Evolution of Internet Governance in China: Actors and Paradigms

Abstract

China’s Internet governance is not immutable, nor is it dominated by the government, as portrayed by Western scholars. Based on an analysis of Beijing’s Internet governance policies and practices, this paper focuses on the evolution of China’s Internet governance from the non-governmental stage through the government control stage to the multi-actor coordination stage. In terms of governance paradigm, Beijing’s Internet governance is transitioning from one-way management to multi-dimensional governance, from offline management to online and offline integration, and from “prior control” to “panoramic governance.” In terms of governance system, Beijing’s Internet governance has evolved from an ad hoc pattern through problem-solving to a strategic planning paradigm. Internet governance in China has demonstrated three features, namely, pragmatism, state centralism, and preemption. These characteristics have paved the way for the rapid development of China’s Internet but also present many challenges.

Regulating Zhibo in China: Exploring multiple levels of self‐regulation and stakeholder dynamics

“…As examined, peer regulators regulate channels with their own criteria and are rewarded with virtual gifts; associations supervise the live streaming industries and get sponsorships from platform companies and ministries; agencies regulate their affiliated streamers to keep them streaming for profit. Therefore, the dominant preemptive or responsible self-regulation model, which hinged on companies strengthening their internal regulation in response to external regulation (Flew & Gillett, 2021), is no longer applicable as the regulatory power has diffused among several actors at different levels in this multiactor coordination stage (Cuihong & Liting, 2021). In addition, compared with a multistakeholder model, accountability in China has not yet been delegated to the regulatory actors-it remains highly centralized since the companies are the only ones to take sole accountability, while the associations, peer regulators and agencies are not accountable for their regulatory activities.…”

“…It has been argued that during Xi's administration, internet governance in China has turned from the government control stage to the ‘multiactor coordination’ stage, which incorporates multiple stakeholders in the regulation process with the state. While the state still maintains its centrality, it delegates the regulatory activities and responsibilities to stakeholders within a multilayered system, making the regulation more panoramic (Cuihong & Liting, 2021; Cai & Wang, 2022).…”

Military AIs impacts on international strategic stability

“…The emergence of artificial intelligence has less impact on the inherent strategic stability of nuclear weapons at its core. At present, there are still limitations in data analysis in environmental reconnaissance, target positioning, and early warning technology for nuclear weapons [6]. In the foreseeable future, nuclear weapons used for a second strike still can survive a first nuclear strike under the information age, and then break through missile defenses for retaliatory strikes on a specified region [6].…”

“…At present, there are still limitations in data analysis in environmental reconnaissance, target positioning, and early warning technology for nuclear weapons [6]. In the foreseeable future, nuclear weapons used for a second strike still can survive a first nuclear strike under the information age, and then break through missile defenses for retaliatory strikes on a specified region [6]. This means that nuclear deterrence based on the second-strike capability remains effective.…”