The modern transformation of philanthropy in China over the past four decades

Abstract

This paper examines the development of philanthropy and civil society in China over the past 40 years of reform and opening-up. The study identifies a process in which China's philanthropy has transitioned from being embedded within the planned economy, to being re-embedded under government regulation, and later integrated into governance frameworks. While the idea of civil society has sparked considerable discussion within philanthropy in China, and faced skepticism and restrictions, civic philanthropy driven by civil society—characterized by voluntarism, equality, and public interest—has played a significant role in social transformation. Currently, challenges such as limited growth space and resource stagnation affect China's civil philanthropy. However, new growth opportunities are emerging through internet-based self-organization of young volunteers, online charity, the development of enterprise-led foundations, diversified community welfare networks, regional public welfare ecosystems, and citizen-based religious charity. Overall, China's civil society follows a unique development path, distinct from Western models, reflecting “the modernity of the Other”, emphasizing cooperation with the state, and playing a crucial role in cultivating modern citizens and alleviating social contradictions.

Introduction

Following China's reform and opening-up, the country rapidly transitioned from a planned to a market economy. This transition subtly triggered the swift transformation of Chinese society. The transformation manifested in two distinct ways: firstly, through the emergence of social conflicts and contradictions and, secondly, through the rise of self-organization and collaborative construction by multiple societal forces. In the past two decades, and especially in the wake of a series of public health emergencies, including the Wenchuan earthquake relief, flood resistance in Henan and Shanxi, and the fight against COVID-19, an increasing number of ordinary people have begun to participate in these self-organizing processes. Concurrently, actors’ civic consciousness and public spirit have awakened. This is particularly visible in the realm of philanthropy, which is under relatively loose regulation. Over the past 40 years, the currents of civil society and the philanthropic culture of China have collided, merged, and diverged in this domain, creating a modern version of philanthropy that is suited to the Chinese context and establishing philanthropy as a new domain in the alternative construction of modernity in China following the nation-state and market economy.

However, despite the undeniable presence and growth of modern philanthropic organizations in China, there remains substantial skepticism in intellectual circles regarding the applicability of civil society theories to the country. Critics have argued that civil society presupposes an adversarial relationship between the state and society—an idealized binary opposition abstracted from the historical development of the West—that does not align with the realities of China (Huang, 2003). This study does not delve deeply into whether civil society theories aptly explain Chinese societal development. Nevertheless, these debates highlight the significant potential and influence of this discourse and thus warrant a retrospective analysis.

The focus of this study is not to defend civil society discourse theoretically but rather to review and examine the development trajectory of China's modern philanthropy over the past 40 years of reform and opening-up. This review seeks to further understand the nuanced relationship between China's philanthropy and the state system, a relationship that is characterized by both interdependence and inherent tensions. We will explore the following questions: What historical transformations have the relationships between philanthropy and the state system undergone? How has philanthropy adjusted its modernization in alignment with the state governance system, and what role has it played in the transformation of state governance? This study aims to analyze these questions and further show that, within the diverse cultural landscape of Chinese philanthropy, modern philanthropy in China over the past 40 years has undergone a process entailing dis-embedding from the original state-planned system alongside its expansion and reinforcement. In turn, it has promoted the societization (shehuihua) of government-led philanthropy. In recent years, modern philanthropy in China has shown a trend toward being reabsorbed and re-embedded into the state governance system; this is characterized by the comprehensive leadership of the Communist Party of China in recent years. In this process, China's modern philanthropy is forging a path that differs markedly from that of the West. Nonetheless, the present study also points out that this type of modern philanthropy is civic philanthropy that is fundamentally based on voluntariness, equality, and publicness. It thus naturally fosters a relatively autonomous and participatory society. This society, while exhibiting certain characteristics of Western civil society, adapts to the non-Western civil society features that are necessary for China's specific governance system. The development of this alternative form of civil society represents the direction of exploration for civic philanthropy.

Civil society and philanthropy: The evolution of thought

The interaction between civil society movements and philanthropic culture is not a novelty that emerged after reform and opening-up. Since the late Ming dynasty, China has witnessed the emergence of philanthropic organizations that are characterized by spontaneous civilian involvement. Further, various acts of kindness became fashionable among the intellectuals and mercantile class of that era (Fu, 2005: 78–160). Although these grassroots philanthropic organizations did not constitute a civil society in the Western sense, they laid the groundwork for China's modernization efforts since the late Qing dynasty. Against the backdrop of the rise of “society studies” (qunxue) during the late Qing and early Republican periods, reform-minded intellectuals sought to evolve past philanthropic practices and embrace a new force that could propel the modernization of the nation-state. The concept of “philanthropy” was introduced into Chinese discourse in 1895. Borrowed from Japanese translations of Western texts, it soon became a key objective that intellectuals such as Liang Qichao promoted to serve the interests of the state or local public affairs. This fusion of traditional charity with the concept of philanthropy became a tool for constructing sociological theories and transformative discourses (Wu, 2018). In 1912, Zhu Youyu, in his book The Spirit of Chinese Philanthropy, introduced the concept of civic improvement, which is akin to what is now referred to as “civic philanthropy”. Thus, from the late Qing through to the early Republican period, civic improvement became a crucial aspect of the Chinese philanthropic spirit (Zhu, 2016 [1912]: 81–98), and it was further developed during the Republican era. Following the establishment of the People's Republic of China, grassroots philanthropic practices were gradually replaced by the socialist state welfare system.

In February 1994, People's Daily published an editorial titled “Legitimizing Philanthropy”, which marked the re-entry of philanthropy into the political arena and public consciousness (Changing Literature Library, 2023). Its previously stigmatized associations were stripped away, and autonomous space was opened for the development of civic philanthropy. By the mid-1990s, the concept of civic philanthropy resurged in Chinese philanthropic culture. This resurgence was particularly evident following the philanthropic outpouring triggered by the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake and the crisis of trust in government-run charities precipitated by the 2011 Guo Meimei incident. The widespread involvement of ordinary people from across social strata in voluntary actions to achieve public benefit or value exemplifies “civic philanthropy” (Payton and Moody, 2008), which is characterized by its voluntariness, equality, publicness, rationality, and cooperativeness (Zhu, 2014), traits that are quintessential to modern society. Therefore, civic philanthropy is a form of spontaneous, voluntary, and autonomous charity that occurs among citizens according to their shared identification with the modern nation-state. It distinctly embodies modernity, yet because of its often spontaneous, autonomous, and independent nature, it lacks the support of natural relationships, making it potentially disorganized, fragile, and ephemeral. Given this reality, on one hand, civic philanthropy often depends on the construction of modern governance systems and ecosystems for its sustained development. On the other hand, it has the potential to drive the construction of social organizations and the transformation of social governance.

The transformation of philanthropic culture naturally requires actors to construct new societal imaginations, thus introducing the concept of civil society. Originating from the Western notion of “civil society”, philanthropic culture is, in Western contexts, generally considered a public sphere comprising autonomous, diverse, and open social groups and networks (Lyu and Chen, 2001). These groups primarily function to amalgamate individual interests into collective or public interests; the groups can then serve as intermediaries between the “public” and “private” spheres. In the West, theories of civil society have been proposed by liberalism, communitarianism (i.e. an evolution of republicanism), and Marxism. However, the most influential theory in contemporary Chinese philanthropy has been that of communitarian civil society, which stems from de Tocqueville. This theory underscores that civil society weaves isolated individuals into broader group networks, thereby establishing social bonds and a sense of mutual responsibility. Civil society steers participants toward goals that transcend individual interests, and this phenomenon is the foundation of American democracy (de Tocqueville, 1988: 368). This theory has provided endless inspiration for practitioners of civil society in China.

Academically, as a foreign-origin concept, “civil society” has been frequently incorporated into scholarly discussions on China's societal transformation over the past two decades. To meet the needs of varied users, the term has been translated into various Chinese phrases such as “citizen society” (shimin shehui), “civil society” (gongmin shehui), and “philanthropic society” (gongyi shehui). The spread of this ideology throughout contemporary China has had three main phases. The first phase, in the mid to late 1980s, saw fervent discussions about civil society in China. At that time, debates centered around reconstructing Marxism as well as around civil rights and the new authoritarianism (Brook and Frolic, 1997). The second phase, in the post-1990s, saw “civil society” partially translated as “citizen society” to distinguish it from the confrontational civil societies of Eastern Europe as well as from the term “folk society” that was being used in the Taiwan region during its transformation period. During this phase, scholars primarily pursued two lines of inquiry. One sought to demonstrate the existence of a Western-style citizen society in China. Some proponents argued for the real existence of Habermas's public sphere in late Qing and modern Chinese society; however, they acknowledged that it was not a complete citizen society (Rowe, 1990). Those who held the opposing view argued that a true citizen society could not exist in an authoritarian culture (Xiao, 1993). The other line of inquiry treated civil society as a normative concept and focused on whether contemporary transitional China could construct a civil society in the Western sense. Representative scholars such as Deng Zhenglai and Jing Yuejin attempted to transcend the dichotomy between Western liberalism and republicanism. They advocated for a positive interaction between society and the state and emphasized limited state intervention in societal matters as well as the necessity for society to engage with the state (Deng and Jing, 1993). This interactionist approach has become the dominant explanatory model that researchers apply in studies on China's societal transformation. Subsequent scholars have combined Western ideologies and the Chinese context to propose concepts such as “socialist civil society” and “the rise of a new type of socialist civil society” (Yu, 1993). However, these discussions are confined to macro-level paradigms.

The study of civil society in China entered its third phase at the beginning of the 21st century. Scholars have conducted numerous studies, for example, on rural temple fairs (Li, 2008) and urban community organizations (Yang, 2001), and concluded that, during China's societal transformation, genuinely autonomous social spaces have indeed emerged beyond the state. The organizations driving this trend are more prevalent in the fields of public welfare and social development and are particularly prominent in the philanthropic sector. In public discourse, civil society is no longer confined to the binary framework of the state versus society; instead, it is emphasized within a tripartite system of government, market, and society, particularly in the public sphere populated by non-profit organizations.

Why do Chinese civic philanthropy actors so highly value the norms of civil society? This is primarily because numerous social issues and contradictions have arisen in China during its rapid market transition. These issues are characterized by the neglect of individual values, disrespect for personal rights, a tendency toward societal atomization, and a lack of mutual trust, all of which contribute to the high uncertainty surrounding China's transformation prospects. Many observers and actors are anxious about these prospects, but many also harbor hope of finding a peaceful, gradual path to China's transformation that is distinct from revolution and reform, through the concept of civil society. These actors aspire to foster networks, mutual trust, and cooperation through positive interaction between the government and citizens to jointly construct a mature and rational society and to ultimately resolve social contradictions and build a harmonious community. Activists seek to harness an internal grassroots force to integrate society and advocate for change.

Governance and philanthropic practice: Dis-embedding, counter-embedding, and re-embedding

The concept of “embeddedness” was initially introduced by the economist Karl Polanyi, who noted that “economic systems are embedded in social relations” (Polanyi, 2007). That statement highlights the absence of a market system that operates entirely autonomously and spontaneously. The concept of “embeddedness” has since been expanded and applied to analyzing state–society relations in China. For instance, Wang Sibin pointed out that the development of professional social work in China is an example of embedded development (Wang, 2011). A review of the 40-year journey of philanthropic practice since China's reform and opening-up reveals that China's philanthropic sector and the state governance system have generally undergone a process of dis-embedding, counter-embedding, and re-embedding.

Dis-embedding: Recovery and “legitimation”

Following the Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in 1978, a period of rectification allowed various aspects of Chinese society to gradually recover, including the philanthropic sector, which was primarily dominated by government-led charities. In the 1980s, the first batch of philanthropic “national” social organizations and foundations emerged (e.g. the China Children and Teenagers’ Fund, the China Women's Development Foundation, and the China Youth Development Foundation). These played a significant role in supporting government efforts in social relief and assistance and thus formed the backbone of the philanthropic sector at the time. Compared with the numerous government-run charities of the era, the Amity Foundation, established in 1985, was an outlier. With its religious background and grassroots genesis, it operated relatively autonomously and can be considered a significant starting point for modern philanthropy in China. However, such distinctive organizations were isolated cases at that time. In the 1980s, although civil society was developing in China, it was primarily manifest in the political and cultural domains, and it overlapped only minimally with the philanthropic sector.

In the early 1990s, the theoretical perspective of civil society began to focus on China's social organizations, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and individual businesses as constituting the so-called “societal middle layer”. The entry of international NGOs in the early 1990s, the establishment of the Friends of Nature in 1994, and the subsequent hosting of the 1995 World Conference on Women in China marked the beginning of contemporary civic philanthropy. At that time, actors in the practice field started to focus on environmental, women's, poverty alleviation, and disability support themes. After 2002, following China's accession to the World Trade Organization and the country's rapid economic development in the context of globalization, China also faced severe “social disintegration” (Sun, 2012). To address these social issues that the government could not manage, society began to self-organize and self-help. These self-organizations are referred to as grassroots NGOs. Between 2003 and 2004, China's grassroots NGOs entered a period of large-scale establishment during which they urgently sought their own internal driving forces for development. Various concepts, methods, techniques, and tools from civil society and from development theories were introduced through international NGOs and development agencies. Although these methods and techniques were often criticized as being ill-suited to the local conditions, international organizations and their funded grassroots NGOs persistently engaged in creative transformations, adapting to fit China's political-social context. The experience and techniques they accumulated reciprocally influenced the strategic renewal of these international organizations. Among them, Heifer International was introduced to Sichuan, China, in 1985. It has successfully completed its localization transformation over 35 years.

Around the same time, government-led charities also underwent significant transformation. In April 1994, the China Charity Federation registered in Beijing. This marked the establishment of China's first comprehensive charitable organization. Further, the Federation was among the first groups to possess public fundraising qualifications. The summer floods of 1998 saw the China Charity Federation experience its first philanthropic surge when it received unprecedented donations totaling over CNY 7 billion (Zheng et al., 1999). Although the vitality of government-led charities could not match the spontaneous civic philanthropy that the public initiated, the presence and existence of the former provided a relatively relaxed political environment for the development of civic philanthropy in China. Evidently, civic philanthropy had entered a period of dis-embedding from the state political system. From 1995 onwards, civic philanthropy evolved into a dis-embedding social movement, which can be broadly categorized into the following five aspects.

Service dis-embedding

Social services were disentangled from the government's all-encompassing management. Civic philanthropy sparked a volunteer service movement that eventually led to the development of professional social work, including social work services. Service delivery is the most flexible social practice in civic philanthropy. The 2008 Wenchuan earthquake and the Olympics catalyzed a peak in Chinese volunteer services. Numerous volunteers and civil philanthropic organizations actively participated in the earthquake relief efforts and gained widespread societal recognition. Moreover, in 2008, the number of volunteers in China increased by at least 14.72 million (albeit according to incomplete statistics; Yang, 2009). Scholars have described the extensive involvement of volunteers in the May 2008 earthquake relief efforts as well as in the post-disaster reconstruction as a rite of passage for Chinese civil society (Gao and Yuan, 2008). In 2018, the Volunteer Service Ordinance was officially implemented. In addition, volunteer services were valued at approximately CNY 82.4 billion, demonstrating growth of over 50% year over year (Yang, 2019). Volunteers and the spirit of volunteering have become cornerstones for many civil philanthropic organizations, and volunteer service has evolved into one of the most significant forms of civic philanthropy. Relatedly, social work, which emphasizes social services, was widely accepted and recognized in 2009, and pilot master's degrees programs in social work were implemented nationwide. Many social organizations began to actively recruit professional social workers in 2009. Not only did this rapidly raise the salaries of social work graduates employed at NGOs, but it also accelerated the integration of social work professionals into NGOs.

Organizational dis-embedding

Social governance disembeds from state dominance, leading to the development of a capable third sector for cooperative governance and to the formation of an interconnected philanthropic ecosystem comprising foundations and other social organizations. The third sector theory is the mainstream ideology in contemporary civic philanthropy. In the West, it is a crucial idea within neoliberalism; however, in China, its primary function is to drive social organizations to eschew bureaucratization for societization, monopolism for competition, and homogeneity for diversity. It has enabled civic philanthropy to extend beyond frontline grassroots volunteer organizations and into foundations, supporting organizations and various other social entities, thereby creating a philanthropic value chain. Since 2009, civilian-led non-public fundraising foundations have rapidly surpassed many government-run public fundraising foundations. Moreover, funding NGOs has become a new trend among domestic foundations. Service purchasing, project funding, and long-term strategic partnering as well as the catalysis of philanthropic innovation have all become new collaborative approaches in the partnerships between foundations and frontline civil philanthropic organizations. During this period, the Narada Foundation emerged as a benchmark. Its chairman, Xu Yongguang, played a pivotal role as an opinion leader regarding this trend; Xu participated in the construction of everything from concepts to platforms.

Community dis-embedding

Previously seen as the political grassroots, community public life has become disentangled from local government. The community empowerment movement, which focuses on people-centered approaches, has turned communities into new focal points for civic philanthropy, thereby fostering a variety of community organizations and burgeoning community-building movements. Although modern China has a long tradition of village experiments and rural construction, the true rise of the community system did not occur until the mid to late 1990s. The Ministry of Civil Affairs first introduced the concept of “community construction” in 1991. With that, it initiated China's urban grassroots governance transition from a work unit system to a community system. Although models of community construction such as those in Wuhan and Shenyang emerged, they were still largely centered around government-managed societies. As the work unit system was dismantled, the commodification of housing accelerated, creating new public spaces such as commercial housing communities. These community public spaces became key sites for community empowerment and self-organization. They also nurtured civic spirit at the community level. The rise of homeowners’ movements and committees was a significant marker of this change. Subsequently, the government widely promoted its policy of purchasing community public services from social organizations. The 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China proposed a direction for social governance based on the principles of co-construction, co-governance, and sharing, which further stimulated the linkages among community social organizations, resident volunteers, and social workers. Within this policy framework, community-building movements that centered around philanthropic organizations––from the promotion of Robert's Rules of Order to open space discussions among residents––began to emerge. Many civil society concepts, methods, and techniques were disseminated throughout communities. This increased the incidence of spontaneous community self-organization initiatives, such as folk-dance teams and square-dancing groups. Many actors in civic philanthropy actively engaged in these community-building processes through such means. This approach directly influenced the comprehensive community-building movement in Chengdu from 2016 onwards. It continues to this day.

Policy dis-embedding

The policy-making process was previously a closed-door operation that occurred in government departments. It has since shifted to embrace social innovation. This shift has stimulated various philanthropic advocacy movements that regularly prompt changes in social policies and even in legislation. Civil society's rights advocacy extends beyond the political realm; it is also widely applied in the philanthropic sector. Unlike political advocacy, philanthropic advocacy initially generates positive exemplar and scale effects through constructive philanthropic actions. These are then amplified via social media and journalistic attention, which encourage public reflection, critique, and suggestions regarding relevant policies. The government responds by adopting a more flexible approach that entails incorporating suggestions and introducing new policies. The Free Lunch initiative is a prime example of civic philanthropy that has been collaboratively advanced by philanthropic organizations. In the environmental sector, campaigns such as opposing the construction of an incinerator in Panyu, Guangzhou, and petitioning for the amendment of the Wildlife Protection Law illustrate various forms of philanthropic advocacy. These philanthropic advocacy efforts sometimes can be confused with violent collective actions. However, as civic philanthropy becomes more rational, some progressive government officials have recognized that such civic advocacy does not incite violence; conversely, it helps to resolve social conflicts and prevent violent incidents. Since 2009, internet-based social innovation has become mainstream. Citizen communication has rapidly developed in China alongside the rise of online social networks. It influences public opinion and can therefore lead to policy shifts.

Cultural dis-embedding

Philanthropic culture has disengaged from the traditional planned system and is moving toward diversification. Traditional philanthropic organizations and forces are not only undergoing a revival but also a rapid transformation, and the concept of civic philanthropy is increasingly becoming the consensus for modern philanthropic development. Under the influence of mass media and new media, the first decade of the 21st century saw civil society become a widely accepted notion. Interestingly, as China's reform and opening-up deepens, modern religious philanthropic organizations like the Tzu Chi Foundation have broadened their charitable services nationwide. These organizations have linked the cultivation of civic-mindedness with traditional culture, and they are engaging in diverse philanthropic activities such as poverty alleviation through education, environmental protection, promotion of traditions, and community volunteering. Further, traditional forces such as religion, family, clans, and neighborhoods are experiencing a revival in the philanthropic field. As they transform, they are disengaging from the communist-style philanthropic culture centered on “learning from Lei Feng and doing good deeds”. This has allowed dis-embedded civic philanthropy to progress along diverse developmental paths involving government-led initiatives, clans, localities, and religions. This alternative practice of diverse civic philanthropy culminated in the enactment of the 2016 Charity Law, which clearly established the legality of civic philanthropy. Through the development of grassroots philanthropy, China's philanthropic sector has gradually expanded and strengthened a relatively autonomous and broadly participatory social space. This ushered in a golden decade of philanthropic activity after 2008.

The societization of government-led charities: The counter-embedding of civic philanthropy

Following the dis-embedding of grassroots philanthropy, not only did it flourish independently, but it also influenced the societization reforms of government-led charities. Indeed, as early as the 1990s, the China Youth Development Foundation had already begun its transformation toward societization with the Project Hope initiative, which represented a significant philanthropic enlightenment of the general public nationwide. Xu Yongguang, editor of the Third Sector Research Series, which focuses on Project Hope, revealed the key ideas underlying the reform of the China Youth Development Foundation. Subsequently, the China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation also experimented with several de-bureaucratization reforms. The large-scale societization of government-led charities occurred after the 2011 Guo Meimei scandal, which sparked a crisis of trust in the Red Cross. In the decade that followed, the Red Cross, local charity associations, and government-run foundations began to draw upon the experiences and adopt the methods of grassroots philanthropic organizations. In so doing, they progressively shed their bureaucratic nature and advanced societization reforms. This path of societization reform in government-led charities is referred to as the counter-embedding of the philanthropic sector. In 2016, the Charity Law was enacted, explicitly prohibiting administrative apportionment. The charity association system embarked on institutional reforms aimed at de-bureaucratization and de-monopolization. Cities such as Shanghai, Beijing, and Dalian pioneered these reforms in charity associations. Similarly, the charity associations in Shenzhen and the Panyu District of Guangzhou severed administrative ties with the local civil affairs departments and transitioned into independent legal entities with governance structures and social service capabilities. By 2019, these socialized local charity associations had become prominent. This was clearly evidenced during Tencent's “99 Philanthropic Day”. Five of the top 10 fundraising organizations on Tencent's list were local charity associations. The Chongqing Charity Federation led the group, having raised CNY 131 million (Ma, 2020).

The re-embedding of civic philanthropy: Governance absorption of philanthropy

Some observers have perceived the rise of charity associations due to counter-embedding as a new phase of state advancement or as a civil society retreat in the philanthropic domain. These can be seen as two sides of the same coin. On the one hand, the vibrant development of civic philanthropy over several decades has directly influenced the societization reforms of government-led charities and even the legislative process of the philanthropic sector. On the other hand, since 2015, the growth of civil society spurred by philanthropic development has also prompted both state attention and divergent discussions among different social perspectives. Unlike in Western civil society, the independence of civil society organizations in China's philanthropic field is often non-institutionalized and informal and is permeated at all levels by state power. Thus, concepts such as the “administrative absorption of society” (Kang and Han, 2007) and the “administrative absorption of services” (Tang, 2010) reveal a power distribution pattern where the state is dominant and civil society is dependent. This governance absorption model primarily involves the government selectively incorporating the governance capabilities of social organizations into a administrative trajectory (Yang, 2014), thereby achieving a more flexible and covert approach to governance (Wu, 2015). Of course, the absorbed social organizations can also expand the scope of their participation and access government resources in the process of re-embedding into the state governance system. In fact, this enhances the quality and level of public services. However, such organizations are in the minority.

Advancing the modernization of both the national governance system and governance capabilities has been a key issue since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. The philanthropic sector, as a significant force in the “third distribution” (disanci fenpei), has been comprehensively integrated into national governance capabilities, thereby demonstrating the overall trend of the “governance absorption of philanthropy” (Zhu and Deng, 2022). According to the 2018 China Philanthropy Development Report, “In 2017, China's philanthropic organizations continued to grow, but compared with 2015 and 2016, the growth rate of foundations, social groups, and private non-enterprise organizations has steeply declined” (Yang, 2018). The slowdown in the growth of social organizations is partly a result of the codification and standardization of philanthropy and partly due to the broader national governance context. Although governance absorption of philanthropy emphasizes the collaborative governance of multiple stakeholders, it inherently maintains a distinct hierarchical order or differential mode of association. At the national level, it mainly manifests when various levels of government departments further “party leadership, government responsibility, societal collaboration, public participation, and legal assurance” (Xinhua, 2019). This is simultaneous with their active development of charity associations and other government-led philanthropic organizations as well as with their selective incorporation of these into their significant role in the third distribution through governance.

In the process of institutionalization, many civic philanthropy organizations have been absorbed into the governance system and aligned with national strategies. The grassroots organizations face challenges such as reduced operational space, resource stagnation, public choice disorientation, and pressure from commercial philanthropy.

The future of civic philanthropy

Despite the aforementioned challenges, there remains space for the development of civic philanthropy in the “new era”. Given the global economic and demographic flux, the awakening of citizen consciousness and the volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity of the so-called risk society, the state, in its governance efforts, cannot be self-reliant; it needs societal cooperation and public participation. Further, the theories of civil society that are grounded in communitarianism within the philanthropic sector do not, as some detractors have claimed, necessarily lead to destructive confrontations with the government. As long as the process of modernization continues, civil society and civic philanthropy will not vanish; they will retain the potential to unite various grassroots forces, continue the trajectory of social construction that has been evolving since modern times, and form an invisible force that interacts beneficially with the government.

In this new era of philanthropy, the extant theories of civil society evidently require an upgrade. Many scholars now recognize that the strength of civic philanthropy should not be excessively reliant on non-profit organizations. Instead, the transformative potential of civil society may more likely manifest through individual citizen behaviors and collective actions. In the field of philanthropy, China must first cultivate a society of citizens. Only with mature and rational citizens can there be a mature and rational civil society. In this regard, the focus should be on fostering civic engagement among the populace through philanthropy. If society adopts a people-centered approach, the new growth areas for civic philanthropy may include internet-based philanthropy and the self-organization of young volunteers via the internet, foundation philanthropy led by businesses and entrepreneurs, a diverse community philanthropic value chain, and the civic engagement of religious philanthropy.

Internet-based self-organization and internet philanthropy by young volunteers

The post-1985 generation is increasingly immersed in a digital existence, and their thought processes have been shaped by the internet from birth. Consequently, they show little interest in hierarchical modern organizations and prefer to operate in a flattened, decentralized online community. Internet philanthropy and volunteer services have become significant means of civic engagement for the youth, a fact that is now evident online. For instance, data from the Alipay philanthropic platform show that donors born in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s account for 9%, 35%, and 48% of all donors, respectively; further, the 1990s cohort has emerged as the main donating force (People's Daily, 2019).

Internet-based self-organization has also become an important mode of youth participation. Today's youth are less involved in structured philanthropic activities and are instead leveraging technology such as the internet to conduct various charitable activities. This phenomenon might be termed “unorganized organization”. These youths do not bear the costs associated with formal organizations, and yet they can leverage internet technology to enhance their efficiency to such an extent that their online philanthropic activities often appear to be more effective than those of formal philanthropic organizations. A notable example of this emerged during the COVID-19 outbreak when youth-led internet self-organization was particularly prominent.

The development of foundations led by businesses and entrepreneurs

The civic engagement of entrepreneurs is an important trend. Amidst various public health events, the entrepreneurial spirit has guided corporate-led, foundation-based rescue efforts that have made a significant and memorable impression. Recently, business philanthropy themed around corporate social responsibility (CSR), social enterprises, impact investing, and charitable finance has drawn significant attention. Particularly notable in this regard has been the integration of technology and philanthropy into the commercial sector. This integration has not only facilitated high-tech enterprises’ participation in philanthropic activities and impact investing, thereby enhancing the application value of their technologies, but it has also propelled the high-quality development of China's philanthropic sector, which has, in turn, provided robust technological support for innovative social governance. As China enters the era of the philanthropic economy, the service sector—which includes social services for the elderly, children, “greater health” (da jiankang), and disabled individuals among others—presents vast opportunities. This system is in its nascent stage, but it is developing rapidly. If technology can be effectively applied in this philanthropic sector, it could revolutionize Chinese technology and bolster social welfare initiatives (Beijing Normal University China Philanthropy Research Institute, n.d.).

Diversified community philanthropic value chains and regional philanthropic ecosystems

Communities, as the grassroots of governance systems, provide a public space where people can interact face to face. Such interaction fosters a sense of identity and belonging. Neighborhoods, as the settings for daily life, naturally engender mutual interests, emotional bonds, and social networks, thus facilitating the formation of communities. These areas are distant from the core of political power struggles and are therefore more conducive to attracting diverse forces to participate equitably in public affairs governance. Importantly, various social issues and conflicts gradually permeate and shift to the grassroots level through a funnel effect, which often leads to “tragedies of the commons” ¹ that neither the government nor the market can fully address. Hence, neighborhoods typically welcome various social resources and forces to help resolve these issues. For these reasons, communities are ideal venues for fostering active citizenship. At the upper end of the community philanthropy value chain, community foundations can tailor their support to suit local needs and problems by funding public infrastructure and shaping community spaces in line with local cultural traditions. Community social organizations organize various philanthropic cultural activities in these public spaces to identify and nurture key philanthropic figures in each neighborhood. During these activities, social organizations and resident volunteers collaborate to discuss and establish various systems and rules for public life. Gradually, community philanthropic leaders emerge and establish local governance organizations and various volunteer groups. These self-organized entities can then collaborate with local governments and community businesses to address key issues at the neighborhood level, thus promoting a governance model of co-construction, co-governance, and sharing.

However, many of today's communities cannot resolve their issues alone. This fact necessitates a local civic philanthropy ecosystem that can provide support. The ecosystem should include not only frontline community social organizations but also grassroots government bodies, foundations, supportive philanthropic organizations, social enterprises, and the CSR departments of businesses that are involved in philanthropy, as well as international NGOs. Foundations progressively form partnerships with grassroots philanthropic organizations, thereby promoting community development through service purchasing and project funding, by entering long-term strategic partnerships, and by catalyzing philanthropic innovation. Supportive philanthropic organizations provide management and leadership support to grassroots organizations in the form of training, incubation, networking, and consulting services. These supportive institutions often offer companionship, empowerment, and collaboration. Assuming these roles allows them to act as hubs that connect various philanthropic organizations and to serve as intermediaries between the organizations and businesses or governments, thus facilitating the injection of various energies into the philanthropic sector. Investing in building this ecosystem is a deliberate effort to enable different functional social organizations to cooperate closely within a regional space and form alliances. Achieving this generates scale effects and collective actions and creates a cluster of philanthropic industries.

Civic engagement through religious philanthropy

The world's dominant religions are often key drivers of philanthropic activities. Various types of religions and beliefs—from Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Taoism to Confucianism—play significant roles in advancing the philanthropic sector. In China, religious philanthropy is widespread and common, but it is generally not considered a part of modern philanthropy. However, numerous studies have indicated that many religions are undergoing a process of secularization and civic engagement in contemporary society. Organizations such as the Amity Foundation, the Tzu Chi Foundation, and the recently emerged “national studies” (guoxue) foundations demonstrate the immense potential of civic engagement through religious philanthropy. Further, under policies that allow freedom of religious belief, the state encourages religious followers to participate in philanthropic activities. This, in turn, encourages religious philanthropy to undergo modernization, thereby fostering civic engagement through religious philanthropy.

Conclusion

Overall, the development trajectory of philanthropy since China's reform and opening-up proves that philanthropy is not isolated but rather closely linked with state policies and governance systems. The development trajectory of modern Chinese philanthropy has essentially entailed the gradual dis-embedding of charitable donations and voluntary services from the planned system. With the development of modern society, Chinese philanthropy has evolved into a modern philanthropic operational regulatory and legal framework based on the values of civic rights and responsibilities. It has subsequently interacted with and re-embedded into the contemporary state governance system (Zhu, 2018). The gradual emergence and refinement of civil society within the philanthropic sector signifies that China's civil society is not merely a Western import. It represents a distinct “other modernity’ that emphasizes collaboration with the state rather than confrontation and advocates for individual rights while also underscoring civic responsibilities from a communitarian perspective.

This form of civic philanthropy has its limitations. With the development of civic philanthropy, internal contradictions and tensions have intensified, and these have led to the gradual fragmentation of civil society. Moreover, the growth of civil society driven by philanthropic development has prompted state agencies to reflect on emerging social dynamics, while also sparking varied discussions among different societal perspectives.

Nevertheless, the new trends that have emerged in the past decade show that there is room for the development of civic philanthropy. Potential new growth areas for civic philanthropy include internet-based self-organization by young volunteers as well as corporate-led foundations, internet philanthropy, diverse community philanthropic value chains, and civic engagement through religious philanthropy. China's current social transformation is a part of what Liang Qichao predicted to be the most significant change in 3000 years. As China rises, there remains hope for a society that is more “democratic, lawful, fair, just, honest, vibrant, stable, orderly and harmoniously coexistent with nature”. The significance of civic philanthropy lies herein; it can become a vital force for nurturing the citizens of a modern nation.