COVID-19 has created long-lasting yet unprecedented challenges worldwide. In addition to scientific efforts, political efforts and public administration are also crucial to contain the disease. Therefore, understanding how multi-level governance systems respond to this public health crisis is vital to combat COVID-19. This study focuses on China and applies social network analysis to illustrate interactive governance between and within levels and functions of government, confirming and extending the existing Type I and Type II definition of multi-level governance theory. We characterize four interaction patterns—vertical, inter-functional, intra-functional, and hybrid—with the dominant pattern differing across governmental functions and evolving as the pandemic progressed. Empirical results reveal that financial departments of different levels of government interact through the vertical pattern. At the same time, intra-functional interaction also exists in provincial financial departments. The supervision departments typically adopt the inter-functional pattern at all levels. At the cross-level and cross-function aspects, the hybrid interaction pattern prevails in the medical function and plays a fair part in the security, welfare, and economic function. This study is one of the first to summarize the interaction patterns in a multi-level setting, providing practical implications for which pattern should be applied to which governmental levels/functions under what pandemic condition.
AlemannoA. (2020). The European response to COVID19. From regulatory emulation to regulatory coordination. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 11(2), 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2020.44
2.
AndersonM.MckeeM.MossialosE. (2020). Covid-19 exposes weaknesses in European response to outbreaks. BMJ, 368(m1075), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1075
3.
BacciniL.BrodeurA. (2021). Explaining governors’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. American Politics Research, 49(2), 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X20973453
4.
BacheI.AndreouG. (2013). Cohesion policy and multi-level governance in South East Europe. London: Routledge.
5.
BacheI.BartleI.FlindersM.MarsdenG. (2014). Blame games and climate change: Accountability, multi-level governance and carbon management. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 17(1), 64–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-856X.12040
6.
BacheI.FlindersM. (2004). Themes and issues in multi-level governance. In Multi-level governance (pp. 1–12). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7.
BacheI.FlindersM. (2015). Multi-level governance: Essential readings.Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.
8.
BenzA. (2000). Two types of multi-level governance: Intergovernmental relations in German and EU regional policy. Regional & Federal Studies, 10(3), 21–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/13597560008421130
9.
BesleyT. J.CoateS. (2003). Centralized versus decentralized provision of local public goods: A political economy analysis. Journal of Public Economics, 87(12), 2611–2637. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(02)00141-X
10.
BlatterJ., K. (2001). Debordering the world of states: Towards a multilevel system in Europe and a multi-polity system in North America? Insights from border regions. European Journal of International Relations, 7(2), 175–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066101007002002
11.
BonaccorsiG.PierriF.CinelliM.FloriA.GaleazziA.PorcelliF., Schmidt, A. L., Valensise, C. M., Scala, A., Quattrociocchi, W., & Pammolli, F. (2020). Economic and social consequences of human mobility restrictions under COVID-19. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(27), 15530–15535. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2007658117
12.
BrattbergE.RhinardM. (2011). Multilevel governance and Complex threats: The case of pandemic preparedness in the European Union and the United States. Global Health Governance, 5(1). 1–21. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2194169
13.
CasellaA.WeingastB. (1995). Elements of a theory of jurisdictional change. In Politics and institutions in an integrated Europe (pp. 11–41). Springer.
14.
CooperM.ReillyE. E.SiegelJ. A.ConiglioK.Sadeh-SharvitS.PisetskyE. M.AndersonL. M. (2020). Eating disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic and quarantine: An overview of risks and recommendations for treatment and early intervention. Eating Disorders, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10640266.2020.1790271
15.
CuiP.LiD. Z. (2020). A SNA-based methodology for measuring the community resilience from the perspective of social capitals: Take Nanjing, China as an example. Sustainable Cities and Society, 53(2020), 101880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101880
16.
DaniellK. A.KayA. (2018). Part 1: Conceptual Challenges. In DaniellK. A.KayA. (Eds.), Multi-level Governance: Conceptual Challenges and Case Studies from Australia (pp. 3–157). ANU Press.
17.
EnderleinH.WältiS.ZürnM. (2010). Handbook on multi-level governance. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.
18.
FreyB. S.EichenbergerR (1999). The New Democratic Federalism for Europe: Functional, Overlapping and Competing Jurisdictions (pp. 3–14). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
19.
GuarnacciU. (2016). Joining the dots: Social networks and community resilience in post-conflict, post-disaster Indonesia. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 16(1), 180–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.03.001
20.
HaoX.ChengS.WuD.WuT.LinX.WangC. (2020). Reconstruction of the full transmission dynamics of COVID-19 in Wuhan. Nature, 584(1), 420–424. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2554-8
21.
HoogheL.MarksG. (2001). Multi-level governance and European integration. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
22.
HoogheL.MarksG. (2003). Unraveling the central state, But how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649
23.
HuQ.KnoxC. C.KapucuN. (2014). What have we learned since September 11, 2001? A network study of the Boston marathon bombings response. Public Administration Review, 74(6), 698–712. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12284
24.
InmanR. P.RubinfeldD. L. (1996). The political economy of federalism. In MuellerD (Ed.), Perspectives on Public Choice: A Handbook (pp. 73–105). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.
İrepoğlu CarrerasY. (2019). Problem-solving across literatures: Comparative federalism and multi-level governance in climate change action. European Policy Analysis, 5(1), 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1066
26.
JalaliA.PetersonB.GalbadageD. (2020). Early COVID-19 interventions failed to replicate 1918 St. Louis vs. Philadelphia outcomes in the United States. Frontiers in Public Health, 8(9), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.579559
27.
JiaoW. Y.WangL. N.LiuJ.FangS. F.JiaoF. Y.Pettoello-MantovaniM.SomekhE. (2020). Behavioral and emotional disorders in children during the COVID-19 epidemic. The Journal Of Pediatrics221(6), 264–266.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.03.013
28.
KapucuN. (2006). Interagency communication networks during emergencies - boundary spanners in multiagency coordination. The American Review of Public Administration, 36(2), 207–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074005280605
29.
KapucuN. (2008). Collaborative emergency management: Better community organising, better public preparedness and response. Disasters, 32(2), 239–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2008.01037.x
30.
KapucuN.ArslanT.DemirozF. (2010). Collaborative emergency management and national emergency management network. Disaster Prevention and Management, 19(4), 452–468. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653561011070376
31.
KapucuN.AugustinM. E.GarayevV. (2009). Interstate partnerships in emergency management: Emergency management assistance compact in response to catastrophic disasters. Public Administration Review, 69(2), 297–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.01975.x
32.
KapucuN.GarayevV. (2011). Collaborative decision-making in emergency and disaster management. International Journal of Public Administration, 34(6), 366–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2011.561477
33.
Kohler-KochB.EisingR. (1999). The transformation of governance in the European Union. London: Routledge.
34.
KolibaC.MeekJ. W.ZiaA. (2017). Governance networks in public administration and public policy (1). Boca Raton: Routledge.
35.
KraemerM. U. G.YangC.-H.GutierrezB.WuC.-H.KleinB.PigottD. M., Plessis, L. D., Faria, N. R., Li, R., Hanage, W. P., Brownstein, J. S., Layan, M., Vespignani, A., Tian, H., Dye, C., Pybus, O. G., & Scarpino, S. V. (2020). The effect of human mobility and control measures on the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Science, 368(6490), 493–497. https://doi.org/doi:10.1126/science.abb4218
36.
LelandS.ThurmaierK. (2014). Political and functional local government consolidation: The challenges for core public administration values and regional reform. The American Review of Public Administration, 44(4_suppl), 29S–46S. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074014533003
37.
MarksG. (1993). Structural Policy and Multilevel Governance in the EC. In CafrunyA.RosenthalG. (Eds.), The State of the European Community State of the European Union the Maastricht Debate & Beyond391–411. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
38.
MohammadfamI.BastaniS.EsaghiM.GolmohamadiR.SaeeA. (2015). Evaluation of coordination of emergency response team through the social network analysis. Case study: Oil and Gas refinery. Safety and Health at Work, 6(1), 30–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2014.09.004
39.
NanY.FengT.HuY.QiX. (2020). Understanding aging policies in China: A bibliometric analysis of policy documents, 1978–2019. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(16), 5956. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165956
40.
NeffS. M.RoeckerC. B.OkamotoC. S.HolguinS. L.NapuliJ. G.MattoxR., Hinkeldey, N. A., & Paris, D. J. (2020). Changes to Chiropractic Practice in Response to COVID-19: a survey of all 50 United States. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, 28(1), 44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12998-020-00333-6
41.
PanA.LiuL.WangC.GuoH.HaoX.WangQ.HuangJ.HeN.YuH.LinX.WeiS.WuT. (2020). Association of public health interventions with the epidemiology of the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China. JAMA, 323(19), 1915–1923. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.6130
42.
PaquetM.SchertzerR. (2020). COVID-19 as a complex intergovernmental problem. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 53(2), 343–347. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423920000281
Popering-VerkerkJ. V.BuurenA. V. (2016). Decision-making patterns in multilevel governance. The contribution of informal and procedural interactions to significant multilevel decisions. Public management review, 18(7–8), 951–971. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1028974
46.
RendaA.CastroR. (2020). Towards stronger EU governance of health threats after the COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 11(Special Issue 2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2020.34
47.
TangS. Y.AnB. (2020). Responses to COVID-19 in China and the United States: How governance matters. Social Science Electronic Publishing. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3602172
48.
TianH.LiuY.LiY.WuC.-H.ChenB., Kraemer, M. U. G., Li, B., Cai, J., Xu, B., Yang, Q., Wang, B., Yang, P., Cui, Y., Song, Y., Zheng, P., Wang, Q., Bjornstad, O. N., Yang, R., Grenfell, B. T., Pybus, O. G., & Dye, C. (2020). An investigation of transmission control measures during the first 50 days of the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Science, 368(6491), 638. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb6105
49.
TouatiN.MailletL.PaquetteM.-A.DenisJ.-L.RodríguezC. (2019). Understanding multilevel governance processes through complexity theory: An empirical case study of the Quebec health-care system. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(3), 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2017.1423501
50.
WangP. (2017). China’s governance: Across vertical and horizontal connexions. Plymouth: Springer.
51.
WeibleC. M.NohrstedtD.CairneyP.CarterD. P.CrowD. A.DurnováA. P., Heikkila, T., Ingold, K., McConnell, A., & Stone, D. (2020). COVID-19 and the policy sciences: Initial reactions and perspectives. Policy Sciences, 53(2), 225–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-020-09381-4
52.
WilsonK. (2004). The complexities of multi-level governance in public health. Canadian Journal Of Public Health, 95(6), 409–412. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03403981
53.
YanB.ZhangX.WuL.ZhuH.ChenB. (2020). Why do countries respond differently to COVID-19? A comparative study of Sweden, China, France, and Japan. The American Review of Public Administration, 50(6–7), 762–769. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020942445
54.
YaoD.YanW.ZhuY. (2021). Budget structure discontinuity: Unveiling mechanism and connecting logic in China’s context. Journal of Chinese Political Science, 26(2), 393–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-020-09679-3
55.
ZarembaA.KizysR.AharonD. Y.DemirE. (2020). Infected markets: Novel coronavirus, government interventions, and stock return volatility around the globe. Finance Research Letters, 35(7), 101597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101597
56.
ZhangQ.LuQ. B.ZhongD. P.YeX. T. (2018). The pattern of policy change on disaster management in China: A bibliometric analysis of policy documents, 1949–2016. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 9(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-018-0164-y
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
