Review and Assessment of China’s Nonprofit Sector after Mao

Published research in English is reviewed on the Nonprofit Sector ( nps ) in China since Mao’s death in 1976. A large, diverse, and rapidly growing nps exists, but openly political Nonprofit Organizations ( npo s) outside the Communist Party and its control are prohibited. China has civil society in the narrower sense that a substantial civil society sector or nps exists. However, the party-state in China continues to play a dominating role in regard to the nps , especially for registered npo s. Freedom of association is still limited in China, especially for national associations, which are nearly all Government Organized Non-Governmental Organizations ( gongo s), not genuine ngo s/ npo s. Genuine associational freedom at lower territorial levels, especially the neighborhood level, is widespread though incomplete, but present far more significantly than under Mao. A 1989 law made npo s legal for the first time after Mao, but only if they are registered with the government (Article 7 of 1989 law states that national npo s can only be registered with Ministry of Civil Affairs, and local npo s can only be registered with the local Bureau of Civil Affairs). Millions of small, largely unregulated, Unofficial or Unregistered Social Organizations (or uso s ), as grassroots organizations (grassroots associations/ ga s) are important evidence for some significant associational freedom at the local level. Technically, all these uso s are illegal under Chinese law, but they have substantial social legitimacy and relative freedom of action nonetheless. Most npo s, even registered npo s, can freely structure their internal governance, although nearly all the national associations are clearly controlled by the party-state. For the vast majority of npo s, especially small and usually local uso s, membership and levels of individual participation are now essentially voluntary. There is also a surprising range of volunteering, voluntary citizen participation, and orderly activism (restrained advocacy) through npo s, especially at the local level. All the above facts constitute substantial progress for the nps and npo s in China since Mao. The broader scope definition of civil society focuses on the general autonomy of the nps in relation to the government, with functioning civil liberties, and on the ability of npo s in general to influence significantly the government on various policy issues. In these terms, China has a comparatively weak but perhaps slowly emerging civil society. The party-state in China does not have either full associational freedom and civil liberties nor participatory or strong democracy as current, stated or operative goals. Indeed, the government has an ambivalent attitude and policies toward the nps and npo s. But such ambivalence is at least a huge improvement over Mao’s totalitarian repression of the nps and npo s.