Resumo Este artigo oferece uma caracterização detalhada do sistema de proteção social na China com foco nos sistemas públicos de saúde e de educação, descrevendo as reformas, os programas implementados, os resultados alcançados e seus principais problemas no período entre 1980 e 2015. A análise utiliza os sistemas de saúde e de educação como proxy do Estado de bem-estar social que se desenha na China desde a virada do século, visto que reformas similares têm sido levadas a cabo em outras áreas, como no mercado de trabalho e na previdência. Este artigo realiza ainda uma comparação qualitativa com as tipologias de regimes de bem-estar social desenvolvidas pela literatura tanto para países ocidentais quanto para países do leste asiático.
This article contributes to the debate on income and wealth distribution in China by analyzing the main characteristics of the Chinese accumulation pattern that determine its distributive dynamics in a comparative perspective. After a period of rapid growth of inequalities, coupled with improved living conditions for all distribution deciles, inequalities have stabilized in China since the mid-2000s. Globally, China is today in a distributive pattern worse than Western Europe or Japan, but it is more egalitarian than the United States and far from the world inequality frontier defined by Brazil, India, South Africa and the Middle East. In this article, we scrutinize three characteristics of the regime of accumulation in China that mitigate the capital-concentrating tendency: 1. the financialization process with Chinese characteristics, 2. the strategic share of State ownership in the economy, 3. its trajectory over the agrarian question.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.