The paradox of citizen grievances in China: an institutional logics perspective

Abstract

Grievance petitioning is a prevailing venue for voicing citizens’ discontent and seeking redress in China. Extant literature documents the simultaneous growth of citizen petitions and local containment, without addressing the dynamics of such a paradox. Inspired by the institutional logics perspective, this study surveyed over 300 onsite petitioners and explored how multiple institutional logics are at work and together produce the paradox. Citizens embrace the grassroots logic, flooding petitions into the grievance system. Local governments follow the state logic, engaging in comprehensive containment. Grievance agencies cope strategically with the rise of citizen petitions and bureaucratic influences, demonstrating the ombudsman logic. Despite local containment and often less than satisfactory resolutions, citizens still hold favorable attitudes toward the grievance system, as well as the top bureaucracy, thus sowing the seeds for more petitions. The paradox manifests the coexistence and interactions of multiple institutional logics, raising challenges for governance and accountability. Points for practitioners The simultaneous growth of citizens’ grievances and local containment presents a paradox. Citizens follow the grassroots logic, filing more petitions. Local governments adhere to the state logic, prescribing containment efforts. In face of competing demands, grievance agencies embrace the ombudsman logic. The coexistence of and interactions among different logics help to explain the recurrent patterns for all parties. Future reforms need to be designed with a sophisticated understanding of interactive institutional logics.