The Social Science of Practice Approach to the Study of China’s Development: A Methodological Discussion

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q2 AREA STUDIES Modern China Pub Date : 2021-11-01 DOI:10.1177/00977004211002112
Liuyang Zhao
{"title":"The Social Science of Practice Approach to the Study of China’s Development: A Methodological Discussion","authors":"Liuyang Zhao","doi":"10.1177/00977004211002112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The basic facts of China’s economic development have called into question Western transition economic theory, most famously presented in the works of János Kornai. On the other hand, the three most representative approaches to explaining China’s development experience have variously emphasized the resource endowment structure, or the property rights system, or the incentive mechanism behind the behavior of local governments, as the key to China’s economic development. Although they focus on different dimensions of China’s economic practices, they ultimately converge on the logic of marketism as the explanation. The “social science of practice” approach proposed by Philip Huang is distinguished from these orthodox theories in that, first, it attends to the rise of the huge informal economy in China and reveals the historical roots of contemporary social inequality. This approach has three closely related characteristics: theoretical formulations based on analyses of paradoxical phenomena, a broad historical perspective on current problems, and the idea of substantive justice. The main significance of this approach lies not only in its insightful and practice-focused understanding of the key realities that have been ignored by mainstream theories, but, more importantly, in its multiple inspirations for constructing a social science theory that incorporates Chinese subjectivity.","PeriodicalId":47030,"journal":{"name":"Modern China","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/00977004211002112","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern China","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00977004211002112","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The basic facts of China’s economic development have called into question Western transition economic theory, most famously presented in the works of János Kornai. On the other hand, the three most representative approaches to explaining China’s development experience have variously emphasized the resource endowment structure, or the property rights system, or the incentive mechanism behind the behavior of local governments, as the key to China’s economic development. Although they focus on different dimensions of China’s economic practices, they ultimately converge on the logic of marketism as the explanation. The “social science of practice” approach proposed by Philip Huang is distinguished from these orthodox theories in that, first, it attends to the rise of the huge informal economy in China and reveals the historical roots of contemporary social inequality. This approach has three closely related characteristics: theoretical formulations based on analyses of paradoxical phenomena, a broad historical perspective on current problems, and the idea of substantive justice. The main significance of this approach lies not only in its insightful and practice-focused understanding of the key realities that have been ignored by mainstream theories, but, more importantly, in its multiple inspirations for constructing a social science theory that incorporates Chinese subjectivity.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中国发展研究的实践社会科学方法论探讨
中国经济发展的基本事实对西方转型经济理论提出了质疑,这些理论在János Kornai的著作中最为著名。另一方面,解释中国发展经验的三种最具代表性的方法都不同地强调资源禀赋结构,或产权制度,或地方政府行为背后的激励机制是中国经济发展的关键。尽管他们关注的是中国经济实践的不同维度,但他们最终都将市场主义逻辑作为解释。黄菲提出的“实践的社会科学”方法与这些正统理论的区别在于:首先,它关注了中国庞大的非正规经济的兴起,揭示了当代社会不平等的历史根源。这种方法有三个密切相关的特点:基于对矛盾现象分析的理论表述,对当前问题的广泛历史视角,以及实体正义的理念。这一方法的主要意义不仅在于它对主流理论所忽视的关键现实有深刻的认识和以实践为中心的理解,更重要的是它对构建融入中国主体性的社会科学理论的多重启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Modern China
Modern China AREA STUDIES-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Published for over thirty years, Modern China has been an indispensable source of scholarship in history and the social sciences on late-imperial, twentieth-century, and present-day China. Modern China presents scholarship based on new research or research that is devoted to new interpretations, new questions, and new answers to old questions. Spanning the full sweep of Chinese studies of six centuries, Modern China encourages scholarship that crosses over the old "premodern/modern" and "modern/contemporary" divides.
期刊最新文献
Institutionalization within Revolutionary Crisis: The Chinese Communist Party’s Radio Communications and Reconnaissance, 1933–1936 Speaking with Devils: Sino-European Vernaculars and Translingual Communication before the Treaty Ports Going Local: Policy Intellectuals’ Adaptive Strategies under Xi Jinping Cross-Boundary Subsumption: Toward a Political Economy of Platform Labor Natural Embeddedness, Place Attachment, and Local Opposition to Developmental Projects: A Polanyian Analysis of the Origins of Preemptive Environmental Protests in China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1