The paper compares urban housing development in China and Russia. While China and Russia tend to be compared to other counties within their respective regions, we argue that their non-democratic political regimes exert important influence over their housing systems and despite structural differences, make the two cases comparable. We follow public policy literature to conceptualise the political influence over housing policy as a function of actors’ interests, ideas and the institutional context. We argue that the influence of national constellations of these factors has shaped the distinct paths of housing development in the two countries. Our analysis finds that the incentive structures to the local officials, different ideational conceptualisations of housing development and cultural beliefs among the society are key factors that have led to different rates of housing growth and levels of policy experimentation in China and Russia. At the same time, the impact of authoritarian politics means that in both countries housing is a source of regime legitimacy for the public, and a source of profits and rents for the elites. Participatory governance is largely blocked by paternalism and clientelism, while policy-making by the central executive is bureaucratic in character but relies on expert ideas.
|Tidskrift||International journal of housing policy|
|Status||Insänt - 25 aug 2019|
- 517 Statsvetenskap