Advertisement

Internal Government Assessments of the Quality of Governance in China

  • Martin K. Dimitrov
Article

Abstract

Internal assessments of the quality of governance allow authoritarian regimes to identify and address public discontent before it threatens regime stability. This article provides a theory of how the information necessary to produce such assessments is collected, processed, and utilized to guide policy. The empirical focus of the article is on China, which is used to illustrate how information-gathering channels in communist autocracies differ from those used in electoral autocracies. The theoretical argument of the article is that petitions rather than elections function as the main channel for gathering information on popular perceptions about governance problems in communist autocracies. Information compiled through the analysis of petitions is valued because it allows the leadership to identify problems with policy implementation; to track corruption; and to monitor the level of popular trust in the regime. Although protests provide similar information, they can threaten stability. Therefore, the advantage of petitions from the perspective of the regime is that they allow for routine information transfer without compromising stability maintenance. This study is based primarily on previously unavailable archival sources and on a systematic analysis of internal-circulation (neibu) materials, which provide insight into internal government understandings of governance problems in China.

Keywords

Information gathering Petitions Protests Quality of governance Policy implementation Corruption Trust Communist autocracies China 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Francis Fukuyama, the participants in the workshop “Assessing the Quality of Governance in China” (held in Sonoma on November 12–13, 2012), and the two anonymous reviewers for SCID for very helpful feedback.

References

China Interviews

  1. 020919B, with representatives of the Central Discipline Inspection Commission and the Ministry of Supervision, Beijing, September 19, 2002Google Scholar
  2. 110729, with the director of the Office of Citizen Complaints, Zouping County, Shandong Province, July 29, 2011Google Scholar
  3. 120721, with a journalist from Guizhou Ribao (Guizhou Daily), Guiyang, July 12, 2012Google Scholar

Issues of Renmin xinfang [RX] (People’s letters and visits)

  1. no. 22/1985Google Scholar
  2. no. 7/1986.Google Scholar
  3. no. 4/1987.Google Scholar
  4. no. 1/1988.Google Scholar
  5. no. 2/1989Google Scholar
  6. no. 10/1989Google Scholar
  7. no. 11/1989Google Scholar
  8. no. 2/1990Google Scholar
  9. no. 2/1991Google Scholar
  10. no. 5/1995Google Scholar
  11. no. 3/2000Google Scholar
  12. no. 7/2000Google Scholar
  13. no. 3/2003Google Scholar
  14. no. 2/2010Google Scholar

Issues of Shandong xinfang (Shandong letters and visits)

  1. no. 3/2011Google Scholar
  2. no. 4/2011Google Scholar

Issues of Guangdong shengqing neican (Internal Reference on the Situation in Guangdong Province)

  1. no. 103/May 28, 2011Google Scholar

Documents from the Shanghai Municial Archive (SMA)

  1. SMA A72-2-284-16 (1960).Google Scholar
  2. SMA A73-2-178-1 (1977).Google Scholar
  3. SMA B180-1-41-15 (1965).Google Scholar
  4. SMA B246-2-940-40 (1973).Google Scholar
  5. SMA B246-2-944-83 (1973).Google Scholar
  6. SMA B248-2-1024-35 (1977).Google Scholar
  7. SMA B250-2-769-14 (1974).Google Scholar
  8. SMA B252-1-109-58 (1975).Google Scholar
  9. SMA B257-2-2 (1967).Google Scholar

Chinese Gazetteers

  1. Tianjin tongzhi: Xinfang zhi (Tianjin gazetteer: Letters and visits issue). Tianjin: Tianjin Shekeyuan Chubanshe. 1997.Google Scholar

Soviet Archival Documents

  1. F. 646 op. 1 d. 3 (1990).Google Scholar
  2. TsKhSD, F. 89 per. 6 d. 11 (1962).Google Scholar
  3. TsKhSD, F. 89 per. 6 d. 12 (1962).Google Scholar
  4. TsKhSD, f. 4 op. 20 d. 467 (1968)Google Scholar

General Bibliography

  1. Annual work reports of central government departments. Beijing: Zhonggong Zhongyang Guojia Jiguan Gongzuo Weiyuanhui Yanjiushi; 2008.Google Scholar
  2. Arendt H. The origins of totalitarianism. New York: Harcourt, Brace; 1951.Google Scholar
  3. Asian barometer. 2002. http://www.asianbarometer.org/. Accessed September 16, 2012.
  4. Asian barometer. 2008. http://www.asianbarometer.org/ Accessed September 16, 2012.
  5. Birney M. Maintaining authoritarian stability through a ‘rule of mandates:’ conditional implementation of village elections in China. Mimeo; 2010.Google Scholar
  6. Blaydes L. Elections and distributive politics in Mubarak’s Egypt. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2011.Google Scholar
  7. Brownlee J. Authoritarianism in an age of democratization. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bueno de Mesquita B et al. The logic of political survival. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  9. Bunce V. Rethinking recent democratization: lessons from the postcommunist experience. World Polit. 2003;55(2):167–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cai Y. Managed participation in China. Polit Sci Q. 2004;119(3):425–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cai Y. Collective resistance in China: why popular protests succeed or fail. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 2010.Google Scholar
  12. Caijing. Xinfang paiming tongbao zhidu yi bei quxiao (The system of publicly reporting letters and visits rankings has already been abolished). 2013.Google Scholar
  13. Chen X. Social protest and contentious authoritarianism in China. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2012.Google Scholar
  14. China Daily. Beijing to close down thousands of liaison offices. 2010.Google Scholar
  15. China human rights yearbook 2007–2008. [N.P.]: Chinese Human Rights Defenders. 2008.Google Scholar
  16. Chinese Communist Party Organization Department. Xin shiqi dangqun guanxi yanjiu baogao (Research report on the relationship between the party and the people in the new period). In Daguoce: Zhengzhi yu zhengfu xinren (Strategy for a big country: Governance and government trust). Beijing: Renmin Chubanshe, 2009. 25–62.Google Scholar
  17. Chinese Communist Party disciplinary punishment regulations. 1997.Google Scholar
  18. Diao J. Renmin xinfang shilüe, 19491995 (History of people’s letters and visits, 1949–1995). Beijing: Beijing Jingji Xueyuan Chubanshe; 1996.Google Scholar
  19. Dimitrov MK. Vertical accountability in communist regimes: the role of citizen complaints in Bulgaria and China. In: Dimitrov MK, editor. Why communism did not collapse. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2013. p. 276–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dimitrov MK. “What the party wanted to know: citizen complaints as a ‘Barometer of Public Opinion’ in Communist Bulgaria,”. East Eur Polit Soc. 2014a; 28: 271–295.Google Scholar
  21. Dimitrov MK. Tracking public opinion under authoritarianism: the case of the Soviet Union under Brezhnev. Russ Hist. 2014b;41(3):329–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Friedrich CJ, Brzezinski ZK. Totalitarian dictatorship and autocracy. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1965.Google Scholar
  23. Friedrich W. Geschichte des Zentralinstituts für Jugendforschung (History of the Central Institute for Youth Research). In: Friedrich W, Förster P, Starke K, editors. Das Zentralinstitut für Jugendforschung Leipzig 19661990: Geschichte, Methoden, Erkenntnisse (The Central Institute for Youth Research in Leipzig 1966–1990: History, methods, findings). Berlin: Edition Ost; 1999. p. 13–69.Google Scholar
  24. Fukuyama F. What is governance? Mimeo: Stanford University; 2012.Google Scholar
  25. Gandhi J. Political institutions under dictatorship. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gandhi J, Lust-Okar E. Elections under authoritarianism. Annu Rev Polit Sci. 2009;12:403–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Guangxi nianjian (Guangxi yearbook). Nanning: Guangxi Minzu Yinshuachang; 2007.Google Scholar
  28. Havel V, Keane J. The power of the powerless: citizens against the state in central-eastern Europe. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe; 1985.Google Scholar
  29. Jijian jiancha xinfang jubao gongzuo jiaocheng (Manual on discipline inspection supervision letters and visits and denunciations work). Beijing: Fangzheng Chubashe, 2007.Google Scholar
  30. Johnston T. Being Soviet: identity, rumor, and everyday life under Stalin. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011.Google Scholar
  31. Kapuściński R. The emperor: downfall of an autocrat. New York: Vintage; 1983.Google Scholar
  32. King G, Pan J, Roberts ME. How censorship in China allows government criticism but silences collective expression. Am Polit Sci Rev. 2013;107(2):326–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kozlov V. Massovye besporiadki v SSSR pri Khrushcheve i Brezhneve, 1953-nachalo 1980-kh gg (Mass Disorders in the USSR under Khrushchev and Brezhnev, 1953-Early 1980s). Novosibirsk: Sibirskii khronograf; 1999.Google Scholar
  34. Kuran T. Now out of never: the element of surprise in the east European revolution of 1989. World Polit. 1991;44(1):7–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kuran T. Private truths, public lies: the social consequences of preference falsification. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1995.Google Scholar
  36. Levada Center: Russians trust president and church most. 2004. http://english.pravda.ru/news/russia/25-03-2004/56195-0/ Accessed September 6, 2012.
  37. Li L. The magnitude and resilience of trust in the center: evidence from interviews with petitioners in Beijing and a local survey in rural China. Mod China. 2012;39(1):3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Li L, Liu M, O’Brien K. Petitioning Beijing: the high tide of 2003–2006. China Q. 2012;210:313–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Li W. Shesu xinfang: Chengyin ji jiejue (Judicial letters and visits: reasons and solutions). Beijing: Zhongguo Fazhi Chubanshe; 2009.Google Scholar
  40. Lin W, Liu H. Gongan jiguan yingdui quntixing shijian shiwu yu celüe (Practical affairs and strategy of the response of the public security organs to mass incidents). Beijing: Zhongguo Renmin Gong’an Daxue Chubanshe; 2008.Google Scholar
  41. Lohmann S. The dynamics of informational cascades: the Monday demonstrations in Leipzig, East Germany, 1989–91. World Polit. 1994;47(1):42–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lorentzen P. Regularized rioting: permitting public protest in an authoritarian regime. Q J Polit Sci. 2013;8:127–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Luehrmann LM. Facing citizen complaints in China, 1951–1996. Asian Surv. 2003;43(5):845–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lussier DN. Contacting and complaining: political participation and the failure of democracy in Russia. Post-Soviet Aff. 2011;27(3):289–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McCubbins M, Schwartz T. Congressional oversight overlooked: police patrols versus fire alarms. Am J Polit Sci. 1984;28(1):165–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Magaloni B. Voting for autocracy: hegemonic party survival and its demise in Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Malesky E, Schuler P. Nodding or needling: analyzing delegate responsiveness in an authoritarian parliament. Am Polit Sci Rev. 2010;104(3):482–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Manion M. A survey of survey research on Chinese politics: what have we learned? In: Carlson A, Gallagher ME, Lieberthal K, Manion M, editors. Contemporary Chinese politics: new sources, methods, and field strategies. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2010. p. 181–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. People’s Republic of China law on administrative supervision. 1997.Google Scholar
  50. People’s Republic of China criminal procedure law. 2012.Google Scholar
  51. Rothstein B. The quality of government: corruption, social trust, and inequality in international perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Saich T. The quality of governance in China: the citizens’ view. Mimeo: Harvard University; 2012.Google Scholar
  53. Shih V. The autocratic difference: information paucity. Mimeo: Northwestern University; 2010.Google Scholar
  54. Shlapentokh V. The politics of sociology in the Soviet Union. Boulder: Westview; 1987.Google Scholar
  55. Smith B. Life of the party: the origins of regime breakdown and persistence under single-party rule. World Polit. 2005;57(3):421–51.Google Scholar
  56. Smith SA. Talking toads and chinless ghosts: the politics of “superstitious” rumors in the People’s Republic of China, 1961–1965. Am Hist Review. 2006;111(2):405–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stockmann D. Media commercialization and authoritarian rule in China. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2013.Google Scholar
  58. Svolik MW. The politics of authoritarian rule. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sun Liping. Shehui shixu shi dangxia de yanjun tiaozhan (Social disorder is currently a serious challenge). Jingji Guancha Bao; 2011.Google Scholar
  60. The World Bank. A decade of measuring the quality of governance: governance matters 2006: worldwide governance indicators. Washington, DC: IBRD/The World Bank; 2006.Google Scholar
  61. Tian, Xianhong. Yishi xingtai zhuanxing yu xinfang zhuli de lunli kunjing (Ideological transformation and the ethical dilemma in regulating petitions). In Zhanlüe yu Guanli: Neibu Ban (Strategy and Management: Internal Edition), nos. 5/6; 2012, 39–54.Google Scholar
  62. VTsIOM. Obshchestvennoe mnenie v tsifrakh (Public Opinion in Numbers). No. 8 (April). Moscow: VTsIOM; 1990.Google Scholar
  63. Walder A. Workers, managers, and the state: the Reform Era and the political crisis on 1989. China Q. 1991;127:467–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wang J, Quan J. 2011–2012 nian Zhongguo jumin shenghuo manyi du diaocha baogao (Research report on life satisfaction among Chinese residents in 2011–2012). In: Wang J, Yang Y, editors. Zhongguo shehui xintai yanjiu baogao, 20122013 (Annual report on social mentality in China, 2012–2013). Beijing: Shehui kexue wenxian chubanshe; 2013. p. 52–70.Google Scholar
  65. Wedeen L. Ambiguities of domination: politics, rhetoric, and symbols in contemporary Syria. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  66. Wedeman A. Enemies of the state: mass incidents and subversion. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. Toronto; 2009.Google Scholar
  67. Whiting S. The cadre evaluation system at the grassroots: the paradox of party rule. In: Naughton B, Yang D, editors. Holding China together: diversity and national integration in the post-Deng era. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2004. p. 101–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wintrobe R. The political economy of dictatorship. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wu Z. Xin Zhongguo 60 nian xinfang zhidu de lishi kaocha (Historical investigation of sixty years of the letters and visits system in the new China). In Zhonggong Dangshi Yanjiu (Central Committee Research on Party History). no. 11, 2009; (137): 46–53Google Scholar
  70. Xinhua. Xishu Zhonggong fanfu niandu “chengji dan” (Numerous CCP annual “report cards”). 2014.Google Scholar
  71. Zhang Y, Zhang W. Lintong xinfang: Zhongguo jiceng xinfang wenti yanjiu baogao (Letters and visits in Lintong: Research report on grassroots letters and visits in China). Beijing: Renmin Chubanshe; 2009.Google Scholar
  72. Zheng R. Zhongguo gongchandang jilüxue (Chinese Communist Party discipline inspection manual). Beijing: Renmin Chubanshe; 2009.Google Scholar
  73. Zhonggong Zhongyang Bangongting & Guowuyuan bangongting. Guanyu chuangxin qunzhong gongzuo fangfa jiejue xinfang tuchu wenti de yijian (Opinion on resolving prominent problems in letters and visits through a new style of work with the masses). 2014.Google Scholar
  74. Zhongyang Jilü Jiancha Weiyuanhui. Duiyu niming xin chuli de yijian (Opinion on the handling of anonymous letters). 1987.Google Scholar
  75. Zhongyang Jiwei, Jiancha Bu. Jijian jiancha xinfang: Jianming jiaocheng (Discipline inspection and supervision letters and visits: Concise tutorial). Beijing: Fangzheng Chubanshe; 2001.Google Scholar
  76. Zouping county government. 2007 nian xianzhi jiguan fanfu changlian jianshe he qinzheng xiaoneng jianshe zonghe kaohe xize (2007 detailed rules on the comprehensive evaluation of organs directly under the county government in the areas of building up anti-corruption and advocacy of honesty as well as building up diligent government capacity). 2007.Google Scholar
  77. Zouping zhengfu gongzuo baogao (Zouping government work report). 2009.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceTulane UniversityNew OrleansUSA

Personalised recommendations