Output from workshops

Special issues (click titles to download)

• The Credibility of (In)formality – Or, the irrelevance of institutional form in judging performance, in Cities, Vol. 99, April 2020, 102609
• The discipline of form: why the premise of institutional form does not apply to capital, technology, land and labor, in Journal of Chinese Governance, 2020, DOI: 10.1080/23812346.2020.1841975
• Institutional function versus form: The evolutionary credibility of land, housing and natural resources, in Land Use Policy, 2018, 75/6
• An Endogenous Theory of Property Rights: Opening the Black Box of Institutions, in Journal of Peasant Studies, 2016, 43/6 also available as book (Routledge, 2019)

 

Application credibility theory in other studies (click for open access)

General theory and methodology

• Ghorbani, A., Ho, P., & Bravo, G. Institutional form versus function in a common property context: The credibility thesis tested through an agent-based model. Land Use Policy, 2021, 102, 105237, doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105
• Benjamin Davy, “After form. The credibility thesis meets property theory“, Land Use Policy, 2018, 79/12, pp. 854-862

Land

• Yugank Goyal, Pranab Ranjan Choudhury, Ranjan Kumar Ghosh , “Informal land leasing in rural India persists because it is credible”, Land Use Policy, 2022, 120, 106299
• Heyuan You, Jinrong Zhang, Yan Song, “Assessing conflict of farmland institutions using credibility theory: Implications for socially acceptable land use”, Land Use Policy, 2022, 112, 105817
• Huirong Chen, “Institutional credibility and informal institutions: The case of extralegal land development in China,” Cities, 2020, Vol. 97, February, 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102519
• Nesru H. Koroso, Jaap A. Zevenbergen, Monica Lengoiboni, “Land institutions’ credibility: Analyzing the role of complementary institutions”, Land Use Policy, 2019, 81, pp. 553–564
• Donald Clarke, “Form and function in China’s urban land regime: The irrelevance of “ownership”, Land Use Policy, 2018, 79/12, pp. 902-912
• Jesper Willaing Zeuthen, “Whose urban development? Changing credibilities, forms and functions of urbanization in Chengdu”, China, Land Use Policy, 2018, 79/12, pp. 942-951
• Eva Pils, “Assessing evictions and expropriations in China: efficiency, credibility and rights”, Land Use Policy, 2016, Vol. 58, pp. 437-444.

Slums, illegality and affordable housing in Global North

• Adam Sheppard and Katie McClymont, “Credibility without Legitimacy? Informal development in a highly regulated context“, Cities, 2020, Vol. 97, 102520, 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102520
• Pablo Celhay and Diego Gil McCawley, “The Function and Credibility of Urban Slums: Unexpected Evidence on Informal Settlements and Affordable Housing in Chile”, Cities, 2020, 97, 10.1016/j.cities.2020.102605
• Slavka Zeković, Ksenija Petovar, Bin Md Saman Nor-Hisham, “The credibility of illegal and informal construction: Assessing legalization policies in Serbia“, Cities, 2020, Vol. 97, 102548, 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102548

Informal settlements and housing in Global South

• Ziqi Zhou and Yung Yau, “The Small Property Rights Housing Institution in Mainland China: The Perspective of Substitutability of Institutional Functions,” Land, 2021, 10, 915. doi: 10.3390/land10090915
• Mark Oranje, Elsona van Huyssteen, Johan Maritz, “Rapid urbanisation to non-metropolitan urban South Africa: A call for Accrediting credible ‘informal’ life-enhancing responses and institutions, Cities, 2020, 96, pp. 102487, 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102487
• Shouying Liu and Yue Zhang, “Cities without Slums? China’s Land Regime and Dual-track Urbanization“, Cities, 2020, Vol. 101, 102652, 10.1016/j.cities.2020.102652
• Yue Zhang, “The credibility of slums: Informal housing and urban governance in India“, Land Use Policy, 2018, 79/12: 876-890

Urban commons, property and apartment rights

• Hazel Easthope, Ryan van den Nouwelant, Sian Thompson, “Apartment ownership around the world: Focusing on credible outcomes rather than ideal systems”, Cities, 2020, 97, February, pp. 102463, 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102463
• Paschalis A. Arvanitidis and George Papagiannitsis, “Urban open spaces as a commons: exploring the credibility thesis in the self governed Navarinou park of Athens, Greece,” Cities, 2020, 97, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102480

Forest and customary rights

• Weiye Wang, Jinlong Liu, “Lessons of government centralization and credibility: A qualitative case-study of administrative change in Jiuzhaigou Nature Reserve, China (1982–2018)“, Land Use Policy, 2022, 113, 105907
• Erez Tzfadia, Avinoam Meir, Batya Roded, “Gray local governance and Israeli Indigenous Bedouin: Credibility, functionality and the politics of refusal”, Cities, 2020, 97, 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102484
• Md Bin Saman Nor Hisham and Peter Ho, “A conditional trinity as ‘no-go’ against non-credible development? Resettlement, customary rights and Malaysia’s Kelau Dam”, Journal of Peasant Studies, 2016, Vol.  43., No. 6, pp. 1177-1205. View related VIDEO. Read Malaysia’s last nomadic people (The Guardian) about the Orang Asli, the indigenous people of which this paper is a study.

Grassland

• Shengyue Fan, Miao He, Tianyu Zhang, Yajing Huo, Di Fan, “Credibility measurement as a tool for conserving nature: Chinese herders’ livelihood capitals and payment for grassland ecosystem services”, Land Use Policy, 2022, 115, 106032

• Shengyue Fan, Jinfei Yang, Wenwen Liu, He Wang (2019), “Institutional Credibility Measurement Based on Structure of Transaction Costs: A Case Study of Ongniud Banner in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region,” Ecological Economics, 159, 212–225

• Heng Zhao and Karlis Rokpelnis, “Local perceptions of grassland degradation in China: a socio-anthropological reading of endogenous knowledge and institutional credibility“, Journal of Peasant Studies, 2016, Vol.  43., No. 6, pp. 1206-1223.

Water resources

• Sharlene L. Gomes, Leon M. Hermans, “Institutional function and urbanization in Bangladesh: How peri-urban communities respond to changing environments“, Land Use Policy, 2018, 79/12, pp. 932-941
• Peter P. Mollinga, “Secure rights and non-credibility: the paradoxical dynamics of canal irrigation in India“,  Journal of Peasant Studies, 2016, Vol.  43., No. 6, pp. 1310-1331.

Mineral resources

• Peter Ho and Heng Zhao, Mining conflict and rent-seeking in China: A mixed method analysis of cases of illegality, The Extractive Industries and Society, 2022, 9/3, 101031

• Niels Fold, Albert N.M. Allotey, Per Kalvig, Lasse Moeller-Jensen, Grounding institutions through informal practice: Credibility in artisanal mining of aggregates, Ghana, Land Use Policy, 2018, 79/12, pp. 922-931

Environment, climate, and spatial planning

• Shengyue Fan, Tianyu Zhang & Mengyao Li, “The credibility and bargaining during the process of policy implementation – a case study of China’s prohibition of open burning of crop straw policy“, Journal of Chinese Governance, 2021, DOI: 10.1080/23812346.2020.1765453
• Karoline S. Rogge and Elisabeth Dütschke (2018), “What makes them believe in the low-carbon energy transition? Exploring corporate perceptions of the credibility of climate policy mixes“, Environmental Science and Policy, 87, pp. 74–84
• Jiayu Wu, Yan Song, Jian Lin, Qingsong He (2018), “Tackling the uncertainty of spatial regulations in China: An institutional analysis of the “multi-plan combination‘”, Habitat International, 78, pp. 1–12

Labor, capital and markets

• Thomas Marois, A Dynamic Theory of Public Banks (and Why it Matters), Review of Political Economy, 2021, DOI: 10.1080/09538259.2021.1898110
• Dic Lo, “State-Owned Enterprises in Chinese Economic Transformation: Institutional Functionality and Credibility in Alternative Perspectives,” Journal of Economic Issues, 2020, 54:3, 813-837, DOI: 10.1080/00213624.2020.1791579
• Shih-Jiunn Shi, “The changing credibility of institutions: how household registration systems (hukou) in Mainland China and Taiwan define immigrants’ social benefits“, Journal of Chinese Governance, 2021, DOI: 10.1080/23812346.2021.1896206
• Godfrey Yeung, “Chinese state-owned commercial banks in reform: inefficient and yet credible and functional?”, Journal of Chinese Governance, 2020, DOI: 10.1080/23812346.2020.1772537
• Shuanping Dai & Markus Taube, “Strategic ambiguity in policy formulation: exploring the function of the term “township and village enterprises” in China’s industrial ownership reforms“, Journal of Chinese Governance, 2020, DOI: 10.1080/23812346.2020.1809272
• Frew Mengistu and Meine Pieter van Dijk, “Credibility of institutions in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia), effects of government policies on real estate developers“, Land Use Policy, 2018, 79/12: 913-921
• Satoshi Miyamura, “Rethinking labour market institutions in Indian industry: forms, functions and socio-historical contexts“, Journal of Peasant Studies, 2016, Vol.  43., No. 6, pp. 1262-1284.
• Thomas Marois and Ali Rıza Güngen, “Credibility and class in the evolution of public banks: the case of Turkey“,  Journal of Peasant Studies, 2016, Vol.  43., No. 6, pp. 1285-1309.

Economic growth, corruption, and rent-seeking

• Linda Yueh, “The China paradox: the endogenous relationship between law and economic growth“, Journal of Chinese Governance, 2020, DOI: 10.1080/23812346.2020.1785142
• Andrew Wedeman, “Bribery with Chinese Characteristics? Corruption, Fuzzy Property Rights, and Rapid Growth“, East Asia, 2017, 34, pp. 87–111
• Paavo Monkkonen, “Are civil-law notaries rent-seeking monopolists or essential market intermediaries? Endogenous development of a property rights institution in Mexico“,  Journal of Peasant Studies, 2016, Vol.  43., No. 6, pp. 1224-1248.
• Juliette Levy, “A history of institutional function: Mexican notaries and wealth distribution – Yucatan, 1850–1900“, Journal of Peasant Studies, 2016, Vol.  43., No. 6, pp. 1249-1261. 

Publications by the RECOLAND team

Monograph

• Peter Ho,  Unmaking China’s Development: The Function and Credibility of Institutions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017

Articles (click for open access)

• Ying Zheng and Peter Ho*, “Unpacking the paradox of “insecure” housing rights in China: Urban residents’ perceptions on institutional credibility”, Cities, 2020, Vol. 97, February, 102485, 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102485
• Li Sun and Peter Ho*, “A model for inclusive, pro-poor urbanization? The credibility of informal, affordable “single-family” homes in China”, Cities, 2020, February, 102465, 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102465
• Kees Krul and Peter Ho*, “Beyond empty forms of formalization: The credibility of a renewed attempt at forest titling in Southwest China”, Geoforum, 2020,Vol. 110, pp. 46-57
• Kees Krul, Peter Ho*, Xiuyun Yang, “Incentivizing household forest management in China’s forest reform: Limitations to rights-based approaches in Southwest China”, 2020, Forest Policy and Economics, Vol. 111, 102075
• Xiuyun Yang and Peter Ho*,“Mining institutions, contention and credibility: A study of court cases in China through the conflict analysis model”, The Extractive Industries and Society, 2019, 19 December, 10.1016/j.exis.2019.11.012
• Xiuyun Yang and Peter Ho, Is mining harmful or beneficial? A survey of local community perspectives in China, 2019, Extractive Industries and Society, 6/2, pp. 584-592
• Peter Ho, “A Theorem on Dynamic Disequilibrium: Debunking Path Dependence and Equilibrium via China’s Urban Property (1949-1998)”, Land Use Policy, 2018, 79, pp. 863-875
• Li Sun and Peter Ho, “Formalizing informal homes, a bad idea: The credibility thesis applied to China’s “extra-legal” housing”, Land Use Policy, 2018, Vol. 79/12, pp. 891–901
• Xiuyun Yang, Heng Zhao, Peter Ho, “Mining-induced displacement and resettlement in China: A study covering 27 villages in 6 provinces“, Resources Policy, 2017, Vol. 53, pp. 408-418. View related VIDEO.
• Kees Krul and Peter Ho, “Alternative Approaches to Food: Community Supported Agriculture in Urban China” Sustainability, 2017, 9(5).
• Peter Ho, “Who owns China’s housing? Endogeneity as a lens to understand ambiguities of urban and rural property“, Cities, 2017, Vol. 65, pp. 66-77.
• Peter Ho, “An endogenous theory of property rights: opening the black box of institutions”, Journal of Peasant Studies, 2016, Vol.  43., No. 6, pp. 1121-1144 (IF: 4.577).
• Peter Ho, “Empty institutions, non-credibility and pastoralism: China’s grazing ban, mining and ethnicity”, Journal of Peasant Studies, 2016, Vol.  43., No. 6, pp. 1145-1176.
• Peter Ho, “Myths of Tenure Security and Titling: Endogenous, Institutional Change of China’s Housing and Land”, Land Use Policy, 2015, Vol. 47, pp. 352–364, IF 3.134.
• Peter Ho, “The ‘Credibility Thesis’ and its Application to Property Rights: (In)secure Land Tenure and Social Welfare in China”, Land Use Policy, 2014, Vol. 40, September, pp. 13–27.
  • Downloaded/viewed 1,124 times in 9 months since publication. Review: “credibility is a powerful metric” and “the Credibility Thesis has much to offer both the academic and practitioner perspective on… tenure analysis and policy.” By Delilah Griswold, Yale Environment Review, Spring 2015 Issue.
• Peter Ho, “In Defense of Endogenous, Spontaneously Ordered Development: The Institutional Structure of China’s Rural Urban Property Rights”, Journal of Peasant Studies, 2013, Vol. 40, No. 6, 1087-1118.
  • Awarded with the 2014 Kapp Prize.

Earlier studies

• Lionel V. Pero and Timothy F. Smith (2008), “Institutional credibility and leadership: critical challenges for community-based natural resource governance in rural and remote Australia,” Regional Environmental Change, 8, pp. 15–2
• Peter Ho (2006), “Credibility of Institutions: Forestry, Social Conflict and Titling in China”, Land Use Policy, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 588-603
• Ilene Grabel (2000), “The political economy of ‘policy credibility’: the new-classical macroeconomics and the remaking of emerging economies” Cambridge Journal of Economics, 24 (1), pp. 1-19