For a large country like China, the handling of intergovernmental fiscal relations must create compatible incentives to central and local governments. China initially created a fiscal management system characterized b...For a large country like China, the handling of intergovernmental fiscal relations must create compatible incentives to central and local governments. China initially created a fiscal management system characterized by tax sharing in 1994, basically meeting the needs of its socialist market economic system. Yet further improvements must be made to the assignment of administrative authority and expenditure responsibilities, revenue allocation and the fiscal transfer payment system. In handling intergovernmental fiscal relations, great attention must be given to the system＇s stability to give play to its function of incentives and restraints. China must create a hierarchical fiscal management system in line with its modern fiscal system. According to the requirements of this system, China should further standardize the division between administrative authority and expenditure responsibilities, standardize the division of government revenues, formalize a fiscal transfer payment system, and develop a hierarchical fiscal management system encompassing the sharing of tax, rents and profits.展开更多
Universal access to China＇s social welfare system involves a process of diffusion from localities to the whole country on the basis of social policy innovations in which intergovernmental relations play a key role as...Universal access to China＇s social welfare system involves a process of diffusion from localities to the whole country on the basis of social policy innovations in which intergovernmental relations play a key role as a facilitator. The rapid establishment of the urban subsistence allowance system in more than 200 cities throughout the country in seven years （1993-1999） serves as a case for our empirical analysis of the diffusion mechanism of social policy innovations at different levels of government. Our findings show, firstly, that in adopting a new social policy, city governments have to respond to the social desire of local citizens while keeping fiscal constraints in mind; at the same time, they are affected by administrative orders from higher-level governments and the vertical fiscal relations between governments at different levels, and are also subject to competitive pressures from other cities at the same level. Secondly, city governments＇ policy innovations offer an opportunity for higher levels of government to learn from their experience. Thirdly, central government orders exert both a direct and indirect influence upon city governments, with provincial orders acting as intermediaries. And lastly, there is a clear difference in the time lag effect of orders from the central government and those at provincial level upon city governments＇ policy adoption.展开更多
文摘For a large country like China, the handling of intergovernmental fiscal relations must create compatible incentives to central and local governments. China initially created a fiscal management system characterized by tax sharing in 1994, basically meeting the needs of its socialist market economic system. Yet further improvements must be made to the assignment of administrative authority and expenditure responsibilities, revenue allocation and the fiscal transfer payment system. In handling intergovernmental fiscal relations, great attention must be given to the system＇s stability to give play to its function of incentives and restraints. China must create a hierarchical fiscal management system in line with its modern fiscal system. According to the requirements of this system, China should further standardize the division between administrative authority and expenditure responsibilities, standardize the division of government revenues, formalize a fiscal transfer payment system, and develop a hierarchical fiscal management system encompassing the sharing of tax, rents and profits.
文摘Universal access to China＇s social welfare system involves a process of diffusion from localities to the whole country on the basis of social policy innovations in which intergovernmental relations play a key role as a facilitator. The rapid establishment of the urban subsistence allowance system in more than 200 cities throughout the country in seven years （1993-1999） serves as a case for our empirical analysis of the diffusion mechanism of social policy innovations at different levels of government. Our findings show, firstly, that in adopting a new social policy, city governments have to respond to the social desire of local citizens while keeping fiscal constraints in mind; at the same time, they are affected by administrative orders from higher-level governments and the vertical fiscal relations between governments at different levels, and are also subject to competitive pressures from other cities at the same level. Secondly, city governments＇ policy innovations offer an opportunity for higher levels of government to learn from their experience. Thirdly, central government orders exert both a direct and indirect influence upon city governments, with provincial orders acting as intermediaries. And lastly, there is a clear difference in the time lag effect of orders from the central government and those at provincial level upon city governments＇ policy adoption.
