3.8 Article

Promotion for Performance? The working incentive of Chinese provincial environmental agency heads in pollution reduction

Journal

CHINESE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages 20-34

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/153967542101200102

Keywords

performance management; promotion incentive; environmental governance; environmental agency head; China

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71704126]
  2. CUHK Faculty of Social Science Direct
  3. CUHK HKIAPS South China Program, and Hong Kong RGC-ECS [24606015]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found a lack of promotion incentive among China's provincial environmental agency heads, whose working motivation mainly comes from top-down control, making them merely implementers of economy-dominated local public policy.
Promotion is argued to be the primary working incentive for Chinese officials. Different from previous studies that focus on the provincial governors and party secretaries, this paper makes the first attempt to examine whether the career turnover of China's provincial environmental agency heads (PEAHs) is affected by the environmental performance within their jurisdictions. The results show that the performance in reducing nationally targeted pollutants-i.e., sulfur dioxide (SO2) and chemical oxygen demand (COD)-is not necessarily correlated with political turnover, which only depends on political factors such as the age when assuming office, tenure of the office, and if they are local people. Therefore, a lack of promotion incentive is found among China's PEAHs in local environmental management. Their working incentive is straightforward top-down control, making them merely the implementers of economy-dominated local public policy. A more robust and transparent performance management system, to connect the provincial environmental performance with the PEAH's political career, is supposed to be beneficial for China's environmental management.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available