Campaign-style crisis regime: how China responded to the shock of COVID-19

Abstract

How did China construct effective crisis governance systems to cope with a transboundary crisis like COVID-19? By integrating policy regime and campaign theories, this article constructs an analytical frameworkthe campaign-style crisis governance regimeto answer this question. The COVID-19 crisis was reconceived as a people's war in order to prompt idea-sharing within the regime. The decision-making and coordination capacity of crisis management was enhanced by the establishment of topdown leading groups/headquarters and complex horizontal/ vertical and formal/informal institutional arrangements. By aligning the interests of stakeholders through a variety of mechanisms, the supply of materials and human resources and the level of cooperation were significantly improved. China's campaign-style crisis regime is embedded in the nation's political-administrative structures. This article also discusses the theoretical and empirical implications of Chinese-style response in the end.

Government Communication, Perceptions of COVID-19, and Vaccination Intention: A Multi-Group Comparison in China

“…Government communication during the anti-COVID-19 campaign carries special significance in China, where its collectivist culture meets the patriotic hygienic movement. The campaign-style health risk governance of China is characterized by its establishment of top-down leading groups or headquarters and complex horizontal institutional arrangements, all of which greatly increased its efficiency in decision-making and coordination in combatting the pandemic (Cai et al, 2021). Chinese authorities are employing a combination of pressure, incentives, and education to motivate mass vaccination to conduct the largest vaccination campaign of the world for COVID-19 to achieve herd immunity (Hua, 2021).…”

From recovery resilience to transformative resilience: How digital platforms reshape public service provision during and post COVID-19

“…Finally, there has been a heavy focus on the Chinese government's control and campaign-style responses to the COVID-19 crisis (Cai, Jiang, and Tang 2021). This raises the important yet puzzling question.…”

Collaborative governance in emergencies: Community food supply in COVID-19 in Wuhan, China

“…Compared to ordinary time, effective leadership in emergency management would need the flexibility to overcome the constraints imposed by hierarchy or standard procedures ( Karaca, et al, 2012 ). It would also need to put practical limits to participation even though it would be necessary ( Waugh Jr and Streib, 2006 ) Cai, et al (2021) . summarised China's responses to COVID-19 as a "campaign-style crises regime", which included establishing leading groups and headquarters, horizontal formal and informal institutions, and vertical formal and informal institutions.…”

“…The COVID-19 is an emergency in which the state does not have time to organize competitions between regions as often used by the Chinese government in other policy contexts. However, Cai, et al (2021) 's research only focused on the epistemology perspective, i.e., the health aspect of the pandemic.…”