Search results

Due to climate change and an increasing concentration of the world’s population in vulnerable areas, how to manage catastrophe risk efficiently and cover disaster losses fairly is still a universal dilemma.

This paper applies a law and economic approach.

China’s mechanism for managing catastrophic disaster risk is in many ways unique. It emphasizes government responsibilities and works well in many respects, especially in disaster emergency relief. Nonetheless, China’s mechanism which has the vestige of a centrally planned economy needs reform.

I propose a catastrophe insurance market-enhancing framework which marries the merits of both the market and government to manage catastrophe risks. There are three pillars of the framework: (i) sustaining a strong and capable government; (ii) government enhancement of the market, neither supplanting nor retarding it; (iii) legalizing the relationship between government and market to prevent government from undermining well-functioning market operations. A catastrophe insurance market-enhancing framework may provide insights for developing catastrophe insurance in China and other transitional nations.

First, this paper analyzes China’s mechanism for managing catastrophic disaster risks and China’s approach which emphasizes government responsibilities will shed light on solving how to manage catastrophe risk efficiently and cover disaster losses fairly. Second, this paper starts a broader discussion about government stimulation of developing catastrophe insurance and this framework can stimulate attention to solve the universal dilemma.

The paper provides an overview of material helpful in placing the subsequent papers in context, as well as a summary of the research contributions made by the individual papers themselves.

We begin with a timeline of China’s Economic Reform, including both major events that permitted the opening and expansion of the nation’s economy, and important milestones of the historical movement. We then consider the impact of philosophy and culture (particularly, Confucianism and socialism) on China’s society and government, which leads naturally to certain observations regarding the political-economic model in which state-owned enterprises play a central role. In the final section, we briefly summarize the contents of the remaining papers.

Although a large number of Chinese libraries keep some sort of electronic publications, mainly formal publications on CD‐ROM and online, the usage is quite different from one library to another. While the hardcopy business process is mature, the rules and regularities of electronic publications in libraries are under development; many business models are on a trial basis. This paper plans to investigate what and how many of these electronic materials should be bought and brought to the users, and how they are used, which are still embarrassing questions for librarians.

The authors made an inquiry into the current status of formal electronic publications, including e‐books and e‐journals at the two major library groups: public and university libraries, as found out from the explanation of the gap by literature analysis and interview.

Through the survey on a few leading libraries of China, we found the big usage gap of e‐journals in public versus university libraries in China. The factors that cause the usage difference are that public libraries have diversified reader needs, lack of general‐purpose e‐publication, inferior skill in using e‐publications, a charging service model of e‐publications, less negotiating power and pricing.

The authors believe that if the improvements outlined in the paper are introduced, then public libraries can lift their e‐publication service to a higher standard, including extension of the subject scope, building of consortia, upgrading of the reading environment, and enhancing of the user training and service.