中国网络民族主义者如何约束政策制定——以外国人永久居留权改革为例

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Journal of Contemporary China Pub Date : 2022-11-23 DOI:10.1080/10670564.2022.2148458
Tabitha Speelman
{"title":"中国网络民族主义者如何约束政策制定——以外国人永久居留权改革为例","authors":"Tabitha Speelman","doi":"10.1080/10670564.2022.2148458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Popular nationalism increasingly dominates public debate in mainland China. This article examines the impact of this trend on Chinese policymaking by looking at the public consultation procedure for new regulations on foreigners’ permanent residency in February 2020. Following an unexpectedly large online outcry of anti-immigrant sentiment in response to the draft regulations, government actors shelved the proposal, which constituted a long-delayed step towards a more comprehensive immigration framework. Drawing on textual analysis, expert interviews, and survey data, the article analyzes elite-public interactions before, during, and after the controversy, asking what factors contributed to this miscalculation of public sentiment, and what the P.R. debate can tell us about the role of public opinion in Chinese policymaking today. It argues that popular nationalists can play a bottom-up politicizing role on previously marginal policy issues such as immigration, surprising and constraining the state. Such politicisation further limits both public and elite policy debate, impairing state information gathering and exacerbating the tension between Chinese policy actors’ desire to both control and understand public sentiment. In addition, the permanent residency debate demonstrates the relevance of public opinion to China’s non-democratic immigration policymaking, which displays a trajectory of gradual politicisation similar to other early-stage immigrant-reception contexts.","PeriodicalId":47894,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary China","volume":"32 1","pages":"879 - 896"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How China’s Online Nationalists Constrain Policymaking – the Case of Foreigners’ Permanent Residency Reform\",\"authors\":\"Tabitha Speelman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10670564.2022.2148458\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Popular nationalism increasingly dominates public debate in mainland China. This article examines the impact of this trend on Chinese policymaking by looking at the public consultation procedure for new regulations on foreigners’ permanent residency in February 2020. Following an unexpectedly large online outcry of anti-immigrant sentiment in response to the draft regulations, government actors shelved the proposal, which constituted a long-delayed step towards a more comprehensive immigration framework. Drawing on textual analysis, expert interviews, and survey data, the article analyzes elite-public interactions before, during, and after the controversy, asking what factors contributed to this miscalculation of public sentiment, and what the P.R. debate can tell us about the role of public opinion in Chinese policymaking today. It argues that popular nationalists can play a bottom-up politicizing role on previously marginal policy issues such as immigration, surprising and constraining the state. Such politicisation further limits both public and elite policy debate, impairing state information gathering and exacerbating the tension between Chinese policy actors’ desire to both control and understand public sentiment. In addition, the permanent residency debate demonstrates the relevance of public opinion to China’s non-democratic immigration policymaking, which displays a trajectory of gradual politicisation similar to other early-stage immigrant-reception contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contemporary China\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"879 - 896\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contemporary China\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2022.2148458\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary China","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2022.2148458","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在中国大陆,流行的民族主义日益主导着公共辩论。本文通过考察2020年2月外国人永久居留权新规的公众咨询程序,探讨了这一趋势对中国政策制定的影响。在网上针对该条例草案的反移民情绪出乎意料地强烈抗议之后,政府部门搁置了该提案,这是朝着更全面的移民框架迈出的拖延已久的一步。通过文本分析、专家访谈和调查数据,本文分析了争议之前、期间和之后的精英与公众的互动,询问导致这种公众情绪误判的因素,以及公关辩论可以告诉我们公众舆论在当今中国政策制定中的作用。它认为,受欢迎的民族主义者可以在移民等先前边缘化的政策问题上发挥自下而上的政治化作用,让国家感到惊讶和约束。这种政治化进一步限制了公众和精英的政策辩论,损害了国家信息收集,加剧了中国政策制定者既想控制又想理解公众情绪之间的紧张关系。此外,关于永久居留权的辩论显示了公众舆论与中国非民主移民政策制定的相关性,这显示了与其他早期移民接收背景类似的逐渐政治化的轨迹。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
How China’s Online Nationalists Constrain Policymaking – the Case of Foreigners’ Permanent Residency Reform
ABSTRACT Popular nationalism increasingly dominates public debate in mainland China. This article examines the impact of this trend on Chinese policymaking by looking at the public consultation procedure for new regulations on foreigners’ permanent residency in February 2020. Following an unexpectedly large online outcry of anti-immigrant sentiment in response to the draft regulations, government actors shelved the proposal, which constituted a long-delayed step towards a more comprehensive immigration framework. Drawing on textual analysis, expert interviews, and survey data, the article analyzes elite-public interactions before, during, and after the controversy, asking what factors contributed to this miscalculation of public sentiment, and what the P.R. debate can tell us about the role of public opinion in Chinese policymaking today. It argues that popular nationalists can play a bottom-up politicizing role on previously marginal policy issues such as immigration, surprising and constraining the state. Such politicisation further limits both public and elite policy debate, impairing state information gathering and exacerbating the tension between Chinese policy actors’ desire to both control and understand public sentiment. In addition, the permanent residency debate demonstrates the relevance of public opinion to China’s non-democratic immigration policymaking, which displays a trajectory of gradual politicisation similar to other early-stage immigrant-reception contexts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: Journal of Contemporary China is the only English language journal edited in North America that provides exclusive information about contemporary Chinese affairs for scholars, businessmen and government policy-makers. It publishes articles of theoretical and policy research and research notes, as well as book reviews. The journal"s fields of interest include economics, political science, law, culture, literature, business, history, international relations, sociology and other social sciences and humanities.
期刊最新文献
The Ramifications of China’s Maritime Equipment Industry Policies for the EU Impact of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor on Nation-Building in Pakistan: A Case Study of Balochistan Institutional Design and Rhetorical Spaces: China’s Human Rights Strategies in a Changing World Order Diverse Patterns of Paradiplomacy by Chinese Local Governments: A Comparative Case Study of Zhejiang and Yunnan Provinces Party Corporatism in Urban China: Grid Governance and Resurgent Centralism
×
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