China’s Overseas NGO Law and the Future of International Civil Society

Abstract

China's law to control international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) has sent shockwaves through international non-governmental organisations (NGOs), civil society and expert communities as the epitome of a worldwide trend of closing civic spaces. Since the Overseas NGO Management Law was enacted in January 2017, its implementation has seen mixed effects and diverging patterns of adaptation among Chinese party-state actors at the central and local levels and among domestic NGOs and INGOs. To capture the formal and informal dynamics underlying their mutual interactions in the longer term, this article employs a theory of institutional change inspired by Elinor Ostrom's distinction between rules-in-form versus rules-in-use and identifies four scenarios for international civil society in China -"no change," "restraining," "recalibrating" and "reorienting." Based on interviews, participant observation and Chinese policy documents and secondary literature, the respective driving forces, plausibility, likelihood and longer-term implications of each scenario are assessed. It is found that INGOs' activities are increasingly affected by the international ambitions of the Chinese party-state, which enmeshes both domestic NGOs and INGOs as agents in its diplomatic efforts to redefine civil society participation on a global scale.

Neither Withdrawal nor Resistance: Adapting to Increased Repression in China

“…20 A few months later, a law on managing overseas NGOs curtailed access to foreign funding for both international and domestic NGOs, and in so doing criminalized an important aspect of capacity building (Franceschini and Nesossi, 2018; Zhu and Jun, 2022). By the early 2020s, observers were comparing the two laws to “tools of repression” (Spires, 2020: 584) in other authoritarian states “that are emblematic of a wider trend of shrinking or closing space for NGO activities worldwide” (see a review of the relevant literature in Holbig and Lang, 2021: 3).…”

“…Today’s NGOs “interact and they discuss, but they seldom challenge” (Gåsemyr, 2017: 102). Their relations with the state are “fluid and multi-directional” (Farid, 2019: 539) and the space in which they operate is shifting, not only closing (Toepler et al, 2020; Holbig and Lang, 2021).…”

Internet Mediated NGO Activity: How Environmental NGOs use Weibo in China

“…Lu, 2007, p. 176). In essence, the Chinese state appears on the surface at least to wield large amounts of power and control, but this is often not the case when the state tries to enforce or realize that control, although with the introduction of the Charity Law introduced in 2016 and the Foreign NGO Law in 2017, levels of control have increased (Holbig & Lang, 2021). The idea of co-opted organisations also proves problematic because it neglects to take into account benefits that these organizations see from their relationship with the state (Saich, 2000).…”

“…These posts about unrelated topics can help to foster a sense of familiarity and an understanding that people working at these organisations are the same as their followers in that they're interested in the same things. By highlighting Chinese cultural festivals like Chinese New Year, they could also be reassuring their followers of the fact that they are Chinese, to distance themselves from international NGOs operating in the country which have come under increasing scrutiny since the Overseas NGO Management Law was enacted in 2017 and restricted many of the ways that foreign NGOs could operate in the country (Holbig & Lang, 2021).…”

“…NGOs have come under considerable pressure and scrutiny over the past few years, especially since the implementation of the new Foreign NGO Law governing foreign NGOs was introduced in 2017 (Holbig & Lang, 2021). More recently nationalist elements have also heaped pressure on 201 some foreign NGOs and those who associate with them because of perceived slights against China (Rennie, 2022).…”