The politics of services subcontracting to NGOs in China
Lead Research Organisation:
London School of Economics and Political Science
Department Name: Department of International Development
Abstract
CONTEXT OF RESEARCH
This research investigates how, why and with what consequences the Chinese government procures welfare services from NGOs through sub-contracting. Governmental sub-contracting of welfare services from NGOs has become commonplace in many Western countries. However, in the case of China this is a new endeavour.
Following the introduction of market-oriented reforms in 1978 the old system and institutions of welfare began to break down. Since the mid-1990s the Chinese government has begun systematically to reform the welfare system in health, pensions, and social security, mainly in urban areas and more recently in rural. The need to expand welfare provider capacity to address a burgeoning range of increasingly complex welfare needs has led the Chinese government to look for non-state alternatives to welfare provision such as the private sector and NGOs.
However, a key obstacle to expanding NGO provision was the restrictive regulatory framework, which required NGOs to identify two government sponsors. After five years of experimentation, in July 2012 the Ministry of Civil Affairs changed the framework to enable certain types of NGOs to register directly with it, waiving the need for a second government sponsor. It thus gave the go-ahead to local governments across the country to roll out service procurement from NGOs.
These developments are significant because relations between the Chinese government and NGOs have often been tense, particularly regarding rights-based and advocacy groups perceived as a risk to social stability. Yet NGO-state relations are clearly pivotal to the effective implementation of this regulatory shift which could not just expand provider capacity but also promote a more relaxed political climate for NGOs in general. Getting NGO-state policies right in these sub-contracting arrangements is thus central to building effective NGO-state relations and balancing expanded welfare provision with stability concerns.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
There is little evidence to date on how these new sub-contracting arrangements affect welfare provision or NGO-state relations. So this project aims to fill this gap by investigating how the sub-contracting process unfolds on the ground, why NGOs and local governments co-operate to deliver services through sub-contracting, and how this affects provider capacity and the development of an NGO sector.
The research has several objectives:
a) To collect and analyse the laws, policies and contractual rules governing sub-contracting from NGOs in China nationally and in the selected sites, and gather information about the debates and arguments around this.
b) To generate original empirical data on why local government officials and NGOs co-operate in these service delivery contracts, and how sub-contracting affects NGO operations and relations with the local state.
c) At the policy and practical level, to highlight examples of best practice that can inform policy development in China and other similar contexts.
d) To conceptualise the emerging models of sub-contracting and NGO-state relations and to advance theoretical understanding of welfare-state building and civil society development in China.
POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS AND BENEFITS
This research project has a number of potential benefits. First, it will fill a yawning gap in knowledge about how and with what consequences the sub-contracting of welfare services from NGOs in China is working out on the ground, about which there is currently a lack of evidence. Second, it will cast light on the particular challenges and opportunities of sub-contracting from NGOs in an authoritarian context. Third, it will throw up examples of best practice in terms of sub-contracting rules and NGO-state relations that can be usefully applied in other countries. Finally, it deepens understanding in the West of how the Chinese government is addressing concerns around welfare, NGO sector development and social stability.
This research investigates how, why and with what consequences the Chinese government procures welfare services from NGOs through sub-contracting. Governmental sub-contracting of welfare services from NGOs has become commonplace in many Western countries. However, in the case of China this is a new endeavour.
Following the introduction of market-oriented reforms in 1978 the old system and institutions of welfare began to break down. Since the mid-1990s the Chinese government has begun systematically to reform the welfare system in health, pensions, and social security, mainly in urban areas and more recently in rural. The need to expand welfare provider capacity to address a burgeoning range of increasingly complex welfare needs has led the Chinese government to look for non-state alternatives to welfare provision such as the private sector and NGOs.
However, a key obstacle to expanding NGO provision was the restrictive regulatory framework, which required NGOs to identify two government sponsors. After five years of experimentation, in July 2012 the Ministry of Civil Affairs changed the framework to enable certain types of NGOs to register directly with it, waiving the need for a second government sponsor. It thus gave the go-ahead to local governments across the country to roll out service procurement from NGOs.
These developments are significant because relations between the Chinese government and NGOs have often been tense, particularly regarding rights-based and advocacy groups perceived as a risk to social stability. Yet NGO-state relations are clearly pivotal to the effective implementation of this regulatory shift which could not just expand provider capacity but also promote a more relaxed political climate for NGOs in general. Getting NGO-state policies right in these sub-contracting arrangements is thus central to building effective NGO-state relations and balancing expanded welfare provision with stability concerns.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
There is little evidence to date on how these new sub-contracting arrangements affect welfare provision or NGO-state relations. So this project aims to fill this gap by investigating how the sub-contracting process unfolds on the ground, why NGOs and local governments co-operate to deliver services through sub-contracting, and how this affects provider capacity and the development of an NGO sector.
The research has several objectives:
a) To collect and analyse the laws, policies and contractual rules governing sub-contracting from NGOs in China nationally and in the selected sites, and gather information about the debates and arguments around this.
b) To generate original empirical data on why local government officials and NGOs co-operate in these service delivery contracts, and how sub-contracting affects NGO operations and relations with the local state.
c) At the policy and practical level, to highlight examples of best practice that can inform policy development in China and other similar contexts.
d) To conceptualise the emerging models of sub-contracting and NGO-state relations and to advance theoretical understanding of welfare-state building and civil society development in China.
POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS AND BENEFITS
This research project has a number of potential benefits. First, it will fill a yawning gap in knowledge about how and with what consequences the sub-contracting of welfare services from NGOs in China is working out on the ground, about which there is currently a lack of evidence. Second, it will cast light on the particular challenges and opportunities of sub-contracting from NGOs in an authoritarian context. Third, it will throw up examples of best practice in terms of sub-contracting rules and NGO-state relations that can be usefully applied in other countries. Finally, it deepens understanding in the West of how the Chinese government is addressing concerns around welfare, NGO sector development and social stability.
Planned Impact
IMPACT OBJECTIVES
With this project, we aim to:
- Build up connections and contact with key stakeholders in the fields of HIV/AIDS, migrants, children with disabilities, to enhance awareness and maintain their steady commitment to the goals of the project;
- Contribute theoretically and conceptually to emerging debates around welfare and authoritarianism, and understanding of subcontracting of government services from NGOs;
- Influence thinking around key policies related to subcontracting from NGOs in China amongst academics, NGOs and policy-relevant people in government at a time when policies and legislation in this area are being developed, and when international development institutions are seeking to extend lessons from China to other countries;
- Encourage participation among researchers or partner bodies in project events.
KEY USERS AND BENEFICIARIES
For this project we have identified four key users and beneficiaries. These are:
a) Chinese government officials at national and local level, particularly in the ministries of health, civil affairs, finance and labour and social security;
b) International development institutions working in the fields of HIV/AIDs, migration and disabled children's services (these include WHO, UNAIDs, UNICEF, UNDP, foundations working in China, British Council China, China-related think-tanks and centres such as the Great Britain China Centre);
c) NGOs in the three sectors (these include the Preventative Medicine Association, HIV/AIDS and STD Association, China Aids Foundation; the Right to Play, the Disabled Services Research Centre; the Beijing Migrant Women Workers' Club, Facilitators);
d) Chinese and international support institutions for NGOs such as NGO research centres in China engaged in training NGOs, foundations and international development institutions.
HOW THEY BENEFIT FROM THE RESEARCH
As outlined in the Pathways to Impact, the project uses a variety of means and outputs to ensure that key users and beneficiaries benefit from the research. Much of the research involves engaging with potential users through informant interviews, so the project is designed to maximise opportunities for stakeholder engagement and knowledge exchange.
Government officials and international development institutions will benefit from the findings of this research by gaining clarity about effective policies and sustainable models of procurement that can be promoted more widely in China. This will assist with addressing increasingly complex and differentiated welfare needs, expanding the capacity of quality providers, and enhancing understanding of the constraints and risks of different models of procurement and ways to mitigate these. The research will also inform international social policy and practice about China's experiences with procurement of welfare services from NGOs.
NGOs and NGO-support institutions will benefit from the empirical findings of this research which will identify best practice models of procurement. This will help NGOs understand the risks and constraints of different procurement arrangements and help identify ways of mitigating these. It is hoped that the research will contribute to building productive relations and trust between government and NGOs.
As the research helps to identify the most effective, sustainable and appropriate models of procurement of welfare services from NGOs, the expanded capacity of quality service providers addressing diverse and complex needs will contribute to increased effectiveness of public services and policy that will ultimately benefit users.
With this project, we aim to:
- Build up connections and contact with key stakeholders in the fields of HIV/AIDS, migrants, children with disabilities, to enhance awareness and maintain their steady commitment to the goals of the project;
- Contribute theoretically and conceptually to emerging debates around welfare and authoritarianism, and understanding of subcontracting of government services from NGOs;
- Influence thinking around key policies related to subcontracting from NGOs in China amongst academics, NGOs and policy-relevant people in government at a time when policies and legislation in this area are being developed, and when international development institutions are seeking to extend lessons from China to other countries;
- Encourage participation among researchers or partner bodies in project events.
KEY USERS AND BENEFICIARIES
For this project we have identified four key users and beneficiaries. These are:
a) Chinese government officials at national and local level, particularly in the ministries of health, civil affairs, finance and labour and social security;
b) International development institutions working in the fields of HIV/AIDs, migration and disabled children's services (these include WHO, UNAIDs, UNICEF, UNDP, foundations working in China, British Council China, China-related think-tanks and centres such as the Great Britain China Centre);
c) NGOs in the three sectors (these include the Preventative Medicine Association, HIV/AIDS and STD Association, China Aids Foundation; the Right to Play, the Disabled Services Research Centre; the Beijing Migrant Women Workers' Club, Facilitators);
d) Chinese and international support institutions for NGOs such as NGO research centres in China engaged in training NGOs, foundations and international development institutions.
HOW THEY BENEFIT FROM THE RESEARCH
As outlined in the Pathways to Impact, the project uses a variety of means and outputs to ensure that key users and beneficiaries benefit from the research. Much of the research involves engaging with potential users through informant interviews, so the project is designed to maximise opportunities for stakeholder engagement and knowledge exchange.
Government officials and international development institutions will benefit from the findings of this research by gaining clarity about effective policies and sustainable models of procurement that can be promoted more widely in China. This will assist with addressing increasingly complex and differentiated welfare needs, expanding the capacity of quality providers, and enhancing understanding of the constraints and risks of different models of procurement and ways to mitigate these. The research will also inform international social policy and practice about China's experiences with procurement of welfare services from NGOs.
NGOs and NGO-support institutions will benefit from the empirical findings of this research which will identify best practice models of procurement. This will help NGOs understand the risks and constraints of different procurement arrangements and help identify ways of mitigating these. It is hoped that the research will contribute to building productive relations and trust between government and NGOs.
As the research helps to identify the most effective, sustainable and appropriate models of procurement of welfare services from NGOs, the expanded capacity of quality service providers addressing diverse and complex needs will contribute to increased effectiveness of public services and policy that will ultimately benefit users.
Publications
Enjuto Martinez R
(2021)
Government Contracting Services to Social Organisations in China: A Review of Research for Future Enquiry
in Social Policy and Society
Enjuto Martinez R
(2021)
Effects of Government Contracting of Services on NGOs in China: Convergence and Divergence with International Experience
in VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations
Howell J
(2021)
Technologies of Authoritarian Statecraft in Welfare Provision: Contracting Services to Social Organizations
in Development and Change
| Description | There are four key areas of achievement: Significant new knowledge generated: important new research questions opened up; research paths closed off; summary information on outcomes; The research project has led to significant new knowledge being generated. Despite the increasingly difficult operational circumstances in China we were by mid-2019 able to have almost completed fieldwork in five locations. We conducted over 121 interviews, largely with NGOs but also with experts, evaluators and around 8 government officials. This constitutes a rich and varied set of empirical data, generating new knowledge around changing NGO-state relations, different models of contracting, and the interconnections between authoritarianism and welfare services contracting. Compared to previous qualitative studies of services contracting to NGOs, this research has produced a much larger set of case-studies. It has provided rich data on how NGOs strategise to gain contracts, the opportunities, risks and incentives they face and how this differs to the situation prior to the nationwide rolling out of welfare services contracting. It has also generated a rich set of empirical data on the impact of contracting on NGOs. It also provided data on NGOs that did not contract and the range of reasons for not doing so. This is currently being revised and resent to a journal for publication. It has shed light on the purposes of government services contracting, feeding into a dedicated piece on the technologies of statecraft. It has generated knowledge about both the authoritarian and new public management elements of contracting which affect NGO-state relations and the operation of welfare services, which has not been explored in-depth previously. This has led to the publication of an article in Voluntas on the impact of welfare services contracting on NGOs. The research involved a literature review of Chinese and English publications on welfare services contracting, which has now been published online in the journal Social Policy and Society. By including a case-study of a location where contracting was new and where the supply of NGOs capable of providing services was thin, we were able to generate interesting data about how a city government struggles with implementing a central policy without adequate starting conditions. This has led to an article which is undergoing final revisions before publication. The majority of studies on contracting welfare services to NGOs in China have focussed on pilot-sites based in large, economically developed cities where a relatively varied and large array of NGOs already existed. It has also generated rich, empirical knowledge about some of the particular problems and issues with contracting to NGOs that can be compared to experiences in Western countries. On the theoretical side the research has contributed to better understanding of governance processes in China and the specific ways in which the nature of the political regime affects contracting experiences. As a result of our final conference, which was in the end on zoom, we have also had accepted a special issue on welfare services contracting and variation by the journal of Social Policy and Society. The research has also opened up new research questions. First, whilst there are some studies on regional variation of contracting models, little has been written on variations across sectors. We have sought to kickstart further research on this by bringing together scholars to contribute to a special issue on sectoral variation in contracting, Second, there has been little research on how political regime affects contracting processes. By highlighting this in our research, it opens up comparative questions. To what extent do the experiences of China reflect what occurs in other authoritarian contexts such as Russia. Third, it has opened up questions around how we best describe China's emerging welfare system. Is China an East Asian welfare state and is that term still relevant? To what extent does China's emerging welfare system resemble welfare systems in Asia or Europe? Is there anything distinctive about China's welfare system? Third, it should be mentioned that some research paths are difficult to keep open. In the course of doing fieldwork it was clear that the increasingly tight political climate was affecting access. Whilst initially in the first location we had some indepth interviews with government officials, this became increasingly difficult to achieve in 2019. By the summer/autumn of 2019 it was even becoming difficult to access some NGOs. Finally, regarding outcomes, we were able to reach out to wider audiences through our events as planned. However, we could no longer do these in person but had to substitute with online. This had some benefits in that we drew a much more international audience and could bring in researchers and NGO practitioners that we would not otherwise have had the funds to invite to the UK. A very important impact event could not be held. We had planned to bring a delegation of relevant Chinese officials and experts to the UK on a study tour of government-contracted NGO provision of China welfare services. Due to COVID-19 this was no longer possible and we of course deeply regret this as this would have been a key way to have an impact in China. |
| Exploitation Route | The project is still being written up. Due to COVID-19 it will not be possible to return to China to take this forward in the way we would have liked to. For example, the plan was to invite a delegation of Chinese officials to the UK in the final year but COVID-19 made this impossible and this is unlikely to happen in the next few months either. As planned in our pathways to impact statement, we organised an online public lecture on Civil Society Under Threat, which allowed to us address the political context of the research. We will continue to write articles on this topic which will be of interest to researchers in this field. To date we have four articles at revise and submit stage, three drafts for submission, and a special issue under consideration. We held our final workshop online due to COVID-19and publicised this through LSE communications and departmental website. We are currently discussing with our international team how best to do and present a final `key findings briefing' aimed at policy-makers in China and internationally, drawing out key lessons and highlighting examples of good practice that could be useful to other countries. We had planned to hire the Great Britain China Centre to organise a study tour of government officials to the UK, as described above. This would have included visits to the Charity Commission, the National Council of Voluntary Organisations, Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations, to a council engaged in subcontracting NGOs and to a council that has taken services back in-house such as in Crewe. It would also involve a dedicated presentation at the LSE on the research project and an opportunity to discuss in depth the key research findings. The Great Britain China Centre has a long track-record of organising such study-tours for Chinese officials in fields such as law and civil society and has strong networks in China. However due to COVID-19 this is not longer possible. |
| Sectors | Communities and Social Services/Policy,Government, Democracy and Justice |
| Description | Ongoing influence on promoting Chinese government to establish/reform China's child welfare and protection system, resulting in pilot research site (NB: not included in options under method of influence) .This involved drafting the first government document to design the system in the pilot site. |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
| Impact | It is difficult to capture fully the impact because it is ongoing and takes several years. It has led to the experimental creation of new institutions within the welfare system to deal with child protection services, including initiatives to contract services to NGOs. |
| Description | Policy suggestion on child protection services to 14th Five Year Plan in China |
| Geographic Reach | Asia |
| Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
| Description | FInal Workshop on Politics of Subcontracting in China |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | This was the final workshop planned under the ESRC grant. Due to COVID-19 it was postponed by a year and finally took place online rather than face-to-face. This had benefits too because it allowed for a much larger audience - 140 people from all over the world. If we had held it face-to-face, we could only have hosted 4o or so people because of the costs of travel, venue hire, accommodation and food. The purpose of the event was not only to report on our findings but also to open up larger questions around contracting, NGOs, welfare and authoritarianism. Instead of running it all over one day, we organised it into two panels, five presentations that fed into the panels, over four days. Participants seemed to like this way of organising the event, rather than trying to do it all in one day. The two panels tackled respectively the following questions: Panel 1 Is contracting welfare services different under authoritarianism? The case of China. Panel 2 What can we learn from China's experiences of contracting welfare services to NGOs? The panellists included a mixture of researchers from China, Australia, UK, USA and practitioners included a civil society researcher/NGO activist and a former director of an international NGO with a programme in China. The substantive papers feeding into the panels covered topics such as contracting and authoritarianism, impact of contracting on NGOs' autonomy in China for panel one, and contracting social work services in China, professionalism and control; building the entrepreneurial welfarist state; and neo-liberalism meets authoritarianism - Chinese and Australian responses to failed social services contracting. Altogether 140 people from all over the world registered for the workshop. On each day there would be a maximum of two sessions. 58 people attended Paper 1 on day 1; 56, Paper 2 on day 1; 46 on panel 1 day 2; 35 paper 3 day 3, 40 paper 4 day 3 and 31 people for paper 5, day 4, and 34 for panel 2 on the final day. Most participants attended a majority of the sessions. The workshop was turned into a podcast, enabling further dissemination via LSE on Youtube. Following the workshop we issued a call for papers for a Special Issue on Contracting to NGOs for the journal Social Policy and Society. We received thirteen submissions of abstracts. From this we selected 7 for consideration by the journal. We are awaiting a final decision on the Special Issue. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
| URL | https://www.lse.ac.uk/international-development/events/Contracting-Welfare-Services-to-NGOs-in-China... |
| Description | LSE Public Lecture: Civil Society Under Threat: Covid-19, Authoritarianism and more. |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A broadcast e.g. TV/radio/film/podcast (other than news/press) |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Third sector organisations |
| Results and Impact | We held the LSE Public Lecture entitled `Civil Society Under Threat: COVID19, authoritarianism and more` in October 2020. The introductory brief for this event read as follows: "Since the launch of the global War on Terror, civil society has come under persistent threat. New laws restricting the spaces and activities of civil society have been passed across the world. The rise of more populist regimes, increasing authoritarian tendencies and COVID-19 have further tightened controls over civil society. What does this mean for the future of a progressive civil society?" The panel speakers were: Dr Sergej Ljubownikow, University of Sheffield Dr Nicola Macbean, Director, The Rights Practice Dr Mariz Tadros, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex. Chair: Professor Jude Howell, LSE This even attracted an audience of 96, with participants from across the world. These ranged from students and researchers to NGOs and international institutions. A podcast of the panel was produced, allowing for further dissemination. The panel discussion sparked many questions about the effects of increasing restrictive legislation across the world on NGOs. Compared to a face-to-event we were able to bring in a much more diverse audience from all corners of the world, thus gaining wider outreach. There was clearly considerable interest and concern about this topic. Both a video and podcast of this event are available. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
| URL | https://www.lse.ac.uk/Events/2020/10/202010211500/civil |
| Description | Roundtable on the East Asia welfare state at the Asian Studies Association conference 2020 (originally Hong Kong, shifted to Japan) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | We had planned to disseminate our research findings in relevant international conferences. The Asian Studies Association is the prime association for presenting work on social science issues related to Asia. It was due to take place in 2019 and had the overarching theme of `Asia at the Crossroads. Solidarity in Scholarship'. We had put forward a roundtable on East Asian welfare state and China. Our proposal was accepted. However, due to the protests in Hong Kong, the conference was transferred to Japan in June 2020. However, with the spread of COVID to Japan, the conference was shifted online and postponed until September 2020. We went ahead with the planned roundtable, though not all of the original invitees were able to participate on this new date. The purpose of the roundtable was to reflect on three key questions: Was the idea of the East Asian welfare state still relevant? Was China's welfare system significantly different to systems in Hong Kong, Singapore and Japan? To what extent was it akin to the East Asian welfare model. We also considered how COVID 19 had changed our thinking about the East Asian welfare model? The roundtable attracted around 20 people. Given the number of parallel sessions, plenaries and other events at such as large international conference, we felt this was a high level of participation. Despite all the changes, we had a stellar panel including Associate Professor Li Binqing of the Social Policy Centre, New South Wales, Professor Ka Ho Mok, of Lingnan University, Hong Kong, Associate Professor Ji Lei of Zhongshan University, Dr Regina Enjuto-Martinez (our team representative) from the LSE. This led to considerable debate of whether there was something called an East Asian welfare state, whether China was heading in this direction, and the impact of neo-liberal policies on the nature of social work in China. Our final ESRC project workshop led to a proposal for a Special Issue on welfare services contracting in Social Policy and Society and we invited the speakers in this roundtable to all put forward papers for consideration. We are awaiting the decision of the journal on this special issue. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
| Description | Workshop in Australia |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | We held our third project workshop in Australia at the Social Policy Centre, University of New South Wales in the week before the Australian Social Policy Conference in September 2019. The purpose of the workshop was to present preliminary findings from the research and discuss these with all project participants as well as specially invited participants from academe and social work practice. In this spirit we drew in researchers from a related project funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC) in which I am also involved, which looks specifically at contracting of NGOs for children's services in six sites in China. Professors Shang and Howell set the scene with an overview of the context of policy development around services contracting in China and of social organisations. In session 2 Dr Qu presented some preliminary findings from the research in Location A, whilst Cui Yujie presented some of the teething problems in contracting through a detailed case-study of one contracted project. The next session focussed on trends and patterns in government purchasing, with a presentation by Natasha Cortis, an investigator in the ARC project, on themes and gaps in international research on social service contracting and a presentation by Dr Enjuto-Martinez on sectoral and regional variation in government purchasing of services. In the final set of presentations we invited two very experienced practitioners, namely Jennifer Mason and Bob Davidson, to speak respectively on trust and control in the oversight and funding of Australian NGOs and on the Australian experience of government-funded welfare services and NGOs. These practitioner presentations drew on years of experience and insights in the Australian experience of contracting, which lent the workshop a comparative edge and contributed to locating the ESRC research in a wider context. Overall, the workshop proved very successful, with around 30-40 participants from academe, policy circles and social policy practice, with experience of China, Australia and other contexts. The workshop was followed the next day by a team meeting where we reviewed the progress of work, remaining fieldwork to be done, preliminary findings, plan for the third and final year of the project and publication plans. In September 2019 (9th to 11th) all three project investigators presented papers at the Australian Social Policy Conference in the policy session on `Chinese Social Policy: States and Markets'. Dr Qu and I presented revised versions of our papers, namely, "Technologies of authoritarian statecraft in welfare provision: government contracting to NGOs" and "The politics of implementing services contracting to NGOs". Dr Enjuto-Martinez presented a paper on "NGOs as welfare providers in China: emerging new modes of state control". Our presentations ran alongside other papers on issues such as domestic welfare chauvinism, public-private partnerships and protecting workers' social rights. During the conference I was invited to speak on a panel with other established researchers on challenges and gaps in social policy research in China. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| Description | preparatory workshop in Beijing in May 2018 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | The activity was a presentation of our research grant to an audience of researchers from other institutions in China, to multilateral organisation (UNICEF), and to policy practitioners in the field of our research. The presentation was intended to raise awareness of our research and spark discussion and suggestions. This paved the way for us to conduct interviews and to extend contacts. The exposure to UNICEF led later to our involvement in organising a roundtable on contracting for a visiting Chinese delegation [partly sponsored by UNICEF) from the National Development Research Centre in Chinal. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018 |
| Description | roundtable between NDRC (China) delegation and NCVO |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | This was a roundtable in October 2018 between a delegation of Chinese government officials, National Council of Voluntary Organisations, UNICEF and ESRC project participants on theme of Contracting Welfare Services to NGOs. The Chinese delegation included Division Director, Social Development Department of National Development and Research Commission (a high-level organ responsible for reform proposals and research); Division Director, Department of Planning and Finance of Ministry of Civil Affairs; Division Director, Department of Planning and Information, National Health Commission; officer, Social Development Department of NDRC; and Researcher, International Cooperation Centre of NDRC. Other participants were the head of research on children at UNICEF, Beijing plus a policy officer from UNICEF, Beijing; participants from the UK including the project team plus Michael Birtwistle, policy offer specialising in NGOs and contracting at National Council of Voluntary Organisations, and Dr Andy West, development consultant on children (and ex-Save in China). The purpose of the roundtable was to exchange knowledge and experiences on contracting welfare services and NGOs in China and UK, with a particular focus on children's services. Prof Howell and Dr West presented on the situation in the UK, whilst the Chinese team explained their interests and presented on the situation in China. This was very successful. The roundtable formed part of a broader visit of a high-level delegation from the National Development Research Centre, including representatives also from the Ministry of Civil Affairs and Ministry of Health to the UK (primarily to Scotland) to investigate social policy. The roundtable was sponsored by UNICEF. We were later informed that the roundtable was highly appreciated and apparently much reference was made to it throughout the visit. Through this roundtable we were able to access high-level officials working on this topic and draw attention to our research. It also enabled us to establish contacts with a key multilateral international institution, UNICEF, which had a strong interest in this field. The plan was to invite some delegates from these organisations back to the UK for a study-tour in 2019 but due to COVID-19, this was no longer possible. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018 |
| Description | roundtable on contracting to NGOs for high-level Chinese delegation |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | We organised a roundtable on contracting welfare services to NGOs in the UK. Panel presenters included a key policy researcher at the National Council of Voluntary Organisations, a highly experienced research consultant working on child welfare issues, and a post-doc researcher working on contracting to NGO issues. The roundtable formed part of a broader visit of a high-level delegation from the National Development Research Centre, including representatives also from the Ministry of Civil Affairs and Ministry of Health to the UK (primarily to Scotland) to investigate social policy. The roundtable was sponsored by UNICEF. We were later informed that the roundtable was highly appreciated and apparently much reference was made to it throughout the visit. FURTHER DETAIL IS PROVIDED IN 2021 ENTRY. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018 |
| Description | workshop in London on contracting |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | This was a preparatory workshop for the fieldwork for our project. The workshop involved presentation of our intended research and fieldwork, inviting discussion and suggestions amongst a primarily UK audience of researchers and practitioners. Colleagues from China and Australia also participated. The second half of the workshop involved presentations by researchers doing related research on contracting, social policy and NGOs |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018 |