Year: 2020
Type: article
Abstract: Although the party‐state has embarked on a mission to increase elder care services, evaluating this development according to different sectors demonstrates certain challenges. Official statistics do not include sector‐specific information, and while provider websites suggest that elder care services are largely in public hands, Chinese experts argue that they are mostly “civilian‐run.” How can we explain these discrepancies in data on Chinese elder care? Drawing on the concept of hybridization and triangulating quantitative and qualitative data, I argue that the party‐state's efforts to “socialize” elder care provision has resulted in hybridization within the industry which blurs the line between care providers and obfuscates the stark role of the state in elder care service provision. During the implementation of state‐initiated hybridization, providers misclassify their ownership type to benefit from financial incentives or circumvent political control, resulting in even greater hybridization and fragmentation on the ground.
Source: Social Policy and Administration
DOI: 10.1111/spol.12616
Author: Christina Maags
Institution: University of Sheffield
Language: English
Subfield: General Health Professions
Field: Health Professions
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
Estimated APC paid: $3,500
OpenAlex ID: W3028512843