Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition) ›› 2024, Vol. 60 ›› Issue (2): 75-88.doi: 10.16088/j.issn.1001-6597.2024.02.006

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Social Construction, Feedback Effects, and Stagnation of Delayed Retirement Age Policies

GUO Lei, BAI Chen   

  1. School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
  • Received:2023-10-16 Published:2024-04-02

Abstract: Since the Third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, China has repeatedly proposed the policy of “raising the retirement age in progressive steps”. However, to this day, a nationwide policy has not yet been introduced. Therefore, the article takes the theory of social construction and policy design as the theoretical basis and analytical framework, and employs 54 documents (1951—2021) issued by China’s central government as samples to examine how the social construction of the target group affects the process of delaying retirement age policies through feedback effects. Research has found that cadres and senior professional and technical personnel are positively constructed and benefit from policies, resulting in positive feedback. Policies are only applicable to this group for a long time, while ordinary workers are positively constructed but suffer from policy damage, resulting in negative feedback and the inability to introduce national policies, thus leading to policy stagnation; the long-term accumulation of positive feedback effects promotes a shift in social construction, and social environmental factors change policy cognition, thereby driving policy progress. Therefore, policy makers should be determined to continuously optimize policy design and respond to the social construction shift of target groups; the Party and the central government should actively respond to the strategy of aging of population by incorporating the policy of delaying retirement age and shaping public policy awareness; local governments should actively carry out policy experiments and summarize experiences and lessons learned. These measures all contribute to accelerating the policy process.

Key words: aging of population, delay the retirement age, social construction, feedback effect, target group, policy process

CLC Number:  D669;F249.2
[1] 张熠,张书博,陶旭辉.中国退休制度设计:基于激励、保险和再分配效应的研究[J].管理世界,2022(7):90-108.
[2] Nordheim V F,Kvist J. Regulating the retirement age — Lessons from Nordic pension policy approaches[J]. Regulation & Governance.2023(3):644-657.
[3] 段欣言,高建伟,李淑清.延迟退休对职工效用最大化的影响——基于“S”型效用函数的分析[J].人口与经济,2022(1):106-120.
[4] 张艳,杨德才.延迟退休对居民消费的影响——一个包含遗赠动机的模型[J].中央财经大学学报,2021(8):74-84.
[5] 郭凯明,余靖雯,龚六堂.家庭隔代抚养文化、延迟退休年龄与劳动力供给[J].经济研究,2021(6):127-141.
[6] 穆怀中.延迟退休年龄与财政养老支出优化效应[J].财政研究,2022(5):96-110.
[7] 曾益,魏晨雪,李晓琳,等.征收体制改革、延迟退休年龄与养老保险基金可持续性——基于“减税降费”背景的实证研究[J].公共管理学报,2019(4):108-118.
[8] 严成樑.延迟退休、内生出生率与经济增长[J].经济研究,2016(11):28-43.
[9] 耿志祥,孙祁祥.延迟退休年龄、内生生育率与养老金[J].金融研究,2020(5):77-94.
[10] 刘相波,马超,赵忠.降低养老保险缴费率和延迟退休政策组合的双重红利[J].中国人民大学学报,2021(6):115-128.
[11] 邱牧远,王天宇,梁润.延迟退休、人力资本投资与养老金财政平衡[J].经济研究,2020(9):122-137.
[12] 杨俊.养老金奖惩机制与延迟退休——基于苏南C市女性劳动者的数据研究[J].社会保障评论,2021(3):51-61.
[13] 张熠,张书博.数量干预还是价格干预?——延迟退休的策略及福利效果[J].经济学(季刊),2020(4):1419-1440.
[14] 于长永.延迟退休年龄:基于退休源头视角的争议透视[J].经济社会体制比较,2021(1):11-21.
[15] 汪伟,王文鹏.预期寿命、养老保险降费与老年劳动供给:兼论中国退休政策改革[J].管理世界,2021(9):119-134.
[16] 武俊伟.延迟退休何以“延迟”?——基于多源流框架的决策议程分析[J].西南大学学报(社会科学版),2021(3):59-70.
[17] Schneider A,Ingram H. Social construction of target populations:implications for politics and policy[J]. American Political Science Review,1993(2):334-347.
[18] Schneider A,Sidney M. What is next for policy design and social construction theory?[J]. Policy Studies Journal,2009(1):103-119.
[19] Pierce J J,Siddiki S,Jones M D,et al. Social construction and policy design:a review of past applications[J]. Policy Studies Journal,2014(1):1-29.
[20] 郭磊,胡晓蒙.住房公积金缴存比例的调整对谁有利?——基于社会建构理论的分析[J].公共行政评论,2020(5):23-43.
[21] Schneider A,Ingram H. Social constructions,anticipatory feedback strategies,and deceptive public policy[J]. Policy Studies Journal,2019(2):206-236.
[22] Thomann E,Rapp C. Who deserves solidarity? Unequal treatment of immigrants in Swiss welfare policy delivery[J]. Policy Studies Journal,2018(3):531-552.
[23] Merry M K. Narrative strategies in the gun policy debate:exploring proximity and social construction[J]. Policy Studies Journal,2018(4):747-770.
[24] Bell E. Deserving to whom? Investigating heterogeneity in the impact of social constructions of target populations on support for affirmative action[J]. Policy Studies Journal,2021(1):268-299.
[25] Schneider A,Ingram H. A response to Peter deLeon[J]. Public Administration Review,2005(5):638-640.
[26] 李文钊.民主的政策设计理论:探究政策过程中的社会建构效应[J].学海,2019(1):151-162.
[27] 郝玉玲.残疾形象建构对公共政策设计的影响——基于美国和德国残疾人福利政策的多案例研究[J].社会保障评论,2022(2):144-159.
[28] Hudson R B,Gonyea J G. Baby boomers and the shifting political construction of old age[J]. The Gerontologist,2012(2):272-282.
[29] 张勇杰.目标群体的社会建构如何转化为公共政策——一个政策议程嵌套的解释框架[J].甘肃行政学院学报,2019(1):14-25.
[30] 李斯旸,朱亚鹏.目标群体社会建构的转型与政策变迁——基于两种传染病的比较研究[J].公共管理与政策评论,2021(6):24-36.
[31] 蔡长昆,王玉.制度、话语框架与政策设计:以网约车政策为例[J].公共行政评论,2019(5):47-70.
[32] 郭磊.基本养老保险挤出了企业年金吗——基于政策反馈理论的实证研究[J].社会保障评论,2018(1):65-81.
[33] 徐自强,李增元.延迟退休政策问题建构中的网络舆情变迁研究[J].河海大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2017(6):75-83.
[34] 郑秉文.职工基本养老保险全国统筹的实现路径与制度目标[J].中国人口科学,2022(2):2-16.
[35] 郑功成.中国养老金:制度变革、问题清单与高质量发展[J].社会保障评论,2020(1):3-18.
[1] LI Wen-zhao. Actor-centered Institutionalism: Exploring the Interaction Effect in Policy Process [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2020, 56(3): 19-42.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 1 -10 .
[2] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 18 -24 .
[3] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 25 -30 .
[4] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 31 -36 .
[5] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 37 -41 .
[6] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 42 -47 .
[7] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 48 -54 .
[8] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 55 -60 .
[9] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 61 -66 .
[10] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 67 -75 .