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

This study focuses on the long-term development of crisis management central level in China. Drawing archival and interview data, it describes analyzes how governance capacity formal structure have changed, but also culturally based legitimacy has altered over past seventy years. These processes change are divided into three phases, punctuated by institutional shifts history institutions, whereby both vertical horizontal coordination become stronger time. Crisis China is a legacy traditional disaster management. In this respect different from West, where its origins civil defense. We argue that each reform element blended with practices an ever more complex combination, producing hybrid patterns. conclude centralization government-centered approach can explain high short-term mobilization challenges communication Chinese 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 largo plazo de la gestión nivel Basándose datos archivo y entrevistas, describe analiza cómo han cambiado capacidad gobernanza estructura crisis, pero también ha alterado legitimidad basada cultura durante los últimos setenta años. Estos procesos cambio dividen tres fases, marcadas por cambios institucionales historia las instituciones que tanto coordinación como fortalecido con tiempo. La es un legado tradicional desastres. En este sentido, diferente Occidente, donde tiene sus orígenes defensa civil. Sostenemos cada elemento reforma combina prácticas tradicionales una combinación vez más compleja, lo produce patrones híbridos. Concluimos centralización enfoque centrado gobierno institucional pueden explicar alta movilización corto desafíos comunicación huge, populous, heterogeneous country long historically had many kinds crises, natural man-made (Chen, 2016). Going back to ancient times, share floods, earthquakes, famines (Shi et al., contemporary China, like industrial explosions, mining accidents, infrastructure food-related contaminations, epidemics, environmental pollution, etc., often claimed lives (Christensen & Ma, 2020). Some reaction authorities been campaign-style governance, meaning temporary political government tools (Liu 2015). So, China's gives background for wanting research system, regarding organization culture, definitely improvement. The unprecedented outbreak COVID-19 revealed strengths emergency system. limited knowledge about virus itself system prevented adequate initial response, took January 2020 series actions prevent spreading (Mei, Both national calls mass mobilization, strong draconic regulatory measures cross-provincial collaboration/coproduction were used epitomized lock-down Wuhan (Cai 2021; Cheng government's handling partly learning SARS 2021), was later widely depicted as rather successful, except inappropriate response. Two concepts stand out crises management: (Boin 2016; Christensen How governments organize their available resources, key indicator assessing 2013; Taleb, 2007). What at issue here public decision-making systems, tools. Throughout tense months pandemic, sought show international domestic audiences. West could only happen authoritarian state, soon most Western countries selection some same (Alemanno, Governance deals societal actors general react terms (Ansell popular trust government, what Easton (1965) ‘diffuse support’, specific ability handle crisis. means generalized may enhance while low overall undermine effectiveness. population subjectively feel they efforts therefore increases, highlighting dynamic between legitimacy. Regarding legitimacy, survey Singapore's leading social agency Blackbox Research online panel specialist Toluna, tops index highest citizens rating pandemic performance favorably.1 To understand arrangements develop, well function, we need consider organizational structure. However, influence cultural-institutional factors historical trajectories path-dependency crucial (Krasner, 1988; March, 1994; Olsen, 2010). interface continuity instrumental bring change, there be Baumgartner Jones (2010) call ‘punctuated equilibrium’ ‘policy entrepreneurs’ participate changing path following (Kingdon, 1984). Here would examine focus dynamics order analyze changed (Egeberg, 2012) (Selznick, 2011), not mention lead breaks reforms. tried imitate efforts, especially since 1980s 2008). It adopted NPM post-NPM 2008; Ngok Zhu, 2007), adapted these models cultural characteristics (Westney, 1987). differs led centralized hierarchy, which typical one-party state. At time, large poses implementing reforms across sectors levels. Therefore, one question structural features will play An instrumental-structural perspective drawn theory structure, specialization 2012). Selznick's (2011) importance norms values organizations. Change abrupt or incremental result discontinuity (Streeck Thelen, 2005). Moreover, context-related display dependency institutionalization Mahoney Our assumption norms/values, reflecting understanding institutions government. use documents previous field divide institutions. Furthermore, management, originated found sense patterns (Mahoney 2010, pp. 15–17). On hand, article seeks contribute literature administrative viewed wider comparative perspective. historical-institutional useful gaining better existing why fight against presented current results. Central conducive fast resource-mobilization during hinder make threats period, owing discretion accorded local Second, highlights important learn external intervention promote change. Third, given changes mechanisms 1978 1988 policy ideas, such governmental monopoly marketization, punctuate period somewhat differently scholarship, indiscriminately regarded opening critical junctures scholars domains. other article's combined analytical framework support further response broadly. Perspectives less frequently applied domain Generally speaking, comprehensive prevailing trend varied countries. aims fill gap. following, outline our theoretical basis then context methods. go main final section devoted analysis conclusions. One assumes (Andrew, 2013), evident case elements (Lan, 2000). Public organizations embedded institutional-cultural contexts provide seek comply expectations through ‘logic appropriateness’ (March 1989). broad makes worthwhile contribution deal ‘wicked’ transboundary, unique, characterized degree uncertainty (Olsen, By mean before, during, after occurred involve identifying, assessing, understanding, coping 2016), dealing potential actual large-scale hazards, threats, disasters. Emergency essential role activity around beginning recorded argues component (Egeberg Firstly, directs attention toward instrument achieving goals problem-solving (Pollitt Bouckaert, 2017). dominant form top-down command-and-control authority. effect because tendency centralize power Hart, 2003). wicked problems uncertain years, responded variously, generally strengthened control looked network approaches (Head Alford, transboundary very challenging structures, because, leaders come realize well-established do function new turbulent conditions (Boin, 2019). two fundamental dimensions within governments. A dimension maps leadership authority shared among levels precondition apparatuses highly top level, others much decentralized. advantages coordination, disadvantages lack flexibility concerns either purpose, process, clientele geography (Gulick, 1937). advantage standardization policies intensely specialized fragmented absorb necessary sectoral functional variation. range agreements loose networks. common model so-called ‘lead model’, designed clarify accountability relations 2014). Secondly, exercise responsibility constrained dilemmas trade-offs (Kettl, related gradual dependencies historic-cultural 1988) covered 2011). success depends compatible institution's value orientation, particular actors' modes thought action (Wang Christensen, extent difference help us Crises trigger demand clear authoritative direction clear-cut responsibilities chains command throughout hierarchical structures (Hart Tummers, 2019; Lægreid Rykkja, But, variations magnitude type called for. challenge balancing decentralization exists Executive mixture elements. collective traditions connects crucial—additionally, matter capacity. centrally planned economic heavy emphasis planning state various areas (Heilmann, 2016b). intentional behavior executives design developments map ideas guiding practice onto perspective, interested regular ministerial/agency arrangements, i.e. coordinative features. filter guide 1996). basis, combining perspectives, furthers empirical punctuations apparatus combines insights mechanism proposed equilibrium seminal book Kingdon (1984) temporality streams pry open windows opportunity entrepreneurs embark paths development. logic ‘the party building state’ survived modernization years (Lin, 2014; Lieberthal Everything begins ends Communist Party (CPC) done so 1949. general, CPC acts governing party, entire deciding ideology, making strategic plans National People's Congress (NPC) legislature, exerting affairs drafting laws regulations (Cabestan, 2006). body legitimizes proposals issued CPC, decreasing controversies programs single-rule NPC entrust implementation State Council (SC) sub-ministries organ administration. All members Standing Committee who act policymakers decisions coordinating activities, members, obeying party's instructions. Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) consultation improve party-state absorbing non-CPC elites promoting quality policymaking professional consultants scientists, economists, educators. CPPCC's all walks life ethnic groups (Dickson Jeffreys, Together, four up described ‘authoritarian system’ (Fewsmith, 1996; Lampton, Oksenberg, fact gradually significantly (Gilley, 2005; Heilmann, today, retains basic principles Leninist powers concentration power, subordination individual rights interest 2016a, p. 57). regime, ideology critically important, mattering than systems (Leonard, Additionally, stability (or security) concern (Shih, unrest, disasters, panic, safety incidents, upheavals gains immediate sustained elites. started drawing documents, archive material, elaborate level. helped architecture underpinning examined last decade (such 2003 Wenchuan earthquake cases discuss combinations Finally, drew collected ministries responsible Handing Law, Overall Contingency Plan Responses sudden events on). operationalize employed subdivided mechanism, micro-institutions instruments. During experienced droughts, waterlogging, Owing poorly organized technical early PRC, passive, focusing ex-post relief. without market regimes, determined relief functions. 1952, Disaster Relief Commission set under direct controlled resources. Ministry Agriculture, Water Resources, Forestry, governments, supposed obey commission's unified command. They no process. established agencies disasters arrangement ‘everyone ask (全国找中央)’. context, super-ministry played controlling one. reason simple PRC enhanced tool, underlying scientific managerial ideas. Top always frontline work, symbolic effect. culture continued dominate even Reform Opening 1978. With deepening reform, efficiency supplement orthodox considerations ruling Especially growth huge increase numbers affected losses, struggled afford (Zhang 2018). employ procure store resources alleviate burden Meanwhile, began trial method ‘all-expense-paid’ instruments improved, did core culture. December 11, 1987, 42nd session United Nations General Assembly declared 1990s International Decade Natural Reduction (IDNDR) (Resolution 44/236 22, 1989) developing establish modern second statement IDNDR made 20, 1988, 43rd member states corresponding committees. goal proclamation reduction reduce rising unacceptable losses continuing cause. advances fields engineering know-how resulting effectively. asserted (CCIDDR) April 1989 represented active UN's (Zhang, 1991). tackled idea technology pragmatically adjusted (综合减灾). primary now seen holistic process including prevention mitigation, preparedness, relief, recovery, rehabilitation Simultaneously, recognized should include integration impact Gao, Accordingly, expanded task combination prevention, recovery. establishment CCIDDR expected assume super-ministerial committee. committee quickly (Tian, vice-premier committee, initially composed twenty-eight units increased thirty-two year Since then, vice-governor, mayor, magistrate formally put charge redefined broader, functions coordination. From 1998, located committee's office Civil Affairs institutionalize level's Until lacked robust body, filled gap society still inadequate. 2005, again name Reduction. comprised thirty-four ministries, commissions, bureaus, armed forces, organizations, Inter-ministerial deliberation Council. date, coordinates de-politized, shifting benefits humanitarian significance Institutional rely rule law experience-based mobilization. having information ‘closed confidential’, said ‘open transparent.’ 1994, integrated hub beyond reporting national, provincial, municipal, county supported smooth bureaucracy. For example, major disaster, Bureaus instructed report directly telephone, fax, telegram twenty-four hours. Official reports submitted least once day preferably several times day, stabilized. became willing accept assistance cooperation. official document, ‘The Consultation Acceptance Aid Office (UNDRO) (民政部、经贸部、外交部印发《关于调整接受国际救灾援助方针问题的请示》的通知),’ marked turn. jointly Foreign Trade Economic Cooperation, Affairs, Affairs. examples imitating strategy written blueprint Agenda 2