No description available.

No description available.

Thesis (LL.M.)--University of Hong Kong, 1996. / "A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the LL.M. programme." Includes bibliographical references (l. [69]-75). Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2006. / Title from first page of PDF file. Includes bibliographical references (p. 230-241).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 2009. / Title from first page of PDF file (viewed Jan. 19, 2010). Available via ProQuest Digital Dissertations. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 320-329).

Thesis (M. Soc. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 1986.

The author's Habilitationsschrift--Freie Universität Berlin, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [1190]-1272) and indexes.

Thesis (M.Soc.Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 1986. / Also available in print.

第三次民主化浪潮及其所代表的世界性民主化转型使得许多人相信民主不仅具有其本身的价值，而且有助于提高大众的福利水平。不少学者曾研究过民主制度与社会福利产出之间的关系。然而，在解释两者关系时并未得到一致性的结论。在很多情况下，民主制国家在改善人类发展指标和提高福利水平方面并没得到社会所期待的结果，而且经常被非民主制国家所超越。政治制度如何影响社会福利表现？民主化和社会福利发展之间是否存在取舍矛盾？如果这种取舍矛盾存在，如何将民主化的社会代价减到最小？ / 本研究试图加深我们对政治制度性质与社会福利产出水平之间关系的理解。为此，本文以维度路径分析政治制度的不同维度如何影响政府采取不同类型的政策选择。本文的核心问题是：民主制的哪些方面有利于/不利于哪种公共政策的实现？民主的不同维度能够促进/抑制哪些政策？竞争性选举和公众参与形成本研究的两个自变量维度。本研究应变量的两个维度是两种政府回应性：政府对公民基本需求（basic needs）的回应，即代表了社会福利表现的改进，以及政府对公民要求（wants and demands）的回应，即代表了满足群体所呼吁的而非客观上对其有利的政策福利。两者在概念上有所不同。本文首先在理论上分析自变量和应变量不同维度之间的关系，继而引用实证科学的定量和定性基本方法来检验所建立的理论关系。 / 本研究证明，并非所有的导致回应要求（wants）的民主属性也有助于使政府回应基本需求（basic needs）。公众要求和公众客观需求作为公共政策所回应的目标具有不同的特征。从委托-代理理论框架来看，回应公众基本需求的政策需要政府采取不同于在回应主观要求时所采取的措施。由于这些不同点，在两个民主维度（政治竞争和公众参与）当中，只有后者对基本需求有积极影响，而前者往往会阻碍以回应基本需求为目的的政策。在政治竞争压力之下，追求选票最大化的政治家更倾向于采取回应社会现有要求的短期措施，且往往以忽视客观需求为代价。因此，为了避免民主化的高成本，需要促进民主的参与维度，且同时要缓解其竞争维度的激烈性。 / The shift towards democracy globally under the “third wave“ of democratization has stirred the conviction that democracy is not only a good thing in itself but also a promoter of general welfare. A considerable amount of research has been conducted to explore the effects of democracy on social outcomes. However, unequivocal conclusions regarding democracy’s impact on health, education, life expectancy and other aspects of human well-being have not been achieved. Many democracies do not perform as good as they are expected to and are often outperformed by non-democratic regimes. Questions appear: How does political regime affect social performance? Is there a trade-off between democratization, on the one hand, and social development, on the other? If there is, how should democratization be carried out so as not to inhibit human well-being? / This dissertation attempts to enhance our understanding of the impact of political regime on social outcomes by applying a dimensional approach. Instead of asking whether democracy is good or bad, it asks: which dimensions of political regime are good for which kinds of outcomes? What kinds of policies are promoted and what are inhibited by different dimensions of democracy? On the causal side are such regime dimensions as competition and participation; on the outcome side are two kinds of government action: responsiveness to people’s objective needs, which conceptually stands for improvement of social outcomes, and responsiveness to subjective wants and demands, which conceptually stands for giving people what they want regardless what is objectively good for them. The relations between these causal and outcome dimensions are explored both theoretically and empirically applying quantitative as well as qualitative methods. / The dissertation demonstrates that not all dimensions of democracy that induce governments to satisfy public wants and demands also work in case of basic needs satisfaction. Public needs and wants, as targets of policymaking, are different. Within a principal-agent framework, responsiveness to needs, compared to responsiveness to wants, implies different strategies of policymaking and has different political implications. Due to these differences, of the two regime dimensions only participation has systemic positive effect on social outcomes. Competition, more often than not, inhibits regime responsiveness to basic needs. In competitive settings, vote-maximizing politicians tend to opt for short-term wants-oriented policies, often at the expense of responding to objective needs. To make democratization less costly, therefore, participation should be encouraged, and competition should be tamed. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Korolev, Alexander. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2012. / Includes bibliographical references. / Abstract also in Chinese. / Chapter 1 / Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1. --- Question --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2. --- Methodology --- p.3 / Chapter 1.3. --- Argument --- p.6 / Chapter 1.4. --- Significance --- p.7 / Chapter 1.5. --- Research design and methods --- p.10 / Chapter 1.6. --- Plan --- p.14 / PART I / A DIMENSIONAL THEORY OF DEMOCRATIC RESPONSIVENESS / Chapter 2 / Literature Analysis: “Two Modes“ of Regime Responsiveness --- p.22 / Chapter 2.1. --- The Dual Nature of Government Action --- p.22 / Chapter 2.2. --- Democracy and Public “Wants“ --- p.27 / Chapter 2.3. --- Democracy and Public “Needs“ --- p.31 / Chapter 2.4. --- Summary --- p.34 / Chapter 3 / Needs, Wants, and Two Dimensions of Responsiveness --- p.38 / Chapter 3.1. --- Concept of Basic Needs and its Cognates --- p.40 / Chapter 3.2. --- Public “Needs“ vs. Public “Wants“ as Targets of Policy Making --- p.44 / Chapter 3.2.1. --- Observability --- p.45 / Chapter 3.2.2. --- Variability --- p.47 / Chapter 3.2.3. --- Malleability --- p.49 / Chapter 3.2.4. --- Satisfaction criteria --- p.51 / Chapter 3.3. --- Needs/wants Dichotomy and Regime Responsiveness --- p.53 / Chapter 3.3.1. --- Observability and the issue of information asymmetry --- p.54 / Chapter 3.3.2. --- Variability and planning frame for policy making --- p.58 / Chapter 3.3.3. --- Malleability and the possibility for manipulation --- p.59 / Chapter 3.3.4. --- Satisfaction criteria and substantiveness of policy response --- p.61 / Chapter 3.4. --- Summary --- p.62 / Chapter 4 / Two Dimensions of Democracy and Responsiveness to Basic Needs --- p.67 / Chapter 4.1. --- Multidimensionality of Regime’s Impact and Decomposition Criteria --- p.68 / Chapter 4.2. --- Political Competition and Regime Responsiveness to Basic Needs --- p.76 / Chapter 4.2.1. --- Competition dimension in theory --- p.77 / Chapter 4.2.2. --- Competition dimension in practice --- p.81 / Chapter 4.3. --- Political Participation and Regime Responsiveness to Basic Needs --- p.89 / Chapter 4.3.1. --- Participation dimension in theory --- p.89 / Chapter 4.3.2. --- Participation dimension in practice --- p.93 / Chapter 4.4. --- Summary --- p.98 / PART II / EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS / Chapter 5 / Competition, Participation and Basic Needs A Quantitative Test --- p.102 / Chapter 5.1. --- Research Strategies and Statistical Model --- p.102 / Chapter 5.2. --- Analysis of Variables and Indices --- p.105 / Chapter 5.2.1. --- Indicators and socio-economic characteristics of basic needs --- p.106 / Chapter 5.2.2. --- Definitions and characteristics of the regime variables --- p.110 / Chapter 5.2.3. --- Critical quantitative analysis of the state capacity variables --- p.116 / Chapter 5.2.4. --- Socioeconomic variables --- p.125 / Chapter 5.3. --- Methods and Results --- p.127 / Chapter 5.4. --- Regime and Needs: Theoretical Explanation of the Statistical Findings --- p.139 / Chapter 5.4.1. --- When elections foster and when hinder basic needs satisfaction --- p.140 / Chapter 5.4.2. --- How participation helps, or is helped by, basic needs attainment --- p.153 / Chapter 6 / Qualitative Illustrations: The Politics of Healthcare in China and US --- p.160 / Chapter 6.1. --- General Patterns of Health Needs Provision in China and US --- p.163 / Chapter 6.2. --- Destructive Competition and Healthcare Reform in the US --- p.173 / Chapter 6.2.1. --- Trends in American healthcare sector --- p.173 / Chapter 6.2.2. --- Failed attempts to reform healthcare --- p.177 / Chapter 6.2.3. --- “Obamneycare bugaboo and public fears of healthcare reform --- p.179 / Chapter 6.3. --- Mobilized Participation and Healthcare Reform in China --- p.185 / Chapter 6.3.1. --- China’s healthcare in the post-reform period --- p.187 / Chapter 6.3.2. --- Policy response and the reversal of negative trends --- p.190 / Chapter 6.3.3. --- Participation and health policy making in china --- p.192 / Chapter 6.4. --- Summary --- p.205 / Chapter 7 / Conclusion --- p.207 / References --- p.212

Thesis (Ph. D.)--State University of New York at Binghamton, Political Science Department, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references.