Quality of governance and political support in China, Japan, and South Korea
| Author | Yida Zhai |
| Published date | 01 June 2022 |
| Date | 01 June 2022 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0020852320921473 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Quality of governance
and political support
in China, Japan, and
South Korea
Yida Zhai
Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China
Abstract
Based on the theoretical distinction between specific and diffuse support, this study
examines and compares the effects of governance quality on political support in China,
Japan, and South Korea. As regime type is an important contextual factor, the three
countries provide ideal cases for testing how the effects of governance on political
support vary across different political systems in East Asia. The results show that both
economic and political governance affects specific support in the three countries.
Political governance is more important for specific support in Japan and South Korea
than in China, though regime type does not moderate the effect of political governance
on diffuse support. In addition, economic governance is more impor tant for diffuse
support in China than in Japan and South Korea. In the field of specific support, eco-
nomic governance is more important for support for government officials in Japan and
South Korea than in China.
Points for practitioners
Public support is critical to a political system’s effectiveness, stability, and even survival.
Quality of governance determines the fate of authoritarian regimes. It is because of bad
governance that the masses cannot continue to tolerate the authorities and take
actions to overthrow authoritarian leadership. Echoing Fukuyama’s (2013) argument
that an authoritarian regime can be well governed, the Chinese government attempts
to improve the quality of governance so as to sustain autocratic leadership by promot-
ing technical innovation in administrative management. However, the intrinsic defects in
Corresponding author:
Yida Zhai, School of International and Public Affairs, Xin Jian Hall, Shanghai Jiao TongUniversity, 1954 Huashan
Road, Shanghai 200030, PR China.
Email: yidazhai@yahoo.com
International Review of Administrative
Sciences
!The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0020852320921473
journals.sagepub.com/home/ras
2022, Vol. 88(2) 411–427
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
authoritarian systems, such as the absence of constitutional constraints on power,
undermine their capacity to improve political governance. It is questionable how
much good political governance in an authoritarian system can achieve without dem-
ocratic reform of the political system.
Keywords
authoritarianism, democracy, East Asia, governance, governmental performance, polit-
ical support, regime continuity
Introduction
Quality of governance is of relevance to citizens’ evaluation of government, and
better governance helps the authorities earn public support. Even though there is a
long debate over the relationship between government and governance (Hysing,
2009; Peters and Pierre, 1998; Rhodes, 2007), the government is still viewed to be
the key agent in governance. Following Rotberg’s (2004, 2007, 2014) definition of
governance, the quality of governance is evaluated by government performance in
different policy domains. Improving the quality of governance is essential to any
kind of political system. As governance is multifaceted, the effects of economic
governance on public support may be different from the effects of political gov-
ernance on public support (Bratton and Mattes, 2001; Park, 2017). The separate
effects that governance in different policy domains has on the public’s political
support need to be examined.
The argument concerning a link between better governance and higher levels of
political support among the masses has become so commonplace that little atten-
tion has been paid to variations in political support. There has been a theoretical
tradition of distinguishing specific support from diffuse support because the two
types of political support are different in nature (Easton, 1965, 1975; Norris, 1999).
Nevertheless, there is insufficient research on whether the effects of governance
quality on specific support are the same as its effects on diffuse support. In addi-
tion, any existent difference may vary in different political systems. The impor-
tance of contextual factors in the research on political support has not obtained
sufficient attention until recent years. Regime type is an important contextual
factor and the effect of governance quality in different policy domains on political
support is contingent on regime type. Cross-national studies find that political
governance is more important for public support in democratic countries
(Mishler and Rose, 2002; Park and Shin, 2006).
Drawing on insights into the role of contextual factors, the present study takes
further steps to examine contextual variations in the effect of governance quality
on political support by dividing it into specific and diffuse support based on
Easton’s seminal theorization of political support. On the one hand, the People’s
412 International Review of Administrative Sciences 88(2)
To continue reading
Request your trial