About the Journal
In Memory of Professor Jerzy Radecki
Editorial Office
Editorial Board
Scope
Impact Factor
Indexed in...
Journal Impact Factor contributing items
Contact
Subscription
Current issue
Online first
Notes to Authors
Frequently Asked Questions
Editorial policies
PJOES Publication Policy Overview
PJOES Peer Review Policy
PJOES Research Ethics and Malpractice Policy
PJOES Plagiarism Policy
PJOES Conflict of Interest Policy
PJOES Open Access Policy
PJOES Instructions for Reviewers
Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies Policy
Archive
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
What Can Arouse Government Attention for Pro-
Environmental Public Participation in China?
A Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis
1
Research Center for Government Governance and Public Policy, Yangzhou University, 88 South Daxue Road, Yangzhou,
Jiangsu Province, China
Submission date: 2024-06-17
Final revision date: 2024-12-13
Acceptance date: 2024-12-29
Online publication date: 2025-03-10
Publication date: 2026-01-30
Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2026;35(1):1385-1400
KEYWORDS
government attentionqualitative comparative analysispro-environmental public participationcases in China
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Government attention, the first step toward a policy agenda, has been a political resource
contested by multiple actors. However, the interaction of the determinants contributing to government
attention remains less explored. Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) of 35 proenvironmental
public participation cases, this article establishes an analytical framework to investigate
the determinants and explores how the determinants combine to arouse government attention. The
analysis identifies four configurations and reveals that when the structural distribution of attention is
significant, it can successfully arouse government attention under the catalysis of situated attention. The
results further indicate that some determinants can produce joint effects, while the role of organizational
degree and resource mobilization capability are not significant. In addition, the perception and trade-off
of the benefits and risks of decision-makers have greatly influenced government attention. This study
enriches the existing studies of government attention in China and provides references for effective
public participation practice.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
REFERENCES (74)
1.
TAMAR M., WIRAWAN H., ARFAH T., PUTRI R.P.S. Predicting pro-environmental behaviours: the role of environmental values, attitudes and knowledge. *Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal*, 32 (2), 328, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-12....
2.
LIM J.Y., MOON K.-K. Perceived environmental threats and pro-environmental behaviors: investigating the role of political participation using a South Korean survey. *International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health*, 17 (9), 3244, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph... PMid:32384739 PMCid:PMC7246740.
3.
GUO J., BAI J. The role of public participation in environmental governance: Empirical evidence from China. *Sustainability*, 11 (17), 4696, 2019. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1117....
4.
ZHANG G., DENG N., MOU H., ZHANG Z.G., CHEN X. The impact of the policy and behavior of public participation on environmental governance performance: Empirical analysis based on provincial panel data in China. *Energy Policy*, 129, 1347, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpo....
5.
JONES B.D. Reconceiving decision-making in democratic politics: Attention, choice, and public policy. University of Chicago Press, 1994.
6.
HäGE F.M. Political attention in the Council of the European Union: A new dataset of working party meetings, 1995–2014. *European Union Politics*, 17 (4), 683, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1177/146511....
7.
MEES H.L., UITTENBROEK C.J., HEGGER D.L., DRIESSEN P.P. From citizen participation to government participation: An exploration of the roles of local governments in community initiatives for climate change adaptation in the Netherlands. *Environmental Policy and Governance*, 29 (3), 198, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.18....
8.
XIA C., SHEN F. Does government pay attention to the public? The dynamics of public opinion and government attention in post-handover Hong Kong. *International Journal of Public Opinion Research*, 32 (4), 641, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/....
9.
LIU X., CIFUENTES-FAURA J., ZHAO S., WANG L. Government environmental attention and carbon emissions governance: Firm-level evidence from China. *Economic Analysis and Policy*, 80, 121, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.....
10.
FAN Z., CHRISTENSEN T., MA L. Policy attention and the adoption of public sector innovation. *Public Management Review*, 25 (10), 1815, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/147190....
12.
CHE Y.K., MIERENDORFF K. Optimal dynamic allocation of attention. *American Economic Review*, 109 (8), 2993, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20....
14.
SIMON H.A. Designing organizations for an information-rich world. *International Library of Critical Writings in Economics*, 70, 187, 1996.
15.
HE L., HUANG L., YANG G. Invest in innovation or not? How managerial cognition and attention allocation shape corporate responses to performance shortfalls. *Management and Organization Review*, 17 (4), 815, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.20....
16.
YU Q., QU S., PENG Z., JI Y. The robust maximum expert consensus model considering satisfaction preference. *Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization*, 2024. https://doi.org/10.3934/jimo.2....
17.
ZHU K., QU S., JI Y., MA Y. Distributionally Robust Chance Constrained Maximum Expert Consensus Model with Incomplete Information on Uncertain Cost. *Group Decision and Negotiation*, 1, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726....
18.
LIAO Z., LU J., YU Y., ZHANG Z. Can attention allocation affect firm’s environmental innovation: the moderating role of past performance. *Technology Analysis & Strategic Management*, 34 (9), 1081, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/095373....
19.
JONES B.D., BAUMGARTNER F.R. The politics of attention: How government prioritizes problems. University of Chicago Press, 2005.
20.
MARCH J.G. A primer on decision making: How decisions happen. Simon and Schuster, 1994.
21.
KLÜVER H., BÄCK H. Coalition agreements, issue attention, and cabinet governance. *Comparative Political Studies*, 52 (13–14), 1995, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/001041....
22.
JENNINGS W., SAUNDERS C. Street demonstrations and the media agenda: An analysis of the dynamics of protest agenda setting. *Comparative Political Studies*, 52 (13–14), 2283, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/001041....
23.
KLÜVER H., PICKUP M. Are they listening? Public opinion, interest groups and government responsiveness. *West European Politics*, 42 (1), 91, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/014023....
24.
CAUGHEY D., WARSHAW C. Policy preferences and policy change: Dynamic responsiveness in the American states, 1936–2014. *American Political Science Review*, 112 (2), 249, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/S00030....
25.
SU Z., MENG T. Selective responsiveness: Online public demands and government responsiveness in authoritarian China. *Social Science Research*, 59, 52, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssre... PMid:27480371.
26.
WEIBLE C.M., SABATIER P.A. Coalitions, science, and belief change: Comparing adversarial and collaborative policy subsystems. *Policy Studies Journal*, 37 (2), 195, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541....
28.
PERERA I.M. Interest group governance and policy agendas. *Governance*, 35 (3), 869, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.1....
29.
NOWNES A.J. Can celebrities set the agenda? *Political Research Quarterly*, 74 (1), 117, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591....
30.
HARVEY M. Celebrity influence: Politics, persuasion, and issue-based advocacy. University Press of Kansas, 2018. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1....
31.
FEEZELL J.T. Agenda setting through social media: The importance of incidental news exposure and social filtering in the digital era. *Political Research Quarterly*, 71 (2), 482, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591....
32.
KINGDON J.W., STANO E. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Little, Brown Boston, 1984.
33.
WALGRAVE S., SEVENANS J., VAN CAMP K., LOEWEN P. What draws politicians’ attention? An experimental study of issue framing and its effect on individual political elites. *Political Behavior*, 40, 547, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109....
34.
BAUMGARTNER F.R., JONES B.D. Agendas and instability in American politics. University of Chicago Press, 2010. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicag....
35.
VAN HULST M., YANOW D. From policy “frames” to “framing”: theorizing a more dynamic, political approach. *The American Review of Public Administration*, 46 (1), 92, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1177/027507....
36.
OLSON JR M. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, with a new preface and appendix. Harvard University Press, 1971.
37.
STONE D.A. Causal stories and the formation of policy agendas. *Political Science Quarterly*, 104 (2), 281, 1989. https://doi.org/10.2307/215158....
38.
LAWRENCE R.G. *The politics of force: Media and the construction of police brutality.* Oxford University Press, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/97....
39.
MCCOMBS M., VALENZUELA S. *Setting the agenda: Mass media and public opinion.* John Wiley & Sons, 2020.
40.
LUO J.-H., HUANG Z., ZHU R. Does media coverage help firms "lobby" for government subsidies? Evidence from China. *Asia Pacific Journal of Management*, 38, 259, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490....
41.
GILARDI F., SHIPAN C.R., WÜEST B. Policy diffusion: The issue‐definition stage. *American Journal of Political Science*, 65 (1), 21, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.1....
42.
ARNEY J. Venue shopping throughout environmental decision-making processes: climate change and winter use policies in Yellowstone. *International Journal of Environmental Policy and Decision Making*, 2 (3), 196, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEPDM....
43.
ZHOU Y., HOU L., YANG Y., CHONG H.-Y., MOON S. A comparative review and framework development on public participation for decision-making in Chinese public projects. *Environmental Impact Assessment Review*, 75, 79, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar....
44.
CHAN K.N., LAM W.F., CHEN S. Elite bargains and policy priorities in authoritarian regimes: Agenda setting in China under Xi Jinping and Hu Jintao. *Governance*, 34 (3), 837, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.1....
45.
LIU Y., CHAN R.H.Y. The framework of crisis‐induced agenda setting in China. *Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies*, 5 (1), 18, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.2....
46.
CHEN J., PAN J., XU Y. Sources of authoritarian responsiveness: A field experiment in China. *American Journal of Political Science*, 60 (2), 383, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.1....
47.
OCASIO W., LAAMANEN T., VAARA E. Communication and attention dynamics: An attention-based view of strategic change. *Strategic Management Journal*, 39 (1), 155, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.27....
48.
BALI A., HALPIN D. Agenda-setting instruments: means and strategies for the management of policy demands. *Policy and Society*, 40 (3), 333, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/144940....
49.
ALLWOOD G. *Agenda setting, agenda blocking and policy silence: Why is there no EU policy on prostitution?* Elsevier, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif....
50.
ROSSITER E.L. Measuring agenda setting in interactive political communication. *American Journal of Political Science*, 66 (2), 337, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.1....
51.
OCASIO W. Towards an attention‐based view of the firm. *Strategic Management Journal*, 18 (S1), 187, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)...+<187::AID-SMJ936>3.0.CO;2-K.
52.
RAGIN C.C. *Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond.* University of Chicago Press, 2009. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicag....
53.
SCHNEIDER C.Q., WAGEMANN C. *Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: A guide to qualitative comparative analysis.* Cambridge University Press, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978....
54.
KRAUS S., RIBEIRO-SORIANO D., SCHÜSSLER M. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) in entrepreneurship and innovation research - the rise of a method. *International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal*, 14, 15, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365....
55.
GERRITS L., VERWEIJ S. *The evaluation of complex infrastructure projects: A guide to qualitative comparative analysis.* Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018. https://doi.org/10.4337/978178....
56.
POT W.D., DEWULF A., BIESBROEK G., VERWEIJ S. What makes decisions about urban water infrastructure forward looking? A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis of investment decisions in 40 Dutch municipalities. *Land Use Policy*, 82, 781, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.land....
57.
STEAD V., ELLIOTT C., GARDINER R.A. Leadership legitimacy and the mobilization of capital(s): Disrupting politics and reproducing heteronormativity. *Leadership*, 17 (6), 693, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/174271....
58.
PAQUET M., LARIOS L. Venue Shopping and Legitimacy: Making Sense of Harper's Immigration Record. *Canadian Journal of Political Science*, 51 (4), 817, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/S00084....
59.
RIHOUX B., RAGIN C.C. *Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques.* Sage, 2009. https://doi.org/10.4135/978145....
60.
PARK Y., FISS P.C., EL SAWY O.A. Theorizing the multiplicity of digital phenomena: The ecology of configurations, causal recipes, and guidelines for applying QCA. *Management of Information Systems Quarterly*, 44, 1493, 2020. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/....
61.
CEPIKU D., GIORDANO F., MASTRODASCIO M., WANG W. What drives network effectiveness? A configurational approach. *Public Management Review*, 23 (10), 1479, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/147190....
62.
RAGIN C.C. *The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies.* University of California Press, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1525/978052....
63.
VANACKER T., FORBES D.P., KNOCKAERT M., MANIGART S. Signal strength, media attention, and resource mobilization: Evidence from new private equity firms. *Academy of Management Journal*, 63 (4), 1082, 2020. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.20....
64.
BEYERS J., KERREMANS B. Domestic embeddedness and the dynamics of multilevel venue shopping in four EU member states. *Governance*, 25 (2), 263, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468....
65.
WHITE L., LOCKETT A., CURRIE G., HAYTON J. Hybrid context, management practices and organizational performance: A configurational approach. *Journal of Management Studies*, 58 (3), 718, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.1... PMCid:PMC11676925.
66.
O'DONOVAN K. An assessment of aggregate focusing events, disaster experience, and policy change. *Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy*, 8 (3), 201, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.1....
67.
ALEXANDROVA P. Explaining political attention allocation with the help of issue character: evidence from the European Council. *European Political Science Review*, 8 (3), 405, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1017/S17557....
68.
KLÜVER H. Setting the party agenda: interest groups, voters and issue attention. *British Journal of Political Science*, 50 (3), 979, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1017/S00071....
69.
BARK T. Information provision as agenda setting: A study of bureaucracy's role in higher education policy. *Regulation & Governance*, 15 (2), 408, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.1....
70.
BAYERLEIN L., KAPLANER C., KNILL C., STEINEBACH Y. Singing together or apart? Comparing policy agenda dynamics within international organizations. *Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice*, 24 (3), 210, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/138769....
71.
CHEN S., CHRISTENSEN T., MA L. Competing for father's love? The politics of central government agency termination in China. *Governance*, 32 (4), 761, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.1....
72.
XU J., LU L., WEI J. Hierarchical difference in attention allocation of local governments: explaining change and stability in safety management. *Safety Science*, 152, 105789, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci....
73.
BAEKGAARD M., LARSEN S.K., MORTENSEN P.B. Negative feedback, political attention, and public policy. *Public Administration*, 97 (1), 210, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.1....
74.
HäGE F.M. Allocating political attention in the EU's foreign and security policy: the effect of supranational agenda-setters. *European Union Politics*, 21 (4), 634, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/146511....
| eISSN: | 2083-5906 |
| ISSN: | 1230-1485 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
