Party, State, Civil Society and Covid-19 in China

IF 2.2 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
{"title":"Party, State, Civil Society and Covid-19 in China","authors":"","doi":"10.1515/npf-2020-0047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In China, the story of Covid-19 and the relationship between government and civil society is not a sharp break from the past. China has long guided and controlled the development of civil society organizations, and that has not changed in the Covid era. Instead, the Covid era is a story of a continuation in restrictive policy, and responses to Covid have utilized those existing policies and regulatory framework rather than developing new policies for the Covid era. The Chinese story may thus somewhat different from others in this special issue. China is certainly not a story of, in the words of our issue editors, when “pluralist and social democratic visions fade.” The Chinese Party-state’s permission for the reemergence of some kinds of civil society organizations in China since the early 1980s has never been marked by pluralist and social democratic visions. Instead, it has been marked by Party and state control, and clear choices on what kinds of organizations to facilitate and which kinds to repress. That control-based framework has accelerated since the current administration came into office in 2012. Covid has neither upset that restrictive framework nor substantially altered it. Instead, the framework of differentiation and constraint employed by the Chinese state has adapted, in some ways, to the need to control Covid and to control public mobilization on it and against the Party-state. In this brief article we outline the framework of differentiation and constraint that the Chinese Party-state uses to control the Chinese nonprofit sector, and mention a few ways in which that framework has been used in the Covid era.","PeriodicalId":44152,"journal":{"name":"Nonprofit Policy Forum","volume":"354 1","pages":"199 - 211"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nonprofit Policy Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2020-0047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract In China, the story of Covid-19 and the relationship between government and civil society is not a sharp break from the past. China has long guided and controlled the development of civil society organizations, and that has not changed in the Covid era. Instead, the Covid era is a story of a continuation in restrictive policy, and responses to Covid have utilized those existing policies and regulatory framework rather than developing new policies for the Covid era. The Chinese story may thus somewhat different from others in this special issue. China is certainly not a story of, in the words of our issue editors, when “pluralist and social democratic visions fade.” The Chinese Party-state’s permission for the reemergence of some kinds of civil society organizations in China since the early 1980s has never been marked by pluralist and social democratic visions. Instead, it has been marked by Party and state control, and clear choices on what kinds of organizations to facilitate and which kinds to repress. That control-based framework has accelerated since the current administration came into office in 2012. Covid has neither upset that restrictive framework nor substantially altered it. Instead, the framework of differentiation and constraint employed by the Chinese state has adapted, in some ways, to the need to control Covid and to control public mobilization on it and against the Party-state. In this brief article we outline the framework of differentiation and constraint that the Chinese Party-state uses to control the Chinese nonprofit sector, and mention a few ways in which that framework has been used in the Covid era.
中国的党、国家、公民社会与新冠肺炎
在中国,新冠肺炎疫情以及政府与公民社会之间的关系与过去并没有明显的不同。长期以来,中国一直引导和控制民间组织的发展,这一点在新冠肺炎疫情中没有改变。相反,新冠病毒时代是限制性政策的延续,对新冠病毒的应对措施是利用现有政策和监管框架,而不是为新冠病毒时代制定新的政策。因此,在本期特刊中,中国的故事可能与其他国家有所不同。用本刊编辑的话来说,中国当然不是一个“多元主义和社会民主主义愿景消失”的国家。自20世纪80年代初以来,中国党国对某些类型的公民社会组织的重新出现的许可从未以多元主义和社会民主主义的愿景为标志。相反,它的特点是党和国家的控制,以及对支持哪种组织和压制哪种组织的明确选择。自本届政府2012年上台以来,这种以控制为基础的框架加快了步伐。新冠肺炎既没有打破这一限制性框架,也没有实质性改变它。相反,在某些方面,中国政府采用的区分和约束框架已经适应了控制疫情、控制公众动员和反对党国的需要。在这篇简短的文章中,我们概述了中国党国用来控制中国非营利部门的区分和约束框架,并提到了该框架在新冠肺炎时代的几种使用方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nonprofit Policy Forum
Nonprofit Policy Forum PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
18.80%
发文量
23
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信