UnderstandingInequalityinChina
YuXie
UniversityofMichigan
Author:YuXie,InstituteforSocialResearch(ISR),UniversityofMichigan,PekingUniversity.
Email:yuxie@umich.edu.ThepaperisbasedonhisinaugurallectureforhisOtisDudley
DuncanDistinguishedUniversityProfessorshipattheUniversityofMichiganonApril1,
2009.MirandaBrown,SiweiCheng,CindyGlovinsky,JingweiHu,NanHu,Guoying
Huang,QingLai,ZhengMu,ShaNi,LiguoPeng,XiSong,TaoTao,XiweiWu,andJiaYu,
providedassistancewiththeresearch.ThearticlewasoriginallypublishedinChinese,
withupdateddata.Thereferencefortheoriginalarticleis:
Xie,Yu.2010.“UnderstandingInequalityinChina(认识中国的不平等)”(inChinese).
Society《社会》30(3):1‐20.
Inequality, Page 2 UNDERSTANDINGINEQUALITYINCHINA
Abstract:Drawingonpastresearch,theauthorhassetforththefollowingpropositions:(1)
inequalityinChinahasbeenseverelyimpactedbycertaincollectivemechanisms,suchas
regionsandworkunits;(2)traditionalChinesepoliticalideologyhaspromotedmerit‐based
inequality,withmeritbeingperceivedasfunctionalinimprovingthecollectivewelfarefor
themasses;and(3)manyChinesepeopletodayregardinequalityasaninevitable
consequenceofeconomicdevelopment.Thus,itseemsunlikelythatsocialinequalityalone
wouldleadtopoliticalandsocialunrestintoday’sChina.
Keywords:attitude/ideology,China,economicdevelopment,inequality
Inequality, Page 3 UNDERSTANDINGINEQUALITYINCHINA
Ⅰ.Introduction
Thetitleofthispaperrequiresabriefclarification.Theword“understanding”means
specificallyascholarlyinquiryforknowledge,whichisanendinitself.Thispaperiswritten
freeofvaluejudgment,anditisnotmyintentiontocounseltheChinesegovernmentorthe
civilaudienceontheissueofinequality.Inequality,inthispaper,isapproachedasan
empiricalphenomenonratherthanasasocialproblem.Inotherwords,inthesepagesmy
intentiondoesnotgobeyondapurelyintellectual,apoliticalunderstandingofinequalityin
China.
Chinatodayisundergoingadramaticsocialtransformationcomparabletothe
RenaissanceinearlyEuropeortheIndustrialRevolutionin18th‐19thcenturyBritain.
Involvingthelargestpopulationintheworldtoday,thesocialchangeshavebeen
unprecedentedlyextensiveinscaleandfar‐reachingintheirconsequences.Atan
astoundinglyrapidrate,manyfundamentalaspectsofChinesesocietyhavebeenchanged
irreversibly.Asscholars,socialscientistsarefortunatetoworkincontemporarytimesand
havetheopportunitytoobserve,document,analyze,andunderstandtheseongoingsocial
changesinChina.
ThegreatChinesesocialtransformationcanbesummarizedunderfouraspects:(1)
Economicdevelopment.Thenationaleconomyhasnotonlyexperiencedrapidexpansionin
volume(seebelowfordata),butisalsoundergoinganinstitutionalshiftfromcentral
planningtoamarketeconomy.(2)Socialchanges.Forexample,manysocialistsocial
arrangements,suchasstate/danwei‐controlledassignmentofjobsandhousinginurban
Inequality, Page 4 China,arenolongerexperiencedbymosturbanresidentstoday.(3)Demographic
transition.Althoughithasattractedonlylimitedattentioninsocialscience,China’s
demographictransitioninrecentdecadescreatedanimportantconditionforthecountry’s
phenomenaleconomicgrowth.Therapiddeclineinmortalitysincethe1950sandthedrop
infertilitysincethelate1970shavehadfar‐reachingconsequencesforthenation.(4)
Culturalchanges.Throughglobalcontact,theWesternwayoflifehasgainedincreasingly
moregroundinChina,whereasChinesetraditionshavecontinuedtowaneovertime.This,
combinedwithvaryingsub‐culturesindifferentsocialgroups,hasproducedrichcultural
dynamicsincontemporaryChina.AllofthesechangeshavegreatlyinfluencedChinese
people’sdailylivesandwork.Thus,economicinequality,anotheraspectofChina’smajor
socialtransformation,hasbeenevolvingagainstthebackdropofthesebroaderchanges.
Anexaminationofdatarevealscleartrendsforbotheconomicgrowthandrising
inequalityinChinaoverrecentdecades.First,Chineseeconomicoutputboomedsincethe
1980s,withanannualizedgrowthrateforper‐capitaGDP,netofinflation,at6.7%peryear
between1978and2008(Figure1).Suchmassive,sustained,andrapideconomic
developmentwasneverseenbeforeinworldhistory.Itovershadowsthegoldenyearsof
theAmericaneconomybetween1860and1930,whentheannualgrowthratewas4%
(MeasuringWorth2009).Whileunfoldingmorerapidly,today’sChineseeconomic
expansionhasalsooccurredonamuchlargerscale.Atthesametime,inequalityhasalso
beenontherise.ThemeasurementofeconomicinequalityinChinaisrathercontroversial
inacademia.Thereareconcernsaboutdataauthenticity,reliability,andcomparabilitywith
othercountries.WhetherornottheGinicoefficientprovidesvalidassessmentofinequality
isalsosubjecttodebate,butitremainsthemostfrequentlyusedindicator(Wu2009).The
GinicoefficientsinFigure2werecomputedusingofficialdatareleasedbytheChinese
government(Han2004).Evenso,arisingtrendisclearlyshown.Infact,nomatterwhat
Inequality, Page 5 dataandmeasuresoneuses,thedramaticincreaseininequalityoverthisperiodis
indisputable.
Figure1aboutHere
Figure2aboutHere
Thekeyquestionis,Howcanweunderstandtheemerginginequalityincontemporary
China?Someobserversinjournalismarguethateconomicinequalitywillleadtopolitical
andsocialinstabilityinChina.Thispossibilityhasraisedpopularconcernsduetothe
seriousnessoftheconsequencesimplied(SeeWu2009foradetaileddiscussion).
Inmyview,thereisnosimpleanswertoourquestion,whichisusefulonlyinthatit
underliesanextensiveresearchagenda.Aboveall,Ibelieveweshouldnotandcannotstudy
inequalityintotalisolationfromotheraspectsinChinesesociety.Unlikeinexperimental
sciences,wheretheaimofresearchisoftentoisolateconfoundingandcontextualeffects,
wemusttrytounderstandChina’sinequalityinperspective—thatis,withinthecontextof
thecountry’shistory,culture,politics,andeconomy.Withsomuchtobeempirically
assessed,mycurrentunderstandingoftheinequalityinChinaisfarfromimpeccable.YetI
daretoadvanceseveraltentativepropositions.
First,China’sinequalitytoagreatextentisattributabletocollectiveagenciessuchas
geographiclocations,householdregistration(hukou),workunits,socialnetworks,villages,
kinshiplineages,families,etc.Inotherwords,muchoftheinequalityexistsnotatthe
individuallevelbutatthemeso‐collectivelevel.
Second,thetraditionalChinesepoliticalideologyendorsesmerit‐basedinequality.
Meritherereferstoadministrativeperformancethatismeasuredbythecollectivegood.
LeadersinChinesesocietyareoftenrewardedwithvariousbenefitsandprivilegesfor
Inequality, Page 6 maximizingthepublicgood.Thatis,iftheprivilegesenjoyedbytheupperclassbringabout
desirableoutcomesfortheirsubjectsandothersinsociety,suchdifferentialtreatmentsare
acceptedandevenencouragedintheChinesemeritocratictradition.
Third,possiblyduetopropagandaandactualexperiencesinrecentyears,inequalityis
viewedbysomeChineseasanecessaryevilforthesakeofdevelopment.Thestate
propagandaorganhastakenpainsindrivinghometheideathateconomicdevelopment
requiressomepeopletogetrichsooner,andtheresultinginequalityisthepricethathasto
bepaid.Asofnow,manyChinesepeoplemaysubscribetothispointofview,holdingthat
inequalityisaninevitable,albeitundesirable,outcomeinacountry’seconomic
development.
Idonotbelievethattheabovethreepropositionshavebeenadequatelyverifiedby
empiricalevidence.Still,IwouldliketoconveyhowIcametogainpartialconfidencein
them.
2ThreepropositionsrelatingtoinequalityinChina
2.1CollectiveAgency
TounderstandinequalityinChina,weshouldtakeintoconsiderationthenational
conditionsandfeaturesofChina.However,weshouldnotoveremphasizedifferences
betweenChinaandothercountries.Overemphasizingandtotallydenyingsuchdifferences
wouldbewrongingoingtoextremes.Tobesure,Chinahasitsownuniquecharacteristics,
butmanyofthemareonlyquantitatively,ratherthanqualitatively,differentfromthoseof
othercountries.
First,inChina,thegovernmentplaysaprominentrole.Thisistrue,comparedtoother
countries,fromthecentraltothelocaladministrationlevels.Second,theinterestsof
businessenterprisesandthegovernmentareinalliance.Thatistosay,enterprises
Inequality, Page 7 (business)andthegovernment(politics)sharemutualeconomicinterestsandmaintain
closerelationships.Thisisnottrueinmanyothercountries.Third,mulit‐layered
paternalismisalongandwell‐establishedChinesetradition.AmemberofChinesesocietyis
imbeddedinmultiplelayersofcollectivity..InancientGreece,citizenswereequalandwere
abletoparticipateinpoliticsdirectly,althoughnoteveryonewasacitizen,andtheirsociety
wassmall.Incontrast,duetothevastnessofthecountry,thesocietalroleofaChinese
citizenbeginsinarelativelysmalllocationordanwei,which,inturnisincludedinalarger
placeordanwei.AdministrationinChinaishierarchicalandnested,notdirectedat
individuals,whohavenoindependentrolesintheirsociety.Forexample,membershipand
title(e.g.,deanordirector)inadanweiisimportantinChinabecauseChinesesociety
emphasizescommonalitieswithinacollectiveunit.Amemberorleaderofadanweiisnotan
independentindividualwhoisfreefromthedanweitowhichhe/shebelongs.An
individual'spositioninsocietywouldnotberecognizedifthepersonbecameseparated
fromhisorherdanwei.Inthisrespect,therearesignificantdifferencesbetweenChinese
andwesternsocieties.Bytheterm“multiplelayers,”wethusmeanmanyhierarchicallayers.
Forexample,inpoliticssuchlayersincludefamilyandsocialnetwork,danwei,basic‐level
government,andlocalgovernment;inhighereducation,theyincludedepartment,college,
university,universityofdistinctrank(e.g.,“211”,“985”universities)andsoon.Theseareall
differentlayers.Inbrief,Chinesesocietyisstructuredonmultiplelevelsandnested
hierarchicallyfromthetopdown.
Thus,IdonotbelievethattheChineseeconomyissimplymovingtowardsamarket
economyor,morespecifically,anAmerican‐stylemarketeconomy.Itisnaïvetoassertthat
ChinaisjustanothercapitalistsocietyliketheU.S.,orthatevenifitisnotsuchasociety
today,itwillbecomeonetomorrow.IrejectthepredictionthatChinawillestablisha
completelycapitalisticeconomicandsocialsystembecauseasasociologistIhavediscerned
Inequality, Page 8 somedistinctcharacteristicsofChinaintermsofsocialstructure,traditionalculture,and
mutualinterestrelationships.
My1996paperincollaborationwithHannumpointedoutthatinChina,themost
influentialfactorforearnedincomeisnotindividualattributes,butregionaldisparities.The
influenceofregioncanbeverysignificant(XieandHannum1996).Later,inanotherpaper
publishedin2005(HauserandXie2005),wediscoveredthattheinfluenceofregional
differencesondeterminantsofearningshadincreased.WuandTreiman’s(2004)research
showsthathouseholdregistration(hukou)statushadagreatinfluenceonpeople’ssocial
statuses;thatis,thereisalargedisparitybetweenruralandurbanhukouholders(Wuand
Treiman2004).Thesedifferencesbyregionorhukoustatuscannotbeattributedto
personalendeavorandability,sincetheyarestructuraldifferencesfromwhichan
individualhasdifficultybreakingaway.Inourrecentpaper(XieandWu2008),WuandI
discussedtheimportanceofdanweiincontemporaryChina.Webelievethateventoday
danweiisstillplayingasignificantroleinaffectingpersonalincome,prestige,welfare,and
socialnetwork.FengWang’srecentbook(Wang2008)alsosupportedthisperspective.
Notlongago,TheGuardianpublishedanarticle(Vidal2008)basedonastudy
conductedbytheUnitedNations,undertheheadline“WealthGapCreatingaSocialTime
Bomb.”AlthoughitdidnotdiscussChinaindepth,itreferredtothecountrytwice.The
articlefirstquotedresearchshowingthatBeijingisthemostegalitarianplaceintheworld,
butthenitclaimedthattherewassevereinequalityinChina.Whywouldthesetwo
contradictoryviewpointscoexistinthesamearticle?Actually,theyarenotcontradictory.
ThelevelofChina’sinequalityishigh,butamajorpartofitisinterregionalandintergroup
inequality,suchastheinequalitybetweenBeijingandothercitiesorbetweenthe
agriculturalpopulationandthenonagriculturalpopulation.Withinacity,forexample
Beijing,inequalityamongresidentsislowerthanthatinothermetropolisessuchasNew
Inequality, Page 9 YorkorLondon,althoughitmaynotbethelowest,asclaimedinthearticle,intheworld.
Relativelyspeaking,manyothercitieshavehigherlevelsofinequality.Thus,thesetwo
seeminglycontradictiveviewpointstellusthatregionaldisparityaccountsforalargepart
ofinequalityinChina.
Basedonofficialstatistics,wecanillustratetheimportanceofgeographicregion.From
Figure3,wecanobservetheprominenceofregionalvariationinincome.Atthesametime,
thedisparitybetweenruralandurbanareasisalsolarge.Thedisparitiesshowninthis
statisticalgraphareinaccordancewiththepublic’sgeneralunderstanding:forexample,the
averagepercapitaincomeinGuangdongorShanghaiishigh,whilelowinwesternregion
suchasGansu;urbanpopulationsenjoyhigherincomesthantheirruralcounterparts.The
magnitudesofthesedisparitiesaregreaterinChinathaninothercountries(e.g.,theU.S.).
Figure3aboutHere
Similartoregion,workunit(danwei)isalsoasignificantcollectiveagencyproducing
andmaintaininginequality.Asiswidelyknown,beforetheeconomicreform,danwei
determinedalmosteveryaspectofanindividual'sexistence,includingdailylife,politicallife,
work,economiccondition,andsoon.Inthosedays,danwei(orlinong,i.e.,neighborhood)
wasresponsiblefordistributingnearlyalltherationcouponsforsuchthingsasmeat,grain,
sugar,film,bathing,bicycles,andsewingmachines.Besides,notonlywouldadanwei
approvemembers'marriages,italsoprovidedhousingforthem.Ifamarriagewasunhappy,
thedanweiwassupposedtointerveneandreconcilethecouple.Ifsomeonecausedtrouble,
otherswouldfirstreportittotheperson'sdanwei,etc.Someobserversarguethatafterthe
economicreformin1978thesituationmayhavechanged,thatthesystemofdanweimay
havebrokendown,ornolongerbeimportant.Inmyview,theseobservationsareincorrect
anddanweicontinuestobeessentialintoday’sChina.Forexample,whenundergraduate
Inequality, Page 10 studentsfailtodealproperlywiththeirpersonalbusiness,administratorsoftheir
departments,colleges,oruniversitiesarestillheldresponsible.
In1999,weconductedasurveyinShanghai,WuhanandXi’an.Throughstatistical
analysesofthedata,wefoundthatdanweiisthesecondmajorfactorthatdetermines
people’sincomes,secondonlytothefactorofregionandcitylocationandoutdistancing
individualfactorssuchaseducationlevel,experience,gender,cadrestatus,andsoon(Xie
andWu2008)(seeTable1).InChina(especiallyincities),adanwei’sprofitabilityhasgreat
influenceonpersonalincomes(seeFigure4).Forexample,thereisincomeinequality
amonguniversityprofessors.Whydosomeofthemenjoyahighsalarywhileothersdonot?
Table1aboutHere
Figure4aboutHere
Toalargeextent,inequalityofprofessors’salariescanbeattributedtouniversities'
(danweis')salarypolicies,astheyaffectprofessors’personalincomesdirectly.If
measurable,oneprofessor’scontributionmaybethesameasanother’s,forexample
measuredbycoursestaughtorresearchconducted,buttheirsalariescouldbevery
different.Thatistosay,danweiexertalargeinfluenceonprofessors’incomes.Byextension
ofthislogic,itisnotdifficulttounderstandwhytheincomesofemployeesindifferent
danweiaredifferent,sometimesdramaticallydifferent,althoughtheyessentiallydothe
samework.Evenifwecontrolsomepersonalcharacteristicsbystatisticalmethods,for
exampleyearsofeducation,danweistillplaysacriticalroleindeterminingaworker’s
earnedincomeandeconomicwelfare.Inshort,danweiisanimportantfactorforinequality
andstratificationinChina.Danweicanactuallybeconsideredasasocialboundary
demarcatingpaymentschemes,whichvarybydanwei.Somedanweipossessmorefinancial
resourceswhileothersdonot.Althoughonemaystillthinkthatinequalityresultingfrom
Inequality, Page 11 danweiisunfair,manyfindinequalitybydanweiacceptable.Becausethereisaboundary,
noteveryonecanbeamemberofacertaindanwei,soenteringagoodoneisacrucialstepin
attainingsocialstatus.
2.2TheTraditionofMerit‐basedInequality
AsfarasIcansee,inequalityhasbeenpartofChineseculturesinceancienttimes.This
argumentisbasedonmystudyofhistoricalmaterials.Theoreticalresearchaboutthisis
stillpreliminary(seeXieandBrown2011).Todiscussthis,Iwouldfirstputforwardseveral
importantcharacteristicsofancientChina.Thesecharacteristicsarenotmyownideasbut
ratherrepresentconsensusviewsamongwesternscholarsstudyingancientChina.HereI
merelysummarizethemtosuitmypurpose.
First,theChineseEmpirewasideallyunited,meaningthattherewasonlyoneemperor
throughouttheempire.Ofcourse,unification(大一统)wastheidealcondition,and
exceptionswerecommon,forexample,duringtheperiodoftheThreeKingdoms.Butideally,
therewasonlyoneemperorastheruler.Theideologyofunification(大一统)hasbeen
dominantinChina,whichisquitedifferentfromthewest.
Second,theChineseEmpirehadaverylargeterritoryandahugepopulation,sothat
thegreatproblemfacingtheEmpirewasadministration.Inanagewithoutautomobiles,
highways,trains,cellphones,internet,andothermoderncommunicationandtransportation
technology,itwouldtakeseveralmonthsforanofficialdocumentorletterfromthecentral
governmenttoreachalocalgovernment.Withmoderntransportationandcommunication
technology,itwasverydifficulttoconductefficientadministration.Thisproblemwasalso
trueinotherplaceshistorically.However,theadministrationoftheChineseEmpire–
somethingverydifficulttoaccomplish–was,ineffect,accomplished.Today,theU.S.isa
strongcountrywithalargeterritoryandahugepopulation.However,asiswellknown,the
U.S.wasdevelopedundermodernsocialconditions.TheU.S.enjoyeddramaticspeedof
Inequality, Page 12 industrializationandmechanizationinthelate19thcenturyandbegantobuildrailwaysand
automobiles.Itsteppedintotheranksofthedevelopedcountriesinaroundthe1930s.
Goingthroughtwoworldwars,thefederalgovernmentoftheU.S.becamestrongerand
stronger,withmoreresourcesandpowerovertime.Yet,itwasextraordinary,andpuzzling,
thattheancientChineseEmpirewithaverylargeterritorycouldbegovernedforsomany
yearswithoutanyfundamentalchangetoitsbasicadministrativemodel.
Third,thebureaucraticsystemforChinesecivilofficialsisunique.Althoughthe
successionofdynastiesdependedonthemilitary,theadministrationoftheChineseEmpire
dependedonthecivilbureaucratsoveritslonghistory.Thisisdifferentfromotherancient
empires(e.g.,theRomanEmpire).InChinesehistory,scholarsorliteraticouldbecome
officials,andevenhigh‐levelones.Eventoday,Chinesepeopleexpecttheirchildrentostudy
hardsoastostartasuccessfulcareer.AConfuciansayingstates,“agoodscholarcan
becomeanofficial.”Thisisauniqueculturalproduct.Comparedwithothercountries,
Chinesebureaucracyhadanearlieroriginandgreaterscale.
Fourth,exceptfortheemperor,thearistocraticandprivilegedclasseswerenotstable.
Forexample,amongtheseigniorsoftheearlyQingDynasty,WuSangui,thePingxiSeignior
(平西王)hadnotremainedinpowerforonegenerationbeforehewasrepressedbythe
centralgovernment.Infact,theemperordidnotwanttheinheritanceofthearistocraticand
privilegedclass.Exceptfortheemperorhimself,noimportantofficialpositionswere
inheritedinChinesehistory.Incontrast,inmedievalEurope,officialpostscouldbepassed
onfromonegenerationtothenext.InEuropeanhistory,anaristocratictitlewasgenerally
passedontotheeldestson,sothatthefamilywouldmaintainwealthandpuissance.This,
however,wasnotthecaseinChina,forseveralreasons.First,exceptfortheemperor(and
veryfewotherposts),theofficialpositionswerenon‐inheritable.Second,therichusually
hadmanywivesorconcubinesandthusproducedmanysons,andthesonswouldthen
Inequality, Page 13 dividethefamilywealthequally.Inthisway,nomatterhowpowerfulthefamilywas,their
wealthandpuissancewouldsoonbedividedup,andtherewasnotmuchleftfordirect
inheritanceafteraboutthreegenerations.Thatistosay,onecouldnotcountoninheritance
tobewealthyinChinesehistory(seeHo1954).Insteadofdirectinheritance,astandard
wayofpassingonfamilyadvantagewastoinvestinasmuchaspossibleinsonssothatthey
wouldbeabletomakemoneyinthefuture.Itdidnotevenmatterifayoungboyhadno
wealthyfather.Ifthefamilysupportedhisstudies,hecouldenterofficialdomandthenget
promotionandwealth.Therefore,intermsofculture,Chinesesocietyemphasizedsocial
mobility,andatleastsomelong‐rangesocialmobilitydidoccur(seeHo1964),whereasin
theWest,aristocratsandplebeianswereseparatedintodistinctcategories.Asaresult,from
theQinDynastyorevenearlier,fromtheWarringStatesonward,feudalismdisappeared.
Feudalismischaracterizedbyhereditabilityofsocialstatusandarigidsystemofpower
division,notsocialmobilityorcentralizedpower.
Fifth,inthepoliticalsystemofimperialChina,ideologyplayedanimportantrole.Since
theWesternHan,therehasnotbeenanyfundamentalchangeintheChinesepolitical
system,itscorebeingtheideologybasedonthedoctrinesofConfuciusandMencius.Ieven
seethepresent‐dayChinesegovernmentnowadaysascarryingonthetraditionofthe
ChineseEmpireinthelasttwomillenniums.Totakeitonestepfurther,thecurrentpolitical
systemincontemporaryChinais,tosomedegree,alegacyofthetwo‐thousand‐year‐old
Chineseculture.
MaxWeberwasaGermanwhohadneverbeentoChina,nordidheunderstandthe
Chineselanguage,buthewasanexcellentsociologistwithhisfamousbook,Economyand
Society(Weber,[1921]1978).HealsowroteabookontheChinesebureaucracy(Weber
1951).Althoughmainlybasedonsecond‐handmaterials,WeberanalyzedtheChinese
situationthoroughlyandthoughtfully(seeZhao2006).Inhisbooks,heraisedtwo
Inequality, Page 14 questionsabouttraditionalbureaucracyinimperialChina.First,whileitseemsreasonable
toselectofficialsbyexams,whywerethecandidatestestedforknowledgeofimpractical
classicsratherthanadministrationskills,suchasaccountingormanagement?Weberdid
notunderstandwhythethingsbeingtestedwerenotdirectlyrelatedtotheworkofficials
weresupposedtoperform.Actuallythisisstillthecasenowadays.Appointmentsat
governmentpostsrequireacademicdegrees,anditisanadvantagetohaveadegreein
scienceorengineering,eventhoughpositionsrarelyrequireonetouse
scientific/engineeringknowledge.Insuchacase,anemphasisonmathematicaland
scientificabilitiesalsoseemsweird.ThisisWeber’sfirstquestion,andhethoughtitwasa
wastebecausetheknowledgetestedwasnotpractical.Hissecondquestionisthatthe
tenureinofficeofanappointedlocaladministratorwasbrief,say,forthreeyears.He
thoughtthispracticewasinefficient.Inordertowork,administratorsshouldlearnabout
thelocalsituationandcustomsandgetalongwellwiththelocalsubordinatesandthelocal
population.Justwhentheybecamefamiliarwiththeirsituations,however,theywere
transferredtoanotherplace.Therefore,WeberconcludedthattheChinesebureaucracywas
indeedinefficient.However,hedidnotunderstandthatefficiencywasnotthemost
importantobjectiveforaregimeordynasty.Inefficientasitwas,theempirestillbelonged
totheimperialfamily.Whatgoodwashighefficiencyiftheempirewasdisruptedandfell
intothehandsofothers?Fromthisperspective,IarguethattheancientChinese
bureaucracywassuccessfulbecauseitsolvedthebigproblemofadministration.Otherthan
thissystem,wecanhardlythinkoffanyothermethodsofgoverningsuchabigempire
underactualconditionsatthattime.
WhydidthegovernanceofChinarequirebureaucracy?Letussupposethatalocal
aristocratestablishedhispower.Howcouldtheemperorguaranteehisabsoluteobedience
tothecentralgovernment?Howcouldhemakethearistocratdispatchtroopsandhandin
Inequality, Page 15 moneyduringwartime?Howcouldtheemperorensurehissubordinate'scollaborationin
infrastructureprojectssuchasdiggingacanalorbuildingthecitywall?Theemperorcould
onlyrelyonhisappointedadministratorstogotolocalplacesandgovern.Ofcourse,forthe
actualtaskofadministration,theadministratorsusedtheirowndiscretion,sincethe
emperorwastoofarawaytoreporttoandhadnoideaoftheactualsituations.Hence,the
situationalocaladministratorfacedinacentralizedempirewouldbesubstantiallydifferent
fromthatofanaristocratunderfeudalism.Ontheonehand,localadministratorswere
appointedandcontrolledbythecentralgovernment,andtheirfurtherpromotionwould
alsobedecidedbythecentralgovernment.Ontheotherhand,thelocaladministratorshad
toworkforthebestinterestsofthelocalpeopleinordertobepromoted(XieandBrown
2011).Chinesebureaucracywasausefulinnovationfortheancientemperorandwasan
importantmethodofmaintainingtheempire’sstability.Fromancienttimestothepresent
day,Chineseterritoryhasbeensovastthatmostemperorsrealizedthatitwouldbe
impossibletogovernbymilitarypower.Militarypowerwasseenasadouble‐edgedsword.
Withoutsufficientpower,themilitarycouldnotbeeffective.Withtoomuchpower,the
militarycouldrebel.Sotheemperorswererationalinrelyingonscholars,whomightbe
inefficientandpedantic,butnotrebellious,ratherthanonthedangerousmilitary.
HowwastheChineseEmpiregoverned?Itwasnotthroughtheuseofmilitarypower
butdoctrinesofConfuciusandMencius.ThedoctrinesofConfuciusandMenciuswere
indispensableadministrativetoolsforancientChineseemperors.Withoutthem,the
bureaucracywouldnotexist,andthelong‐termcentralizedempirewouldnotlastin
Chinesehistory.ItisinterestingthatthekeypointofConfuciusandMenciusdoctrinesis
benevolentgovernance(仁政).Thatistosay,thepersonbestowedwithpowershouldwork
forthepublicgood.Thisideologyattractspopularsupport.Forinstance,Menciusputit,
“Thepeopleareofsupremeimportance;thealtarstothegodsofearthandgraincomenext;
Inequality, Page 16 lastcomestheruler”(Mencius,tr.Lau,p.68).Thispassageactuallyattributedtheultimate
purposeofimperialpowertotheservicetothepeople.However,Menciusbelievedthatin
ordertoservethepeople,inequalitywasjustified,“Itisanobjectiveandnaturalfactthatall
thingsaredifferentfromoneanother”(Mencius 孟子:卷五滕文公上).Putinthewordsof
moderneconomics,somelevelofinequalityacrosspersonsisakindofcomplementary
relationshipthatbenefitseveryone,whileabsoluteequalitywillleadtowidespreadpoverty
oftheentiresociety.SoMenciussaid,“Ifeveryonemustmakeeverythingheuses,the
Empirewillbeledalongthepathofincessanttoil.Henceitissaid,‘Therearethosewhouse
theirmindsandtherearethosewhousetheirmuscles.Theformerrule;thelatterareruled.
Thosewhorulearesupportedbythosewhoareruled.’Thisisaprincipleacceptedbythe
wholeEmpire”(《孟子:卷五滕文公上》).Hearguedthatabsoluteequalityrequiring
everyonetodothefarmworkwouldnotworkandwouldtrapeveryoneintopoverty.There
aredifferencesamongpeople.Thosewhoaresmartshouldtakeupintellectualworkand
thosewhoarenotsmartbutstrongshouldparticipateinmanuallabor.Thisisthedivision
ofworkinsociety.InChina,manypeoplehaveheardandapprovedofthestatementthat
“Therearethosewhousetheirmindsandtherearethosewhousetheirmuscles.The
formerrule;thelatterareruled.”Thisstatementalsohelpsustounderstandinequality.In
Mencius’sview,capablepersonsshouldenjoytheirprivilegeandgovernothers,while
incapablepersonsshouldexerttheirphysicalstrengthanddosubordinateworkforothers.
Thisisacooperativerelationshipacceptedbyall,eventhepoor.
Whywouldthepooralsosupportinequality?Therearetworeasonsinthehistorical
contextofChina.First,asstatedabove,therichenjoyedtheprivilegeofactingonbehalfof
thepublic,includingthepoor.Asaresult,thepoorwerenotabsolutelosersinthis
arrangement,sincethedivisionoflaborbenefitedeveryone.Thisisanideologytermed
"paternalism,"whichisstillprevalentinChinatoday.Second,recallthatatleast
Inequality, Page 17 theoreticallyspeaking,privilegeandwealthresultednotmerelyfromdestinybutfromthe
individual'sperformanceandabilities.Anincapablepersontodaymightbecomecapable
tomorrow,orhecouldraisehissontobecapable.Again,althoughhissonmightbe
incapable,hisgrandsoncouldberaisedtobecapable—therewasalwayssomehope.
Hence,Chinesecultureencouragedpeopletolookforward.Ratherthancomplainingabout
currentconditions,itisbettertolooktothefuture,notonlyone’sownfuture,butalsothat
ofthenextgeneration.Thatistosay,Chineseculturetendstopushpeopletochasetheir
futuredreamsattheexpenseofpresentinterestsandpleasures.Thisappealingidea
suggeststhatitdoesnotmatterifanindividual’scurrentconditionisnotidealbecausehe
orshecancountonthenextgeneration.Thisishowsocialmobilityworks,bringing
opportunitiestoeveryone.
Thereisapicture‐storybooktellingthestoriesofOuyangXiu.Suchstorybooksare
popularinChina,andmostofthemtellstoriesofsuccessfulcelebritiesinhistory.Teachers
andparentsnarratethesestoriestomotivatechildren:nomatterhowpoorapersonmaybe,
ifheisdiligent,hecangetanythingexcepttheimperialthrone.Aslongasthepersonstudies
well,hecanearnhighofficialtitles,justasOuyangXiubecametheMinisterofDefense(兵部
尚书).Moreover,theidealimageofascholargoesbeyondbeingmerelyagoodscholarto
beingagoodadministrator(“‘fatherandmother’ofthepeople”).Whydidthepublichave
suchexpectationsforadministrators?ThisisbecausetraditionalpoliticalideologyinChina
emphasizedbenevolentgovernance(i.e.,仁政).Weknowthatbecausethedecisionsof
administratorswererelativelyindependentandautonomous,itisunderstandablewhythe
selectioncriteriaofadministratorswerenotaboutadministrationormanagementskills,
butaboutvirtues.Yet,itwasnoteasytoknowwhetherapersonwasvirtuousornot.Many
methodsformeasuringanindividual’squalitieswereimplemented.Criteriaincluded
whetherhewasfilial,whetherherespectedhissuperiors,whetherheobeyedrules,andso
Inequality, Page 18 on.DuringtheHanDynasty,“FilialandIncorrupt”(xiaolian)wastheprimarycriterionin
theRecommendationSystemofrecruitment 察举制,andwasconsideredthemost
fundamentalvirtueofhumansinConfucianism.TheAnalectssays,“Afilialandfraternal
personwillhardlyoffendthesuperior”(《论语:学而第一》).AftertheSuiDynasty,a
person'sknowledgeoftheclassicsbecamethemaincriterioninevaluatinghisvirtues.For
thosewhovaluedthiscriterion,familiaritywiththeclassicscouldrevealone’sbasic
qualities:intelligence,obedience,respectfortheteacher,self‐disciplineandsoon.Itis
similartotheemphasisonmathematicsandscientificknowledgeforappointmentsof
administratorsintoday’sChina.Althoughmathematicsandscientificknowledgearenot
reallyneededinadministrativeworkitself,personswhomaketheappointmentscanobtain
informationthroughacandidate’seducationinmathandscienceconcerningwhetherornot
thepersonisintelligent,obedient,hardworking,andaggressive.Itismoreatestofvirtues
andqualitiesthanofone'sknowledge.
Aswediscussedbefore,theChineseEmpirepossessedavastterritory,suchthatmost
appointedadministratorswereassignedtoplacesfarfromthecentralcapital.
Administratorsweregivenautonomousauthorityovertheregionstheygoverned.Forsuch
aposition,itwasaperson’svirtue,nothispracticalskills,thatdeterminedifhewasagood
administrator—“‘fatherandmother’ofthepeople.”Officials,especiallylocaladministrators,
accepteddualaccountability,beingbeholdentoboththesuperiorsandsubordinates.Their
workwas,toalargeextent,autonomous.Sincetheemperorwastoofarawaytocontrol
them,theadministratorscouldmakedecisionsbythemselvesandreportbackonlyafter
decision‐makingandimplementation.Whatgaveultimatelegitimacytotheimperialpower?
InfluencedbythedoctrinesofConfuciusandMencius,officialsbelieveditwastheMandate
ofHeaven.Thus,middle‐levelofficialsshouldassisttheemperorinrealizingthemandate.
Asaresultofbelievinginthemandate,theywereworkingforthelocalpopulation,i.e.to
Inequality, Page 19 providefortheirmaterialneeds.Thus,itwasoftenrecordedinancientbooksthatmiddle‐
levelofficialssometimesdisobeyedtheirsuperiors’commandsbecausetheybelievedthey
shouldrespondtotheirhigherobligationasthe“‘fatherandmother’ofthepeople,”an
obligationinaccordancewiththeemperor’sMandateofHeaven.
Historically,officialsatandabovethecountylevelwereappointedbytheimperial
courtsothattheirpowercamefromthecentralgovernment.Yet,thedutyofacounty
administratorwasmainlytoservethelocalpopulation.Thiscreatesasituationforpotential
conflicts,whichcallforabalance.Executionofsuperiors’commandsmayincurarealcost
totheinterestofthelocalpopulation.Thus,middle‐levelofficialswerealwayscaughtinthis
situationofdualaccountability.Ibelievethisinevitablyresultedinthecommon
phenomenonofofficialsconcealingsometruthsfrombothfromtheirsuperiorsandtheir
subordinates.Administratorscannotdisclosecompleteinformationtoeitherside.This
phenomenonwasaconsequenceoftheChinesesocialstructure.Officialssometimescould
nottellthetruth,ortheywouldrisklosingtheirpositions.TheprimaryreasonfortheGreat
Famine(1959‐1961)wasthatthisbalancewasbroken—theofficialswereonlyresponsible
totheirsuperiors,nottotheirsubordinates.Themutually‐constrainedbureaucraticsystem
hadahistoryoftwothousandyearsinChina.Init,administratorsdidnothavemuch
freedom,astheyweresqueezedbytheirresponsibilitiestoboththeirsuperiorandtheir
subordinates.However,officialdomwasandstillis,attractivetomanypeopleinChina.
Unfortunately,theChinesebureaucraticstructuremakesitnecessarythatmanywell‐
meaningofficialslie.Howtosolvetheproblem?Superiorsknowthatsubordinateofficials
lie,sotheydesignmanyregulationsbywhichtosupervisesubordinates.However,
“wheneverthereisarule,thereisawaytogetaroundit.”Subordinatescontinuallyfind
waystoresistregulationandsupervision.Thecyclesofdeception‐regulationneverend,
Inequality, Page 20 makingadministrativeproceduresmoreandmorecomplexandcumbersome,and
bureaucracyinefficient.
InthetraditionalChinesebureaucracy,animportantcriterionforevaluatingofficials
wastheirachievement‐‐howwelltheyassistedtheemperorinrealizingtheMandateof
Heaven.Toputitmoreconcretely,thecriterionwashowwellthelocalpopulationunder
theirgovernancelived.Thecentralgovernmentdidnotcareaboutwhatofficialsactually
didintheirpositions.Theofficialswereregardedasgoodaslongasthejurisdiction
governedwasprosperous,peaceful,andproblem‐free.Conversely,whenproblems
occurred,eventhoseduetonaturalcauses,officialsweretoblame,nomatterhowwellthey
performedorhowdiligentlytheyworked.Iftheconditionsweregood,peoplewouldpraise
theadministrator.Iftherewerenonaturaldisastersforyears,itwouldbecontributedto
Heaven’sappreciationfortheadministrator.Sothenotionofachievementwasimportant
eveninancienttimes.Theemphasisonanofficial’sachievementnowadaysisaresurgence
ofanoldpracticeintheChineseEmpire.
In2007,weconductedasurveyinGansu,animpoverishedandfarawayprovince.We
askedtherespondents:whatarethemostimportantfactorsthataffectyourowneconomic
wellbeing?Weprovidedthemwithfivechoices:centralgovernment,localgovernment,
danwei,familyandindividual(seeTable2).Althoughlivinginremoteareas,nearlyhalfof
theGansurespondentschosethecentralgovernmentastheirfirstchoice,meaningthatthey
believedthecentralgovernmentwasthemostimportantfactordeterminingtheireconomic
wellbeing.Thesecondmostimportantfactorgivenbytherespondentswasthelocal
government.Relativelyspeaking,personalfactorsweresecondarycomparedwith
governments.Thisillustratesthefactmentionedabovethatthepublicholdveryhigh
expectationsfortheofficialsandgovernmentsregardingtheirwellbeinginChineseculture.
Table2aboutHere
Inequality, Page 21 Wementionedthatagoodadministrator,asthe“fatherandmother”ofthepeople,
sometimeswouldprotectlocalinterestsinsteadofyieldingtohissuperiors.Thenhowdid
thelocalpopulationencourageadministratorstobehaveinlocalinterests?Asweknow,
appointedadministratorswerenevernative,whichmeanttheyhadnointimate
relationshipsorkinshipwithlocalpeople.Aspecialmethodofencouraginglocal
accountabilitywasusedinancientChina:peopleerectedstelemonuments(andevenbuilt
templesandshrines)torecordofficials’contributions,suchasinitiatingtheconstructionof
roadsandbridges,defeatingbandits,andsoon.Intheeulogiesonsteleinscriptions,
administrators’achievementswerepraisedextravagantly.Peopleinthedistrictcouldsee
thesestelesbythewayside,beforeabridge,orwithinshrines.Officialswerealsohappyto
seethem.Steleswereerectednotonlyfordeadadministrators,butalsoforthosewhowere
alive.Asareflectionofpublicopinion,steleshelpedofficialstosecurepromotions(Xieand
Brown,2011).Inshort,althoughancientChinadidnotenjoydemocracy,localgroups
utilizedreputationalmechanismstoinfluenceadministratorstoservetheirinterests.Onthe
onehand,thissatisfiedadministrators’innerdesireforpromotion;ontheotherhand,it
motivatedthemtoconductthemselvesinwaysthatwouldbenefitthelocalpopulation.
2.3InequalityasaBy‐productofChineseEconomicDevelopment
Aroundthirtyyearsago,theChinesegovernmentpopularizedtheideathateconomic
growthmakesitnecessarythatasmallnumberofpeopleberichfirst.Ofcourse,such
propagandawasintendedtopersuadethepublictoacceptinequalityasacostofeconomic
development.Inmyview,alargenumberofChineseapproveoftheideathatinequalityisa
necessaryby‐productofChineseeconomicdevelopment.
Wefirstputforwardahypothesiscalled“SocietalProjection”(XieandWang2009).
Thepremiseofthishypothesisisthatthegeneralpublicdonotknowmuchaboutsocial
conditionsinothercountries,sincemosthavenevertraveledabroad,andeventhosewho
Inequality, Page 22 havetraveledabroadhaveonlyhadacursoryglanceattheforeigncountriestheyvisited.
Tounderstandasocietyindepthisnoteasy,andordinaryChinesearenoexceptioninnot
knowingthelevelofinequalityandotherfeaturesofforeigncountries.However,theymay
haveroughideasaboutthedevelopmentallevelofthedifferentcountries,basedon
informationtransmittedthroughpopularmedia.Whenaskedaboutthelevelofinequality
inothercountries,theypresenttheirunderstanding,whichismostlysubjectiveimagination.
Inoursurvey,respondentscouldtellthelevelofdevelopmentwhenaskedaboutwhich
countrywasdevelopedandwhichonewasnot.However,whenaskedaboutthelevelof
inequality,althoughtheydonotknowtheactualanswers,theywouldmakeupanswers
basedontheirownimagination.
Thesedatacomefromoursurveyinsixprovinces(Beijing,Hebei,Qinghai,Hubei,
Sichuan,andGuangdong)in2006withnearly5000respondents(XieandWang2009).The
intervieweraskedtherespondenttoratethelevelofdevelopmentinfivecountriesusinga
scalefromzerototen:China,Japan,Brazil,UnitedStates,andPakistan,with10
representingthemostdevelopedand0representingtheleastdevelopedcountry.The
respondentswerealsoaskedtoratethelevelofinequalityforthesamefivecountriesona
0‐10scale,with10representingthemostunequaland0representingtheleastunequal
country.Actually,therehavebeenstatisticalindicatorsfromsocialscienceresearchthat
measurecomparativelevelsofdevelopmentandinequalityacrosscountries,whichare
reportedbytheUnitedNations(UN).Table3showsthecomparisonbetweenthestatistical
resultsfromoursurveyandtheobjectiveindicators.TheUNratingsofthelevelof
developmentareinthefirstcolumn,andtherespondents’averageratingsareinthesecond
one.OurrespondentsratedtheU.S.faraheadoftherest,withthescoreof9.19,andJapanis
thenext.Here,thestatisticalresultsofoursurveycloselyresembletheUNratings,except
foranunderestimationbyourrespondentsofthelevelofdevelopmentinJapan.However,
Inequality, Page 23 therelativepatternholdstrue,withtheU.S.andJapanaheadofothercountries.Nextto
themareChinaandBrazil,andthesetwocountriesarecloseintheirratingsforboththe
respondents’ratingsandtheUNratings.AtthebottomisPakistan,whichisalsoin
accordancewiththeUNratings.Ofcourse,statisticalerrorisinevitableinsurveydata.
Table3aboutHere
BeforeIexplaintheratingresultsoninequalityfromthesurvey,letmedescribethe
actualconditionofinequalityinthesecountries.Amongthelargecountries,themost
unequaloneisBrazil,partlyduetoitslowlevelofeducationalattainment.Also,Brazilhas
aninternationalizedeconomy,soreturnstoeducationarehigh,whichincreasessocial
inequality.Inaddition,withitslargesize,Brazilsuffersfromregionaldisparity.Between
ChinaandtheU.S.,inequalityishigherintheformerthaninthelatter.Pakistanhasalow
levelofinequality,andJapanhasthelowestinequalityinthegroup.
How,then,didtherespondentsformtheirratingopinionsonthelevelofinequalityin
oursurvey?Ageneralanalysisofthesubjectiveratingsshowsthattherespondentsbelieved
thatinequalityishigherintheUnitedStatesthaninChina.Theyconsideredthelevelof
inequalityhighinJapanbutthelowestinPakistan(seeTable3).Itisworthnotingthatthe
respondentsratedthelevelofinequalityinBrazilaslow,whichcontradictstheratings
providedbytheUN.Asdescribedabove,therespondentswereabletoaccuratelyratethe
levelsofdevelopmentinthesecountries,buttheywerenotknowledgeableofthelevelsof
inequalityinthesecountries.Sotheirinequalityratingswereinconsistentwiththe
objectiveindicators.However,wecanaskwhytheseordinaryChineseratedinequalitythis
wayinfurtheranalysesofthedata.
Chinaisundergoingdramatictransformations,includingatransformationfrombeing
underdevelopedtobeingrelativelydevelopedeconomically,andfrombeingrelativelyequal
tobeingunequalinthedistributionofincome.Beforetheeconomicreform,peoplewere
Inequality, Page 24 relativelypoorbutequal.Nowadays,asChinahasbecomemoredeveloped,inequalityhas
alsorisen.PerhapssomeChinesebelievethatthecurrentstatusoftheU.S.isChina’sfuture.
TheybelievethatatsuchahighlevelofinequalityChinaisonlyhalfwaythrough
development.IfChinaevercatchesupwiththeU.S.,itwillexperienceevenmoreinequality.
BecausetheU.S.ismoredevelopedthanChina,theybelievetheU.S.tobemoreunequal.We
alsoaskedinthesurveywhetherdevelopedcountrieshavehigherlevelsofinequalitythan
underdevelopedones,andmostoftherespondentsagreedthattheydo.
Wethenconductedastatisticalanalysisoftheresponsepatternstodevelopment
ratingsafterrank‐orderingthenumericalresponses,thatis,statingwhichcountryisthe
mostdeveloped,whichoneisthesecondmostdevelopedandsoon(seeTable4).Inthe
firstprevalentpattern,theU.S.isatthetop,followedbyJapan,Brazil,ChinaandPakistan.
34.11%oftherespondentschosethisresponsepattern.Thesecondpatternexchangedthe
ranksofBrazilandChinaandwaschosenby33.96%oftherespondents.Thethirdpattern
is,indescendingorder,Japan,theU.S.,Brazil,ChinaandPakistan,butonly2.18%ofthe
respondentschosethisone.Thefourthpatternissimilartopattern3butwiththeranksof
BrazilandChinaswitched.Ofalltherespondents,71.62%fallintothesefourpatterns.
Otherrank‐orderedcombinationsareirregularanduninterpretable,whichcanbeviewed
asmeasurementerrors.Withthesedata,wehopetoinvestigatetherelationshipbetween
theresponsepatternstoinequalityratingsandresponsepatternstodevelopmentratings
(seeTable5).Ouranalysisrevealsthattheyaresignificantlyassociated.Thereisapositive
correspondencebetweenresponsestotheinequalityscaleandthesameperson’sresponses
tothedevelopmentscale(seelines1‐4ofTable5).Thereisalsoanegativecorrespondence
patternshowingthatsomerespondents’inequalityratingscorrespondexactlytothe
oppositepatterntotheirdevelopmentratingsforthesamecountries.Forexample,if
respondentsrankedthedevelopmentlevelsasU.S.,Japan,Brazil,ChinaandPakistanfrom
Inequality, Page 25 hightolow,theyrankedtheinequalitylevelsintheoppositedirectionasPakistan,China,
Brazil,JapanandtheU.S.fromhightolow(seelines6‐9ofTable5).
Table4aboutHere
Table5aboutHere
Inbrief,wediscoveredthattheChineserespondents’ratingsoflevelsofdevelopment
forthefivedifferentcountriescloselyresembledtheratingsgivenbytheUnitedNations
withaslightunderratingforJapanandBrazil,particularlyforJapan.However,the
respondents’ratingsofinequalitylevelsinthefivecountrieswerenotatallinaccordance
withtheinequalitystatisticsreportedbytheUN.Wefoundthatquiteanumberofthe
respondentsseemtohavederivedtheirratingsofinequalityfromtheirratingsof
development.Howdotheyviewtherelationshipbetweeneconomicdevelopmentandsocial
inequality?Someseeapositiverelationship,butothersseeanegativeone.InChina’sown
experienceinitsrecenthistory,developmentandinequalityhaverisentogether.Thatisto
say,increasesineconomicgrowthandsocialinequalityhavebeensimultaneous.Thus,the
prevalentopinionamongtherespondentswasapositivecorrelationbetweenthetwo.The
resultreflectstherecentexperienceofChinaandthegovernment’spropaganda.Thisresult
alsosupportstheargumentthat,tomanyChinese,inequalityisanecessarypricefor
economicdevelopment.
3Conclusion
Isetforththreepropositionsoropinionsinthispaper.Firstly,collectiveagenciesare
largelyaccountableforinequalityinChina.Duetotheexistenceofcollectiveagenciesasa
mechanismthatgeneratesinequality,theboundaryofinequalityisstructuralratherthan
personal.Also,thevisibilityofinequalityisdiminishedindailylife,whichhelpstolessen
socialresentmentinthegeneralpopulation.Second,intermsofideology,althoughthereis
astrongmoralimperativeforequalityinChina(Wu,2009),Chinesetraditionalcultureis
Inequality, Page 26 actuallytolerantofinequality.Ofcourse,inmyview,people’sacceptanceofinequalityis
conditionalonthepropositionthatinequalityshouldbringwelfaretothegeneralpublic
andthatthereisthepossibilityforthemtomoveupinsocialstatusthroughindividual
efforts.InfluencedbyChinesetraditionalculture,manyChinesetodayfindinequality
acceptable.Third,someChinesebelievethateconomicgrowthitselfleadstoinequality:
sincedevelopmentiswhattheywant,inequalityisaninevitablebyproductofimproving
everyone’slivingcondition.Therefore,thoseunsatisfiedwithinequalitycanalsotolerate
inequalityinChinapassivelyandreluctantly.Basedonthesethreeconsiderations,I
conjecturethattheproblemofinequalityitselfalonewillnotcausesocialinstabilityforthe
nearfutureinChina.Thatistosay,althoughinequalityinChinaisincreasing,itsthreat
mightbeexaggerated.Inmyview,therearecertainmechanisms(e.g.politics,culture,
publicopinion,family,socialnetworkandsoon)moderatingsocialproblemscreatedby
inequality.Finally,itworthemphasizingthatmytentativeconclusionisfreefromany
politicalimplication.ItissimplymyunderstandingofinequalityinChina.
References
ChinaStatisticalInformationNetwork(中国统计信息网).2011.RetrievedSeptember1,2011.
(http://www.tjcn.org/plus/list.php?tid=5).
Han,Wenxiu.2004.“TheEvolutionofIncomeDistributionDisparitiesinChinaSincethe
ReformandOpening‐Up.”Pp.9‐25inIncomeDisparitiesinChina:AnOECDPerspective,
editedbyOrganisationforEconomicCo‐operationandDevelopment,Paris.
Hauser,SethandYuXie.2005.“TemporalandRegionalVariationinEarningsInequality:
UrbanChinainTransitionbetween1988and1995.”SocialScienceResearch34:44‐79.
Ho,Pingti.1954.“TheSaltMerchantsofYang‐Chou:AStudyofCommercialCapitalismin
EighteenthCenturyChina.”HarvardJournalofAsiaticStudies17:130‐168.
Inequality, Page 27 Ho,Pingti.1964.TheLadderofSuccessinImperialChina:AspectsofSocialMobility,1368‐
1911.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.
Lau,D.C.(tr.).1990.Mencius.Harmondsworth:Penguin.
NationalBureauofStatistics(国家统计局).2010a.ChinaCompendiumofStatistics1949‐
2008(新中国六十年统计资料汇编1949‐2008).Beijing:ChinaStatisticsPress(北京：中
国统计出版社).
NationalBureauofStatistics(国家统计局).2010b.ChinaStatisticalYearbook2010(中国统
计年鉴2010).Beijing:ChinaStatisticsPress.(北京：中国统计出版社).
Vidal,John.2008.“WealthGapCreatingaSocialTimeBomb.”TheGuardian,23October.
RetrievedMarch28,2008(http://www.guardiannews.com).
Wang,Feng.2008.BoundariesandCategories:RisingInequalityinPost‐SocialistChina.
Stanford,CA:StanfordUniversityPress.
Weber,Max.1951.TheReligionofChina:ConfucianismandTaoism.Glencoe,IL:FreePress.
Weber,Max.[1921]1978.EconomyandSociety:AnOutlineofInterpretiveSociology.Edited
byG.RothandC.Wittich.Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
MeasuringWorth.2009.RetrievedJune24,2009(http:www.measuringworth.com).
Wu,Xiaogang.2009.“IncomeInequalityandDistributiveJustice:AComparativeAnalysisof
MainlandChinaandHongKong.”TheChinaQuarterly200:1033‐1052.
Wu,XiaogangandDonaldTreiman.2004.“TheHouseholdRegistrationSystemandSocial
StratificationinChina:1955‐1996.”Demography41:363‐384.
Xie,YuandMirandaBrown.2011.“BetweenHeavenandEarth:DualAccountabilityofEast
HanChineseBureaucrats.”Society31(4):1‐28.[谢宇、董慕达.2011.天地之间：东汉官
员的双重责任.社会31(4):1‐28].(天地之间：东汉官员的双重责任).”Society《社会》
(inChinese)4:1‐28.
Xie,YuandEmilyHannum.1996.“RegionalVariationinEarningsInequalityinReform‐Era
UrbanChina.”AmericanJournalofSociology101:950‐992.
Xie,YuandGuangzhouWang.2009.“ChinesePeople’sBeliefsabouttheRelationship
betweenEconomicDevelopmentandSocialInequality.”ResearchReport09‐681,
Inequality, Page 28 PopulationStudiesCenter,UniversityofMichigan,AnnArbor,MI.RetrievedJune24,
2009(http://www.psc.isr.umich.edu/pubs/pdf/rr09‐681.pdf).
Xie,YuandXiaogangWu.2008.“DanweiProfitabilityandEarningsInequalityinUrban
China.”TheChinaQuarterly195:558‐581.
Zhao,Dingxin.2006.“InDefenseofMaxWeber:TheLogicofComparisonandPatternsof
ChineseHistory.”DepartmentofSociology,UniversityofChicago,Chicago,IL.
Unpublishedmanuscript.
Inequality, Page 29 Table1:PercentVarianceExplainedinLoggedEarnings
Viable
DF
City
2
EducationLevel
5
2
WorkingYears+WorkingYears2
Gender
1
CadreStatus
1
WorkingSector
3
Profitabilityofdanwei(linear)
1
Profitabilityofdanwei(dummies)
4
Notes:*p≤0.05;**p≤0.01;***p≤0.001.BasedonFtest.
R2
17.47***
7.82***
0.23
4.78***
3.08***
3.54***
12.52***
12.89***
R2(1)
19.12***
4.46***
0.05
3.05***
0.63***
1.8***
9.3***
R2(1)referstotheincrementalR2aftertheinclusionofDanwei'sfinancialsituation
(linear).
Source:XieandWu(2008),basedonasurveyinShanghai,WuhanandXi’anin1999.
Inequality, Page 30 Table2:AttitudesofResidentsinRemoteAreasonFactorsEffectingPersonal
EconomicWelfareSituation(n=633)
First%
Second%
CentralGovernment
41.61
12.03
Local(City/County)Government
8.54
31.33
DanweiorVillageCommittee
8.23
12.82
FamilyFactors
21.33
18.8
IndividualFactors
20.38
25.28
Note:“Now,pleaseconsideryoureconomicwelfareconditioningeneral.Therearemany
factorsinfluencinganindividual’seconomicwelfare.Inyourviewpointandaccording
toyourconsiderations,pleaserankthefollowingfivefactorsintermsoftheir
importance.(whichdoyouthinkisthe‘mostimportant’,whichdoyouthinkisthe
‘secondimportant’andsoon.)”
Inequality, Page 31 Table3:Respondents’RatingsofFiveCountriesonLevelsofDevelopmentand
Inequality,inComparisontoUNRatings.
Country
UNRatingof
AverageRatingof
Development
Development
(0‐1)
(0‐10)
China
0.768
5.56
Japan
0.949
7.79
Brazil
0.792
5.49
U.S.
0.948
9.19
Pakistan
0.539
3.80
Source:XieandWang(2009).
UNRatingof
Inequality
(Gini,0‐1)
0.447
0.249
0.580
0.408
0.306
AverageRating
ofInequality
(0‐10)
6.25
5.92
5.47
6.81
5.07
Inequality, Page 32 Table4:MainResponsePatternsofDevelopmentRating
Pattern
DescriptionofRankingOrder
Percentage
Number
Cumulative
Percentage
1
US≧Japan≧Brazil≧China≧Pakistan
34.11
34.11
2
US≧Japan≧China≧Brazil≧Pakistan
33.96
68.07
3
Japan≧US≧Brazil≧China≧Pakistan
2.18
70.25
4
Japan≧US≧China≧Brazil≧Pakistan
1.37
71.62
5
All116RemainingOtherCombinations
28.38
100.00
Source：XieandWang(2009).
Inequality, Page 33 Table5:MainResponsePatternsofInequalityRatingbyResponsePatternsto
DevelopmentRating
No.
InequalityResponsePattern
Description
ResponsePatterntoDevelopmentRating
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6.67
3.03
8.42
14.13
1
US≧Japan≧Brazil≧China≧Pakistan
25.58
8.32
2
US≧Japan≧China≧Brazil≧Pakistan
7.43
31.31 4.76
16.67
9.96
16.33
3
Japan≧US≧Brazil≧China≧Pakistan
0.43
0.67
8.57
3.03
0.29
0.69
4
Japan≧US≧China≧Brazil≧Pakistan
0.30
0.61
11.43
4.55
0.44
0.50
6
ReverseofPattern1
12.61
3.55
0.00
0.00
3.51
6.75
7
ReverseofPattern2
3.59
10.28
5.71
4.55
2.20
5.53
8
ReverseofPattern3
1.64
0.49
12.38
3.03
0.44
1.16
9
ReverseofPattern4
0.61
0.61
0.00
9.09
0.37
0.64
10
All112RemainingCombinations
47.81
44.16 50.48
56.06
74.38 54.28
Source:XieandWang(2009).
Inequality, Page 34 Figure1:TrendsinGDPandPer‐CapitaGDP,
1952‐2008(in2008RMB)
35,000
GDP
(Billion, RMB)
Per‐Capita GDP (RMB)
30,000
25,000
20,000
25,000
20,000
GDP
Per‐Capita GDP
15,000
15,000
10,000
10,000
5,000
5,000
0
0
1952 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008
Year
Source: National Bureau of Statistics (2010a, 2010b). Note: Adjustment has been done for the data of 2005‐2008, on the basis of the 2nd Economic Census. Inequality, Page 35 Figure 2: Trend in Gini Coefficient
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
1970
Overall
Rural
Urban
1980
1990
Year
Source: Han(2004).
2000
2010
Inequality, Page 36 35000
30000
25000
20000
Figure 3: Cross‐province Comparison of Per‐Capita Income Separately for Urban/Rural Residents, 2010 per capita income of urban residents
（RMB）
per capita income of rural residents（
RMB）
15000
10000
0
Shanghai
Beijing
Zhejiang
Guangdong
Tianjin
Jiangsu
Fujian
Shandong
Inner…
Liaoning
Chongqing
Guangxi
Hunan
Hebei
Yunnan
Henan
Hubei
Shanxi
Ningxia
Anhui
Jiangxi
Shaanxi
Jilin
Sichuan
Hainan
Tibet
Guizhou
Qinghai
Heilongjiang
Xinjiang
Gansu
5000
Source:ChinaStatisticalInformationNetwork(2011).
Inequality, Page 37 Figure 4: Earnings Differentials by Danwei Profitability
Earnings
14000
12000
10000
Observed
Observed Linear
Adjusted Linear
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Very poor Relatively
poor
Average
Fairly good Very good
Danwei Profitability