Author(s)

YanRunYu Liang, YaQian Zhao, ShiYu Xie^*

Affiliation(s)

School of Elderly Care Services and Management, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing 210023, Jiangsu, China.

Corresponding Author

ShiYu Xie

ABSTRACT

Welfare management aims to foster a balance of power and cross-disciplinary synergy between the public sector and welfare actors at the macro level, while at the micro level, it seeks to create a synergistic impact on welfare outcomes. This logic is relevant to analyzing whether China has developed a public service system that prioritizes those most in need of support while integrating welfare quality with administrative performance in the process of outsourcing public services.As a community with both security and administrative needs, the sheltered housing community faces the dilemma of a lack of a welfare system in terms of its own welfare, public welfare, and the complexity of its residents.This thesis examines the extent to which the purchase of public services by the Public sector as a welfare delivery tool can avoid the "welfare trap" that breeds the new urban poor, using one of the largest subsidised housing communities in Eastern China as a case study. The study finds that the community as a whole is characterised by a mismatch between the supply and demand of public services, a lack of professionalism in social organisations and a constant iteration of old and new projects.

KEYWORDS

Welfare management; Public service system; Public Service Agencies; Affordable housing community

CITE THIS PAPER

YanRunYu Liang, YaQian Zhao, ShiYu Xie. The choice preference of public service agencies in Chinese affordable housing communities: an explanatory framework of welfare management. Trends in Social Sciences and Humanities Research. 2024, 2(9): 45-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61784/tsshr3089.

REFERENCES

[1] Bogdon AS, Can A. Indicators of local housing affordability: Comparative and spatial approaches. Real Estate Economics, 1997, 25: 43-80.

[2] Hamidi S, Ewing R, Renne, J. How Affordable is HUD Affordable Housing? Housing Policy Debate, 2016, 226(3): 437-455.

[3] Brown K, Kenny S, Turner B, et al. Rhetorics of welfare: Uncertainty, choice and voluntary associations. Springer, 2000.

[4] Henman, Fenger M. Administering Welfare Reform: International Transformations in Welfare management. Bristol: The Policy Press, 2006: 287.

[5] Dornan P, Hudson J. Welfare management in the Surveillance Society: A Positive-realistic Cyber Criticality View. Social Policy and Administration, 2003, 37: 468-482.

[6] Glendinning C, Powell M, Rummery K. Partnerships, New Labour and the governance of welfar. Policy pr, 2002: 113.

[7] Johnson N. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press. 1987: 58.

[8] Kuhnle S, Selle P. Government and Voluntary Organizations: A Relational Perspective, in Kuhnle.S.; Selle, P.Government and Voluntary Organizations. London: Avebury, 1992: 1-33.

[9] Kim J W. Dynamics of the Welfare Mix in the Republic of Korea: An Expenditure Study between 1990 and 2001. International Social Security Review, 2005, 58: 1-26.

[10] Gurran N, Whitehead C. Planning and affordable housing in Australia and the UK: A comparative perspective. Housing studies, 2011: 26,7-8, 1193-1214.

[11] Milligan V, Phibbs P, Gurran N. et al. Approaches to Evaluation of Affordable Housing Initiatives in Australia. National Research Venture 3: Housing Affordability for Lower Income Australians. Research Paper, 2007, 7.

[12] Hood C. A public management for all seasons. Public Administration, 1991, 69: 1, 3-19.

[13] Domberger S. Contracting out by the public sector: theory, evidence, prospects. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 1997, 13(4): 67-78.

[14] Le Grand J, Bartlett  W. Quasi-markets and Social Policy. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1993: 168.

[15] Kettl D F. Sharing power: Public governance and private markets. Brookings Institution Press, 2011.

[16] Durkheim é. De la division du travail social. F. Alcan, 1922: 135.

[17] Siverbo S. The purchaser‐provider split in principle and practice: experiences from Sweden. Financial Accountability & Management, 2004, 20(4): 401-420.

[18] Gottschalk P, McLanahan S, Sandefur GD. The dynamics and intergenerational transmission of poverty and welfare participation. Social Stratification, Routledge, 2019: 378-389.

[19] Salamon L M. Global Civil Society:Dimensions of the Nonprofit Sector, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies, 1999: 34.

[20] Koning P, Heinrich C J. Creaming-skimming, parking and other intended and unintended effects of high-powered, performance-based contracts. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2013, 32(3): 461-483.

[21] Bovaird T. The ins and outs of outsourcing and insourcing: what have we learnt from the past 30 years? Public Money & Management, 2016, 36(1): 67-74.

[22] Damm C. The third sector delivering employment services: an evidence review. Working Paper, University of Birmingham, 2012.

[23] Susin S. Rent vouchers and the price of low-income housing. Journal of Public Economics, 1999, 83(1): 109-152.

[24] Sen A. Development as freedom. The globalization and development reader: Perspectives on development and global change. 2014: 525.

[25] Gareth S, Political marketing: segmentation, brand and competitive strategies in the UK, Optical. Engineering, 2009, 41(7): 1586-1602.