Administrative resilience and democratic backsliding in crisis governance: comparative lessons from Wuhan and Shanghai during COVID-19

This study examines how crisis governance in China mediates the tension between administrative resilience and participatory-democratic backsliding through a comparative analysis of Wuhan and Shanghai during the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing on government directives, media reports, and citizen feedback, the research explores how emergency responses affected transparency, citizen engagement, and institutional adaptability. The analysis reveals two contrasting governance logics: Wuhan’s coercion-then-correction model, marked by rigid centralization and subsequent adjustment, and Shanghai’s flexibility-then-retrenchment model, characterized by initial local experimentation followed by renewed central control. Despite these differences, both cities ultimately normalized emergency infrastructures, such as digital health codes and grid management, blurring the boundary between temporary crisis response and routine administration. The findings demonstrate that administrative resilience and democratic backsliding are not mutually exclusive: adaptive governance can legitimize expanded surveillance and reduced deliberation, thereby embedding exceptional controls into ordinary governance. Situating China’s experience within broader debates on hybrid regimes, the study shows how crisis governance in authoritarian contexts can simultaneously enhance bureaucratic competence and consolidate centralized authority. The article concludes that transparency, local accountability, and equity in public service delivery are essential to sustaining resilience without eroding democratic norms.