by 國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系助理教授，王信賢

1. 2008 10
NGOs 113
11 3 - 1 4 6
In Search of NGOs in Contemporary China:
The Two Approaches and Dilemmas
Hsin-Hsien Wang
Associate Professor of the Department of Public Administration and Policy,
National Taipei University
Tsung-Yi Lee
Ph.D Student, Institute of Sociology, National Tsing Hua University
*
2008 1 8
NSC 95-2414-H-305-010-MY2

2. 114 2008 10
NGO
GONGO
NGO

3. NGOs 115
1978
neo-traditionalism
Walder, 1986
non-governmental organizations, NGOs
market transition
redistribution
Nee, 1989:
663~681; 1992: 267~282; 1996: 908~949; 2002
modernization theory
NGO
Gordon White, 1993
NGO NGO
NGO NGO NGO
post-totalitarian regime

4. 116 2008 10
NGO
NGO
NGO
NGO
state-society relationship
NGO
NGO Government Organized NGOs GONGOs
NGO
NGO
NGO

5. NGOs 117
Non-Governmental
Organization, NGO
NGO market failure
government failure
the third sector Non-
Profitable Organization, NPO NGO
civil society
Salamon, 1994: 109~122 2006
109~122
post socialist states
reemergence

6. 118 2008 10
NGO
NGO
NGO
NGO Petrova Tarrow 2007: 80~83
participatory activism
transactional activism
NGO
NGO
1949

7. NGOs 119
1965 6000
2008 6
38 21.1
17.4 1392
2008/10/05 75
300
civil society
corporatism
Ma, 2002: 113~130 2006b
2001 12~18 2004 3~23
2004 118~145
1

8. 120 2008 10
1
NGO
2004 118~145
NGO
strategic interaction
Seibel
Clark 1991
Najam, 2000:

9. NGOs 121
375~396 Coston 1998: 358~382
third-party government
Dennis Young 2000
149~172
Adil Najam 2000: 375~396 4C
Four-C’s model
strategic institutional interests
Najam
cooperation
co-optation
complementarity
confrontation
2
2 NGO 4C
Najam 2000: 383

10. 122 2008 10
differential
control 2005 73~89
totalitarian regime
authoritarian regime
post-communist / post-totalitarian regime Linz, 1996; 2000
totalism 1994 204~265
2000 1~8
2007 309~335
developmental states Governing the Market

11. NGOs 123
1
Post-Totalitarian Capitalist
Developmental State, PTCDS
2007 309~335
2007 1~28
despotic power Mann, 1993:
54~63
1. 1
2 3 4
Johnson 1982 Amsden 1989 Wade 1990 Woo-
Cummings 1999

12. 124 2008 10
Armstrong, 2002: 56~64 2004
1~60

13. NGOs 125
3
NGO
3
2
2.

14. 126 2008 10
Mann,
1993: 54~63
2003 349~365
2005 73~89
1999 4
2004 9 2005 7

15. NGOs 127
20 BBC
2008/09/15
2008/09/15
infrastructural power
4 2006 27~51
4
NGO 3
NGO
NGO

16. 128 2008 10
GONGOs

17. NGOs 129
2004
2006a 293~326
3
1999
3.
2005 59~60

18. 130 2008 10
1
2007 267~308
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
4.
2001 5~9 53~54
OK
2006 2006 7 18
KTV
OK

19. NGOs 131
7 20
KTV
7 27
OK
8 21 OK
OK
2006 35~36
NGO GONGOs
4
2004 319~322
2002 42
4. 2004 8 20

20. 132 2008 10
NGO
NGO
2006 2007 5~15 2007 8 30
Pfeffer and Salancik,
1978

21. NGOs 133
NGO
Minxia Pei 1998: 285~318
NGO
3
3 5
75 2004
71~77
300 200
2005 8~17

22. 134 2008 10
5
2005 30~32 2
GONGO
2000 117~131
NGO
6
2007 9~15
5. 2004
2006 4 30
6. 2008 7 16

23. NGOs 135
2
GONGOs
NGO
*
NGOs
*
Yang 2005 50
7
7. 2007 4 11

24. 136 2008 10
8
9
10
2007
NPO
NGO
2004 36~47
8. 2007 4 09
9. 2007 4 10
10. 2008 7 16

25. NGOs 137
3
NGO
11
3
12
13
Saich, 2000: 138~139
11. 2008 7 15
12. 2008 7 14
13. 2008 7 18

26. 138 2008 10
birdcage economy doctrine
birdcage society
NGO
GONGO
NGO
O’Donnell and Schmitter, 1986:
3~5
1992 Armstrong, 2002:
56~64 2004 1~60

27. NGOs 139

28. 140 2008 10
2005
2005
14 11 11 8~17
2001
2004
2006a W
18 2 6
293~326
2006b
2007
267~308
2006
49 1 3 27~51
2004
6 12 71~77
2005 NGO 2 2
30~32
2004 NGO 6 12
36~47
2007
309~335
2006 10 10

29. NGOs 141
35~36
2002 2 2
42~45
2004
319~322
2006
1 109~122
http://
www.stnn.cc:82/china/200701/t20070104_435920.html 2008/09/15
2007
9 9 9~15
2006
2007
37 6 11
5~15
2007
50 3 9 1~28
2003
349~365
2005
6 12 73~89
2000
32 117~131
2004 NGO 1
3 118~145
1994
1992 1
11 56~64
2000

30. 142 2008 10
6 12 1~8
2004
1 3 1~60
2002
BBC http://news.bbc.co.
uk/chinese/trad/low/newsid_6990000/newsid_6998200/ 6998246.stm
2008/09/15
2008 http://
cws.mca.gov.cn/accessory/200806/1201050645191.htm 2008/10/05
Amsde, Alice. 1989. Asia's Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization
(New York: Oxford University Press).
Armstrong, Charles K. 2002. Korean Society: Civil Society, Democracy and the
State(New York : Routledge).
Clark, John D. 1991. Democratizing Development: The Role of Volunteer Organi-
zations. (London: Earthscan ).
Coston, Jennifer. M. 1998.”A Model and Typology of Government-NPO
Relationships,” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3
(September), pp. 358~382.
Johnson, Chalmers. 1982. MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industri-
al Policy, 1925~1975 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).
Linz, Juan, and Alfred Stepan. 1996. Problems of Democratic Transition and De-
mocratic Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post Commu-
nist Europe (Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press).
Linz, Juan. 2000. Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes (Boulder, Colo: Lynne
Rienner Publishers).
Ma, Qiusha. 2002. “ Defining Chinese Nongovernmental Organizations,” Voluntas:
International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, vol. 13, no.

31. NGOs 143
2 (June), pp. 113~130.
Mann, Michael. 1993. The Sources of Social Power: The Rise of Classes and Nati-
on-states, 1760~1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Najam, Adil. 2000. “ The Four-C's of Third Sector-Government Relations:
Cooperation, Confrontation, Complementarity, and Co-optation,” Nonprofit
Management and Leadership, vol. 10, no. 4 (Summer), pp. 375~396.
Nee, Victor. 1989. “A Theory of Market Transition: From Redistribution to Markets
in State Socialism,” American Sociological Review, vol. 54, no. 4 (Oct.), pp.
663~681.
Nee, Victor. 1991. “Social Ineqalities in Reforming State Socialism: Between
Redistribution and Markets in China,” American Sociological Review, vol.
56, no. 3 (June), pp. 267~282.
Nee, Victor. 1996. “The Emergence of a Market Society: Changing Mechanisms of
Stratification in China,” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 101, no. 4
(August), pp. 908~949.
O Donnell, Guillermo and Philippe C. Schmitter. 1986. Transitions from Authori-
tarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies (Baltimore
Maryland: The Johns Hopkins University Press).
Pei, Minxin. 1998. “Chinese Civic Associations: An Empirical Analysis,” Modern
China, vol. 24, no. 3 (July), pp. 285~318.
Petrova, Tsveta, and Sidney Tarrow. 2007. “ Transactional and Participatory
Activism in the Emerging European Polity: The Puzzle of East-Central
Europe,” Comparative Political Studies, vol. 40, no. 1 (January), pp. 74~94.
Pfeffer, Jeffrey Pfeffer, and Gerald R. Salancik. 1978. The External Control of Or-
ganizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective (New York: Harper and
Row).
Saich, Tony. 2000. “Negotiating the State: The Development of Social
Organizations in China,” no. 161 (April), pp. 124~141.
Salamon, Lester M. Salamon. 1994. “ The Rise of the Nonprofit Sector,” Foreign
Affairs, vol. 73, no. 4 (July/August), pp. 109~122.
Wade, Robert. 1990. Governing the Market: Economic Theory and the Role of Go-

32. 144 2008 10
vernment in Taiwan’s Industrialization Princeton (NJ: Princeton University
Press).
Walder, Andrew,1986. Communist Neo-Traditionalism: Work and Authority in Chi-
nese Industry (Berkeley: University of California Press).
White, Gordon, 1993. Riding the Tiger: The Politics of Economic Reform in Post-
Mao China (Stanford: Stanford University Press).
Woo-Cumings, Meredith. 1999. The Developmental State (New York: Cornell
University Press).
Young, Dennis. 2000. “Alternative Models of Government-Nonprofit Sector
Relations: Theoretical and International Perspectives,” Nonprofit and Volunta-
ry Sector Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 1 (March), pp. 149~172.

33. NGOs 145
In Search of NGOs in Contemporary China:
The Two Approaches and Dilemmas
Hsin-Hsien Wang
Associate Professor of the Department of Public Administration and Policy,
National Taipei University
Tsung-Yi Lee
Ph.D Student, Institute of Sociology, National Tsing Hua University
Abstract
Over the past three decades, the Chinese economy has moved dramatically
away from the model of socialist planning and into the new world of market forces.
During the process, the CCP has made a wide range of efforts to reform its
institutions of economic and soical govermance. The result to all these changes is the
emergence of a new set to institutional arrangements. The dramatic changes and
significant consequences stirred by the development of social organizations have
drawn much attention to the subject. The transitions have caused changes ont only in
the economic and social structures but also in the whole perception of a proper state-
society relationship, and more importantly, in how the CCP combines the introduction
of market forces and the emerging social groups with tight political control. It is
necessary to model and document exactly what effect are produced.
This paper is discussing alternative approaches to Leninist transitions and
noting some implications for further research. It develops a new framework named
"Post-Totalitarian capitalist Developmental State" to analyze the changes of state-
society relationship in China. Instead we employ a framework that is based on the
post-totalitarian regime and development state model. Due to the capacity of social
organizations to challenge the party-state authority and the public good they cna
provide, the state exerts different strategies to control the emerging social forces.
Accordingly, the social organizations are classified into four categories. This paper
points out two possible approaches to search for the "authentic" NGOs and explore
their dilemma in China. The line of analysis seeks to explain how pluralizing socio-
economic changes induced by market reforms co-exist with the continued dominance
of the party-state.
Key words: Post-Totalitarian Capitalist Developmental State, state-society
relationship, differential control, Non-Governmental Organization
( N G O ) , G o v e r n m e n t O rg a n i z e d N G O ( G O N G O ) , g r a s s r o t t s
organization