Does Airport Preferential Policy Aggravate the Competition of Aviation Hubs in Central and Western China? Based on the Investigation of 78 Airports

China’s regional economic competition is intensifying; in particular, the cluster development of air transport, high-end manufacturing, and modern service industries is closely related to the construction of regional airports. Local governments have listed aviation hubs as the hardcore advantage of high-quality growth in the new era, but it may also lead to excessive convergence and preferential system competition. Based on the “GDP competition” of local governments in China, this paper uses panel data of 78 airports in mainland China from 2001 to 2018 and tries to explore the causes of airport preferential policies. The Synthetic Control Method is used to study the influence of preferential policies on airport passenger and cargo flow, and then the Spatial Durbin Model is used to verify the spatial spillover effect of aviation hubs, which may be magnified by the preferential policies. This paper finds that the impact of preferential policies on airports in central and western China is mainly reflected in the increase of cargo throughput, and there is a spatial siphon effect on cargo throughput between airports. The implementation of the preferential policy enhances this spatial siphon effect, which in turn leads to more fierce competition. The research results show that the preferential policies, issued in central and western aviation economy, have shown a trend of evolving in the direction of vicious competition. Before the airport preferential system produces more negative effects, it should be corrected in time, and each aviation economic zone in the central and western regions should be scientifically coordinated and reasonably planned.

Adivasis, Preferential Policy and the State in Odisha

The Indian state has ratified preferential policies enshrined in the Indian Constitution by ensuring a reserved quota for geographically isolated and underprivileged communities such as adivasis, thereby attempting to integrate them within mainstream society. Computing the data available on the impact of a preferential policy on the adivasis of Odisha, this article argues that although the policy has been relatively useful in securing employment, adivasis of the state remain underrepresented in aggregate numbers and in different groups of services. The article also indicates the existence of a regional disparity even among the adivasis of Odisha with regard to their representation in elite government employment. The real problem is not the preferential policy per se but its poor implementation, abject poverty, bureaucratic apathy and the lack of political will to implement preferential policies effectively. In fact, the practice of preferential policies has sporadically led to violent community conflicts in Odisha and impacted the changing relationship between policy and politics.

From free to fee: Neoliberalising preferential policy measures for minority education in China

In both China and in the United States, policies of 'positive discrimination' were originally intended to lessen educational and economic inequalities, and to provide equal opportunities. As with affirmative action in the American context, China's 'preferential policies' are broad-reaching, but are best known for taking ethnic background into consideration for university admissions. The rhetoric of China's preferential policy discourse has remained surprisingly constant but shifts to a market-economy and incorporation of neoliberal elements have resulted in fee-based reforms that discourage inclusion of poorer students. In addition, as ethnic minority students principally from Western China compete to enter 'self-funded' college preparatory programmes, public funding is being directed towards the achievement of 'world-class' universities overwhelmingly concentrated in Eastern China. In contrast, in the United States, the difficulty of defending affirmative action in the face of a neoliberal climate has resulted in a shift in policy. If in China the policy remains even as the 'rule' has changed (Arno 2009), in contrast, in American institutions the rhetoric has shifted away from affirmative action in favour of diversity but efforts to hold on to the rules that promote equal opportunities remain.