Cargando…
Ecopolitical discourse: Authoritarianism or democracy? — Evidence from China
From the discourse analysis perspective, ecopolitics has experienced a discourse change from authoritarianism to democracy. This study uses theory of authoritarianism and democracy in ecopolitics to explore the impact of authoritarian ecopolitical discourse (AED) and democratic ecopolitical discours...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7529190/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33002076 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239872 |
_version_ | 1783589383916486656 |
---|---|
author | Hu, Xinyun Li, Mingming |
author_facet | Hu, Xinyun Li, Mingming |
author_sort | Hu, Xinyun |
collection | PubMed |
description | From the discourse analysis perspective, ecopolitics has experienced a discourse change from authoritarianism to democracy. This study uses theory of authoritarianism and democracy in ecopolitics to explore the impact of authoritarian ecopolitical discourse (AED) and democratic ecopolitical discourse (DED) on environmental quality in China. After analysis using panel data and comparison of three main regions, results suggest a negative relationship between AED of the central government and environmental quality. By contrast, a positive relationship exists between AED of local governments and environmental quality. A positive relationship exists between DED, which measures the proposals of People’s Congress deputies and Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), and environmental quality. Nevertheless, the positive effect of DED is weaker than that of AED. The impact is also different among the regions. Our interpretations are as follows. China’s current governance mechanism is a top–down decision-making mechanism, rather than a bottom–up information transmission mechanism. The concentration of power keeps decision-making power and resources away from levels with considerably accurate information and capabilities in problem solving. Therefore, we suggest that governments should change their decision-making process and exert effort to be transparent to the entire society. A bottom–up mechanism of information collection and transmission should be established, such as environmental inspection mechanism and checking on cadres’ achievements with green GDP. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7529190 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75291902020-10-02 Ecopolitical discourse: Authoritarianism or democracy? — Evidence from China Hu, Xinyun Li, Mingming PLoS One Research Article From the discourse analysis perspective, ecopolitics has experienced a discourse change from authoritarianism to democracy. This study uses theory of authoritarianism and democracy in ecopolitics to explore the impact of authoritarian ecopolitical discourse (AED) and democratic ecopolitical discourse (DED) on environmental quality in China. After analysis using panel data and comparison of three main regions, results suggest a negative relationship between AED of the central government and environmental quality. By contrast, a positive relationship exists between AED of local governments and environmental quality. A positive relationship exists between DED, which measures the proposals of People’s Congress deputies and Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), and environmental quality. Nevertheless, the positive effect of DED is weaker than that of AED. The impact is also different among the regions. Our interpretations are as follows. China’s current governance mechanism is a top–down decision-making mechanism, rather than a bottom–up information transmission mechanism. The concentration of power keeps decision-making power and resources away from levels with considerably accurate information and capabilities in problem solving. Therefore, we suggest that governments should change their decision-making process and exert effort to be transparent to the entire society. A bottom–up mechanism of information collection and transmission should be established, such as environmental inspection mechanism and checking on cadres’ achievements with green GDP. Public Library of Science 2020-10-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7529190/ /pubmed/33002076 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239872 Text en © 2020 Hu, Li http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Hu, Xinyun Li, Mingming Ecopolitical discourse: Authoritarianism or democracy? — Evidence from China |
title | Ecopolitical discourse: Authoritarianism or democracy? — Evidence from China |
title_full | Ecopolitical discourse: Authoritarianism or democracy? — Evidence from China |
title_fullStr | Ecopolitical discourse: Authoritarianism or democracy? — Evidence from China |
title_full_unstemmed | Ecopolitical discourse: Authoritarianism or democracy? — Evidence from China |
title_short | Ecopolitical discourse: Authoritarianism or democracy? — Evidence from China |
title_sort | ecopolitical discourse: authoritarianism or democracy? — evidence from china |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7529190/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33002076 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239872 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT huxinyun ecopoliticaldiscourseauthoritarianismordemocracyevidencefromchina AT limingming ecopoliticaldiscourseauthoritarianismordemocracyevidencefromchina |