Search

Begin New Search Topic Privatization Political Geography Asia

1. The Fruits of Opportunism: The Making of the World’s Largest For-profit Education Industry in China

Author:
Le Lin and Qin Gao
Publication Date:
10-2023
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Weatherhead East Asian Institute, Columbia University
Abstract:
Supplemental education, such as test-preparation coaching and after-school tutoring, has become increasingly influential in shaping educational outcome and social inequality in China, U.S. and around the world. This study examines the last forty years’ making of the world’s largest for-profit education industry—China’s supplemental education industry (the Industry)—on the margin of China’s socialist education system. How and why has the Industry privatized, marketized and become globally financialized, despite the Chinese state’s restrictive policies? Drawing on in-depth interviews, internal archives, and participant observations on 28 leading supplemental education organization, the study finds that the ambiguity of the Industry empowered socially marginalized entrepreneurs to enter this previously state-dominated market and found opportunistic organizations. With their opportunistic practices being made effective and invisible under ambiguity, opportunistic organizations as a prototype of private enterprises expanded the boundaries of market operations, facilitated the retreat of the state and fostered the Industry’s privatization and marketization. This study illustrates that while opportunism leaves destruction in its wake, it can also drive the formation and evolution of a market. The study also has implications for institutional change and social stratification during China’s market transition. This event is part of the 2023-2024 lecture series on “Labor Market Transformations in China" and is hosted by the Weatherhead East Asian Institute and cosponsored by Columbia's China Center for Social Policy.
Topic:
Education, Markets, Privatization, and Industry
Political Geography:
China and Asia

2. China’s Private Military and Security Companies: “Chinese Muscle” and the Reasons for U.S. Engagement

Author:
Christopher Spearin
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
PRISM
Institution:
Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:
On 7 February 2019, General Thomas Waldhauser, then-Commander of United States Africa Command, stated the following during a hearing of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee: “The Chinese bring the money and the Russians bring the muscle.” “Chinese money” is evident in the fact that since 2009, China has been Africa’s largest trading partner.
Topic:
Privatization, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

3. Midcourse Manoeuvres:Community strategies and remedies for natural resource conflicts in Myanmar

Author:
Meenakshi Kapoor, Nwe Ni Soe, and Vidya Viswanathan
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre for Policy Research, India
Abstract:
Land transformation has been at the centre of economic growth of post-colonial, Asian nation-states. While their political reforms and economic policies have focused on land governance, the outcomes have resulted in promoting privatisation and speculative business interest in ecologically sensitive landscapes that are also under diverse forms of common use by resource-dependent communities. A three-year study undertaken to understand community-level responses to land use transformation in India, Indonesia and Myanmar shows that the current scale and approach of land–intensive development in these large democracies is facilitated by fast-paced, top down policy changes. These policies are ‘stacked’ (when multiple layers of current and revoked laws are simultaneously in use) rather than integrated and their implementation is the responsibility of various authorities and agencies that overlap. Growing private investments in land that has remained within varying degrees of state control have changed the way land is managed. Land has become increasingly securitised and ‘out of bounds’ for small farmers and other land-users with or without recognised forms of ownership and use rights. Land conflicts are caused due to coercive acquisition processes or land grabs, unlawful operations of projects and long pending remedies to social and environmental impacts. In many instances, these conflicts begin even before the final decisions on projects are taken and persist for years. Highly capitalised land use change brings powerful investors and corporations, governments and local communities in unequal and precarious arrangements of negotiation and confrontation. Citizens and communities affected by land use change, use varied strategies such as administrative complaints, protests, litigation, media campaigns and political advocacy, and engage in improving project design and implementation, increase compensations, restore community access to resources and get a review on the operations of harmful projects. These are done under conditions of political intransigence and criminalisation of those who speak up. While all three countries have recognised land conflicts and their impact on development plans and proposals, they are yet to give affected people a formal and effective role in land and natural resource governance. This is the study report on Myanmar.
Topic:
Privatization, Natural Resources, Governance, Economic Growth, Land Law, and Land Rights
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, Asia, and Myanmar

4. Midcourse Manoeuvres: An overview of community strategies and remedies for natural resource conflicts in India, Indonesia & Myanmar

Author:
Manju Menon
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre for Policy Research, India
Abstract:
Land transformation has been at the centre of economic growth of post-colonial, Asian nation-states. While their political reforms and economic policies have focused on land governance, the outcomes have resulted in promoting privatisation and speculative business interest in ecologically sensitive landscapes that are also under diverse forms of common use by resource-dependent communities. A three-year study undertaken to understand community-level responses to land use transformation in India, Indonesia and Myanmar shows that the current scale and approach of land–intensive development in these large democracies is facilitated by fast-paced, top down policy changes. These policies are ‘stacked’ (when multiple layers of current and revoked laws are simultaneously in use) rather than integrated and their implementation is the responsibility of various authorities and agencies that overlap. Growing private investments in land that has remained within varying degrees of state control have changed the way land is managed. Land has become increasingly securitised and ‘out of bounds’ for small farmers and other land-users with or without recognised forms of ownership and use rights. Land conflicts are caused due to coercive acquisition processes or land grabs, unlawful operations of projects and long pending remedies to social and environmental impacts. In many instances, these conflicts begin even before the final decisions on projects are taken and persist for years. Highly capitalised land use change brings powerful investors and corporations, governments and local communities in unequal and precarious arrangements of negotiation and confrontation. Citizens and communities affected by land use change, use varied strategies such as administrative complaints, protests, litigation, media campaigns and political advocacy, and engage in improving project design and implementation, increase compensations, restore community access to resources and get a review on the operations of harmful projects. These are done under conditions of political intransigence and criminalisation of those who speak up. While all three countries have recognised land conflicts and their impact on development plans and proposals, they are yet to give affected people a formal and effective role in land and natural resource governance. This is the overview of the study's methodology and findings.
Topic:
Development, Privatization, Natural Resources, Business, Economic Growth, Land Law, Conflict, and Land Rights
Political Geography:
Indonesia, India, Asia, Southeast Asia, and Myanmar

5. Midcourse Manoeuvres: Community strategies and remedies for natural resource conflicts in Indonesia

Author:
Meenakshi Kapoor, Manju Menon, and Vidya Viswanathan
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre for Policy Research, India
Abstract:
Land transformation has been at the centre of economic growth of post-colonial, Asian nation-states. While their political reforms and economic policies have focused on land governance, the outcomes have resulted in promoting privatisation and speculative business interest in ecologically sensitive landscapes that are also under diverse forms of common use by resource-dependent communities. A three-year study undertaken to understand community-level responses to land use transformation in India, Indonesia and Myanmar shows that the current scale and approach of land–intensive development in these large democracies is facilitated by fast-paced, top down policy changes. These policies are ‘stacked’ (when multiple layers of current and revoked laws are simultaneously in use) rather than integrated and their implementation is the responsibility of various authorities and agencies that overlap. Growing private investments in land that has remained within varying degrees of state control have changed the way land is managed. Land has become increasingly securitised and ‘out of bounds’ for small farmers and other land-users with or without recognised forms of ownership and use rights. Land conflicts are caused due to coercive acquisition processes or land grabs, unlawful operations of projects and long pending remedies to social and environmental impacts. In many instances, these conflicts begin even before the final decisions on projects are taken and persist for years. Highly capitalised land use change brings powerful investors and corporations, governments and local communities in unequal and precarious arrangements of negotiation and confrontation. Citizens and communities affected by land use change, use varied strategies such as administrative complaints, protests, litigation, media campaigns and political advocacy, and engage in improving project design and implementation, increase compensations, restore community access to resources and get a review on the operations of harmful projects. These are done under conditions of political intransigence and criminalisation of those who speak up. While all three countries have recognised land conflicts and their impact on development plans and proposals, they are yet to give affected people a formal and effective role in land and natural resource governance. This is the study report on Indonesia.
Topic:
Development, Privatization, Natural Resources, Business, Land Law, Conflict, and Land Rights
Political Geography:
Indonesia, Asia, and Southeast Asia

6. Midcourse Manoeuvres: Community strategies and remedies for natural resource conflicts in India

Author:
Kanchi Kohli, Meenakshi Kapoor, Manju Menon, and Vidya Viswanathan
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre for Policy Research, India
Abstract:
Land transformation has been at the centre of economic growth of post-colonial, Asian nation-states. While their political reforms and economic policies have focused on land governance, the outcomes have resulted in promoting privatisation and speculative business interest in ecologically sensitive landscapes that are also under diverse forms of common use by resource-dependent communities. A three-year study undertaken to understand community-level responses to land use transformation in India, Indonesia and Myanmar shows that the current scale and approach of land–intensive development in these large democracies is facilitated by fast-paced, top down policy changes. These policies are ‘stacked’ (when multiple layers of current and revoked laws are simultaneously in use) rather than integrated and their implementation is the responsibility of various authorities and agencies that overlap. Growing private investments in land that has remained within varying degrees of state control have changed the way land is managed. Land has become increasingly securitised and ‘out of bounds’ for small farmers and other land-users with or without recognised forms of ownership and use rights. Land conflicts are caused due to coercive acquisition processes or land grabs, unlawful operations of projects and long pending remedies to social and environmental impacts. In many instances, these conflicts begin even before the final decisions on projects are taken and persist for years. Highly capitalised land use change brings powerful investors and corporations, governments and local communities in unequal and precarious arrangements of negotiation and confrontation. Citizens and communities affected by land use change, use varied strategies such as administrative complaints, protests, litigation, media campaigns and political advocacy, and engage in improving project design and implementation, increase compensations, restore community access to resources and get a review on the operations of harmful projects. These are done under conditions of political intransigence and criminalisation of those who speak up. While all three countries have recognised land conflicts and their impact on development plans and proposals, they are yet to give affected people a formal and effective role in land and natural resource governance. This is the study report on India.
Topic:
Development, Privatization, Natural Resources, Business, Economic Growth, Land Law, Conflict, and Land Rights
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, and Asia

7. Quality and Accountability in Healthcare Delivery: Audit Evidence from Primary Care Providers in India

Author:
Jishnu Das, Alaka Holla, Aakash Mohpal, and Karthik Muralidharan
Publication Date:
02-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for Policy Research, India
Abstract:
We present among the first direct evidence on the quality of healthcare in low-income settings using a unique and original set of audit studies, where standardized patients were presented to a nearly-representative sample of rural public and private primary care providers in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh. We report three main findings. First, private providers are mostly unqualified but spent more time with patients, and completed more items on a checklist of essential history and examination items than public providers, while being no different in their diagnostic and treatment accuracy. Second, we identify the private practices of qualified public sector doctors, and show that the same doctors exert higher effort and are more likely to provide correct treatment in their private practices. Third, we find a strong positive correlation between provider effort and prices charged in the private sector, whereas we find no correlation between effort and wages in the public sector. Our results suggest that market-based accountability in the unregulated private sector may be providing better incentives for provider effort than administrative accountability in the public sector in this setting. While the overall quality of care is low in both the public and private sectors, these differences in provider effort may partly explain the dominant market share of fee-charging private providers even in the presence of a system of free public healthcare.
Topic:
Government, Health, Privatization, Health Care Policy, Social Policy, and Rural
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, and Asia

8. Government Connections and Financial Constraints: Evidence from a Large Representative Sample of Chinese Firms

Author:
Robert Cull, Bo Sun, and Lixin Colin Xu
Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Abstract:
We examine the role of firms’ government connections, defined by government intervention in CEO appointment and the status of state ownership, in determining the severity of financial constraints faced by Chinese firms. We demonstrate that government connections are associated with substantially less severe financial constraints (i.e., less reliance on internal cash flows to fund investment), and that the sensitivity of investment to internal cash flows is higher for firms that report greater obstacles to obtaining external funds. We also find that those large non-state firms with weak government connections, likely the engine for innovation in the coming years in China, are especially financially constrained, due perhaps to the formidable hold that their state rivals have on financial resources after the ‘grabbing-the-big-and-letting-go-the-small’ privatization program in China. Our empirical results suggest that government connections play an important role in explaining Chinese firms’ financing conditions, and provide further evidence on the nature of the misallocation of credit by China’s dominant state-owned banks.
Topic:
Privatization, Governance, Business, Fiscal Policy, Innovation, and Banking
Political Geography:
China and Asia

9. Value Subtraction in Public Sector Production: Accounting Versus Economic Cost of Primary Schooling in India

Author:
Lant Pritchett and Yamini Aiyar
Publication Date:
12-2014
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
We combine newly created data on per student government expenditure on children in government elementary schools across India, data on per student expenditure by households on students attending private elementary schools, and the ASER measure of learning achievement of students in rural areas. The combination of these three sources allows us to compare both the “accounting cost” difference of public and private schools and also the “economic cost”—what it would take public schools, at their existing efficacy in producing learning, to achieve the learning results of the private sector. We estimate that the “accounting cost” per student in a government school in the median state in 2011/12 was Rs. 14,615 while the median child in private school cost Rs. 5,961. Hence in the typical Indian state, educating a student in government school costs more than twice as much than in private school, a gap of Rs. 7,906. Just these accounting cost gaps aggregated state by state suggests an annual excess of public over private cost of children enrolled in government schools of Rs. 50,000 crores (one crore=10 million) or .6 percent of GDP. But even that staggering estimate does not account for the observed learning differentials between public and private. We produce a measure of inefficiency that combines both the excess accounting cost and a money metric estimate of the cost of the inefficacy of lower learning achievement. This measure is the cost at which government schools would be predicted to reach the learning levels of the private sector. Combining the calculations of accounting cost differentials plus the cost of reaching the higher levels of learning observed in the private sector state by state (as both accounting cost differences and learning differences vary widely across states) implies that the excess cost of achieving the existing private learning levels at public sector costs is Rs. 232,000 crores (2.78% of GDP, or nearly US$50 billion). It might seem counterintuitive that the total loss to inefficiency is larger than the actual budget, but that is because the actual budget produces such low levels of learning at such high cost that when the loss from both higher expenditures and lower outputs are measured it exceeds expenditures.
Topic:
Economics, Education, Privatization, and Reform
Political Geography:
India and Asia

10. Delivering Results in Standards and Conformance in ASEAN: the Critical Roles of Institutional Strenghthening and the Private Sector

Author:
Simon Pettman
Publication Date:
08-2014
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA)
Abstract:
Addressing technical barriers to trade is a key priority of ASEAN as part of trade facilitation in achieving an integrated economy under the ASEAN Economic Community in 2015 and in building an effective and competitive Economic Community beyond 2015. Standards and Conformance assessment measures, while seeking to ensure quality and safety of products for consumers, should not become barriers to trade across the region as ASEAN liberalises its trading regime. A delicate balance needs to be achieved between the two to build a thriving economic region. ASEAN has been working towards achieving standards harmonisation in its priority sectors of integration and bringing about regulatory convergence, taking into account the diversities in its ten member states. More, however, needs to be done and as this Policy Brief shows, the roles of institutional strengthening and the private sector are critical in this task.
Topic:
Development, Privatization, Regional Integration, Institutions, and Private Sector
Political Geography:
Asia and Southeast Asia