This research paper examines how foundations—foreign and domestic, public and private, operating ... more This research paper examines how foundations—foreign and domestic, public and private, operating and grant making—engage with Chinese civil society organisations in an authoritarian political context. In contrast to previous literature, which considers civil society through the lens of state-society relations, the author contends that in the case of China, civil society-building has been a foundation-led process.
Following a discussion of conceptual caveats in the nascent field of foundation research, the author traces how China's evolving policy framework has influenced the development trajectories, legal statuses and modes of operation of both foreign and domestic foundations.
The empirical part of the paper focuses on foundation positions, paradigms and power. Based on 12 in-depth interviews conducted in 2014 with foundation representatives and CSO leaders, this research reveals how foreign and domestic foundations position themselves vis-à-vis the party-state, market and civil society; how they understand philanthropy; and how they deal with the power imbalance in the relationship between grant maker and grantee.
Research findings show that foundations have different value propositions, visions and missions, as well as different theories of change, which determine their philanthropic approaches. Foreign and domestic foundation representatives primarily follow a paradigm of conventional charity, managerial philanthropy, or political philanthropy. Findings from this research raise a number of pertinent questions about the likely impacts of China's controversial Overseas NGO Law on foreign and domestic foundations and their grantees.
This research paper centres around the question to what extent the CCP’s approach to social manag... more This research paper centres around the question to what extent the CCP’s approach to social management in post-Maoist China can be explained with reference to Bismarck’s political statesmanship in the late 19th century. In the first part of this research paper I compare and contrast key sociopolitical developments in the German Empire under Bismarck (1862-90) with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) during the Mao (1949-1976) and post-Mao period (1976-). I argue that there are more similarities than differences between Bismarck’s approach to social and political stability in the 19th century and China’s social management approach in the late 20th and early 21st century. In the second part of my paper Bismarck’s social legislation is contrasted with the introduction of social policies in the fields of social security, labour, health, education and housing in post-Maoist China. The lack of success of Bismarck’s social legislation suggests that social policies limited in scope and ambition may enhance regime stability in the short term, but that they are likely to fail in the medium- to longterm since they do not address deep-seated questions about social, political and economic justice in China.
In his seminal work Bridging the Gap: Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy, Alexander George (19... more In his seminal work Bridging the Gap: Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy, Alexander George (1993) lamented the great divide between academia and the foreign policymaking community, arguing that greater interaction between scholars and policymakers would ...
This research paper examines how foundations—foreign and domestic, public and private, operating ... more This research paper examines how foundations—foreign and domestic, public and private, operating and grant making—engage with Chinese civil society organisations in an authoritarian political context. In contrast to previous literature, which considers civil society through the lens of state-society relations, the author contends that in the case of China, civil society-building has been a foundation-led process.
Following a discussion of conceptual caveats in the nascent field of foundation research, the author traces how China's evolving policy framework has influenced the development trajectories, legal statuses and modes of operation of both foreign and domestic foundations.
The empirical part of the paper focuses on foundation positions, paradigms and power. Based on 12 in-depth interviews conducted in 2014 with foundation representatives and CSO leaders, this research reveals how foreign and domestic foundations position themselves vis-à-vis the party-state, market and civil society; how they understand philanthropy; and how they deal with the power imbalance in the relationship between grant maker and grantee.
Research findings show that foundations have different value propositions, visions and missions, as well as different theories of change, which determine their philanthropic approaches. Foreign and domestic foundation representatives primarily follow a paradigm of conventional charity, managerial philanthropy, or political philanthropy. Findings from this research raise a number of pertinent questions about the likely impacts of China's controversial Overseas NGO Law on foreign and domestic foundations and their grantees.
This research paper centres around the question to what extent the CCP’s approach to social manag... more This research paper centres around the question to what extent the CCP’s approach to social management in post-Maoist China can be explained with reference to Bismarck’s political statesmanship in the late 19th century. In the first part of this research paper I compare and contrast key sociopolitical developments in the German Empire under Bismarck (1862-90) with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) during the Mao (1949-1976) and post-Mao period (1976-). I argue that there are more similarities than differences between Bismarck’s approach to social and political stability in the 19th century and China’s social management approach in the late 20th and early 21st century. In the second part of my paper Bismarck’s social legislation is contrasted with the introduction of social policies in the fields of social security, labour, health, education and housing in post-Maoist China. The lack of success of Bismarck’s social legislation suggests that social policies limited in scope and ambition may enhance regime stability in the short term, but that they are likely to fail in the medium- to longterm since they do not address deep-seated questions about social, political and economic justice in China.
In his seminal work Bridging the Gap: Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy, Alexander George (19... more In his seminal work Bridging the Gap: Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy, Alexander George (1993) lamented the great divide between academia and the foreign policymaking community, arguing that greater interaction between scholars and policymakers would ...
Uploads
Papers by Andreas Fulda
Following a discussion of conceptual caveats in the nascent field of foundation research, the author traces how China's evolving policy framework has influenced the development trajectories, legal statuses and modes of operation of both foreign and domestic foundations.
The empirical part of the paper focuses on foundation positions, paradigms and power. Based on 12 in-depth interviews conducted in 2014 with foundation representatives and CSO leaders, this research reveals how foreign and domestic foundations position themselves vis-à-vis the party-state, market and civil society; how they understand philanthropy; and how they deal with the power imbalance in the relationship between grant maker and grantee.
Research findings show that foundations have different value propositions, visions and missions, as well as different theories of change, which determine their philanthropic approaches. Foreign and domestic foundation representatives primarily follow a paradigm of conventional charity, managerial philanthropy, or political philanthropy. Findings from this research raise a number of pertinent questions about the likely impacts of China's controversial Overseas NGO Law on foreign and domestic foundations and their grantees.
developments in the German Empire under Bismarck (1862-90)
with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) during the Mao (1949-1976) and post-Mao period (1976-). I argue that there are more similarities than differences between Bismarck’s approach to social and political stability in the 19th century and China’s social management approach in the late 20th and early 21st century. In the second part of my paper Bismarck’s social legislation is contrasted with the introduction of social policies in the fields
of social security, labour, health, education and housing in post-Maoist China. The lack of success of Bismarck’s social legislation suggests that social policies limited in scope and ambition may enhance regime stability in the short term, but that they are likely to fail in the medium- to longterm since they do not address deep-seated questions about social, political and economic justice in China.
Following a discussion of conceptual caveats in the nascent field of foundation research, the author traces how China's evolving policy framework has influenced the development trajectories, legal statuses and modes of operation of both foreign and domestic foundations.
The empirical part of the paper focuses on foundation positions, paradigms and power. Based on 12 in-depth interviews conducted in 2014 with foundation representatives and CSO leaders, this research reveals how foreign and domestic foundations position themselves vis-à-vis the party-state, market and civil society; how they understand philanthropy; and how they deal with the power imbalance in the relationship between grant maker and grantee.
Research findings show that foundations have different value propositions, visions and missions, as well as different theories of change, which determine their philanthropic approaches. Foreign and domestic foundation representatives primarily follow a paradigm of conventional charity, managerial philanthropy, or political philanthropy. Findings from this research raise a number of pertinent questions about the likely impacts of China's controversial Overseas NGO Law on foreign and domestic foundations and their grantees.
developments in the German Empire under Bismarck (1862-90)
with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) during the Mao (1949-1976) and post-Mao period (1976-). I argue that there are more similarities than differences between Bismarck’s approach to social and political stability in the 19th century and China’s social management approach in the late 20th and early 21st century. In the second part of my paper Bismarck’s social legislation is contrasted with the introduction of social policies in the fields
of social security, labour, health, education and housing in post-Maoist China. The lack of success of Bismarck’s social legislation suggests that social policies limited in scope and ambition may enhance regime stability in the short term, but that they are likely to fail in the medium- to longterm since they do not address deep-seated questions about social, political and economic justice in China.