Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Political Behavior
Published in: Political Behavior 2/2011

01-06-2011 | Original Paper

Distrust in Government Leaders, Demand for Leadership Change, and Preference for Popular Elections in Rural China

Author: Lianjiang Li

Published in: Political Behavior | Issue 2/2011

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between distrust in incumbent government leaders and demand for systemic changes in rural China. It finds that individuals who distrust government leaders’ commitment to the public interest have both stronger demand for leadership change and stronger preference for popular elections. It argues that distrust in government leaders may have enhanced the demand for leadership change, which in turn may have reinforced the preference for elections. It further argues that distrust in incumbent leaders has in effect induced a demand for systemic changes, as introducing popular election of government leaders would require a major constitutional amendment. The paper suggests that two distinctive mechanisms may be at work in determining whether distrust in current government authorities induces preference for systemic changes. Whether citizens can engineer leadership change through existing channels influences the generation of idealistic wishes for a better political system. Perceived availability of better and viable alternatives affects whether idealistic wishes become a practical preference.
previous article In the Eye of the Beholder? Motivated Reasoning in Disputed Elections
next article Do Campaigns Drive Partisan Turnout?

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
It is worth noting that preference for elections is not equivalent to support for democratization, not to mention demand for overall regime change. As important as it is, popular election of government leaders is only one of several major dimensions of a democratic system. Moreover, election without multiparty competition can hardly be considered a criterion for democracy. Even if government leaders at all levels are elected with one-person one-vote, China will at best become an “electoral authoritarian” country (e.g., Diamond 2002; Schedler 2006) rather than a democracy if such elections are limited to and run by a single ruling party and exclude all potential organized opposition. Recent survey studies of political support in urban China have used more direct measures to tap popular demand (or the lack of it) for regime change, e.g., to what extent an individual feels proud to live under the current political system and feels obliged to support the current political system, if an individual believes that the communist-led multi-party system should be changed, and whether an individual finds political stability more important than democratization (Chen 2004, p. 23; Tang 2005, pp. 70–76).
 
2
Villagers’ committees are not a level of government but “mass organizations of self-government.”
 
3
The answer “do not know” was treated as a valid response rather than a missing value because it was read out as an alternative answer during the interview and it indicates a level of perception of corruption which is stronger than answering “no” but weaker than answering “it is said so.”
 
4
It ought to be noted that many unobserved factors might have affected distrust in government leaders, demand for leadership change, and preference for elections. Failed attempts to defend one’s lawful rights and interests through non-electoral channels such as petitioning and administrative litigation, for example, may result in stronger distrust in government leaders, stronger demand for leadership change, as well as stronger preference for elections.
 
Literature
Abramson, P. R. (1972). Political efficacy and political trust among black schoolchildren: Two explanations. Journal of Politics, 34, 1243–1275.CrossRef
Abravanel, M. D., & Busch, R. J. (1975). Political competence, political trust, and the action orientations of university students. Journal of Politics, 37, 57–82.CrossRef
Achen, C. H. (1978). Measuring representation. American Journal of Political Science, 22, 475–510.CrossRef
Anderson, C. J., & LoTempio, A. J. (2002). Winning, losing and political trust in America. British Journal of Political Science, 32, 335–352.
Anderson, C. J., & Tverdova, Y. V. (2003). Corruption, political allegiances, and attitudes toward government in contemporary democracies. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 91–109.CrossRef
Avery, J. M. (2006). The sources and consequences of political mistrust among African Americans. American Politics Research, 34, 653–682.CrossRef
Avery, J. M. (2007). Race, partisanship, and political trust following Bush versus Gore (2000). Political Behavior, 29, 327–342.CrossRef
Balch, G. I. (1974). Multiple indicators in survey research: The concept “sense of political efficacy”. Political Methodology, 1, 1–43.
Berinsky, A. J. (2004). Silent voices: Public opinion and political participation in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bowler, S., & Karp, J. A. (2004). Politicians, scandals, and trust in government. Political Behavior, 26, 271–287.CrossRef
Bratton, M., & Mattes, R. (2001). Support for democracy in Africa: Intrinsic or instrumental? British Journal of Political Science, 31, 447–474.CrossRef
Burns, J. P. (Ed.). (1989). The Chinese communist party’s nomenklatura system. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Caddell, P. H. (1979). Trapped in a downward spiral. Public Opinion, 2, 2–7, 52–55, 58–60.
Cai, Y. (2008). Local governments and the suppression of popular resistance in China. China Quarterly, 193, 24–42.CrossRef
Catterberg, G., & Moreno, A. (2006). The individual bases of political trust: Trends in new and established democracies. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 31–48.CrossRef
Chan, H. S. (2004). Cadre personnel management in China: The nomenklatura system, 1990–1998. China Quarterly, 179, 703–734.CrossRef
Chanley, V. A., Rudolph, T. J., & Rahn, W. M. (2000). The origins and consequences of public trust in government—a time series analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 239–256.CrossRef
Chen, J. (2004). Popular political support in urban China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Citrin, J. (1974). Comment: The political relevance of trust in government. American Political Science Review, 68, 973–988.CrossRef
Citrin, J., & Green, D. P. (1986). Presidential leadership and the resurgence of trust in government. British Journal of Political Science, 16, 431–453.CrossRef
Citrin, J., & Muste, C. (1999). Trust in government. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of political attitudes (pp. 465–532). San Diego: Academic Press.
Craig, S. C., & Maggiotto, M. A. (1982). Measuring political efficacy. Political Methodology, 8, 89–110.
Craig, S. C., Niemi, R. G., & Silver, G. E. (1990). Political efficacy and trust: A report on the NES pilot study items. Political Behavior, 12, 289–314.CrossRef
Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. New Haven, NJ: Yale University Press.
Dalton, R. J. (1985). Political parties and political representation: Party supporters and party elites in nine nations. Comparative Political Studies, 18, 267–299.CrossRef
Diamond, L. (2002). Thinking about hybrid regimes. Journal of Democracy, 13, 21–35.CrossRef
Dong, L. (2006). Direct town elections in China: Latest developments and prospects. Journal of Contemporary China, 15, 503–515.CrossRef
Finkel, S. E., Muller, E. N., & Seligson, M. A. (1989). Economic crisis, incumbent performance and regime support: A comparison of longitudinal data from West Germany and Costa Rica. British Journal of Political Science, 19, 329–351.CrossRef
Fraser, J. (1970). The impact of community and regime orientations on choice of political system. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 14, 413–433.CrossRef
Hetherington, M. J. (2004). Why trust matters. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hill, D. B. (1981). Attitude generalization and the measurement of trust in American leadership. Political Behavior, 3, 257–270.CrossRef
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.CrossRef
Huber, J. D., & Powell, G. B., Jr. (1994). Congruence between citizens and policymakers in two visions of liberal democracy. World Politics, 46, 291–325.CrossRef
Jamal, A. (2007). When is social trust a desirable outcome? Examining levels of trust in the Arab World. Comparative Political Studies, 40, 1328–1349.CrossRef
Johnson, I. (2005). Political trust in societies under transformation: A comparative analysis of Poland and Ukraine. International Journal of Sociology, 35, 63–84.
Kinder, D. R. (1981). Presidents, prosperity, and public opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45, 1–21.CrossRef
King, G., Honaker, J., Joseph, A., & Scheve, K. (2001). Analyzing incomplete political science data: An alternative algorithm for multiple imputation. American Political Science Review, 95, 49–69.
Levi, M., & Stoker, L. (2000). Political trust and trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 475–508.CrossRef
Li, L. (2002). The politics of introducing direct township elections in China. China Quarterly, 171, 704–723.CrossRef
Li, L. (2004). Political trust in rural China. Modern China, 30, 228–258.CrossRef
Li, L., & O’Brien, K. J. (1996). Villagers and popular resistance in contemporary China. Modern China, 22, 28–61.CrossRef
Li, L., & O’Brien, K. J. (2008). Protest leadership in rural China. China Quarterly, 193, 1–23.CrossRef
Lipset, S. M., & Schneider, W. G. (1983). The decline of confidence in American institutions. Political Science Quarterly, 98, 379–402.CrossRef
Little, R. J. A. (1988). A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83, 1198–1202.CrossRef
Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: Wiley.
Manion, M. (1994). Survey research in the study of contemporary China: Learning from local samples. China Quarterly, 139, 741–765.CrossRef
Manion, M. (1996). The electoral connection in the Chinese countryside. American Political Science Review, 90, 736–748.CrossRef
Manion, M. (2000). Chinese democratization in perspective: Electorates and selectorates at the town level. China Quarterly, 63, 764–782.CrossRef
Manion, M. (2006). Democracy, community, trust: The impact of elections in rural China. Comparative Political Studies, 39, 301–324.CrossRef
Manion, M. (2008). When communist party candidates can lose, who wins? Assessing the role of local people’s congresses in the selection of leaders in China. China Quarterly, 195, 607–630.CrossRef
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999). Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320–341.CrossRef
Miller, A. H. (1974a). Political issues and trust in government, 1964–1970. American Political Science Review, 68, 951–972.CrossRef
Miller, A. H. (1974b). Rejoinder to “comment” by Jack Citrin: Political discontent or ritualism? American Political Science Review, 68, 989–1001.CrossRef
Miller, W. E. (1979). Confidence in government or a crisis in leadership? Misreading the public pulse. Public Opinion, 2, 9–15, 60.
Miller, A. H., & Listhaug, O. (1990). Political parties and confidence in government: A comparison of Norway, Sweden and the United States. British Journal of Political Science, 20, 357–386.CrossRef
Muller, E. N., & Jukam, T. O. (1977). On the meaning of political support. American Political Science Review, 71, 1561–1595.CrossRef
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2006). Mplus user’s guide (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
O’Brien, K. J. (1990). Reform without liberalization: China’s national people’s congress and the politics of institutional change. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
O’Brien, K. J. (Ed.). (2008). Popular protest in China. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
O’Brien, K. J., & Li, L. (2000). Accommodating “democracy” in a one-party state: Introducing village elections in China. China Quarterly, 162, 465–489.CrossRef
Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Reisinger, W. M., Miller, A. H., Heslik, V., & Maher, K. H. (1994). Political values in Russia, Ukraine and Lithuania: Sources and implications for democracy. British Journal of Political Science, 24, 183–223.CrossRef
Rose, R. (2007). Learning to support new regimes in Europe. Journal of Democracy, 18, 111–125.CrossRef
Rose, R., & Shin, D. C. (2001). Democratization backwards: The problem of third wave democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 31, 331–354.CrossRef
Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley.CrossRef
Sarsfield, R., & Echegaray, F. (2006). Opening the black box: How satisfaction with democracy and its perceived efficacy affect regime preference in Latin America. International Journal of Public Opinions Research, 18, 153–173.CrossRef
Schafer, J. L. (1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. London: Chapman and Hall.CrossRef
Schafer, J. L., & Olsen, M. K. (1998). Multiple imputation for multivariate missing-data problems: A data analyst’s perspective. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33, 545–571.CrossRef
Schedler, A. (2006). Electoral authoritarianism: The dynamics of unfree competition. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc.
Seligson, M. A. (2002a). Trouble in paradise? The erosion of system support in Costa Rica, 1978–1999. Latin American Research Review, 37, 160–185.
Seligson, M. A. (2002b). The impact of corruption on regime legitimacy: A comparative study of four Latin American countries. Journal of Politics, 64, 408–433.
Shi, T. (1999). Village committee elections in China: Institutionalist tactics for democracy. World Politics, 51, 385–412.
Shi, T. (2001). Cultural values and political trust: A comparison of the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan. Comparative Politics, 33, 401–419.CrossRef
SPSS Inc. (2008). SPSS missing values 17.0. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.
Stelzl, I. (1986). Changing a causal hypothesis without changing the fit: Some rules for generating equivalent path models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 21, 309–331.CrossRef
Sztompka, P. (2000). Trust: A sociological theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tang, W. (2005). Public opinion and political change in China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Tsai, L. L. (2007). Solidary groups, informal accountability, and local public goods provision in rural China. American Political Science Review, 101, 355–372.CrossRef
Waldron-Moore, P. (1999). Eastern Europe at the crossroads of democratic transition: Evaluating support for democratic institutions, satisfaction with democratic government, and consolidation of democratic regimes. Comparative Political Studies, 32, 32–62.CrossRef
Walker, K. L. (2006). Gangster capitalism and peasant protest in China: The last twenty years. Journal of Peasant Studies, 33, 1–33.CrossRef
Warwick, P. V. (1998). Disputed cause, disputed effect: The postmaterialist thesis re-examined. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 583–609.
Weatherford, M. S. (1984). Economic stagflation and public support for the political system. British Journal of Political Science, 14, 187–205.CrossRef
Weitz-Shapiro, R. (2008). The local connection: Local government performance and satisfaction with democracy in Argentina. Comparative Political Studies, 41, 285–308.CrossRef
Zhu, J.-H. (1996). “I don’t know” in public opinion surveys in China: Individual and contextual causes of item non-response. Journal of Contemporary China, 5, 223–245.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Distrust in Government Leaders, Demand for Leadership Change, and Preference for Popular Elections in Rural China
Author
Lianjiang Li
Publication date
01-06-2011
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Political Behavior / Issue 2/2011
Print ISSN: 0190-9320
Electronic ISSN: 1573-6687
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9111-3

Other articles of this Issue 2/2011

Political Behavior 2/2011 Go to the issue

Original Paper

In the Eye of the Beholder? Motivated Reasoning in Disputed Elections

Original Paper

Assessing the Impact of Alternative Voting Technologies on Multi-Party Elections: Design Features, Heuristic Processing and Voter Choice

Original Paper

Polarization and Issue Consistency Over Time

Original Paper

Sex and Race: Are Black Candidates More Likely to be Disadvantaged by Sex Scandals?

Original Paper

Do Campaigns Drive Partisan Turnout?

Original Paper

Accuracy and Bias in Perceptions of Political Knowledge