internal validity),也要至少acknowledge政策在数据之外的实际后果。不然的话,或者不见天地,或者不见人烟。 (展开)
0 有用 维特利D吉米昂 2022-08-22 23:24:23 中国香港
有点过于普通了
0 有用 ca7thy 2022-01-26 14:16:09
intro, the balance of power between different government levels and the relative economic performance of a province that affect which spatial development model emerges. Hunan, jiangxi, shaanxi, jiangs... intro, the balance of power between different government levels and the relative economic performance of a province that affect which spatial development model emerges. Hunan, jiangxi, shaanxi, jiangsu. other provinces appendix A; states in Brazil and India, Appendix B. (展开)
1 有用 暮兮云 2020-07-07 11:36:46
这本书由作者的博士论文修改而来,记得没错的话补了陕西的案例。两个解释变量还挺直觉的,用四个省之间的controlled comparison来验证解释变量的作用,也算是比较有说服力。细读的话,几个省份的细节里藏有一些有趣的信息。但总体来说就是……很不刺激。理性选择框架看似价值无涉、安全可靠,但多大程度上加深了我们对权力-空间关系的理解?梳理数十年间各级政府五光十色的空间政策、描述每一次虚实不明的转... 这本书由作者的博士论文修改而来,记得没错的话补了陕西的案例。两个解释变量还挺直觉的,用四个省之间的controlled comparison来验证解释变量的作用,也算是比较有说服力。细读的话,几个省份的细节里藏有一些有趣的信息。但总体来说就是……很不刺激。理性选择框架看似价值无涉、安全可靠,但多大程度上加深了我们对权力-空间关系的理解?梳理数十年间各级政府五光十色的空间政策、描述每一次虚实不明的转向,是否反而掩盖了最值得研究的主要矛盾?研究具体政策和制度的社会科学学者,既要超越政策表象看到一般性(不限于external/internal validity),也要至少acknowledge政策在数据之外的实际后果。不然的话,或者不见天地,或者不见人烟。 (展开)
0 有用 chinhogo 2020-02-18 10:20:21
一句话可以概括:中国的省级政府喜欢pick winners,从而创造出一些区域性的大城市。这种行为的强弱与否取悦于它们和中央的力量对比。叙述太罗嗦,例子不典型。
0 有用 侯粉 2020-01-30 03:43:55
观点还是有点道理的,最有力度的论证是江西和湖南的对比,但总体来说一方面是缺乏比较理论贡献,另一方面是实证做的差。