Brief Study of the Attitude of the Chinese State Toward NGOs - A Relationship of Dependent Autonomy
Brief Study of the Attitude of the Chinese State toward NGOs: A Relationship of Dependent Autonomy (The study briefly focuses on the attitude of the regulative state which is providing the non-state actors some sort of dependent autonomy for its own existence. The following parts of the same discussion will be published elsewhere.) Asoke Kumar Mehera (aust35@gmail.com) (Teacher of Skills Institute, Australia)

The principal focus of this brief article is to explore the Chinese state-centric attitude towards NGOs as part of the broader implementation of CSR strategies. I am going to concentrate on the emergence of local corporatist state framework, which is paving a new way for the autonomy of the NGOs. Although, Chinese state-centric model of CSR is contrary to the market-based model (US) and relational model (EU); but non-monolithic nature of the present state is contributing towards local government influence and control. The NGOs in Shanghai & Guangdong province indicates that local governments implement their own policy in the absence of higher-level guidance of central policy and the local states across all levels have a substantial interest and control in the work and operations of NGOs. It is essential to analyse the collaborative role of the local state at various levels – particularly at the municipal and district level – in pursuing the objectives and operational development of NGOs. A local corporatist state framework is therefore an appropriate mechanism to interpret the state’s actions, and the ensuing state-society engagements. Tacit sanctioning in the context of State-NGO relations is useful to understand how the local state has modified corporatist mechanisms vis-à-vis social responsibilities and the increasing activism of NGOs. Yiyi Lu’s (2008) study, for instance, provides good grounds for arguing that the autonomy of the NGOs arise in part because of the limited capacity of central government to control NGOs, and in part because of the fragmented and non-monolithic nature of the state, which enables individual bureaucratic patrons to protect particular NGOs, especially officially-organised ones, from the full impact of state control. It is easy to notice a leading trend towards an "uncivil society", where rules do not exist or are ignored, and where organisations which are supposed to work for the public interest are being used to serveillegitimate private interests instead. I want to relate NGO studies to such issues as state capacity, political culture, and the evolving state-society relations in China. Migdal’s (2001) state-in-society approach (where local state is seeking to co-opt certain NGOs as a means of extending the institutional reach of the state within society) emphasizes alterations to the state, and subsequently impact on society. It is necessary to articulate the benefits of a local state corporatist framework because there is ‘strong evidence that social and economic interests are equally desirous of a state corporatism that accommodates their presence in politics. Central economic development policies now directly support and motivate the proliferation of local government CSR programs. At the subnational level, local officials also have personal incentives to prioritize legal compliance and CSR goals for sustainable development. Local CSR guideline and audit programs are the centrepiece of many subnational governments’ CSR facilitation efforts and have been adopted by governments in different provinces including Shanghai. There is a vast discourse on localism and the growing shift from central to local state influence, which is paving a new way for State-NGO relations. This is needed because of the socio-economic changes (as experienced by NGOs) and political changes (transition in state-structure in regard to implementation of CSR) in leading areas of China (i.e. Shanghai & Guangdong province). The traditional scholars have emphasized that the growth and expansion of NGOs in China should be considered from State-centric CSR (regulation, policymaking, standard-setting, and other forms of governmental facilitation of CSR) perspective. However, the main understudied area is local governance and ever-growing autonomy. There is an interesting intersection of law, CSR and the civil society efforts in specific provinces. State Policy makers, social pressure groups and community stakeholders are reorganizing their plans to contribute towards the better implementation of CSR. This can potentially upgrade and expand the NGO activities to improve the standards of socio-economic life. Through the investigation and interaction with the operators of NGOs, the relevance of the frequently applied theoretical frameworks – state-centric theory has been examined by different scholars. The emerging results will be of particular significance for the application of an appropriate theory that can explain state-NGO relationship within the overall purview of CSRenvironment.

A research on the NGOs carried out in 2000 shows that popular NGOs active in the field of women’s rights, tries to hide the cases from mass media because it would directly criticize the local authorities and police, whose goodwill is important for their existence. Many NGOs consider their relationship with government agencies and officials as the most important of all their relationships. Many officially organized NGOs at local levels are simply tools for local government agencies to create agency slush funds.

Chinese NGOs have been plagued by many external and internal problems, such as restrictive government NGO policies, their dependent relationship with the state, motivational problems of NGO staff, and certain features of China's political culture. Wary of the potential threat to its authority and rule, the government has adopted a policy of forestalling the formation of NGOs which might challenge it politically, weaken its control over society, or constrict its autonomy in formulating economic and social policies. For example, civil affairs department guidelines indicate that no NGO set up by ‘specific social groups’, such as migrant labourers, laid off workers, or ex -servicemen, should be allowed to exist. In a collection of MCA documents, several reports by provincial governments highlighted that the local government successfully persuaded the union (i.e. union at Shanghai factory by rural migrants protesting for reduction of working hours and pay rise) to disband. One of the clauses in the current government regulations for NGO management and registration prohibit national NGOs from establishing regional branches and provincial NGOs from expanding out of the provincial capital city. After the central government ordered an overhaul of the NGO sector in 1998, the local civil affairs department refused to renew the popular NGO’s registration. Rather than tracking the economics misdeeds of some NGOs, the government focussed its attack on certain types of NGOs (based on political/ideological ground) championing the rights of disadvantaged social groups and challenging state policies.

Various qualitative and quantitative studies of China’s political culture have identified a number of features that are not conducive to collectiveaction and civil society activism. These include elitism, fatalism, and lack of cooperative spirit and group solidarity. Individual NGOs need to pool their resources and join hands with other likeminded people and organizations to challenge government policies which prioritize economic growth over environmental protection. It is not unjust to apply “macro” political theories such as civil society and corporatism for explaining the actual behaviour of NGOs. Actually, we need to relate NGO studies to such issues as state capacity, political culture, and the evolving state-society relations in China.

References:
Migdal, J. S. (2001). State in Society: Studying How States and Societies Transform and Constitute One Another; Cambridge University Press. Hsu, J., and Hasmath, R. (2013).The Local Corporatist State and NGO Relations in China, Journal of Contemporary China 22. Aras,G., & Crowther,D. (2010).NGOs and Social Responsibility (Developments in Corporate Governance and Responsibility), Emerald Group Publishing. Yongnian, Z., & Fewsmith, J. (2008). China's Opening Society: The Non-State Sector and Governance (China Policy Series), Routledge, NY. Li, Y. (Ed) (2013). NGOs in China and Europe (2011): Comparisons & Contrasts, Ashgate Publishing Limited, England. Hildebrandt, T.(2013).Social Organizations and the Authoritarian State in China, Cambridge University Press, NY. Lu, Y. (2012). Non-Governmental Organisations in China (China Policy Series), Routledge, UK. Yu, J., & Guo, S. (Ed) (2012). Civil Society and Governance in China, Palgrave Macmillan, NY. Yaziji, M., & Doh, J. (2009). NGOs and Corporations: Conflict and Collaboration (Business, Value Creation, and Society), CUP, UK.