Aging & Social Change: Ninth Interdisciplinary Conference

Abstract

This is part of my PhD research, which is inspired by the observation of very different policy responses to the central instruction on long-term care (LTC) provision in Beijing and Shanghai despite their significant similarities in population ageing challenge, economic development, fiscal capacity, and institutional structure. In fact, two sites differ from policy problem conceptualization through interpreting the central instructions and policy learning based on local contexts. Berman (2013) argues that policymaking is about power as well as dealing with uncertainty and ideas help agents to act in spite of uncertainty (Blyth, 2002). This is particularly true for China which has been experiencing fundamental transitions in every term. Policy learning is a critical source of ideas by obtaining information and knowledge and it is highly valued as a precious experience. However, policy learning is not neutral. It serves multiple goals and different types of policy learning have different influences on subsequent policies in two sites. By analysing 25 in-depth interviews with policy makers in two sites, this paper gives a full picture of LTC problem conceptualization in two sites and reveals learning processes and the effects by solving three questions: who does the learning, what and where to learn and learn for what, and what effects (Bennett and Howlett, 1992). The conclusion is that policy learning is selective and thus highly political. It can either be supportive or opponent evidence for certain policy ideas depending on the contents of learning, which are largely decided by policy makers.