Accountability under populism and a dramatized environment: Do organizational transparency and policy meaningfulness matter?

Yanwei Li & Hongbo Yu

Public Policy and Administration2025https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767251347330article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.41

What the paper says

This study examines how two environmental conditions—perceived populism of the public and media attention—and two institutional conditions—transparency and policy meaningfulness—shape Chengguan officers’ felt accountability within a Chinese regulatory context. The findings reveal that environmental conditions do not directly influence street-level bureaucrats’ (SLBs) perceptions of accountability but instead exert their effects through institutional conditions. Specifically, Chengguan officers’ perceptions of public populism negatively affect their felt accountability via diminished policy meaningfulness, whereas media attention positively enhances their felt accountability through increased transparency. These findings underscore the importance of institutional conditions in mitigating the potential negative effects of populism and dramatized environments on SLBs’ felt accountability. By highlighting the intermediary role of institutional conditions, this study contributes to the field of public administration by offering insights into the mechanisms shaping SLBs’ perceptions of accountability.

2 citations

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767251347330

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{yanwei2025,
  title        = {{Accountability under populism and a dramatized environment: Do organizational transparency and policy meaningfulness matter?}},
  author       = {Yanwei Li & Hongbo Yu},
  journal      = {Public Policy and Administration},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767251347330},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Accountability under populism and a dramatized environment: Do organizational transparency and policy meaningfulness matter?

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.41

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.25 × 0.4 = 0.10
M · momentum0.55 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.