A Study of Law-Based Chinese Petition System From the Perspective of Evolutionary Game Model

Chaoqiang XIE, Jin CHEN, Wenyuan LÜ


Petition system (named Xinfang in Chinese) is a typical Chinese system for citizens to express opinions and seek non-lawsuit remedies. It was originally positioned with the emphasis on expression of public opinions, but the general public expect more on its rights relief function. Over the recent 30 years, China’s economy entered into a period of high-speed development, and the redressal of social interest structure aggregated the conflicts of functional position of petition, which has surged the volume of petition letters and visits. The frequent occurrence of social contradictions resulting from blockage of petitions has seriously impaired social stability. Hence, it is pressing to readjust the functional position of petition and guide the system onto the legal track. In this paper, theoretical analysis is made over the strategy selection and dynamic game of both players of petition during the interaction process by building an evolutionary game model, to conclude an ideal state of stable equilibrium. With the theory base, suggestions are proposed on guiding petition onto the legal track.


Petition system; Law-based petition; Petition assessment; Irregular petition; Evolutionary game

Full Text:



Anthony, D. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. Harper Collins.

Bexelius, A. (1966). The ombudsman’s office and other means for protecting citizens’ rights in Sweden. International Social Science Journal, 12(2), 247.

Chen, H. R. (2014). Performance of petition system and upgrading of petition visit strategy. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 3, 42-50.

Chen, T. Y., Liu, X. Z., & Yang, J. (2012). Game-based analysis of the phenomenon of bypassing the immediate authority in internet petition. Leadership Science, 17, 57-58.

Daniel, F. (1991). Evolutionary games in economics. Econometrica, 59, 637-666.

Deng, Z. F. (2010). The Japanese administrative counseling and complaint systems and their enlightenment. Japan Studies, 2, 105-108.

Duncan, B. (1948). On the rationale of group decision-making. Journal of Political Economy, 56, 23-34.

George, A. A. (1970). The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(2), 488-500.

Harsanyi, J. (1967-1968). Games with Incomplete Information Played by Bayesian Players, Management Science, 14, 159-182,320-334,486-502.

Larry, S. (2012). Evolution and game theory. Economic Perspectives, 16(2), 47-66.

Li, H. B. (2012). An Adventurous game—Analysis of modern Chinese petition game in the perspective of sociology of law. Tsinghua Law Review, 6(1), 127-153.

Maynard, S. (1974). The Theory of Game sand the Evolution of Animal Conflict. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 47, 209-221.

Nash J. (1950). Equilibrium Points in N-person Games. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 36(1), 48-49.

Nash J. (1951).Non-cooperative games. Annals of Mathematics, 54, 286-295.

Peter, D. T., & Leo, B. J, (1978). Evolutionary stable strategies and game dynamic. Mathematical Biosciences, 40, 145-156.

Regulations on Letters and Visits. (2005). Retrieved from http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2005-05/23/content_271.htm.

Selten, R. (1965). Spieltheoretische Behandlung Eines Pligopolmodells mit Nachfagetragheit. Zeitschrift fur die gesamte Staatswissenschaf, (12), 301-324.

Su, M. Y. (2011). Case analysis of petition related to the real estate development in Shanghai – petition cases of a residential quarter in Shanghai. Economic Research Guide, 24, 118-119.

Tan, S. K., & Qi, T. (2010). Building and analysis of the game model for land expropriation conflict in China. China Land Sciences, 3, 25-29.

Tirole, J. (1986). Hierarchies and bureaucracies: On the role of collusion in organization. Journal of Law, Economics and Organizations, 2(2), 181-214.

Tirole, J. (1992). Collusion and the theory of organizations. Sixth World Congress.

Wang, H. N., & Liu, P. (2014). On functional position of petition system. Journal of Northeast Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 4, 227-229.

Yu, J. R. (2009). “Paradox of petition” and its solution. South Reviews, 8, 42-43.

Yu, J. Z. (2011). Law consideration of “irregular petition”. Theory Journal, 10, 86-88.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/7518


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2015 Canadian Social Science

Share us to:   


  • How to do online submission to another Journal?
  • If you have already registered in Journal A, then how can you submit another article to Journal B? It takes two steps to make it happen:

1. Register yourself in Journal B as an Author

  • Find the journal you want to submit to in CATEGORIES, click on “VIEW JOURNAL”, “Online Submissions”, “GO TO LOGIN” and “Edit My Profile”. Check “Author” on the “Edit Profile” page, then “Save”.

2. Submission

  • Go to “User Home”, and click on “Author” under the name of Journal B. You may start a New Submission by clicking on “CLICK HERE”.
  • We only use three mailboxes as follows to deal with issues about paper acceptance, payment and submission of electronic versions of our journals to databases: caooc@hotmail.com; css@cscanada.net; css@cscanada.org

 Articles published in Canadian Social Science are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).


Address1020 Bouvier Street, Suite 400, Quebec City, Quebec, G2K 0K9, Canada.

Website: Http://www.cscanada.net Http://www.cscanada.org 
E-mailcss@cscanada.net, css@cscanada.org

Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture