Sanctions play a pivotal role in ensuring accountability among local government officials. The existing literature, however, falls short in characterizing sanction measures and examining how sanction decisions are made in practice. We address this critical research gap by leveraging an innovative data set encompassing all sanction announcements against local officials during the most recent public health crisis in China. Beyond a rich descriptive analysis of sanction measures, our empirical analysis consistently indicates that, at the city level, the application of sanctions follows the principle of “the nail that sticks out gets hammered down first”. At the individual level, we find that poor managerial performance and central government on-site inspections escalate the punitive degree of sanctions on senior local leaders, while political patronage appears to mitigate the severity of sanctions and potentially influence their political career.
AleksovskaM.SchillemansT.GrimmelikhuijsenS. (2021). Management of multiple accountabilities through setting priorities: Evidence from a cross-national conjoint experiment. Public Administration Review, 82(1), 132–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13357
BehnR. D. (2001). Rethinking Democratic Accountability. Brookings Institution Press.
4.
BevanG.HoodC. (2006). What’s measured is what matters: Targets and gaming in the English public health care system. Public Administration, 84(3), 517–538. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00600.x
5.
BovensM. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468.
6.
BovensM.SchillemansT.GoodinR. (2014). Public accountability. In BovensM.GoodinR.SchillemansT. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 1–20). Oxford University Press.
7.
BrandsmaG. J. (2010). Backstage Europe: Comitology, accountability and democracy in the European Union. In Dissertation (pp. 1–279). Utrecht University.
DubnickM.YangK. (2011). The pursuit of accountability: Promise, problems, and prospects. In & H. WhiteD. Menzel (Ed.), The state of public administration: Issue, challenges, opportunities (pp. 171–186). M.E. Sharpe.
10.
GaoJ. (2015). Pernicious manipulations of performance measures in China’s cadre evaluation system. The China Quarterly, 223(September), 618–637. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305741015000806
11.
GaoJ. (2021). Mitigating pernicious gaming in performance management in China: Dilemmas, strategies and challenges. Public Performance & Management Review, 44(2), 321–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2020.1775662
GrantR.KeohaneR. (2005). Accountability and abuses of power in world politics. American Political Science Review, 99(1), 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055405051476
14.
HeA. J.ShiY.LiuH. (2020). Crisis governance, Chinese style: Distinctive features of China’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Policy Design and Practice, 3(3), 242–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2020.1799911
15.
HongS.KimY. (2019). Loyalty or competence: Political use of performance information and negativity bias. Public Administration Review, 79(6), 829–840. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13108
16.
HoodC.JamesO.ScottC.JonesG. W.TraversT. (1999). Regulation inside Government: Waste Watchers, Quality Police, and Sleaze-Busters. Oxford University Press.
17.
HuC. (2017). Accountability of public servants under dominant political settlements of China: Effects, challenges, and issues. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(3), 240–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2015.1107735
JiaR.KudamatsuM.SeimD. (2015). Political selection in China: The complementary roles of connections and performance. Journal of the European Economic Association, 13(4), 631–668. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12124
20.
JiangJ. (2018). Making bureaucracy work: Patronage networks, performance incentives, and economic development in China. American Journal of Political Science, 62(4), 982–999. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199641253.001.0001
21.
KuipersS.HartP. (2014). Accounting for crisis. In BovensM.GoodinR.SchillemansT. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 589–602). Oxford University Press.
22.
LandryP. F. (2008). Decentralized authoritarianism in China: The communist party’s control of local elites in the post-Mao era. Cambridge University Press.
23.
LandryP. F.LüX.DuanH. (2018). Does performance matter? Evaluating political selection along the Chinese administrative ladder. Comparative Political Studies, 51(8), 1074–1105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414017730078
24.
LiH.ZhouL.-A. (2005). Political turnover and economic performance: The incentive role of personnel control in China. Journal of Public Economics, 89(9-10), 1743–1762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2004.06.009
25.
LindbergS. I. (2013). Mapping accountability: Core concept and subtypes. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 79(2), 202–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852313477761
26.
Liston-HeyesC.JuilletL. (2022). What has become of the audit explosion? Analyzing trends in oversight activities in the Canadian government. Public Administration, 100(4), 1073–1090. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12793
27.
Manion Melanie. (2023). Political Selection in China: Rethinking Foundations and Findings. Cambridge University Press.
28.
Martinez-BravoM.Padró i MiquelG.QianN.YaoY. (2022). The rise and fall of local elections in China. American Economic Review, 112(9), 2921–2958. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20181249
29.
MulganR. (2003). Holding Power to Account: Accountability in Modern Democracies. Palgrave Macmillan UK.
NiX.WangR. (2018). The separation of powers and responsibilities and avoidance of responsibility at the grass-roots level: A theoretical explanation. Social Sciences in China (5), 116–135. (in Chinese).
RomzekB. S.DubnickM. J. (1987). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the challenger tragedy. Public Administration Review, 47(3), 227–238.
38.
RosenthalU.‘t HartP.CharlesM. T. (1989). The world of crises and crisis management. In RosenthalU.CharlesM. T.HartP. T. (Eds.), Coping with crises: The management of disasters, riots and terrorism (pp. 3–33). Springfield.
39.
SchedlerA. (1999). Conceptualizing accountability. In SchedlerA.DiamondL. PlattnerM. F. (Eds.), The self-restraining state: Power and accountability in new democracies (pp. 13–28). Lynne Rienner.
40.
ShiX.XiT. (2018). Race to safety: Political competition, neighborhood effects, and coal mine deaths in China. Journal of Development Economics, 131, 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2017.10.008
41.
ShihV.AdolphC.LiuM. (2012). Getting ahead in the communist party: Explaining the advancement of central committee members in China. American Political Science Review, 106(1), 166–187. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055411000566
42.
TianH., et al. (2020). An investigation of transmission control measures during the first 50 days of the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Science, 368(6491), 638–642. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb6105
43.
TuW.GongT. (2021). Accountability intensity and Bureaucrats’ response to conflicting expectations: A survey experiment in China. Public Management Review, 24(7), 1779–1801. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1930123
44.
WangX.XiaoH.YanB.XuJ. (2021). New development: Administrative accountability and early responses during public health crises—lessons from COVID-19 in China. Public Money & Management, 41(1), 73–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2020.1819012
45.
WarrenM. (2014). Accountability and democracy. In BovensM.GoodinR.SchillemansT. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 39–53). Oxford University Press.
46.
WooldridgeJ. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. The MIT press.
47.
XuC. (2011). The fundamental institutions of China’s reforms and development. Journal of Economic Literature, 49(4), 1076–1151. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.49.4.1076
48.
YeZ.MaB.LiY. (2023). Wrestling with multiple accountabilities in times of crisis: Findings from the experiences of Chinese local governments in responding to COVID-19. Review of Policy Research, 43(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12573
ZangX. (2017). How cohesive is the Chinese bureaucracy? A case study of street-level bureaucrats in China: Street-level bureaucrats in China. Public Administration and Development, 37(3), 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1790
51.
ZhouL. (2004). The incentive and cooperation of government officials in the political tournaments: An interpretation of the prolonged local protectionism and duplicative investments in China. Economic Research Journal, 6, 33–40. (in Chinese).
52.
ZhouL. (2007). Governing China's local officials: An analysis of promotion tournament model. Economic Research Journal, 7, 36–50. (in Chinese).
53.
ZhouX. (2008). Collusion among local governments: The institutional logic of a government behavior. Sociological Studies, 6, 1–21. (in Chinese).
54.
ZhouX. (2017). The institutional logic of governance in China: An organizational approach. SDX Joint Publishing Company. (in Chinese).
