This article examines the concept and practices of “participatory representation” in the Chinese context, a subset of substantive representation that emphasizes “authenticity” and participatory engagement in solving neighborhood problems. Through examining Chinese homeowner associations (HOAs), we explain how representation operates at the neighborhood level in a grassroots organizational context without a Western style of democracy, identifying the determinants and capacities of participatory representation. By proposing a model of representational capacity and using logistic regression analysis, we find that four factors have an impact on the quality of participatory representation: (1) homeowner attributes (i.e., gender, occupation, and length of residence), (2) problem-solving effectiveness of representative organizations, (3) transparent and open elections, and (4) level of homeowner participation. We further suggest that in a transitional society like China, these representative organizations, namely, HOAs, act as important training grounds for democratic skills, through which participatory citizen engagement is being learned and cultivated. This study contributes to contemporary accounts of participatory representation by identifying the informal representation patterns within HOAs and their potential to foster civic participation and social democracy in China in the coming decades.
BerryJeffrey M.PortneyKent E.ThomsonKen. 1993. The Rebirth of Urban Democracy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
2.
BingNgeow Chow. 2012. “Civil Society with Chinese Characteristics? An Examination of China’s Urban Homeowners’ Committees and Movements.” Problems of Post-Communism59 (6): 50–63. doi:10.2753/PPC1075-8216590604.
3.
BolducVincent L.1980. “Representation and Legitimacy in Neighborhood Organizations: A Case Study.” Journal of Voluntary Action Research9 (1–4): 165–78. doi:10.1177/089976408000900116.
4.
ChapmanRachaelLowndesVivien. 2014. “Searching for Authenticity? Understanding Representation in Network Governance: The Case of Faith Engagement.” Public Administration92 (2): 274–90. doi:10.1111/padm.12067.
5.
ChungYousun. 2015. “Pushing the Envelope for Representation and Participation: The Case of Homeowner Activism in Beijing.” Journal of Contemporary China24 (91): 1–20. doi:10.1080/10670564.2014.918392.
6.
CnaanRam A.1991. “Neighborhood-representing Organizations: How Democratic Are They?” The Social Service Review65 (4): 614–34. Accessed 24 March 2020. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30012431.
7.
DavisDeborah S.2006. “Urban Chinese Homeowners as Citizen-Consumers.” In The Ambivalent Consumer: Questioning Consumption in East Asia and the West, edited by GaronSheldon M.MacLachlanPatricia L., 281–99. Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press.
8.
GuoChao. 2007. “When Government Becomes the Principal Philanthropist: The Effects of Public Funding on Patterns of Nonprofit Governance.” Public Administration Review67 (3): 458–73. Accessed April 12, 2020. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4624589.
9.
GuoChaoMussoJuliet A. 2007. “Representation in Nonprofit and Voluntary Organizations: A Conceptual Framework.” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly36 (2): 308–26. doi:10.1177/0899764006289764.
10.
GuoChaoZhangZhibin. 2013. “Mapping the Representational Dimensions of Non-profit Organizations in China.” Public Administration91 (2): 325–46. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01994.x.
11.
HeShenjing. 2015. “Homeowner Associations and Neighborhood Governance in Guangzhou, China.” Eurasian Geography and Economics56 (3): 260–84. doi:10.1080/15387216.2015.1095108.
HebererThomas. 2019. “Representation in a Context Across Political Orders and the Chinese Case.” Journal of Chinese Governance4 (4): 339–61. doi:10.1080/23812346.2019.1672363.
14.
HebererThomasGöbelChristian. 2011. The Politics of Community Building in Urban China. London: Routledge.
15.
HebererThomasGunterSchubert. 2009. Politische Partizipation und Regimelegitimität in der VR China [Political Participation and Regime Legitimacy in China]. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
16.
HuangYouqin. 2004. “The Road to Homeownership: A Longitudinal Analysis of Tenure Transition in Urban China (1949–94).” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research28 (4): 774–95. doi:10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00551.x.
17.
JiangYihong. 2013. “Altering the Rules: Chinese Homeowners’ Participation in Policymaking.” Journal of Current Chinese Affairs42 (3): 121–48. doi:10.1177/186810261304200307.
18.
KellyDavid. 2006. “Citizen Movements and China’s Public Intellectuals in the Hu-Wen Era.” Pacific Affairs79 (2): 183–204. doi:10.5509/2006792183.
LuhmannNiklas. 1983. Legitimation Durch Verfahren. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
22.
ManionMelanie. 2014. “‘Good Types’ in Authoritarian Elections: The Selectoral Connection in Chinese Local Congresses.” Comparative Political Studies50 (3): 362–94. doi:10.1177/0010414014537027.
23.
ManionMelanie. 2015. Information for Autocrats: Representation in Chinese Local Congresses. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
24.
MansbridgeJane. 2003. “Rethinking Representation.” American Political Science Review97 (4): 515–28. doi:10.1017/S0003055403000856.
25.
MansbridgeJane. 2019. “Representation, Legitimacy, and Innovation.” Journal of Chinese Governance4 (4): 299–322. doi:10.1080/23812346.2019.1672361.
26.
McDonaldMichael D.BudgeIan. 2005. Elections, Parties, Democracy. Conferring the Median Mandate. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
27.
MerleAurore. 2014. “Homeowners of Beijing, Unite! The Construction of a Collective Mobilisation.” China Perspectives2:7–15. doi:10.4000/chinaperspectives.6441.
28.
MontanaroLaura. 2012. “The Democratic Legitimacy of Self-appointed Representatives.” The Journal of Politics74 (4): 1094–107. doi:10.1017/S0022381612000515.
PattonMichael Quinn. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3rd ed.London: SAGE.
31.
PhillipsAnna. 1995. The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
32.
PitkinHanna F.1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
33.
PowellG. BinghamPowellG. BinghamJr.2000. Elections as Instruments of Democracy. Majoritarian and Proportional Visions. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.
34.
RagabIbrahim A.BlumArthurMurphyMichael J. 1981. “Representation in Neighborhood Organizations.” Social Development Issues5 (2–3): 62–73.
35.
ReadBenjamin L. 2003. “Democratizing the Neighbourhood? New Private Housing and Home-owner Self-organization in Urban China.” The China Journal49:31–59. Accessed 24 March 2020. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3182194.
36.
ReadBenjamin L.2007. “Assessing Variation in Civil Society Organizations: China’s Homeowner Associations in Comparative Perspective.” Comparative Political Studies41 (9): 1240–65. doi:10.1177/0010414007302340.
37.
RehfeldAndrew. 2006. “Towards a General Theory of Political Representation.” The Journal of Politics68 (1): 1–21. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00365.x.
38.
RehfeldAndrew. 2011. “The Concepts of Representation.” American Political Science Review105 (3): 631–41. doi:10.1017/S0003055411000190.
39.
RuedinDidier. 2012. “Individual Representation: A Different Approach to Political Representation.” Representation48 (1): 115–29. doi:10.1080/00344893.2012.653248.
40.
SawardMichael. 2006. “The Representative Claim.” Contemporary Political Theory5 (3): 297–318. doi:10.1057/palgrave.cpt.9300234.
41.
SawardMichael. 2009. “Authorisation and Authenticity: Representation and the Unelected.” Journal of Political Philosophy17 (1): 1–22. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2008.00309.x.
42.
SawardMichael. 2010. The Representative Claim. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
43.
SwindellDavid. 2000. “Issue Representation in Neighborhood Organizations: Questing for Democracy at the Grassroots.” Journal of Urban Affairs22 (2): 123–37. doi:10.1111/0735-2166.00046.
44.
ThomassenJacques. 2012. “The Blind Corner of Political Representation.” Representation48 (1): 13–27. doi:10.1080/00344893.2012.653229.
45.
TombaLuigi. 2005. “Residential Space and Collective Interest Formation in Beijing’s Housing Disputes.” The China Quarterly184:934–51. doi:10.1017/S0305741005000573.
46.
UrbinatiNadia. 2006. Representative Democracy: Principles Genealogy. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
47.
UrbinatiNadiaWarrenMark E. 2008. “The Concept of Representation in Contemporary Democratic Theory.” Annual Review of Political Science11:387–412. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.053006.190533.
48.
van MontfortCorSunLiZhaoYing. 2018. “Stability by Change–The Changing Public-private Mix in Social Welfare Provision in China and the Netherlands.” Journal of Chinese Governance3 (4): 419–37. doi:10.1080/23812346.2018.1522733.
49.
WangFeng. 2014. “Determinants of the Effectiveness of Chinese Homeowner Associations in Solving Neighborhood Issues.” Urban Affairs Review50 (3): 311–39. doi:10.1177/1078087413501641.
50.
WangFengCooperT. L. 2008. “Chinese Homeowner Associations: A School of Democracy.” PA Times, February, 4.
51.
WangFengYinHaitaoZhouZhiren. 2012. “The Adoption of Bottom-up Governance in China’s Homeowner Associations.” Management and Organization Review8 (3): 559–83. doi:10.1111/j.1740-8784.2011.00277.x.
52.
WangWeijie. 2015. “Exploring the Determinants of Network Effectiveness: The Case of Neighborhood Governance Networks in Beijing.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory26 (2): 375–88. doi:10.1093/jopart/muv017.
53.
WangWeijieLiHuiCooperTerry L. 2017. “Civic Engagement and Citizenship Development: The Case of Homeowners’ Participation in Neighborhood Affairs in Beijing.” Administration & Society49 (6): 827–51. doi:10.1177/0095399715581041.
54.
WarrenMark E.2001. Democracy and Association. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.
55.
WeissElisa S.AndersonRebecca MillerLaskerRoz D. 2002. “Making the Most of Collaboration: Exploring the Relationship Between Partnership Synergy and Partnership Functioning.” Health Education & Behavior29 (6): 683–98. doi:10.1177/109019802237938.
56.
WilliamsMelissa S.1998. Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.
57.
YoungIris Marion. 2002. Inclusion and Democracy. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
