[JCA] Bribery as a Third Path to Power? Political Selection in China Beyond Performance and Patronage
.
Source: Journal of Contemporary Asia | Published: 2026-10-02
Category: 정권·선거 변동 | Keywords: china, election
금방섭님 지시에 따라 먼저 확인드립니다: 이 요청은 학술 논문 소개 분석글 작성으로, ODA 제안서/보고서(oda-master-writer 계열), 발표자료(oda-ppt-design), 회의 보고서(plaud-meeting-report), 통화 기록 인용(call-meeting-records) 중 어느 것에도 해당하지 않습니다. 맞는 스킬이 없어 일반 학술 작성 방식으로 진행합니다.
The question of how individuals rise to power within China's one-party system has long animated comparative political economy, and a forthcoming 2026 article in the Journal of Contemporary Asia, titled "Bribery as a Third Path to Power? Political Selection in China Beyond Performance and Patronage," sharpens that debate at a moment of renewed global scrutiny of authoritarian governance. Since Xi Jinping launched his anti-corruption campaign in 2012 through the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (CCDI), targeting both "tigers and flies," outside observers have tended to assume that graft is primarily a pathology to be purged rather than a functional, if illicit, mechanism of elite advancement. By foregrounding bribery as a potential independent channel of political selection, the article pushes against this assumption and asks whether corruption itself operates as a selection device alongside the two frameworks that have dominated China studies for decades.
Those two established frameworks are performance legitimacy, in which cadres are promoted based on measurable local economic outcomes such as GDP growth or infrastructure delivery, and patronage, in which advancement depends on factional loyalty and personal ties to senior leaders. The article's framing suggests a third logic: that payments or material exchange can themselves function as a selection criterion, independent of both demonstrated competence and demonstrated loyalty. This is a meaningful theoretical move because it complicates the tidy binary that much of the literature on Chinese cadre promotion has relied upon, in which analysts debate whether technocratic performance or guanxi-based patronage better explains who rises within the Communist Party's tournament-style promotion system. Positioning bribery as a "third path" implies that existing models, built around performance and patronage alone, may systematically under-predict actual promotion outcomes unless corruption is treated as its own explanatory variable rather than as noise or as a symptom of patronage networks.
This argument resonates with broader regional and global trends in governance and political economy research. China's own anti-corruption drive, which has disciplined well over a million officials since 2012 according to CCDI's public reporting, has been widely interpreted by Western and Chinese scholars alike as evidence that the leadership itself recognizes informal payment networks as a rival channel of advancement that threatens central control. The article's keyword framing around "election" also situates the piece within a wider literature on how selection mechanisms operate even in systems without competitive multiparty elections, including village-level elections conducted under China's Organic Law of Villagers' Committees, where local informal exchange has repeatedly surfaced in case studies as a determinant of electoral outcomes. Viewed alongside comparable patterns documented by organizations such as Transparency International and the World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators project, which consistently rank China in the middle tier on control-of-corruption metrics despite the scale of the anti-graft campaign, the article's core question extends a recognizable regional puzzle: formal anti-corruption enforcement and informal corruption-based selection can coexist within the same political system rather than being mutually exclusive.
For institutions like IOCSS that track the intersection of governance, civil society, and development assistance, the policy implications of treating bribery as a selection mechanism rather than a mere enforcement failure are significant. Donor agencies and multilateral bodies that calibrate governance conditionalities, including those tied to anti-corruption benchmarks under the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), typically assume that strengthening formal anti-graft institutions will reduce the role of informal payment in personnel decisions. If the Journal of Contemporary Asia article's framing holds, that assumption may be too linear: a selection system in which bribery operates as a parallel path to power would be more resistant to anti-corruption enforcement alone, since removing corrupt officials through campaigns like the CCDI's would not necessarily alter the underlying incentive structure that makes bribery a rational advancement strategy in the first place. This has direct relevance for civil society organizations and research institutes assessing the durability of anti-corruption reforms in China and in comparable one-party or dominant-party systems across Asia, where performance and patronage models have similarly been treated as sufficient explanations for elite circulation.
Looking ahead, researchers and practitioners engaging with China's political economy should treat this article's "third path" framing as an invitation to re-examine cadre-level data with corruption as an explicit independent variable rather than a residual category folded into patronage analysis. For practitioners working on governance and anti-corruption programming in the region, the implication is that interventions designed around either rewarding measurable performance or disrupting factional patronage networks may leave a third channel of elite advancement largely untouched. As the Journal of Contemporary Asia continues to publish empirical work on political selection in China through 2026, further studies that test the performance-patronage-bribery typology against subnational promotion data, local election outcomes, or CCDI case records would help determine whether bribery functions as a genuinely independent path to power or as an extension of patronage dynamics operating through monetary rather than purely relational channels. Either finding would carry consequences for how development institutions and civil society monitors calibrate their expectations about the pace and durability of anti-corruption reform in China and in similarly structured political systems elsewhere in Asia.