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

Analysis of governmental open letters mobilizing residents in China during the COVID-19 pandemic

“…In Zhou's (2017) opinion, in fact, campaigns are often initiated to correct problems when the routine mechanism gradually solidifies the boundary between administration practice, but might weaken the stability and efficiency of bureaucratic organizations. Furthermore, the mobilization might cause problems such as high institutional costs or redistribution of institutional legitimacy (Cai et al, 2022).…”

“…The Central Leading Group works under the leadership of the Central Politburo Standing Committee of the CPC and sends commands directly to the subordinate departments and local governments. This command-control chain further includes hundreds of headquarters set up in local governments throughout the country (Cai et al, 2022). Furthermore, unusual measures are adopted to guarantee the effectiveness of top-down campaign, such as the removal of provincial leaders in Hubei Province and Wuhan City, and the large number of officials sent from upper-level governments to communities (Mei, 2020).…”

“…Shan, 2008; Tang, 2007). Researchers have also observed institutional changes during such top-down mobilizations: usual organizational relationships are often broken, the conventions formed in routine administrative practice are sometimes challenged, and most often, various temporary organizations are constructed parallel with or above those in the original vertical hierarchy (Cai et al, 2022; Feng, 2011). In Zhou’s (2017) opinion, in fact, campaigns are often initiated to correct problems when the routine mechanism gradually solidifies the boundary between administration practice, but might weaken the stability and efficiency of bureaucratic organizations.…”

“…He et al, 2020). Cai et al (2022) study the realization of effective crisis governance during COVID-19 under a framework of campaign-style crisis governance. Mei (2020) find that the strict community lockdowns were made possible by the traditional strategies compatible with China’s policy style that features ‘centralized leadership, bureaucratic mobilization and collective memories of the right policy of previous crises’.…”

“…While COVID-19 studies under a campaign framework mainly focus on the crucial question of the effective government strategies to realize large-scale mobilization (e.g. Cai et al, 2022; Mei, 2020), the ways to explain and justify those actions have not received sufficient attention. In the series of meetings held by President Xi during the pandemic, public opinion and ideological work have always been treated as paramount as the concrete pandemic control measurements.…”