1. New approaches to Local Government Innovations in the Xi Era
Dr. Jianxing YU
Dean & Professor, School of Public Affairs
Zhejiang University

2. Content Some new phenomena
Current research’s insufficiency to explain these new phenomena
A new approach: Seeking proposal-approved
Explanations for the shift of local government innovation
Conclusion

3. 1. New phenomena After 18th CPC National Congress:
1) The dynamics of local government innovation (LGI) weakened
The number of applications for “Chinese Government Innovation Award” decreases dramatically
Local governments spend most of time on coping with the tasks from superior governments
2013
2014
2015
213
132
119

4. 1. New phenomena After 18th CPC National Congress:
2) the changing discourse of local government
From “In order to handle the problem and meet the needs of local people, we decide to innovate the new mechanism” To “According to superiors’ order, we conduct the program of...”
From showing the highlights and innovations of their work To emphasizing how they follow the central government’s spirit and instructions, as well as reflect the principle of rule of law.

5. Two Questions:
1). Do local governments still have motivation to innovate?
2). If any, then how do they carry out an innovative program?

6. 2. Current Research Review
The research of LGI has become a hot topic in the studies of contemporary Chinese government and politics
Keping Yu (2003): Chinese local governments have a strong incentive to innovate. The innovation has become their conscious act.
As a leading scholar, his finding significantly impacts the research and practice of LGI
Most researches make a priori assumption: LGI is equal to that local governments employ innovative programs initiatively (He, 2003; Wu, 2007; etc.）

7. 2. Current Research Review
What is the original definition of “government innovation”?
An innovation is a program or policy which is new to the government adopting it, no matter how old the program may be or how many other governments have adopted it (Walker, 1969)
Apparently, LGI  initiative exploration of local government
In resent years, another kind of LGI gains many researchers’ attention—Pilots, appointed by higher level governments (Heilmann, 2008; Mei, 2015; etc.)

8. 2. Current Research Review
The current work on this topic has two distinct approaches and two models of LGI:
1) From the perspective of central-local relationship: Pilot
2) From the perspective of local government: Initiative exploration

9. 2. Current Research Review
1） Pilot by upper-level governments: upper-level governments select some local governments as pilots zones to implement new policies.
Widely used since reform and opening up in 1978
From 1978-early 1980s: special economic zone, economic develop zone
From later 1980s: Tax-sharing reform, SOE’s reform, social governance and public service reform etc.

10. 2. Current Research Review
2） Initiative exploration by local governments:
local governments employ new policy instruments or policy objectives initiatively.
Emerging in the middle of 1990s, local governments need to handle local affairs flexibly
Booming since 2000, the Chinese Local Government Innovation Award
Examples: Social Organization Management Reform in Shenzhen, Democratic Consultation in Wenling,

11. 2. Current Research Review
However, neither “Pilot” nor “Initiative exploration ” could explain the new phenomena raised at the beginning of presentation.
After the 18th CPC national congress, many scholars hold the opinion that local governments are unwilling to explore innovative programs any more.
They only tell part of the story.

12. 3. Seeking proposal-approved
We argue that a new approach of LGI, which is different from pilot and initiative exploration emerges.
“Seeking proposal-approved”
Local government draft the proposal of an innovative program first, and then seeks for formal approval from superiors. Once approved, the program will be appointed as a pilot, and implemented by the local government. Otherwise, the local government will drop the program.
How could we understand this new approach?
How to explain the change of LGI?

13. 3. Seeking proposal-approved
Designing proposal
Seeking approval
Formal authorization
Carrying out the reform
A Typical case: the Comprehensive Administrative Law- enforcement Reform in Jiaxing, Zhejiang province
The process of this innovation:

14. 3. Seeking proposal-approved
Jiaxing’s practice is neither an initiative LGI, nor a typical pilot.
Many other so-called “pilots” after the 18th CPC national congress get the same experience as Jiaxing Government did.
We have identified 25 cases of “seeking proposal-approved” innovation nationwide.

15. 3. Seeking proposal-approved
Shandong province and Zhejiang province had introduced similar regulations about LGI, ordering that local governments should ask for formal authorization from their superiors prior to carrying out an innovative program.
We could expect that proposal-approved would become another dominating approach of LGI in Xi’s era.

16. 3. Seeking proposal-approved
Comparison of their main features
Initiative exploration
Pilot
Proposal-approved
Subject
Local government
Upper-level government
Executor
Responsibility
Local government and Upper-level government
Source of legitimacy
Self-justifying
Authorization
Objective
Solving a local issue
Experiment of new policies
Solving a local issue, experiment of new policies
Local initialization
Low
High
Intermediate

17. Initiative exploration
3. Seeking proposal-approved
The comparison of their general processes:
Initiative exploration
Pilot
Proposal- approved

18. 4. Explanations
A new approach of LGI, “seeking proposal-approved”, only emerged after Xi´s taking the power.
What are the reasons for this significant change of LGI: from “pilot” and “initiative exploration” to “seeking proposal-approved”?
This question can be divided into three further parts.

19. 4. Explanations
The first sub-question is that why the amount of the local exploration decreases sharply?
After 18th CPC national congress, China starts a new round of centralization, local governments should follow the top-level design.
The central government struggles to regulate the behavior of local government by emphasizing law-based administration and anti- corruption campaign.
The autonomy of local government is decreasing dramatically.

20. 4. Explanations
The second sub-question is that why some local governments still want to carry out innovations?
The reason is that local governments need to response to some local issues which cannot be carefully handled by the nationwide policies.

21. 4. Explanations
The third sub-question is that why local governments choose to seek proposal-approved?
In order to face complicated local affairs, local governments have to find a new way to adopt innovative programs by which they wouldn’t offend their superiors or even break the law.
Seeking proposal-approved becomes the strategic choice of local government.

22. 4. Explanations
On one hand, seeking proposal-approved makes local government gain formal authorization from higher level governments, enhancing the legitimacy of the innovation that they want to carry out.
On the other hand, involving their superiors could minimize the possibility of being blamed or punished.

23. 4. Explanations
Chinese local government innovation has experienced a significant change in Xi’s era. Few local governments innovate public policies initiatively. Instead, they prefer to adopt innovative programs by seeking proposal-approved.

24. 5. Conclusion
Existing researches have revealed two dominating forms of LGI: “pilot” and “initiative exploration”.
Our study discovers a new approach “proposal-approved”.
We find that “seeking proposal-approved” is a new trend of LGI.
Chinese local government is strategic enough to cope with the subtle change of the political atmosphere.

25. 5. Conclusion
Recently, the central government again tries to encourage different explorations in local level. Still, the dilemma of centralization and decentralization exists.
Emphasizing coordinate reform: the dynamics of local exploration decline, the top-design loses a vital resource of experience;
Leaving too much room for local authorities: fragmented local policies, the rise of localism and department protectionism.
What´s next: Effective interaction of top-level design and local exploration

26. Questions and Comments Are Welcomed