Page 87 - EER-2-3

Explora: Environment
and Resource The development of the river chief in Nantong and Huzhou

Table 2. Movement of the river chief system
Case Degree of transfer Primary driving force Degree of learning Primary motivation Adaptability Outcome performance
Nantong Copy External Soft Legitimacy Weak Low
Huzhou Assortment Internal Hard To be seen as a leader Strong High

4.3. Summary discussion As a result, Huzhou authorities had the freedom (and

This study selected Nantong and Huzhou to represent two time) to develop and institute a river chief system based
distinctly different cases of policy transfer in developing on a different set of motivational factors from those that
the river chief system in China. The objective was to better drove officials in Nantong. One of the primary reasons that
understand how a core model spreads under different Huzhou officials voluntarily engaged in the transfer process
situations within a hierarchical governing system. We was their desire to be seen as provincial leaders who could
selected Nantong because its administrators were acting offer a model that was even better than the Wuxi model.
under the direction of a higher governing authority and Concerning the transfer direction, Nantong reflects the
chose to follow the rules and regulations developed by the vertical transfer path of “absorption radiation,” where the
offices in Jiangsu Province rather than look more widely for Jiangsu Provincial Government absorbed Wuxi’s chief river
more appropriate models. This resulted in a near copy that system, slightly adapted it, and then promoted it across
failed to account for local needs or structures. Part of the the province. During this process, the river chief system
reason for this was that officials were motivated to appease underwent two stages of transfer translation: bottom-up
higher-level officials. Had Nantong officials undertaken a and top-down. In the bottom-up process, the Jiangsu
more informed process of policy development (including Provincial Government adjusted the original policies,
modeling their policy on what had been implemented in adding regulatory requirements while deleting some of
other “similar” municipalities within Jiangsu), based on the specific institutional design content. In the top-down
the needs of the municipality and its water courses, we process, Nantong primarily copied the Provincial guide.
believe that the outcomes of the transfer process would This uninformed/incomplete transfer subsequently led to
have been better than those to date. outcome problems (in relation to water quality measures)
that are still apparent in the Nantong region.
We selected Huzhou because its officials were
acting under their own initiative. As a result, this study In contrast, Huzhou’s transfer process had no time
demonstrated that Huzhou represents the advantages pressures, allowing transfer agents to engage in horizontal
associated with harder forms of learning in the transfer (between municipal governments) transfer at their own
process that voluntary transfer can encourage. In the case pace. This allowed for a considerably better learning
of Huzhou, this included understanding the specific needs environment that was enhanced by the motivation of
of the water resources in Huzhou (and the wider Zhejiang officials in Huzhou to be seen as policy innovators and use
Province) and how other similar jurisdictions operated the river chief to improve the conditions and operation of
their river chief systems. This informed transfer and their river basin management. 49,51
learning process allowed Huzhou officials to consider how We want to emphasize that despite both jurisdictions
different models could be assimilated into a new, more being under the direction of the central government’s
appropriate, and effective system. authority, as shown in Table 2, different motivations
Considering Chinese governing structures, once a drove the actors in Nantong and Huzhou, and that these
higher-level government introduces a policy, lower- motivations help explain the different types of transfer
level governments must act to implement it. In the case that occurred. Recall that the policy transfer behavior of
of Nantong, while the Provincial guidelines allowed a actors in Nantong reflects legitimacy orientation, which
degree of freedom in how the river chief was designed and led them to implement the policy spirit of their superiors,
operated, Nantong officials had to carry out the wishes of complete the task goals set by their superiors, and obtain
the Jiangsu Provincial government. In this, we found that the legitimate recognition of their superiors. On the other
this response was highly impacted by the institutional hand, the actors in Huzhou were motivated by the desire
setting, structuring how actors saw the transfer and thus, to improve the performance of watershed governance and
what motivations they prioritized. create a regional policy brand.
In contrast, Huzhou was not subjected to direct external In conclusion, while the study design limits our core
coercive pressure, as its superior government had not issued findings to Nantong and Huzhou, what it does suggest is
mandatory policy requirements around river management. that motivational factors need to be considered not only in

Volume 2 Issue 3 (2025) 10 doi: 10.36922/EER025110018