East Asia

, Volume 35, Issue 1, pp 43–58 | Cite as

The Growth of Chinese Think Tanks and the Question of Crime



This paper reviews several of the key issues that underlie the development and expansion of think tanks in China from both a domestic and international perspective. Substantively, the review focuses on the need to develop criminological think tanks in China due to the well-documented relationship between rapid urbanization, social displacement, and crime. Though work on urbanization, social disorganization, and crime has existed for over half a decade in Western criminology, it suffers from a lack of research outside of the Western and usually more specifically American, cultural context. To advance this call for research, the paper identifies 14 generative research programs in the areas of the Routine Activities Theory, Social Bonds Theory, and Institutional Anomie Theory pursuable by Chinese criminological think tanks. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of some potential barriers to the successful production and dissemination of criminological research in China.


Think tanks Guanxi Social capital China Criminology 


  1. 1.
    Xi, Jinping. (2017). Secure a Decisive Victory in Building a Moderately Prosperous Society in All Respects and Strive for the Great Success of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. Address to the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China.
  2. 2.
    McGann, J.G. (2016). 2016 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report. Resource document. University of Pennsylvania.
  3. 3.
    MendizabalE. (2016) Think Tanks in China: A Golden Age? Resource document. On Think Tanks.
  4. 4.
    Chan, J.L. (2017). China’s knowledge strategy: 100 new think tanks, one school of thought. Public Money & Management, 37(4), 240–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Osnos, E. (2014). Age of ambition: chasing fortune, truth, and faith in the new China., New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chamlin, M. B., &Cochran, J. K. (1995). Assessing Messner and Rosenfeld’s institutional anomie theory: A partial test. Criminology, 33(3), 411–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Savolainen, J. (2000). Inequality, welfare state, and homicide: Further support for the institutional anomie theory. Criminology, 38(4), 1021–1042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maume, M. O., &Lee, M. R. (2003). Social institutions and violence: a sub-national test of institutional anomie theory. Criminology, 41(4), 1137–1172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bjerregaard, B., &Cochran, J. K. (2008). A cross-national test of institutional anomie theory: do the strength of other social institutions mediate or moderate the effects of the economy on the rate of crime. Western Criminology Review, 9(1), 31–48.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Messner, S., &Rosenfeld, R. (2012). Crime and the American dream. Boston: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: how Asians and Westerners think differently...and why, New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Putnam, R. D. (Ed.) (2002). Democracies in flux: the evolution of social capital in contemporary society. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wing Lo, T., &Jiang, G. (2006). Inequality, crime and the floating population in China. Asian Journal of Criminology, 1(2), 103–118.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Taormina, R. J., &Gao, J. H. (2010). A research model for guanxi behavior: antecedents, measures, and outcomes of Chinese social networking. Social Science Research,39(6), 1195–1212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. The American Economic Review, 45(1), 1–28.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang, L., Messner, S. F., &Lu, J. (2007). Criminological research in contemporary China: Challenges and lessons learned from a large-scale criminal victimization survey. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 51(1), 110–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bakken, B. (Ed.) (2018). Crime and the Chinese dream. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xu, J. (2017). Legitimization imperative: the production of crime statistics in Guangzhou, China. British Journal Of Criminology, 58 (1), 155–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    People Daily’s Online. (2017). China has one of the lowest murder rates in the world. China Daily.
  21. 21.
    Overseas Security Advisory Council. (2017). China 2017 Crime & Safety Report: Shanghai. Resource Document. United States Department of State Bureau of Diplomatic Security.
  22. 22.
    Zhang, L., Messner, S. F., &Liu, J. (2008). A critical review of recent literature on crime and criminal justice in China: research findings, challenges, and prospects. Crime, Law and Social Change, 50(3), 125–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cheng, J., Liu, J., &Wang, J. (2017). Domestic migration, home rentals, and crime rates in China. The Journal of Chinese Sociology, 4(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Song, W., &Liu, D. (2013). Exploring spatial patterns of property crime risks in Changchun, China. International Journal of Applied Geospatial Research, 4(3), 80–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stone, D. (2007). Recycling bins, garbage cans or think tanks? Three myths regarding policy analysis institutes. Public Administration, 85(2), 259–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Goodman, J.C. (2005). What is a think tank? Resource Document. National Center for Policy Analysis.
  27. 27.
    Stone, D. (2001). Think tanks, global lesson-drawing and networking social policy ideas. Global Social Policy, 1(3), 338–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Abb, P. (2013). China’s foreign policy think tanks: changing roles and structural conditions. German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
  29. 29.
    Abb, P. (2015). China’s foreign policy think tanks: institutional evolution and changing roles. Journal of Contemporary China, 24(93), 531–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Menegazzi, S. (2018). Think tanks in China. In S.Menegazzi (Ed.), Rethinking Think Tanks in Contemporary China (pp. 59–106). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Li, C. (2017). The power of ideas: the rising influence of thinkers and think tanks in China. Hackensack: World Scientific PublishingCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Weaver, R. K. (1989). The changing world of think tanks. Political Science & Politics, 22(3), 563–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Menegazzi, S. (2013). Reinterpreting civil society in contemporary China: think tanks, hybrid institutions and the political role of experts. Resource document. Italian Political Science Association.
  34. 34.
    Hebenton, B., &Jou, S. (2010). Criminology in and of China: discipline and power. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 26(1), 7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bentham, J. ([1709] 1907). An Introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Park, R., Burgess, E.&McKenzie, R. (1925). The city. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Elliott, M., MerrillF. (1934). Social disorganization. New York: Harper & Brothers;Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Merton, R. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review3: 672–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wei, L., &Kim, J (2014). Urban China: toward efficient, inclusive, and sustainable urbanization. Resource document. World Bank and Development Research Center of the State Council.
  40. 40.
    Kristof, N., Wudunn, S. (1995). China wakes: the struggle for the soul of a rising power. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Cohen, L. E., &Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44 (4), 588–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sherman, L. W., Gartin, P. R., &Buerger, M. E. (1989). Hot spots of predatory crime: routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology, 27(1), 27–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kennedy, L. W., &Forde, D. R. (1990). Routine activities and crime: an analysis of victimization in Canada. Criminology, 28(1), 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Parker, R. N., &McCaffree, K. J. (2012).Alcohol and violence: The nature of the relationship and the promise of prevention. Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pratt, T. C., Holtfreter, K., &Reisig, M. D. (2010). Routine online activity and internet fraud targeting: Extending the generality of routine activity theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47(3), 267–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hirschi, T. (1998). Social Bond Theory. In F. T.Cullen, &R.Agnew (Eds.) Criminological Theory: Past to Present (pp. 167–174). Los Angeles: Roxbury.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Jiang, S., &Lambert, E. G. (2009). Views of formal and informal crime control and their correlates in China. International Criminal Justice Review,19(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Zhuo, Y. (2012). Social capital and satisfaction with crime control in urban China. Asian Journal of Criminology, 7(2), 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zoutewelle-Terovan, M., van derGeest, V., Liefbroer, A., &Bijleveld, C. (2014). Criminality and family formation: Effects of marriage and parenthood on criminal behavior for men and women. Crime & Delinquency, 60(8), 1209–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Messner, S. F., &Rosenfeld, R. (1997). Political restraint of the market and levels of criminal homicide: a cross-national application of institutional-anomie theory. Social Forces, 75(4), 1393–1416.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Callero, P. L. (2017). The myth of individualism: How social forces shape our lives. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Nielsen, F., &Alderson, A. S. (1997). The Kuznets curve and the great U-turn: income inequality in US counties, 1970 to 1990. American Sociological Review, 62(1), 12–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    EnriqueMendizabal. (2012). Chinese think tanks are more intellectually independent than you think. On Think Tanks.
  54. 54.
    Xufeng, Z. (2009). The influence of think tanks in the Chinese policy process: Different ways and mechanisms. Asian Survey, 49(2), 333–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of North TexasDentonUSA

Personalised recommendations