China Policy Journal Volume 1, Number 1, Fall 2018 | Page 95

China Policy Journal
tween objective and subjective performance
indicators (Miller and Miller
1991). Due to the differences in conceptualization,
measurement, and model
specification, the debate has continued
and research findings are mixed.
A stream of studies tries to empirically
show that subjective government performance
are influenced by individual
demographic characteristics such as
gender, age, education and race, and
individual use experience and expectation
(Brown and Coulter 1983; Stipak,
1979, 1980; Swindell and Kelly 2000;
Van Ryzin and Immerwahr 2008).
Stipak (1979) argued that many
public services are rarely used by citizens.
The relationship between subjective
indicators and objective indicators
is confounded by many statistical problems.
Brown and Coulter (1983) empirically
explored the relationship between
residents’ perceived police performance
(e.g., policy response time, police treatment
of people, and police service
quality) and corresponding objective
indicators, finding that subjective indicators
are not significantly related to
objective indicators. However, other
scholars disagreed that previous studies
have various methodological problems.
At least in public service areas such as
park maintenance and street cleaning,
if outcome-oriented objective indicators
and a more scientific research design
are adopted, subjective and objective
indicators are significantly related,
which means that citizen’s perception
of government performance can reflect
government genuine performance (Andrews
et al. 2011). Using New York public
school data, Charbonneau and Van
Ryzin (2011) found that parents’ subjective
assessment of education quality
corresponds fairly well with objective
school performance measures.
Proving public goods and service,
and regulating market are two
essential functions of government. Air
is a pure public good. Without government
regulation, due to air pollution’s
externality and spillover effects,
“the tragedy of commons” takes place
(Burger and Gochfeld 1998). Air quality
is considered as a sign of government
regulatory capacity and an essential
indicator of government performance
(Holzer and Yang 2004). Different from
other public services such as park and
library; nobody can escape from enjoying
the “service.” Air pollution is highly
sensible and visible. However, it does
not necessarily mean subjective perceptional
measures are reliable in measuring
air quality.
Perception of air pollution is
socially constructed by individuals
and societal characteristics, as well as
their interactions (Li and Li 2012). Human
body is an adaptive system, and
long-time exposure to pollution could
change the psychological and biological
formula for evaluating air quality.
Objective measures of air pollution are
based on a universal set of scientific
measures according to a set of universal
scientific “truth” of public health.
In contrast, regular people do not have
professional equipment and knowledge
to detect air quality. In addition to their
personal experience, their perception
of air quality is highly influenced by
information provided by mass media
92