| |
In this context, the sub-title of the book, “Rising Inequality in Post-Socialist Urban China”, does not convey the original contribution of the comprehensive study of Wang Feng. The title, however, indicates that the focus, or the result of his long research, will be on the significance of categories and boundaries.
What does that mean? Chapter 4 for categories and chapter 5 for boundaries are written to give the necessary explanations. Actually, the first construct is already introduced in Chapter 2, when the author lists four categories which “figure prominently in shaping inequality in both socialist and post-socialist urban China : ownership type, industry, locale and work organisation” (p.25). It is added that the last three are not typical of China , but may have there a different meaning. Chapter 2 (as well as pp. 9-21 already introducing the constructs) narrates the origin and evolution to the present situation of China 's urban society; chapter 4 centres on the present, decomposing the rising income inequality into “that between categories with clear geographical and institutional boundaries and that within these categories.” (p.93)
Boundaries, in chapter 5, are explained with two factors: locality and work organisation (pp. 167-168). Both constructs are more than geographical space; they actually are “meaningful political and economic categories surrounded by detectable boundaries.” In a nutshell, categories enlarge inequality (chapter 4) and boundaries maintain equality (chapter 5). The second phenomenon is explained by the responsibility and power of local governments: they “participate in activities associated with economic growth…They are also expected to participate in distributing income, both directly and indirectly” (p.141). This situation of course results in boundaries between cities. The same is observable within work organisations and the author gives examples of separation of rights and benefits between regular and migrant workers and old and new employees (pp. 157-159).
We already know that, some readers would say. This primary reaction may even be stronger specially when reading the first two chapters (“From Equality to Inequality”, and “Categorical Sources of Inequality”). The author does not claim any new discovery, and has put these pages under the general title “Introduction”, which indeed helps a lot to understand “Trends and Patterns” (of inequality), whereas the two last chapters offer an “Explanation”.
As written in the back jacket cover, Wang Feng presents a “coherent line of argument” (Xueguang Zhou), and a “sophisticated yet accessible investigation of the changing nature of inequality in China ” (Emily Hannum)—coherent indeed, as we have said, from the first to the last chapter. Sophisticated: the statistical methods used surely merit this qualification; the book is perhaps accessible, but surely not easy reading, unless you are familiar with advanced quantitative methods; for the profane, fortunately the figures and tables are sufficiently explained to assure that the results are reliable and significant.
Qualitative methods are also called into service here and there, usually, to initiate or confirm quantitative calculations, checked and re-checked with various statistical apparatuses. No wonder that researching and writing the book took about one and a half decades, as the author writes in the first two lines of the preface. A good synthesis, although perhaps the accumulated evidence, comparisons and theoretical explanations are too rich, with some apparent repetitions, but with differences in details and moments in the whole argument.
The study merits its place in the collection “Studies in Social Inequality” of Stanford University . It does not cover all the inequalities in China. Wang Feng justifies his choice to centre the research on the urban populations in Liaoning , Sichuan and Guangdong (pp.21-22). Other studies of equivalent calibre of other places in the country would most probably confirm the general conclusion of the author. What about the rural and urban gap? Wang Feng does speak of this problem here and there (mainly in chapter 2; see the entry “rural sector” of the very good index which adds to the value of the book as a reference study), but that subject would need another study altogether.
The concluding pages (pp.178-182) note the originality of the Chinese case: its large inter-group inequality makes it different form the United Sates, but the relatively small inter-group inequality reminds the reader of something observed in Japanese society. Should one bring culture into the picture to explain this? Wang Feng answers positively, but does not say much on how and to what extent.
Of course, it would also be possible to speculate on the effect of possible slow, or accelerating, political change in China , or a deep modification of the ownership system, or the future social consequences of the present boundaries. As sociologist, Wang Feng rightly insists on important observable phenomena, and gives further proof that market societies are not uniform, even when facing similar challenges.
|
