Greenhalgh's 2008 book repeats, rather than resolves, the 'slogan' vs. 'origin' fork over the June 1978 meeting that already separates her 2003 article from Liang Zhongtang's essay

chinapopulation-policyone-child-policyhistoriographyliang-zhongtanggreenhalghjust-one-childcitation-genealogybridge-seed

Greenhalgh's Just One Child Introduction frames the four rows of Table 3 as a sequence from informal to formal, stating of the first two rules: "Technically, the first was a 'slogan,' the second a 'policy.'" The book treats the June 1978 recommendation as the first in a series of escalating slogans and policies culminating in the September 1980 codification of the strict one-for-all rule, which it treats elsewhere as the moment "the one-child policy" proper came into existence.

This is the same "legitimation, not origination" framing the vault's existing fork note already identifies in Greenhalgh's 2003 article (claim-decade-vs-seven-years-fork-depends-on-policy-origin-anchor): Greenhalgh's account of the June 1978 date, now confirmed in a second of her own publications, does not adopt Liang Zhongtang's stronger 始作俑者 ("instigator") framing of that same date as the policy's origin point — "given that both the leading group's own meeting report and the Party Central Committee's 1978 Document No. 69 confirm that this meeting proposed 'one is best, two at most,' we have reason to regard the 'three-day meeting' as the instigator of the 'one-child' policy." The 2008 book, like the 2003 article, supplies the date without the origin-claim; the fork between the two framings is not resolved by this second text, it recurs in it. Both Greenhalgh texts trace to the same author, so this is one witness restating her own interpretive choice twice, not a second scholar independently arriving at it.

This is a historical/interpretive claim, Tier 1, resting on a direct read of the book's own prose framing alongside Liang's own essay, both re-verified this session.