IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v39y2022i3p282-302.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The long‐term development of crisis management in China—Continuity, institutional punctuations and reforms

Author

Listed:
  • Yihong Liu
  • Tom Christensen

Abstract

This study focuses on the long‐term development of crisis management on the central level in China. Drawing on archival and interview data, it describes and analyzes how governance capacity and the formal structure of crisis management have changed, but also how culturally based legitimacy has altered over the past seventy years. These processes of change are divided into three phases, punctuated by institutional shifts in the history of crisis management institutions, whereby both vertical and horizontal coordination have become stronger over time. Crisis management in China is a legacy of traditional disaster management. In this respect it is different from the West, where crisis management has its origins in civil defense. We argue that each reform element is blended with traditional practices in an ever more complex combination, producing hybrid reform patterns. We conclude that centralization and a government‐centered approach in the institutional history can explain the high short‐term mobilization capacity and the challenges of communication in Chinese crisis management. 本研究聚焦于中国中央级别的危机管理的长期发展。基于档案数据和访谈数据,描述并分析了过去70年里治理能力和危机管理的正式架构如何产生变革,以及基于文化的合法性如何发生变化。这些变革过程被分为三个阶段,危机管理制度史中的制度变迁对各阶段加以间断,借此纵向和横向协调随时间推移变得更强。中国的危机管理是传统灾害管理的产物。在这一点上,其有别于西方,后者的危机管理源于民事防护。我们主张,每个改革要素都以越来越复杂的方式与传统实践相结合,进而产生混合改革模式。我们的结论认为,集中化和制度史中以政府为中心的措施能解释中国危机管理中强大的短期动员能力和传播挑战。 Este estudio se centra en el desarrollo a largo plazo de la gestión de crisis a nivel central en China. Basándose en datos de archivo y entrevistas, describe y analiza cómo han cambiado la capacidad de gobernanza y la estructura formal de la gestión de crisis, pero también cómo se ha alterado la legitimidad basada en la cultura durante los últimos setenta años. Estos procesos de cambio se dividen en tres fases, marcadas por cambios institucionales en la historia de las instituciones de gestión de crisis, en las que tanto la coordinación vertical como la horizontal se han fortalecido con el tiempo. La gestión de crisis en China es un legado de la gestión tradicional de desastres. En este sentido, es diferente de Occidente, donde la gestión de crisis tiene sus orígenes en la defensa civil. Sostenemos que cada elemento de la reforma se combina con las prácticas tradicionales en una combinación cada vez más compleja, lo que produce patrones de reforma híbridos. Concluimos que la centralización y un enfoque centrado en el gobierno en la historia institucional pueden explicar la alta capacidad de movilización a corto plazo y los desafíos de la comunicación en la gestión de crisis en China.

Suggested Citation

  • Yihong Liu & Tom Christensen, 2022. "The long‐term development of crisis management in China—Continuity, institutional punctuations and reforms," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(3), pages 282-302, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:39:y:2022:i:3:p:282-302
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12455
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12455
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12455?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arjen Boin & Madalina Busuioc & Martijn Groenleer, 2014. "Building European Union capacity to manage transboundary crises: Network or lead‐agency model?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 418-436, December.
    2. March, James G. & Olson, Johan P., 1983. "Organizing Political Life: What Administrative Reorganization Tells Us about Government," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(2), pages 281-296, June.
    3. Tom Christensen & Liang Ma, 2021. "Comparing SARS and COVID-19: Challenges of Governance Capacity and Legitimacy," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 629-645, December.
    4. Tom Christensen & Liang Ma, 2020. "Coordination Structures and Mechanisms for Crisis Management in China: Challenges of Complexity," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 19-36, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jian Yang & Weikun Huang, 2022. "Institutional Network Relationship of Chinese Public Crisis Governance System—Based on the Quantitative Comparative Analysis of Policies during SARS and COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-15, November.
    2. Tao Peng & Tom Christensen & Liu Yihong & Chu Chun, 2024. "Power Structure, Issue Priorities and Attention Dynamics of Leaders from 2001 to 2017 in China," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 351-368, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tom Christensen & Liang Ma, 2021. "Comparing SARS and COVID-19: Challenges of Governance Capacity and Legitimacy," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 629-645, December.
    2. Batory Agnes & Svensson Sara, 2019. "The fuzzy concept of collaborative governance: A systematic review of the state of the art," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 13(2), pages 28-39, December.
    3. Isuru Koswatte & Chandrika Fernando, 2022. "Policy Development for Crisis Management in the Context of Sri Lanka," Managing Global Transitions, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 20(3 (Fall)), pages 295-327.
    4. Hasan Muhammad Baniamin, 2021. "Citizens’ Initiatives for Crisis Management and the Use of Social Media: An Analysis of COVID-19 Crisis in Bangladesh," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 797-813, December.
    5. Kelman, Steven J. & Myers, Jeff, 2009. "Successfully Executing Ambitious Strategies in Government: An Empirical Analysis," Scholarly Articles 4481609, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Katarzyna Sienkiewicz-Małyjurek & Tomasz Owczarek, 2020. "Complementarity of Communication and Coordination in Ensuring Effectiveness of Emergency Management Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Jarle Trondal & Stefan Gänzle & Benjamin Leruth, 2022. "Differentiation in the European Union in Post‐Brexit and ‐Pandemic Times: Macro‐Level Developments with Meso‐Level Consequences," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(S1), pages 26-37, September.
    8. A Radian, 1984. "The Dynamics of Policy Formation: Income Tax Rates in Israel, 1948–1975," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 2(3), pages 271-284, September.
    9. Tom Christensen & Liang Ma, 2020. "Coordination Structures and Mechanisms for Crisis Management in China: Challenges of Complexity," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 19-36, March.
    10. Frances L. Edwards & J. Steven Ott, 2023. "Lessons Learned, Opportunities Developed: Building Administrative and Governance Capacities Through the Pandemic and Post-Pandemic Eras," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 421-429, June.
    11. Tao Peng & Tom Christensen & Liu Yihong & Chu Chun, 2024. "Power Structure, Issue Priorities and Attention Dynamics of Leaders from 2001 to 2017 in China," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 351-368, March.
    12. Ali Farazmand & Hasan Danaeefard & Seyed Hosein Kazemi, 2024. "The Nexus of Policy Legitimacy and Crisismanship Performance: Examining the Harmonizing Role of Value-Based Decision Making," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 521-538, June.
    13. Marie Nilsen & Trond Kongsvik & Stian Antonsen, 2022. "Taming Proteus: Challenges for Risk Regulation of Powerful Digital Labor Platforms," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-23, May.
    14. Joel D. Aberbach & Tom Christensen, 2018. "Academic Autonomy and Freedom under Pressure: Severely Limited, or Alive and Kicking?," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 487-506, December.
    15. Baulenas, Eulàlia & Sotirov, Metodi, 2020. "Cross-sectoral policy integration at the forest and water nexus: National level instrument choices and integration drivers in the European Union," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    16. Schroeter, Eckhard & Roeber, Manfred, 2004. "Governing the Capital — Comparing Institutional Reform in Berlin, London and Paris," Institute of European Studies, Working Paper Series qt9km4z5vf, Institute of European Studies, UC Berkeley.
    17. Jonas Lund-Tønnesen & Tom Christensen, 2023. "Learning from the COVID-19 Pandemic: Implications from Governance Capacity and Legitimacy," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 431-449, June.
    18. Peregrine Schwartz-Shea & Randy T. Simmons, 1991. "Egoism, Parochialism, and Universalism," Rationality and Society, , vol. 3(1), pages 106-132, January.
    19. Jeremy Hall, 2007. "Implications of Success and Persistence for Public Sector Performance," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 281-297, September.
    20. Julio C. Teehankee, 2022. "Duterte's pandemic populism: Strongman leadership, weak state capacity, and the politics of deployment in the Philippines," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2022-63, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:39:y:2022:i:3:p:282-302. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.