China: Effective Social Welfare - Literature review Example

hаllеngеs tо Сhinа Рrоviding a Соmрrеhеnsivе and Еffесtivе Sосiаl Wеlfаrе tо its Сitizеns Student’s Name Instructor’s Name Course Code and Name University Date of Submission The three mаjоr сhаllеngеs tо Сhinа рrоviding а соmрrеhеnsivе аnd еffесtivе sосiаl wеlfаrе tо its сitizеns tоdаy 1. Family Planning Challenge One of the major challenges affecting the provision of a comprehensive and effective social welfare to the citizens today in China is the issue of family planning. Most importantly, this challenge can be attributed to the One Child Policy, as well as the aging population concern. Notably, One Child Policy refers to a population control policy that was enacted and enforced by the government of China (Sonne 1999, p. 1446). The policy fundamentally limit the couples residing in the urban areas to have only one child, while at the same time allowing extra children in various cases such as twins, ethnic minorities, rural couples, as well as the couples that are both the only children themselves. In addition, the foreigners are significantly exempted from this law (Wakabayashi 2000, p. 71). Worth noting, this policy was principally established by the government of China with a focus of alleviating the economic, social, as well as environmental problems the Chinese country was going through. As a matter of fact, when a country has got lower population, the government is consequently kept in a position to sustainably provide a comprehensive and effective social welfare, as well as enhance economic development and environmental sustainability (Bazhenova 1998, p. 7). In addition, owing to the verity that, China is the most highly populated country in the world, it is seemingly complex for the government of China to effectively enhance social welfare and poverty reduction, which, thereby, made this One Child Policy to be highly suitable for the country. The One Child Policy ultimately has led to the prevention of more than 400 million since the enactment of the policy in 1979 to 2011. On the positive side, this reduction of birth rate had resulted to gradually declining population, an attribute that has consequently enabled the government to provide better and more improved social welfare and poverty reduction, to a larger extent. However, this policy was significantly deemed to be controversial both outside and within China due to the way the policy was executed, as well as due to the issues concerning its negative social consequences (Cho 2012, p. 118). Remarkably, the policy has for long been implicated to highly contribute to the increased of female infanticide, forced abortions, as well as increased underreporting of child birth. In addition, the policy has also been suspected to be the main cause behind the issue of sex imbalance within China. Nonetheless, it should also be noted that there are still numerous citizens that continue to bear more than one child despite the presence of the policy (Xiao & Zhao 1997, p. 61). Essentially, the majority of the citizens that were initially subject to the policy have already surpassed the reproductive age, and it has also been indicated that many citizens are simply disregarding or violating the policy increasingly in the recent years. More importantly to note is that even if it was to be abandoned now, the One Child Policy will ultimately generate some long term socio-economic consequences that are hardly to be evaded. In this regard, over the next few years, china is anticipated to become one of the highly age-heavy societies in the world. For instance, it has been projected that, by 2050, 23% of the population in China will be above 65 years of age, while compared to India 13%, Indonesia 18%, and Vietnam 20%, which are comparatively low (Chen & Powell 2012, p. 381). Notably, a higher population share of retired people is a great disadvantage for the long term economic growth and enhancement of social welfare in a country. This is owing to the fact that, it significantly reduces the productive proportion of the population in the economy, and at the same time, increases the burden on the fewer working population to support the effortless large elderly population. In addition, it is also expected to generate social strive through forcing the government to redistribute the income from the productive workers to the elderly so as to compensate for their living and health care expenses (Liang, Tu & Chen 2010, p. 118). Nevertheless, despite the challenges and issues poised by the One Child Policy, the Chinese government highly considers the policy a great success, particularly in helping to implement the current economic growth in China (Xiao & Zhao 1997, p. 65). It has significantly reduced the fertility rate, thereby reducing the population growth and the severity of problems associated with overpopulation such as slums, epidemics, overwhelming and more costly social services like health, law enforcement, and education, as well as the eco-system strains (Sonne 1999, p. 1448). However, the implementation of this policy has not been without criticism, including the increment of an ageing population, which would ultimately create an economic burden to the government, as well as upon the fewer young productive population in providing for the increasingly unproductive elderly. 2. Magnetization and Privatization of Social Welfare China has been pursuing all-inclusive, market oriented economic reforms since the early 1980s. The social institutions and structures in China have significantly undergone far reaching and widespread changes (Selden & You 1997, p. 1662). Despite the low levels of economic development, as well as the limited financial and technical resources, the Chinese government was able to provide basic and relatively comprehensive social welfare and security to the majority of the Chinese population (Mok, Wong & Zhang 2009, p. 509). Notably, almost all the urban residents, which are highly populated, were offered with basic education, health care, pensions, and housing. More specifically, during the 1990s, a full scale privatization of a previously collective owned town and enterprises increasingly undermined the revenue base of the local governments in the country, which consequently became highly indebted and thereby lost the capacity of financing and supporting the local public services (Hebel 2003, p. 228). Worth noting, within the urban centers, the collective and state owned enterprises have significantly suffered from deteriorating conditions, a situation that caused many to be privatized. Such marketization and privatization changes have undermined and ultimately led to the breakdown of once triumphant social security system that was build under socialist planning. Although the Chinese government in different levels has continued to own most of the health care facilities, hospitals, universities, and schools, it should be noted that education and health care financing systems have been at large effectively privatized (Li 2006, p. 67). In addition, many of the education institutions and health care in China have increasingly pursued the policy of marketization. In this regard, the policy of marketization entails transformation from nonprofit making organization to profit seeking organization. However, this has not come without challenges, in which one of them is that, the privatization of the financing systems, as well as the marketization of education and health care institutions, have increasingly deprived the ability of the lower income population to easily access education and health care services (Selden & You 1997, p. 1664). In a nut shell, the difficulty to access the basic education and health care by the lower income population has significantly become a major factor in hindering poverty reduction and has also contributed to the generation of a new poverty population. Notably, education and health care services are public goods, which have got strong external effects. Furthermore, privatization of basic services, through distributing health care and education resources unequally within the population, is similar to intensifying the existing inequality on income, as well as wealth distribution (Li 2006, p. 114). In addition, the inability to access the basic services by a larger share of the can possibly result to negative effects on the entire human capital accumulation, and consequently decrease the growth potential. In turn, the decreased economic growth and increased inequality can possibly imply higher poverty population or declining rate of poverty reduction (Mok, Wong & Zhang 2009, p. 510). Therefore, the main social welfare challenge associated with the concept of privatization and marketization in China is that the increased privatization and marketization progress affecting various social welfare sectors have become increasingly uneven, and in some cases, the situation has either deteriorated or stagnated. In addition, after the decline of the collective economy, the cooperative medical care systems has deteriorated, thereby leaving substantial majority of the population not covered by any type of medical insurance (Selden & You 1997, p. 1665). Furthermore, the government of China has deliberately allowed and encouraged the public educational and medical institutions to focus on the policy of marketization and profit seeking, which has resulted to the excessive growth of educational and medical costs. Also, in the context of insufficient public funding for education and medical care, the private education and private medical institutions have prospered. Nevertheless, it is worth to note that the private education and medical practice is increasingly suffering from insufficient regulations, as well as low quality services (Li 2006, p. 119). More too, the issue of privatization and marketization in China has significantly led to increased inequality in resource accessibility and also caused excessively high educational and medical costs, which has deprived the poor population their basic access to quality health and education. Most importantly, in order to enhance increased access of the low income population to the basic social welfare services, as well as to facilitate the efforts of reducing poverty levels, the government of China needs to, significantly, increase the quantity of resources that are committed to education and health care, change and improve the behavior practices of the public education and medical care institutions so as to provide more and better services towards the low income population, foster the performance of the private education and health care services, and also develop new public institutions that can guarantee easy universal access to basic education and health care (Selden & You 1997, p. 1666). 3. Fiscal decentralization / Local Governance's lack of fund to provide effective welfare In the last decade, the world has significantly witnessed the trend of decentralization, which has been utilized to evade from the insufficient economic growth, as well as inefficient governance among the developing economies, including China. Essentially, fiscal decentralization is broadly recognized as a significant component in the Chinese transition to a market economy and has been advocated by many for its commendable contribution to the country’s substantial growth over the last years (Wei 1996, p. 330). In this regard, China has made remarkable efforts of breaking down its highly centralized fiscal systems of management with several kinds of fiscal systems of contracting, as well as a tax sharing system. However, as it has been argued by many scholars, the fiscal decentralization in China has greatly exacerbated some regional inequality (Zhang 1998, p. 225). More specifically, the fiscal decentralization, together with the distorted price systems, as well as the duplicated industry structures across the regions, has significantly led to the inter-regional protection of trade and fragmented domestic market as a result of the rent seeking behaviors by the local governments. In addition, the reform of the fiscal expenditure decentralization, which hardens the budget limitations for grass root government levels, significantly undermine the ability of revenue starved jurisdiction of providing public goods and services, intensify the fiscal burden of the lower level government, and also hinder them from fostering further economic development and investment, which ultimately result to the regional fiscal and income gaps (Ming 2012, p. 158). Indeed, it has been found that fiscal decentralization has got a positive and noteworthy impact on the degree of the intensified regional inequality in China, which has particularly enlarged the urban-rural inequality. Nevertheless, the decentralized fiscal system in China has not really coped well with the challenge of intensifying inequality (Li-Hua 2009, p. 94). For instance, by 2005 the richest province in China, Shanghai, was reported to have above 8 times per capita as compared to the poorest province, which was Anhui. Furthermore, in order to accomplish efficient service delivery, countries, as well as states should institute an effectual division of labor among the government multi-levels, and essentially assign suitable financial instruments so as to match the fiscal responsibilities. In this regard, the Chinese highly decentralized system should be a benefit to management of service delivery. However, under its present arrangements, the grass root governments have got insufficient revenues to meet their huge expenditure responsibilities (Wei 1996, p. 340). More too, they seemingly receive negligible help from the intergovernmental transfers system. As a consequence, some of the local authorities sincerely lack the potential of delivering the basic public services, regardless of how high they tax their respective local population. Worth noting, the core public services such as public health and education, which are normally perceived as responsibilities to be shared by both the central government and sub-national governments for they have essential spillover impacts for the society at large, are significantly assigned to the local governments in China (Zhang 1998, p. 237). On the same note, it is significant to mention that the overall government expenditure responsibilities are equally distributed among the local governments. Therefore, the rural governments at the township and county levels are significantly treated equally as the urban governments within the Chinese fiscal system. Consequently, this situation of fiscal decentralization has in the past recent decades made the rural governments become relatively bankrupt, thereby leaving numerous basic public services unfunded. In addition, there is also significant evidence of high regional and local inequalities, particularly in the delivery and financing of the basic services. Remarkably, no mechanisms have been established for ensuring minimum service standards across the regions (Zhang 1998, p. 238). Thus, as the regional income disparity grow; this has also led to increased regional disparities on basic services over the recent decades, as well as an evasion in the delivery of essential services among many poor localities. Thus, despite the increased effort of fiscal decentralization for betterment of citizens’ social and economic welfare, the local governments have been struggling to get their ends meet due to constrained financial resources, at least to deliver the basic public services effectively (Ming 2012, p. 194). List of References Bazhenova, ES 1998, “The contemporary demographic situation and population policy in the Peopleʼs Republic of China”, Chinese Sociology and Anthropology, Vol. 16, No. 3-4, p.1-42. Chen, S & Powell, JL 2012, Aging in China implications to social policy of a changing economic state, Springer, New York. Cho, LJ 2012, “Population dynamics and policy in the Peopleʼs Republic of China”, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 476, No. 476, p. 111-127. Hebel, J 2003, “Social welfare in rural China”, Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol. 30, No. 3, p. 224-251. Li, X 2006, Assessing the extent of China's marketization, Ashgate Pub. Co., Aldershot, England. Liang, J., Tu, E.J. & Chen, X.M., 2010. Population aging in the Peopleʼs Republic of China. Social science medicine, 23(12), p.1353-1362. Li-Hua, HL HH 2009. Fiscal decentralization and urban-rural income inequality in China. 2009 International Conference on Management Science and Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 1, p. 94. Ming, L 2012, China's economic development: institutions, growth and imbalances, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. Mok, KH, Wong, YC & Zhang, X 2009, “When marketisation and privatisation clash with socialist ideals: Educational inequality in Urban China”, International Journal of Educational Development, Vol. 29, No. 5, p. 505-512.  Selden, M & You, L 1997, “The reform of social welfare in China,” World Development, Vol. 25, No. 10, p. 1657-1668. Sonne, O 1999, “The population policy of China”, Ugeskrift For Laeger, Vol. 139, No. 24, p. 1445-1449. Wakabayashi, K 2000, “Problems on the current population policy of China”, Journal of population problems, Vol. 157, p. 52-78. Wei, YH 1996, “Fiscal systems and uneven regional development in China, 1978- 1991”, Geoforum, Vol. 27, No. 3, p. 329-344. Xiao, BL & Zhao, BG 1997, “Current practice of family planning in China”, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Vol. 58, No. 1, p. 59-67.  Zhang, T 1998, “Fiscal decentralization, public spending, and economic growth in China”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 67, No. 2, p. 221-240.  Read More

In addition, many of the education institutions and health care in China have increasingly pursued the policy of marketization. In this regard, the policy of marketization entails transformation from nonprofit making organization to profit seeking organization. However, this has not come without challenges, in which one of them is that, the privatization of the financing systems, as well as the marketization of education and health care institutions, have increasingly deprived the ability of the lower income population to easily access education and health care services (Selden & You 1997, p. 1664). In a nut shell, the difficulty to access the basic education and health care by the lower income population has significantly become a major factor in hindering poverty reduction and has also contributed to the generation of a new poverty population.

Notably, education and health care services are public goods, which have got strong external effects. Furthermore, privatization of basic services, through distributing health care and education resources unequally within the population, is similar to intensifying the existing inequality on income, as well as wealth distribution (Li 2006, p. 114). In addition, the inability to access the basic services by a larger share of the can possibly result to negative effects on the entire human capital accumulation, and consequently decrease the growth potential.

In turn, the decreased economic growth and increased inequality can possibly imply higher poverty population or declining rate of poverty reduction (Mok, Wong & Zhang 2009, p. 510). Therefore, the main social welfare challenge associated with the concept of privatization and marketization in China is that the increased privatization and marketization progress affecting various social welfare sectors have become increasingly uneven, and in some cases, the situation has either deteriorated or stagnated.

In addition, after the decline of the collective economy, the cooperative medical care systems has deteriorated, thereby leaving substantial majority of the population not covered by any type of medical insurance (Selden & You 1997, p. 1665). Furthermore, the government of China has deliberately allowed and encouraged the public educational and medical institutions to focus on the policy of marketization and profit seeking, which has resulted to the excessive growth of educational and medical costs.

Also, in the context of insufficient public funding for education and medical care, the private education and private medical institutions have prospered. Nevertheless, it is worth to note that the private education and medical practice is increasingly suffering from insufficient regulations, as well as low quality services (Li 2006, p. 119). More too, the issue of privatization and marketization in China has significantly led to increased inequality in resource accessibility and also caused excessively high educational and medical costs, which has deprived the poor population their basic access to quality health and education.

Most importantly, in order to enhance increased access of the low income population to the basic social welfare services, as well as to facilitate the efforts of reducing poverty levels, the government of China needs to, significantly, increase the quantity of resources that are committed to education and health care, change and improve the behavior practices of the public education and medical care institutions so as to provide more and better services towards the low income population, foster the performance of the private education and health care services, and also develop new public institutions that can guarantee easy universal access to basic education and health care (Selden & You 1997, p. 1666). 3.

Fiscal decentralization / Local Governance's lack of fund to provide effective welfare In the last decade, the world has significantly witnessed the trend of decentralization, which has been utilized to evade from the insufficient economic growth, as well as inefficient governance among the developing economies, including China.

Read More