Social Value Chains: A New Organizational Framework for Studies on State-Society Relations in China

Abstract

Chinese Public Administration Review CPARIn the past three decades, many studies have emerged to conceptualize the changing state-society relations in China. Yet, less attention has been paid to what kinds of social sector organizations these competing or conflicting studies were empirically examining. This lack of a synthesis of the organizational foundations of these studies has resulted in fragmentation and weak generalization of the arguments on Chinese state-society relations. To address this issue, this article systematically reviews the organizational bases in the extant literature on the Chinese state-society relations. It then constructs an inclusive organizational framework, social value chains (SVCs), for future research by combining two mainstream organizational forms in extant research with two understudied organizational types. This new organizational framework includes four types of social sector organizations: infrastructure organizations, financial organizations, support organizations, and operating organizations. This article concludes by revealing potential applications of the new organizational framework to guide future research on state-society relations in China.

Party‐led innovation of state‐sponsored intermediary organizations in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangdong of China: Effects and managerial strategies

“…The findings echo some previous studies that neither liberal civil society ideals nor state corporatism framework can capture the diverse state–society dynamics in China (see the review in Han et al, 2018). Contrary to what previous studies suggest (e.g., Thornton, 2013), state‐sponsored IOs can gain organizational independence and managerial autonomy even though they receive high level of financial resources from the state and carry out party activities.…”

“…These IOs include mass organizations (quntuan zuzhi), and federations, associations and SO service centers. Although they were established in different time periods and possess different amount of resources (e.g., Han et al, 2018; Howell, 2015), they are all targeted by the party‐led innovation to strengthen the supporting services and regulatory supervision to their constituents; they are all funded by the state 2 to support and guide the participation of SOs in social service provision.…”

Explaining the expansion of the NGO sector in China: Through the lense of adaptive corporatist governance

“…This article by shifting the focus to the central state find its practice close to adaptive state corporatism, as it allows parts of autonomous civil society to remain active, yet it is steered and promoted via state control and intervention. These interventions and controls encompass the state's support of activities of intermediary organizations (Wei, 2022); as well as activities of organizations of diverse origins – state and grassroots alike (Han et al, 2018).…”

“…Such variability indicates that not all NGOs in China map on to the concept of liberal civil society which presumes NGOs' autonomy from the state. Second, the focus on the liberal civil society has led to a narrow examination of state relations with specific types of organizations—the grassroots organizations, 2 which in part contributes to weak generalization of state‐society relations in China (Han et al, 2018).…”

Promoting Sexuality Education for Children and Adolescents on a Large Scale: Program Design, Organizational Cooperation Network and Administrative Mobilization

“…It is believed that social organizations’ participation in solving the social problems depends on the support of foundations and supportive platform organizations that provide the funds and program design in a top-down approach. The participation of different social actors can help enhance the impact and resource mobilization ability of the social organizations, promote policy changes and solve social problems more effectively [ 16 , 17 ].…”