B01 - Public Policy in Asia and Oceania
Date: Jun 2 | Time: 08:45am to 10:15am | Location:
Chair/Président/Présidente : Alexandre Pelletier (Cornell University)
The Health Insurance and the Urbanization of Rural Migrants in China: Lijian Qin (Anhui University of Finance and Economics), Hong Chen (Anhui University of Finance and Economics)
Abstract: The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of health insurance on the integration of rural migrants into cities of China. Both the OLS and Quantile Regressions are employed. The dataset comes from a nationwide survey conducted by China’s National Health Commission. We have the following findings. First, health insurance improved the integration of migrants into cities, although the effect varied significantly at different quantiles. At low quantiles, the impact of health insurance on migrant integration was weak. The impact was relatively strong at upper quantiles, and it magnified as quantiles increased. Second, rural-urban migrants were not as integrated as urban-urban migrants. The gap between them widened as quantiles increased. Third, the effect of health insurance on rural-urban migrants’ integration varied at different quantiles. At lower quantiles, the impact was modest, and it grew to be substantial at upper quantiles. Fourth, at all quantiles, the effect of health insurance on urban-urban migrants was relatively minor, and the effect remained consistent at different quantiles. On the policy front, it is therefore important to make medical services more affordable. Employers should purchase health insurance for all migrant employees, despite their employment status. We also suggest to accelerate the cross-region transfer of health insurance. Meanwhile, different levels of governments should prioritize the needs of rural-urban migrants, especially low-income migrants, in social integration. These measures can contribute to migrants’ smooth integration and an overarching goal of high-quality urbanization.
A Movement within a Movement: Understanding Transgender Policy Change in Australia: Nicole McMahon (The University of Western Ontario)
Abstract: Since at least the early 1970s, transgender individuals have mobilized for greater political recognition. Their efforts to convince policymakers and citizens to recognize their particular identities and challenges have historically been met with fierce opposition or indifference. However, across Western democracies we observe substantial variation in the timing and substance of shifts in public policy towards greater recognition. This paper thus asks: Why are some Western democracies recognizing transgender people in public policy? Focusing on Australia as a theory generating case, I contrast military policy and federal anti-discrimination legislation as least and most likely cases. Despite allowing gay, lesbian and bisexual (LGB) people to serve in the military in 1992, transgender people were not permitted to serve until 2010. By comparison, the Australian government amended the Sex Discrimination Act to prohibit discrimination based on gender identity in August 2013. In each policy area, I rely on archival documents and purposive elite interviews with officials, nongovernmental organization staff, and politicians. Existing scholarship suggests that transnational activist networks have been a crucial mechanism for LGB policy change. While such networks are important, I argue that it obscures the intra-group conflict within the history of the LGBTQ+ movement. By integrating social identity theory with social movement literatures in comparative politics, I advance our theoretical understanding of public policy change.
Benevolent Policies: Carmen Jacqueline Ho (University of Guelph)
Abstract: Benevolent policies – social policies which serve politically weak groups and address issues with low visibility – are often overlooked by national governments. Policymakers have little incentive to respond to groups that lack political power and prioritize issues with low visibility. Yet some governments expand their benevolent policies – though there are no clear political gains. What explains why policy change occurs? Conventional explanations for welfare state expansion focus on labour strength, clientelistic opportunity, and social mobilization. By contrast, I argue that we need to look outside the state to understand the influence of international factors, then inside the government bureaucracy to examine policymakers’ responses. Using the case of nutrition in Indonesia, I present a theory of policy change. I argue that the United Nations (UN) uses processes of socialization to shape national nutrition policies. The UN’s impact, however, depends on the country’s bureaucratic capacity. When bureaucratic capacity is strong, policymakers respond. They use the UN as a tool for pushing through policy reform. The main contribution of this paper is to develop new conceptual tools for understanding the welfare state. I introduce the concept of benevolent policies, arguing that existing theories overlook this type of social policy. I also show that we need to turn to international relations research on socialization and public policy scholarship on bureaucratic capacity, both of which remain underexplored by the welfare state literature, to explain policy change.
Two Steps Forward, One Step Back? The Politicization of South Korean Refugee Policy Through Bordering Practices: Jennifer McCann (University of Toronto)
Abstract: Since the much lauded South Korean Refugee Act came into force in 2013, refugee advocates have raised concerns about new and expanding bordering practices by the state that have curbed the anticipated impact of the new law, including indefinite administrative detention of migrants at odds with both domestic legislation and international norms, the introduction of island enclaves to restrict asylum-seekers’ mobility within the state during first instance RSD procedures, and the indefinite containment of asylum seekers at port of entry transit zones. This paper seeks to map and contextualize these shifting practices within the global securitization of migration, as well as examine the ways in which they have been challenged by refugee advocates in domestic courts and international human rights bodies. I argue that these practices have “thickened” the border by complicating its legal geography. Discursive strategies exploiting the resultant jurisdictional ambiguity have, in turn, helped foster the rapid politicization of refugee policy in South Korea. To develop this argument, I bring discursive institutionalist approaches to policy change into conversation with political geographers. I show how shifting bordering practices have shaped the mobility of asylum seekers and thereby their access to human rights protections from the South Korean state.