No abstract

This article considers how autocrats decide to expand or narrow the issue diversity of their policy agenda during a period of political liberalization. Prior studies have two competing perspectives. First, political liberalization increases the social and political freedom that enhances information exchange, and thus expands issue diversity. Second, political liberalization decreases government's control of the legislature and thus narrows the issue diversity. This article offers a novel theoretical perspective by combining these two countervailing theories. Specifically, it predicts a diminishing marginal benefit of information exchange and an increasing marginal bargaining cost. As such, this article argues that issue diversity follows a negative quadratic (inverted‐U) relationship as the regimes liberalize. The analysis of a new and unique dataset of Hong Kong's legislative agenda (1975 to 2016) offers support for this theory. This study sheds light on policy‐making in authoritarian regimes and democracies, and advances the theory of information processing.

In this article, we review the dynamic role of state and nonstate actors in governance. We first discuss the main arguments for and against the state being the main actor in governance in recent literature. Then, we review some of the literature about the changing role of state and nonstate actors in response to the 2007–08 global financial crisis from 2011 to 2015. The two themes under examination are, first, more control over financial markets and second, austerity measures. They illustrate different trajectories of governance that go beyond the now well‐established New Public Management paradigm of public sector reforms. Our review shows that no single actor provides the best mode of governance for all circumstances. Instead, governance is hybrid and dynamic. The mode of governance is dependent on the circumstances under which an actor is more capable of interacting with other actors to provide public services.

People may experience a heightened level of stress reactions during a pandemic event and in an isolated social environment. A multi-national survey about such mental health information about COVID-19 was conducted in May 2020 across six Asian regions: Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand. Data were collected from a population representative sample of 11,895 adults on their stress symptoms and reactions to COVID-19 and the related public health measures. 59.1% of the respondents showed at least one substantial stress symptom. The situation was particularly worrying in South Korea, where 75% of the respondents reported substantial stress symptoms. Respondents who were young, educated, lived in an urban area, had a high socio-economic status, had a history of chronic illness or mental illness, or who lived with a pregnant woman, elderly or children were most vulnerable to stress during the pandemic. Stress reactions showed a positive relationship with the amount of time spent following news about the COVID-19 outbreak. Asian adults coped with their stress by preparing safety equipment and extra daily commodities (62.4%) and by following government-issued public health measures (60.1%). Most Asian (71%) also frequently checked on the safety of family members and friends to keep each other safe. The COVID-19 pandemic and the associated stringent public health measures have largely increased the prevalence of substantial stress symptoms across multiple Asian regions. Governments should prepare this mental health pandemic and the associated social repercussions.