IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rapaxx/v48y2026i1p105-125.html

What is good government? comparing public values across three Confucian societies

Author

Listed:
  • Qinrou Zhou
  • Chung-An Chen
  • Soojin Kim

Abstract

What should a good government do? Answers to this question vary across institutional and cultural contexts, reflecting individuals’ underlying public values. This study examines how future public administrators – students majoring in public administration – perceive public values associated with a good government in China, Singapore, and Taiwan, three Confucian societies. Drawing on survey data from first-year public administration students and analysing differences using ANOVA and ANCOVA, we find that students prioritise government functions differently, with public sentiment strongly shaping their expectations. Certain societal dimensions – such as efficiency in China, public security in Singapore, and human rights in Taiwan – are highly prioritised, whereas others – such as equity in China, happiness in Singapore, and public security in Taiwan – receive relatively limited attention. This study contributes to comparative public administration by moving beyond East – West comparison and focusing on variations within Confucian societies. It has implications for public administration scholars and educators for a more balanced perspective about public values.

Suggested Citation

  • Qinrou Zhou & Chung-An Chen & Soojin Kim, 2026. "What is good government? comparing public values across three Confucian societies," Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(1), pages 105-125, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rapaxx:v:48:y:2026:i:1:p:105-125
    DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2025.2612290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/23276665.2025.2612290
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/23276665.2025.2612290?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rapaxx:v:48:y:2026:i:1:p:105-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAPA20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.