Outlining the Development of the Chinese Charity Sector in 2015

中文 English

Editor’s Note:

This is an edited and abbreviated version of an article from the Chinese Academy of Social Science’s annual “Blue Book of Philanthropy” of 2015. The article summarizes the development of China’s charity sector during 2015. For the most part the year is described as a period of positive change, during which the legal framework improved, the sector continued to expand, the public’s participation intensified and online charity became increasingly popular. What’s more public interest litigations became the new preferred form of action on the part of environmental organizations, and the earthquake in Nepal allowed Chinese NGOs to scale up the pace of their internationalization. On the other hand various scandals concerning the missapropriation of funds came to light, exposing weaknesses in the industry’s regulations, and disagreements between social organizations and the government remained.

 

2015 will go down as an important year in the development of the charity sector in China, during which the legal environment for charity improved rapidly. It was the year when the “Law on the Management of Overseas NGOs” and the “Charity Law” were successively published for public consultation. The Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) strengthened party-building aimed at social organizations, presenting documents on party-building for this purpose. The state published an overall plan to separate administrative authorities from professional associations and chambers of commerce, thereby achieving the administrative reform of these organizations. China’s civil affairs departments at all levels explored new types of supervisory systems to achieve the comprehensive supervision of social organizations.

Furthermore, during 2015 China’s public welfare industry quickened the pace of building up its basic infrastructure. The industry vigorously took part in the legislative discussions on the “Overseas NGO Law” and the “Charity Law,” reflecting popular sentiment. The emergence of the “September 9 Public Welfare Day” promoted the productive link that now exists between the public welfare sector and public participation, and mass public welfare continued to become more mainstream. Academic institutions and professional support alliances continuously sprung up within the public welfare industry, furthering its maturation. Social enterprises explored new paths that go beyond traditional public welfare, while many new social enterprises and social investment platforms were established. At the same time, measures for the certification of social enterprises were introduced. The attention drawn by the “Under the Dome” documentary made environmental organizations realize the public’s potential. Public participation platforms like the Public Environment Research Center, Guangzhou Green Net and others were able to take advantage of this situation for their own development.

On the other hand, during 2015 incidents like those involving White Student Aid Online and the Special Starlight Fund continued to come to light, making it clear that governmental and organizational supervision are insufficient. Student aid organizations, environmental organizations, labor organizations and women’s organizations continued to see their space to exist and operate come under government pressure. Managing the relationship with the government is a challenge always faced by public welfare organizations. Finally, under the government’s One Belt and One Road strategy, China’s public welfare organizations actively advanced their internationalization.

▼Constructing a Comprehensive Institutional Environment for the Development of the Charity Sector

 

The “Charity Law” and the “Overseas NGO Law” are Drafted in Order to Standardize the Management of Foreign and Domestic Charity Organizations

In 2015, two laws on China’s public welfare industry were published to solicit feedback. The “Charity Law” was drafted with the aim of developing the charity sector, while the goal of drafting the “Overseas NGO Law” was to standardize and guide the activities of overseas NGOs in mainland China. The “Charity Law” was passed during the 4th Plenary Session of the 12th National People’s Congress (NPC) in March 2016, while it is still unclear when the “Overseas NGO Law” will be put to the vote. The promulgation of these two pieces of legislation will have a profound effect on China’s public welfare sector.

Beginning in February 2014, when it launched legislative work on the “Charity Law,” the NPC has implemented an open law-making procedure. In the process of drafting the “Charity Law,” the Internal and Judicial Affairs Committee of the NPC used a variety of formats to hear opinions on the legislation from relevant government departments, local people’s governments, charitable institutions, experts and the public, creating a law-making procedure founded on state/society interaction. In 2014, the Internal and Judicial Affairs Committee received many feedback reports on the charity law from academic institutions. In October 2015, the NPC conducted the first reading of the “Charity Law.” The “Charity Law (Draft)” was then released to solicit feedback. Overall, there were many excellent elements in the first draft. The first draft clearly defined the concept of charity in broad terms, expanding the previous legal limitations on the term. The sections of the first draft on matters such as charitable organizations engaging in online fundraising, individuals engaging in public fundraising, charitable trusts and tax benefits triggered debate and drew the attention of charity circles, academia and the public.

In December 2015, the NPC conducted the second reading of the “Charity Law”, followed by a second round of public consultations, once again displaying a spirit of open law-making. The sections from the second reading’s draft on matters such as social organizations engaging in online fundraising, individuals engaging in public fundraising, tax benefits, real-name registration of volunteers and information disclosure triggered debate and drew the attention of charity circles, academia and the public. On March 9th 2016 Li Jianguo, vice-chairman of the NPC, introduced the “Charity Law (Draft)” during the 4th Plenary Session of the 12th NPC. Concerning the third reading’s draft of the law, the focus of charity circles, academia and the public was on the limits placed on the management expenses of public fundraising foundations as a proportion of total expenditures, and the precise definition of management expenses. On March 16th, the 4th plenary session of the 12th NPC voted to pass the “Charity Law,” effective from September 1st 2016. From that point onwards, China’s charity sector will enter a new period of legal certainty.

In 2014, as the state launched the drafting of the “Charity Law,” the drafting of a separate law on overseas NGOs was pushed forward at an even greater speed, although the legislative procedure decelerated following comments received in response to a request for feedback on the second draft law in 2015. In December 2014, the State Council submitted the draft of the overseas NGO management law to the NPC for deliberation. That draft was not made available for public consultation. Currently, the main Chinese laws touching on overseas NGOs are the 1989 “Provisional Regulations on the Management of Foreign Chambers of Commerce” and the 2004 “Regulations on the Management of Foundations.” In 2009, the central government authorized Yunnan to introduce local regulations on overseas NGOs, the “Yunnan Province Provisional Regulations on Standardizing the Activities of Overseas NGOs.” In April 2015, the 14th meeting of the 12th NPC Standing Committee deliberated on the “Law on the Management of Overseas NGOs (Second Draft)”, after which the law was published to solicit feedback from society.

The main areas regulated by the “Law on the Management of Overseas NGOs” are overseas NGOs registering representative offices and conducting temporary activities, the scope of these activities, relevant measures for protecting the legal rights and interests of overseas NGOs and the supervision and management of the activities of representative offices. The second draft clearly adopts the dual-management system and confirms that the Ministry of Public Security and the public security departments at the provincial level are the registration authorities of overseas NGOs, that organizations authorized by national-level departments and commissions, relevant provincial level authorities, the State Council or local people’s governments are the professional management units, and that public security departments and other relevant departments below the provincial level may not act as registration authorities or professional management units, respectively.

After the “Overseas NGO Management Law” was made public, it immediately drew a high degree of attention both domestically and internationally, especially among overseas NGOs and the domestic public welfare organizations working with them. International NGOs and the international media generally believe that this law will severely restrict the activities of overseas NGOs in China. Currently, issues such as how overseas NGOs and activities conducted by overseas NGOs are defined in the “Overseas NGO Management Law” are drawing considerable attention. In July 2015, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Public Security and the Ministry of Civil Affairs (MCA) convened a forum for overseas NGOs in Shanghai in order to understand the situation of overseas NGOs working in China and to listen to feedback on the services and management provided by the authorities. Following the forum, there was no clear progress in the drafting of the “Overseas NGO Management Law.” According to information published by China’s two national legislatures in 2016, the “Overseas NGOs Management Law” is still being revised.

 

A Series of Institutional Measures Taken by the Central Committee Strengthens Party-Building and Ensures the Presence of the Party within Social Organizations

In recent years, especially after the government lowered the threshold for the registration of social organizations, their scope and variety has been rapidly increasing. At the same time, the Central Committee recognized that party-building was weak within social organizations and especially that the insufficient presence of party organizations made it difficult for the party to establish itself as the leading core within social organizations. The report of the 18th National Congress of the CPC clearly proposes intensifying party-building among social organizations. In 2015, the Central Committee released two important documents to strengthen party-building among social organizations. In June 2015, the party’s central committee issued the “Regulations of the CPC on Party Organizations (for Trial Implementation)”. These regulations clearly call for party organizations to be established within social organizations. Previously, as stipulated in the “Charter of the Communist Party of China,” social organizations were allowed to establish party organizations, but there was no clear requirement for them to do so. In September of 2015, the General Office of the Central Committee of the CPC published the “Opinions on Strengthening Party-Building among Social Organizations (for Trial Implementation)”.

The Central Committee had two goals in mind when releasing this document: on the one hand, to expand the party’s presence within the space occupied by social organizations, increasing the influence of the party; on the other, to establish the party’s leadership in guiding the development of social organizations along the correct trajectory and encourage social organizations to play a role in the modernization of China’s governance system and governance capabilities. The document clearly defined social organizations: for the most part, the term refers to social associations, civil non-enterprise work units, foundations, social intermediary organizations and urban and rural community social organizations. These steps demonstrate that the Central Committee will comprehensively strengthen party-building within all types of social organizations and complete the expansion of its presence within these organizations.

The document clarifies the management system for party-building among social organizations: party-building in national-level social organizations is subject to the unified leadership and management of the work committees of authorities directly under the Central Committee, the work committees of central government departments under the Central Committee and of the party committee of the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission; party-building among local level social organizations is subject to the unified leadership and management of the party-building institutions for social organizations established at the provincial, municipal and county levels; the management of party-building among urban and rural community social organizations is to be undertaken by sub-district, township and village party organizations.

Leading and managing party-building in social organizations with professional management units is the responsibility of the party committees of the professional management units, subject to the guidance of the authorities responsible for party-building within social organizations. Party organizations can be established in three ways as proposed by the “Opinions” Document, namely, in the context of a work unit, industry or region. In most cases, the “Opinions” requires the secretary of the party organizations to come from within the social organization and suggests that the head of the organization fill that post if they are a party member. If the head of the organization is not a party member, the secretary of the party organization can be chosen from the management level of the organization. If there is no suitable person within the social organization, it can request a higher level party organization to appoint someone according to internal party regulations.

 

The Administrative Reform of Industry Associations and Chambers of Commerce is Intensified and a Pilot Program to Increase the Administrative Independence of these Organizations is Launched.

According to statistics, the number of industry associations and chambers of commerce in China reached 70,000 by the end of 2014, and is currently increasing at an annual rate of 10-15%. Industry associations and chambers of commerce play an active role in areas such as providing government consultation and business development services, improving resource allocation, strengthening the industry’s self-regulation, rethinking social governance and taking on social responsibility. Because China’s industry associations and chambers of commerce were established in the wake of government downsizing and institutional reform, they were linked to the affected departments in countless ways. It is not rare for industry associations and chambers of commerce to use these links to exploit the authority of government departments to their own advantage. In 2014, the National Audit Office published a report stating that the Chinese Medical Association, under the management of the National Health and Family Planning Commission, illegally received 820 million RMB from pharmaceutical companies. In accordance with the policies implemented by the Central Committee since the 18th Party Congress, which emphasize clean government, the relationship between market and society, and the decisive role played by the market in resource allocation, the state began pushing administrative reform forward among industry associations and chambers of commerce.

In July 2015, the General Office of the Central Committee of the CPC and the General Office of the State Council published the “Overall Plan for Separating Industry Associations and Chambers of Commerce from Administrative Authorities”. The state pushed forward this plan to break the chain of special interests that linked administrative authorities with industry associations and chambers of commerce, as well as to promote their independent operations. The plan called for completing the “five separations and five standardizations”: separating institutions and standardizing the overall supervisory relationship; separating functions and standardizing the administrative entrustment and division-of-labor relationship; separating financial assets and standardizing the financial relationship; separating personnel management and standardizing the human resources relationship; separating party-building, foreign affairs and other matters and standardizing the management relationship. Later on, the State Council began to push forward a pilot program for increasing the independence of national industry associations and chambers of commerce, expecting to complete the program within three years.

In September 2015, the MCA released the “Measures on Appointing the Heads of National Industry Associations and Chambers of Commerce (for Trial Implementation).” The document stipulates the process for selecting candidates to manage national industry associations and chambers of commerce, abolishing the old system whereby candidates were generally recommended by the relevant professional management unit. In addition, the measures stipulate that managers of industry associations and chambers of commerce should not hold an administrative post. The position shall also not be held by current officials or former officials who have not completed the procedures for stepping-down. Cadres in leadership positions who retired less than three years ago shall not hold positions in industry associations and chambers of commerce. Passing these measures ensures that there will be a thorough separation between government departments, industry associations and chambers of commerce in terms of personnel.

 

A Comprehensive Supervisory System is Created to Ensure Supervision is in Place as Social Organizations Expand

As the development of social organizations flourishes, the question of how to establish a supervisory system suited to their development trajectory is one that civil registration authorities urgently need to consider. In response to the increasing diversity and sheer number of social organizations, the state has proposed the establishment of a comprehensive supervisory system for these organizations. Fundamentally, this system would include legal, governmental and societal supervision, as well as self-regulation among social organizations. According to the recently issued “Charity Law,” civil affairs departments at all levels must fulfill their legal obligation to supervise and inspect charitable activities and to guide organizations belonging to the charity industry. The MCA released numerous documents in 2015 to plan relevant aspects of the comprehensive supervisory system.

In May 2015, the MCA released the “Guiding Opinions on Exploring the Creation of a Third-Party Assessment Mechanism for Social Organizations.” The document noted that establishing a third-party assessment mechanism is an important component of improving the comprehensive supervisory system for social organizations. A third-party assessment mechanism is beneficial for strengthening the continuous supervision of social organizations. At the end of 2015, the MCA drafted the “Opinions of the Ministry of Civil Affairs on the Mechanism for Terminating Social Organizations (Draft for Public Consultation)”. The document stipulates the different types of termination, the grounds and procedures for doing so, and establishes the legal obligations of the registration and management authorities of social organizations. In March 2016, the MCA released the “Regulations on Registration and Management Authorities Arranging Meetings with Social Organizations for Administrative Law Enforcement (for Trial Implementation)”, providing detailed regulations for conducting meetings with social organizations. According to reports, the MCA is considering releasing a comprehensive document on the supervisory system for social organizations. 

Beijing-China-city-slowly-sinking

 

▼Chinese NGOs’ Response to the Charity Law and Recommendations for the Philanthropic Sector

 

Philanthropic organizations had an extremely successful year in 2015. According to the latest statistics from the Ministry of Civil Affairs, by the end of December 2015 there were a total of 658,000 social organizations in China. These included 326,000 community organizations, 4,719 foundations, and 327,000 private non-enterprise work units. By way of comparison in 2014 there was a total of 606,000 social organizations, meaning that in 2015 there was an increase of 8.6%.[2]

According to statistics from the China Foundation Center on December 31st 2015 there were a total of 4,846 charitable foundations in China, representing an increase of 609 from 2014, with an annual rate of growth of 14.37%. Out of these foundations, 1550 (31.99%) were public, and 3296 (68.01%) were private. Only 61 of the newly created foundations in 2015 were public, four less than the number of new public foundations from the previous year. On the other hand there were 648 new private foundations, making up 89.98% of the total amount of newly established foundations in 2015. This increase was about the same as the previous year’s one. The newly created foundations of 2015 were primarily located in Guangdong, Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, and Zhejiang. A total of 330, or 54.19%, of the new foundations of that year were located in these five provinces.

In 2015, there were approximately 100 million people registered as volunteers in China (Mainland), accounting for 7.27% of the total population. The number of people who were actually active as volunteers totalled 94.88 million. In 2015, the number of volunteers increased by 6.9%, the number of volunteered hours totalled 1.559 billion, and the net value of volunteer contributions totalled 60 billion Yuan. In comparison to 2014, there were 4,870,000 more active volunteers in 2015, representing a 5.4% increase. The rate of volunteer donations increased by 4.9%, and the total time donated by volunteers increased by 337 million hours, which is a 27.5% increase. The net value of volunteer contributions increased by 15.7 billion Yuan, which represents an actual growth rate of 29%.

The total anticipated amount of donations from 2015 is expected to reach 99.2 billion Yuan. Out of this, foundations are expected to receive 37.4 billion Yuan in donations. Charities are expected to receive 36.2 billion Yuan; civil administration programs are expected to receive 5.623 billion Yuan, and other organizations will receive 2 billion Yuan. Additionally, taking into consideration the monetary value of volunteer time (60 billion Yuan), as well as the estimated value of the public welfare lottery funds used (34 billion Yuan), the total amount of charitable funds is expected to reach 193.2 billion Yuan.

Although the expected amount of material donations from society in 2015 was anticipated to be less than that of 2014, the increase in the number of volunteers and the increase in volunteered time in 2015 caused a clear increase in the overall value of the volunteered service time. This means that comparing 2015 to 2014, there has actually been a significant increase in the overall value of philanthropic contributions from society. This shows that volunteer services have already had a notable effect on China’s growth and maturity.

 

The Nonprofit Sector’s Discussion and Concern Regarding the “Charity Law” and the “Law on Overseas NGOs”

 Since 2014, Chinese academic organizations and nonprofit platforms that are concerned with the philanthropic sector have actively participated in researching and discussing the Charity Law, and especially the law’s first draft, the revised second draft and the third draft that were all made publicly available in order to get public feedback. This method of improving the legislation not only promoted discussion and attention towards the Charity Law from the Chinese nonprofit community, but also provided feedback to the national legislative organizations, thereby providing an effective response to the Charity Law’s open-door style legislative process.

In 2015, the Chinese nonprofit community was consulted three times about the Charity Law. At each stage, it energetically returned with feedback and suggestions, and through the legislative feedback mechanisms in place, the nonprofit community, to a large extent, had an influence on the law’s content. For the first draft, the Chinese nonprofit community provided key points of discussion regarding online fundraising, individual public fundraising, charitable trusts, and tax benefits, among other things. For the second draft, the nonprofit community heavily focused on online charitable fundraising, individual public fundraising, tax benefits, use of one’s real name when registering as a volunteer, and public disclosure of information. For the third draft, the implications and proportional limits of the management costs of public foundations became the focal point of discussion.

Since the 1990s, international NGOs have been entering China in large numbers. According to statistics, there are currently around 7000 international NGOs operating in China. For quite some time, international NGOs have not only been stable sources of funding for Chinese NGOs, but have also provided great assistance in raising their level of professionalism and the development of philanthropy as a philosophy. In 2015, when the “Foreign NGOs Management Law (Draft)” (Second Draft) was published, there was much concern among international and Chinese philanthropic organizations. The main point of discussion was how the legislative intent, content, and subsequent legislative impact of the “Foreign NGOs Management Law” (Second Draft) would affect Chinese and international NGOs’ ability to exist. National security was the basic legal objective of the “Foreign NGOs Management Law,” and it focused on effectively regulating international NGOs at an organizational and behavioral level.

The second draft of the “Internal Security Act” was made public at almost the exact same time. From a certain perspective, this confirms that the legislative intent of the “Foreign NGOs Management Law” is to provide social security and stability. The content of the law aims for safety and stability, and it emphasizes the selection and management of foreign NGOs. In this way, there is a structural conflict with the development of international NGOs in China. In this draft, the Public Security Administration is clearly responsible for the registration and management of foreign NGOs. This is a point of contention between foreign NGOs and the Chinese philanthropic sector. As the department responsible for the strength of internal stability, it is worth discussing whether or not the Public Security Administration is indeed capable of achieving professional management of international NGOs.

The Chinese philanthropic sector proposes that the Department of Civil Affairs should be responsible for the registration and management of foreign NGOs in order to maintain consistency in the management of foreign and domestic nonprofit organizations. The subsequent impact of the “Foreign NGOs Management Law” drew the most concern from the Chinese and international nonprofit community. International NGOs were most concerned about whether or not they would be able to legally exist and work in China after the law was implemented. In accordance with the regulations of the draft, the space international NGOs had to operate would be severely restricted, and to a certain degree, the independence of their activities would be impacted. At the same time, the Chinese nonprofit community was concerned about whether or not international NGOs would be able to support Chinese grassroots organizations or act as advocates by supplying them with funding, thus impacting the diversity of Chinese nonprofit organizations.

 

The 9th of September Day of Giving sparks an increased emphasis on crowd-sourced fundraising, and fundraisers and donors create a deeper connection through the Internet

Internet Plus has been one of the hottest topics of 2015. Every industry in China has been working to promote and deepen its integration with the Internet, and the nonprofit sector is no exception. Chinese NGOs are drawing support from the tremendous growth of domestic mobile online platforms; the traditional framework for public welfare is being reconstructed, and the public is now capable of accessing public welfare projects at their fingertips. In 2015, the Tencent Charitable Platform received over 540 million Yuan in donations, 5.4 times more than what was received in 2014. Over 23 million people donated money, which is 4.7 times more than the sum for 2014. There were 7241 fundraising programs in total, which is 6.4 times more than in 2014. Over 95.32% of the donations were completed on a mobile device. Only 4.68% of the donations were completed through a PC device. By contrast, in 2014, nearly 40% came through a PC device.

In 2015 Tencent, in collaboration with many other organizations, launched an annual philanthropic program called the 9/9 (9th of September) Day of Giving. In Europe and the United States, these special charity days are very common. In the United States, the Tuesday following Christmas is called “Giving Tuesday.” In England, on every odd numbered year a “Red Nose Day” is organized in March. The 9/9 Day of Giving draws support from Tencent’s products’ “connecting” function, connecting the public with public welfare and donors with recipients. It can thus become a source of connection, promoting public service in a genuine way to a greater audience. In order to add a certain amount of weight to the event, Tencent invested 99.99 million Yuan in matching funds, encouraging public charity and participation. According to statistics, during the three days of the 9/9 Day of Giving, the public donated 127.9 million Yuan through the Tencent online platform. A total of 2.05 million people participated and made donations. For China, this represented a record number of online donations and of people donating online. In total, 95 publicly-funded organizations hosted 2178 projects, covering areas of need such as poverty alleviation, student aid, medical relief, assistance to the disabled, women and children, environmental protection, animal protection, preservation of traditional culture, public works projects, humanitarian aid, and social innovation, to name but a few.

From this first edition of the 9/9 Day of Giving, we can gauge the following facts: first of all, NGOs are currently very much lacking money, and they strongly sought after the matching funds from Tencent. There were 2178 nonprofits that heavily utilized social media to mobilize a large number of supporters to donate from the middle of the night of September 7 through to 10 am, in order to receive a higher amount of matching funding from Tencent. On that single day there were 33.33 million Yuan worth of donations for matching funds. Because of this, Tencent quickly revised its rules and began to limit matching funds from public and organizational donations. If Tencent had not revised its rules, 99.99 million Yuan worth of funds could have been matched by the end of one day. “How to Pluck Goose Feathers,” “Three Days Looting for 100 million, Celebrating the 9/9 Day of the “Diaosi” (losers),” “NGOs Raise Money through Stealth”– these article headlines certainly reflect the current state of the nonprofit industry. Additionally, what needs to be considered regarding the programs hosted by NGOs is whether the purpose of fundraising is to solve social problems or to solve the monetary problems of the organizations themselves.

Secondly, as a large-scale online charitable activity organized by Tencent, the 9/9 Day of Giving shows us that capital has started to draw on support from technology, which will influence the Chinese philanthropic sector and the public. We notice that the Internet gives notable outside support to the Chinese nonprofit sector, and we see that technology will have a restructuring effect on Chinese philanthropy. When creating the rules and regulations for the 9/9 Day of Giving, it was decided that donors must have a bank card linked to the Wechat app in order to be able to accept their online or mobile payments. By using the mechanism of matching funds, which mobilized the public and nonprofit organizations to enthusiastically participate in the fundraising, and by adjusting the rules and regulations for these funds, these new rules have created a brand new “arena” for philanthropy. If NGOs and the public want to enter this new arena, they must be ready to adapt.

Thirdly, there were 2.05 million people who donated money during the 9/9 Day of Giving. If we count the number of people who may not have donated but spread news of the event through social media, the actual number of participants is extremely large. Tencent never published any statics or data about these 2.05 million people, but we should still conduct a preliminary analysis of this group. Tencent decided that only the money donated through Wechat and QQ would be counted in the total for matching funds, so we are going to focus on analyzing the Wechat group. According to statistics published in August 2015 by Tencent, the average age of a Wechat user is 26, and 86.2% are between the ages 18-36. The vast majority of users are one of the following: staff of corporations and business enterprises, freelance workers, students, and staff of public institutions. By looking at the distribution of age and occupation of Wechat users, we can roughly estimate that those who donated during the 9/9 Day of Giving were mainly educated people living in a city and belonging to the middle class elite. This group of people is, in fact, currently the key target audience for public fundraising by Chinese NGOs. In this way, we can see that truly mobilizing the entire population for something like the 9/9 Day of Giving will still be a long process.

  

Academic organizations and alliances for support continue to emerge within the charity sector

2015 is destined to be a year worth remembering for Chinese philanthropic research and education. The Tsinghua University Institute for Philanthropy became the first national-level think tank to focus on the philanthropic sector. On April 26 2015, this institute was jointly established by the Bureau of Civil Affairs and Tsinghua University. The strategic mission of the Institute of Philanthropy is to fully promote research into philanthropy and public welfare and build a system for encouraging talented personnel in the industry.

In April 2015, the Beijing Recende Fundraising Research Center, the Narada Foundation, the Shenzhen One Foundation, the China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation, the Zhejiang Dunhe Foundation and five other organizations jointly set up a member-led alliance for professional fundraisers in the Chinese philanthropic sector. In September 2015, the China Philanthropy Service Alliance was established at the fourth meeting of the China Charity Exhibition. The China Philanthropy Service Alliance (Yilian Alliance) was put together by third party service organizations wanting to support the development of the philanthropic sector, as a kind of complete, comprehensive service for all the different needs in public philanthropy, including human resources, maintaining and increasing value, fundraising services, financial support, legal aid, communication services, IT support, intellectual rights, project evaluation, event planning, and volunteer management.

 

Under the national policy of promoting public entrepreneurship and innovation, the Chinese philanthropic sector actively encourages the domestic development of social enterprises

Starting in 2014, when China produced a national policy on public entrepreneurship and innovation, social enterprises begun to tackle social problems. They have simultaneously been working to create economic benefit, creating lasting programs that will generate large amounts of interest from the public toward philanthropy. During the past two years, China’s philanthropic sector has started to pay serious attention to social enterprises, and many platforms for social enterprise and social investment have been created one after the other. In 2014, 16 organizations jointly held a symposium for Chinese social enterprises and social investment in order to integrate resources to encourage their development.

That same year, the Youcheng China Social Entrepreneur Foundation, in collaboration with many other partners, launched the first Chinese social investment alliance, following the principles of “building together, sharing together, winning together”. This alliance will connect the government, business, society, and platforms for international cooperation and innovation, and select programs and resources with both a social and business value. On June 18 2015, the first annual symposium on Chinese social enterprise and social investment was held in Shenzhen. During the conference, Xu Yongguang stated that he believes China’s social enterprises and social investment will see four main trends and patterns of development; 1) companies and private non-enterprise units coming together in a common drive; 2) cooperation in the private and public sector between the government and the people; 3) diversified investment from public welfare foundations and private capital; 4) equality and efficiency in social and economic development.[4]

In September 2015, the Peking University Center for Civil Society Studies, the China Philanthropy Research Institute of Beijing Normal University, the Narada Foundation, the Shenzhen Charity Foundation and Development Center, and the Social Enterprise Research Center published “Methods for the Development of Chinese Philanthropy and Social Certifications (Trial)”. This methodization draws on the experience of certification of social enterprises in China and abroad, as well as relevant factors involved in the ISO certification system. The organization’s goals, sources of income, profit distribution, organizational management, and registration information will be the core elements of certification for social enterprises. The organizations that pass the social certification process will receive financial, personnel, and incubation aid and support. In 2015, a total of seven Chinese businesses received the certification, making up the first group of enterprises to receive this recognition.

16ae4a7e-0c8d-11e6-b8ab-30cd2474e1b0_1280x720

Public participation and environment-related lawsuits from NGOs become an important avenue of civil action for environmental protection in 2015

In February 2015 Under the Dome, a documentary published by former investigative journalist of CCTV Cai Jing, became extremely popular on the internet. In one respect, this is indicative of the fact that within the public there are others like Cai Jing who have developed an environmental awareness. We can also see from this that the public is paying much more attention to environmental issues. In 2015, the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs and the Guangzhou Green Network implemented an effective mechanism to mobilize public participation in regards to issues of industrial pollution. The Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs launched a Blue Sky Map application, which compiled all of the government information available about environmental pollution. By releasing this app, public oversight and the power of consumer choice has been broadly mobilized, thus transforming mere data on pollution into viable action. Currently, there are over 2 million people who follow this app. In 2015, the Guangzhou Green Network Center for Environmental Protection focused widespread media attention on an investigative report of China’s Environmental Impact Assessment. This investigative report let the world know about the current disarray of Environmental Impact Assessment in China. One month after its release, the Department of Environmental Protection quickly began special corrective action to rectify its EIA.

The Guangzhou Green Network is not only an organization that overseas the EIA, it also promotes the Green Network— this is a website that has content from over 40 thousand EIA programs as well as their geographical locations. The public can quickly search and find all the places where there is an environmental risk.

In 2015, the new Environmental Protection Law was passed. According to media statistics, in 2015, there were only nine social organizations that acted as the plaintiffs in environmental protection lawsuits. For example, Fujian’s Green Home organization sued as the plaintiff against poultry and livestock breeders in Fujian, Changting County for causing water pollution. The Putian Lvyin Binhai Research Center and Lufa Hui filed as co-prosecutors. In addition to this, there are some social organizations that will file as the plaintiff in public litigation cases that deal with environmental protection. For example, Green Anhui acted as the prosecutor in the case against Changzhou Wintafone, Ltd Co. In 2015, only 14 of the 34 provinces and administrative regions of China accepted public interest litigations concerning the environment.[8] In 2015, Friends of Nature and Fujian Green Home filed the first successful legal case on environmental protection filed by a social organization. The success of this case shows us that environmental protection organizations can utilize public interest litigation to combat pollution.

 

Many Chinese NGOs are suspected of malpractice, sometimes giving rise to scandals. 

The 2015 Charity Law has a provision that does not allow individuals to conduct public fundraising, something which has sparked widespread debate. The Bai’se Student Aid Network incident reveals the shortcomings and problems with individual donations. According to reports, the Bai’se Student Aid Network was founded in 2006 by Wang Jie as an online platform for student financial aid. It was never registered with the Department of Civil Affairs. The incident reflects the difficulties of regulating individual and grassroots level donations and self-regulation in the industry. The network was intended to help solve the problem of students in the area who are unable to go to school. Its existence and mission had been disclosed by the local media. With this understanding, the government, to a certain extent, was tacitly allowing this student aid platform to exist without legal status for nine years.

Because the Bai’se Student Aid Network is located in an area where the development of China’s civil society sector is weak, there is a lack of supervision and regulation among public welfare organizations. The fact that the Bai’se Student Aid Network was able to exist for so long shows that the government and philanthropic sector were both unable to provide any supervision or oversight. According to regulations contained in the Charity Law, organizations that do not have the qualifications to receive public donations or individuals with charitable purposes can collaborate with charitable organizations that do have the necessary qualifications for public donations. The donations collected will be managed and overseen by the qualifying charitable organization. This regulation closes a legal loophole for personal donations, while also providing a legal channel for individuals to initiate fundraising.

By September 2015, media coverage of the Special Starlight Fund of the China Charities Aid Foundation for Children had ended over two years previously, but there were many patients with cerebral palsy who were still waiting for financial aid. Investigation of this foundation revealed that the Special Starlight Foundation raised 1.4 million Yuan and 670,000 donated items. However, the administrative fees and payment to the management team of the funds totalled as much as 860,000 Yuan. In 2013, the China Charities Aid Foundation for Children found out that the money from the Special Starlight Fund had been used up and decided to end its cooperation with the foundation. In the process of making this decision, there were seven issues that were noted about the Special Starlight Fund, including among others lack of planning, being behind on debt payments, poor staff management, non-submitted work reports and unpaid costs related to the foundation.

In actuality, the incident with the Special Starlight Fund revealed certain long-standing regulatory and management issues of the program. According to national law, a foundation is allowed to set up a corresponding special fund. However, these special funds exist in a “black space” that current laws are unable to get involved with. The problems with the Special Starlight Fund had made the government realize that there are a number of such funds that are facing management problems. At the end of 2015, the Ministry of Civil Affairs issued “Notifications Regarding Further Strengthening the Management of Special Funds of Foundations.” It requires foundations, responsible business units, and registration and management bodies to strengthen oversight of these special funds.

 

NGOs are searching for methods of survival and strategic moves for development within the boundaries set by the government

In August 2015, an essay described as “the most sorrowful essay,” written by a fourth grade elementary student named Muku Yiwumu from the Liangshan Yi autonomous prefecture in Sichuan, led to the demolition of the Suoma Elementary School, founded by the Suoma Charity Foundation of Sichuan. The elementary school had been built in 2012. The organization’s leaders were also called in by the police for questioning. This sparked widespread concern in the philanthropic sector and in Chinese society. In 2015, during a routine inspection of the school in July, the chairman of the Suoma Charity Foundation, Huang Hongbin, saw an essay entitled “Tears” written by Muku Yiwumu, “The food was ready. I went to call Mom, but Mom was already dead.” He shared it on Wechat, and the post was rapidly spread online. Because of this essay, 920,000 Yuan were donated to Muku Yiwumu and the Suoma Foundation. It also led to public criticism of the local government in Liangshan.

Very soon after, the local government published the “Notice of Set Date of Demolition for the Suoma Elementary Due to Illegal Construction”. Following this, under pressure from the public, the Xichang city government held a press conference to announce why the Suoma Elementary would be torn down. Immediately following this, the chairman of the Suoma Charity Foundation received a summons for questioning from the local public security administration. In this way, we see how grassroots-style NGOs are always conducting a challenging balancing act: how to draw public interest to local social problems and implement effective fundraising, while simultaneously maintaining a “tacit understanding” with the local government.

In December 2015, two volunteers from the Nature University and Tianjin Green-Collar who had begun conducting an investigation into industrial pollution in Ningde, Fujian, were taken in by the local police under suspicion of being involved in prostitution. Eventually, the two volunteers were released without charges. Prior to this, the aerial photography equipment of a volunteer from Beijing was confiscated by the Radio Administration Bureau while the volunteer was photographing the state of the environmental protection of the wetlands in Ningde. The Ningde municipal government has been especially concerned about any activity related to environmental groups and organizations because of the impact caused by the media’s exposure of pollution from a local nickel alloy industry and from fraud discovered in the relevant Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

Since 2015, many public interest organizations in China have either closed or gone out of business, or even more seriously some of their employees have been held in criminal detention. In May 2015, a women’s rights advocacy organization called the Hangzhou Wei Ming Center was closed. In December 2015, employees of labour organizations such as the Panyu Workers Group Service Bureau and the Foshan Southern Birds Social Work Center were detained by the police for criminal activities. In January 2016, China’s first NGO to specialize in women’s legal aid and research, the Beijing Zhongze Women’s Legal Consulting Services Center (formerly known as the Peking University Law School Women’s Legal Studies and Service Center), announced that it would close on February 1.

These are not isolated cases for rights advocacy groups in China. According to the English publication the Guardian, about half of the world’s countries have adopted restraining measures towards rights advocacy NGOs, and thousands of organizations have been affected. In this world, democratic countries and authoritarian countries alike all exert administrative control over NGOs. The logic behind this is an understanding that developing NGOs weakens the power of the state. According to Tang Hao, in an economically developing country that has concentrated power, controlling international NGOs is needed to maintain the concentration of power. In a democratic country that is economically behind, controlling international NGOs is needed for economic development.[10]

 

By participating in the relief efforts for the Nepal earthquake, Chinese NGOs have accelerated the process of internationalization

On April 25 2015, an 8.1 scale earthquake struck Nepal. Chinese civil organizations that had gained experience from their work in the wake of the earthquakes in Wenchuan, Yushu, Lushan, and Ludian were first-responders in Nepal, utilizing their strong rescue capabilities. In comparison to past relief efforts by Chinese NGOs, which focused primarily on the donation of money and supplies, this time Chinese organizations participating in earthquake relief were able to implement large-scale evacuation plans, sending many support and rescue teams into Nepal. The Chinese Red Cross, One Foundation, China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation, Amity Foundation, China Social Welfare Foundation, Siyuan China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation, and other associated rescue teams, Blue Sky Rescue Team, and China Women’s Development Foundation participated in the emergency rescue operations.

The China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation, the Amity Foundation, the China Youth Development Foundation, and other organizations participated in post-disaster reconstruction in Nepal. The Chinese Foundation for Disaster Relief, together with the United Nations Development Program (China Office), the Asia Foundation, Save the Children, and other international partners established the “Chinese NGOs Emergency Coordination Response Center for the Nepal Earthquake of 4/25.” The Anping China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation and the Disaster Information Service Center of Zhuoming also provided broadcasts and informational support.

This time, the Chinese government did not place any restrictions on avenues for donations, and many participating NGOs engaged in fundraising in the community. According to statistics from the China Charity Information Center, over 220 million Yuan were raised for earthquake relief, out of which 70% were donated funds, or approximately 170 million RMB.[12] Chinese NGOs’ participation in relief efforts following the earthquake in Nepal also brought to light certain challenges the industry is facing: Chinese NGOs still lack sufficient professional experience in rescue operations; Chinese NGOs lack the ability to adjust to foreign environments; communication and cooperation between Chinese NGOs and local organizations abroad is lacking; Chinese NGOs lack a stable mechanism for cooperation and support amongst themselves.

In April 2015 Ma Che, the Director of the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs and creator of the “Air and Water Pollution Maps,” became the first Chinese person selected to receive the Social Entrepreneurship Award from the Skoll Foundation. In September 2015, the Yunnan’s Green River Valley Management and Promotional Center was awarded the Equator Prize from the United Nations Development Program. In 2014, the Pendeba Society won this award, making this the second year in a row that a Chinese NGO was selected as the recipient. In October 2015 Yang Dongping, the president of the 21st Century Education Research Institute, was awarded the 2015 Prix Charles and Monique Moraze Prize from France’s “Foundation House of Human Sciences” (Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme), in recognition of his many decades of work contributing to the promotion of educational reform in China. In 2015 the Compassion Award of the Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwanese Charity Fund was also given to people from Mainland China for the first time. The award was given to philanthropists Deng Fei and Zhe Chengqing.

In 2015, with the support of the Foundation for Disaster Relief Coordination as well as the Institute of Post-Disaster Reconstruction and Management of Sichuan University and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Chinese NGOs were represented for the first time at the third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction. During the conference, the “Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction for 2015-2030” was agreed upon. In 2015, the UN Millennium Goals Achievement Fund, the China Women’s Development Foundation, and the Sino-American Friendship Association jointly organized an International Forum on Women and Sustainable Development in order to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the World Conference on Women.

Chinese NGOs are rapidly moving onto the global stage, which is not only in keeping with a broader national framework, but also indicative of a maturing philanthropic sector. In 2015, the China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation became registered as a legal international NGO first in Myanmar and then in Nepal. The Amity Foundation set up an office in Addis Ababa, the capital of Ethiopia, making it the first Chinese NGO to open an office location in Africa. It then opened its second overseas office in Geneva, Switzerland. In addition to this, Chinese nonprofit organizations are actively advocating for NGOs to become involved in the broader national framework of foreign aid.

The Charity Law will pass into effect on September 1, 2016. This is China’s first step in creating a comprehensive, foundational law for China’s philanthropic sector and will have an extremely important influence on Chinese NGOs. NGOs will move from the current dual management system to registering directly with the Bureau of Civil Affairs, which will greatly promote the organizations’ development. Requirements for public donations will be fully dropped; organizations that have reached a certain time requirement will be allowed to acquire public funds. Chinese public fundraising will change from its past government-led model to one that is genuinely supported by the people, achieving a market allocation of public welfare resources. Preferential tax benefits are expected to be fully put in place, and nonprofit organizations will be able to get tax-exempt status.

The implementation of charitable trusts will allow the property and funds of private individuals to enter the public welfare sector, bringing large-scale charitable resources into that sector. This income from charitable trust funds will resolve China’s long-standing bottleneck, which has caused a lack of resources and funding for public welfare. From here on, NGOs will have to face much higher expectations of openness, which will raise the transparency and credibility of these organizations. At the same time, regulations in the Charity Law such as those related to online fundraisers setting up an information platform, or foundations with public-funds managing their donations are, to a degree, lagging behind the nation’s current development.

In regards to online fundraising and charitable information platforms set up by the Ministry of Civil Affairs, we must still wait and see whether or not the existing online fundraising platforms will be able to fit into the specified criteria for charitable information platforms. The management fee for public fundraising foundations is set at 10%, which will inhibit the development of these types of foundations. Additionally, in regards to individual soliciting donations, the Charity Law does not restrict people seeking for help, but it sets clear limits for such fundraising.

 

[1] 2015年4季度全国社会服务统计数据:http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/sj/tjjb/qgsj/201602/20160200880171.htm

[2] 2015, Fourth Quarter, National Statistics and Data of Social Services:http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/sj/tjjb/qgsj/201602/20160200880171.htm

[3]徐永光:《社会企业与社会投资的中国趋势》,南都公益基金会http://www.naradafoundation.org/content/4598

[4]Xu Yongguang: “Chinese Trends of Social Enterprise and Social Investment,” Narada Foundation. http://www.naradafoundation.org/content/4598

[5] 顾远:《社企认证有待氛围成熟》,《公益时报》,2015年11月24日http://www.gongyishibao.com/newdzb/html/2015-11/24/content_12698.htm?div=-1

[6] Gu Yuan: “Social Enterprise Certification Waits for the Right Atmosphere to Mature,” China Philanthropy Times, Nov 24, 2015 http://www.gongyishibao.com/newdzb/html/2015-11/24/content_12698.htm?div=-1

[7] 刘蓉:《2015年仅9家社会组织成为环境公益诉讼原告》,《经济日报》,2016年3月22日

[8] Liu Rong: “In 2015, Only 9 NGOs filed as plaintiff in public interest lawsuits,” Economic Daily, March 22, 2016

[9] 唐昊:《全球化时代的“权力扩散”,金砖国家如何管理境外NGO》,《凤凰周刊》,2016年第3期

[10] “The Age of Globalization and “Diffusion of Power,” How Brazil, Russia, India, and China Manage Foreign NGOs,” Phoenix Weekly, 2016, No. 3.

[11] 中民慈善捐助信息中心:《4.25尼泊尔强震捐赠报告》,2015年5月12日。

[12] China Charitable Donations Information Center: “Report on Donations of the April 25 Nepal Earthquake,” May 12, 2015.

 

[1] 董强 中国农业大学人文与发展学院副教授、博士。

[2] Dr. Dong Qiang – Associate Professor at the College of Humanities and Development Studies of China Agricultural University.

国家制度规范与公益行业发展的一年——2015年中国慈善事业发展综述[1]

 

摘要:2015年中国慈善事业进入了快速发展阶段,公益组织的数量继续高速增加,国家开始重视对公益行业的制度规范,法律体系正在完善,党的建设全面推进,监管体系正在加强,行业协会商会的活力正在激发;与此同时,公益行业的自身建设不断完善,在互联网+的推动下公众参与公益渠道正在形成、行业性支持平台越发多元,社会企业新的力量正在崛起,公益环保诉讼正在成为新的环保行动,公益丑闻曝光显示行业发展的薄弱,公益组织与政府的边界博弈依然存在,尼泊尔地震预示着公益组织开始规模化地走向国际。

关键词:制度规范   行业发展

 

 

2015年注定将成为中国慈善事业发展的重要年份。中国慈善事业的法律环境正在加快完善。在这一年,《境外非政府组织管理法》、《慈善法》先后公开征求意见。党中央开始加强对社会组织的党建工作,专门出台了党的建设文件。国家发布了行业协会商会与行政机关的脱钩总体方案,彻底实现行业协会商会去行政化。各级民政部门开始探索建立新型监管体制,实现对社会组织的综合监管。我国民间公益行业在2015年加快行业基础设施建设。公益行业积极参与《境外非政府组织法》、《慈善法》的立法讨论,反映民间声音。99公益日出现促进了当前公益行业与公众参与的有效链接,大众公益正在走向主流。中国公益行业的学术机构以及行业支持联盟不断涌现,促进公益行业生态的发育。社会企业正在探索传统公益之外的转型路径,2015年有多个社会企业和社会投资平台建立,同时推出了社会企业的认证办法。《穹顶之下》引发的热播让环保组织看到了公众的潜力,公众环境研究中心和广州绿网等机构公众参与平台在2015年得以借势发展。在2015年相继爆出包括百色助学网、星光专项基金等事件,凸显了政府监管与组织监管的不足。2015年,助学组织、环保组织、劳工组织、妇女组织相继受到了政府对其生存及活动空间的挤压,公益组织如何处理与政府的边界始终需要面临的挑战。我国的公益组织在国家倡导的一带一路的战略下,积极推进其国际化进程。

 

 

 

一、国家全面构建规范慈善事业发展的制度环境

 

1、国家积极制定《慈善法》与《境外非政府组织法》,规范境内外慈善组织管理

2015年中国公益行业同时有两部法律相继公开征求意见。《慈善法》的立法目的是发展慈善事业,《境外非政府组织法》的立法目的是规范并引导境外非政府组织在中国境内的活动。《慈善法》在2016年3月第十二届全国人大第四次全体会议通过,《境外非政府组织法》却还没有明确的出台时间。这两部法律的制定对于中国公益行业将产生深远的影响。

自2014年2月,全国人大启动《慈善法》立法工作以来,采取开门立法的形式。《慈善法》制定过程中,全国人大内务司法委员会利用多种形式积极听取政府相关部门、地方民政、慈善机构、专家学者、公众的立法意见,形成了官民互动的立法进程。在2014年,全国人大内务司法委员会收到了多个学术机构的慈善法意见稿。2015年10月,全国人大对《慈善法》进行一审。之后,《慈善法(草案)》第一次公开征求意见。一审稿总体而言,亮点众多。一审稿明确界定慈善的概念为大慈善,拓宽了慈善的旧有边界。一审稿中关于慈善组织网络募捐、个人公开募捐、慈善信托、税收优惠等方面的内容引发了慈善界、学术界与公众的关注与讨论。

2015年12月,全国人大对《慈善法》进行二审。之后,全国人大进行第二次公开征求意见,再次体现了开门立法的精神。二审稿修改稿中的慈善组织网络募捐、个人公开募捐、税收优惠、志愿者实名登记、信息公开等方面的内容引发了慈善界、学术界与公众的关注与讨论。2016年3月9日,全国人大副委员长李建国在第十二届全国人大第四次会议上做《慈善法(草案)》的说明。三审稿中关于公募基金会的管理费用含义及比例限定成为慈善界、学术界与公众的关注焦点。3月16日,十二届全国人大四次会议表决通过《慈善法》,将于2016年9月1日施行。自此,中国的慈善事业开启了有法可依的新阶段。

2014年,国家在启动《慈善法》立法的同时,还有另外一部关于境外非政府组织的法律正在以更快的立法速度推进,但是在2015年二审稿征求意见之后受到国内外意见牵制使得立法进程放缓。2014年12月,国务院提请全国人大审议境外非政府组织管理法草案。该草案并没有向社会公开征求意见。中国目前涉及境外非政府组织的法律主要是1989年的《外国商会管理暂行规定》以及2004年《基金会管理条例》。2009年,国家授权云南出台境外非政府组织的地方性法规《云南省规范境外非政府组织活动暂行规定》。2015年4月,第十二届全国人大常委会第十四次会议审议了《境外非政府组织管理法(草案二次审议稿)》,随后向社会公开征求意见。《境外非政府组织管理法》主要对境外非政府组织的代表机构登记、临时活动开展、活动的行为规范、保护合法权益的相关措施、代表机构活动的监督管理等进行了规制。该草案二次审议稿明确了将采取双重管理的方式,确定公安部及省级公安部门是境外非政府组织的登记管理机关,国家部委及省级相关部门以及国务院或者省级人民政府授权的组织为业务主管单位,省级以下的公安部门及相关部门不得作为相应的登记管理机关和业务主管单位。

《境外非政府组织管理法》一公布,引发了国内外的高度关注,特别是境外非政府组织以及与之合作的国内公益组织。国际NGO以及国际媒体普遍认为此法将会严格限制境外NGO在华的活动。目前来看,对于《境外非政府组织管理法》的关注点主要有境外非政府组织界定、境外非政府组织开展得活动界定等方面。2015年7月,外交部、公安部、民政部在上海共同召开境外非政府组织座谈会,了解境外非政府组织在中国开展工作的情况介绍以及听取服务管理工作的意见。此后,关于《境外非政府组织管理法》的立法进程并无明显进展。根据2016年两会发布的消息,《境外非政府组织管理法》仍处于修改阶段。

2、中央正在通过一系列制度安排加强社会组织的党建,实现党在社会组织中的覆盖

关于社会组织的党建历史可以追溯到上个世纪九十年代。1996年,中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅联合下发了《关于加强社会团体和民办非企业单位管理工作的通知》,首次提出了建立党组织的要求。1998年,中共中央组织部和民政部联合下发了《关于在社会团体中建立党组织有关问题的通知》。2000年,中共中央组织部颁布《关干加强社会团体党的建设工作的意见》。中央对于社会组织的党建早有关注,由于社会组织的发展缓慢,因此并没有形成系统的社会组织党建的相关政策。

近年来,特别是国家降低社会组织的注册门槛之后,社会组织的规模与类型得到了快速增加。与此同时,中央认识到社会组织中的党的建设薄弱,特别是党组织的覆盖不足,难以形成党在社会组织领域中的领导核心。在十八大报告中明确提出要加大社会组织党建力度。2015年,中央相继出台两份重要文件以加强社会组织的党建。2015年6月,党中央颁布《中国共产党党组工作条例(试行)》。在该条例中明确要在社会组织中设立党组。此前,按照《中国共产党章程》规定,社会组织可以设立党组,并没有做出明确的要求。2015年9月,中共中央办公厅印发《关于加强社会组织党的建设工作的意见(试行)》。中央出台此项意见,着眼于两个作用:一方面扩大党在社会组织领域中的覆盖面,提升影响力;另一方面,实现党引领社会组织正确的发展方向,促进社会组织在国家治理体系和治理能力现代化进程中发挥作用。在此项意见中,对于社会组织进行了明确的界定:主要包括社会团体、民办非企业单位、基金会、社会中介组织以及城乡社区社会组织等。由此可以看出,中央将全面加强对各种类型的社会组织党建,实现社会组织的全覆盖。该意见明确了社会组织党建工作的管理体制:全国性社会组织党建工作,分别归口中央直属机关工委、中央国家机关工委、国务院国资委党委统一领导和管理;地方社会组织党建工作,由省、市、县成立社会组织党建工作机构统一领导和管理;城乡社区社会组织党建工作,由街道社区和乡镇村党组织兜底管理。有业务主管单位的社会组织党建工作,由业务主管单位党组织负责领导和管理,接受社会组织党建工作机构的工作指导。《意见》提出了按单位建立党组织、按行业建立党组织、按区域建立党组织三种方式。《意见》要求党组织书记一般从社会组织内部产生,提倡党员社会组织负责人担任党组织书记。社会组织负责人不是党员的,可从管理层中选拔党组织书记。社会组织中没有合适人选的,可提请上级党组织选派,再按党内有关规定任职。

 

 

3、国家对行业协会商会加大去行政化力度,启动全国性行业协会商会脱钩试点工作

根据统计,2014年底我国行业协会商会达到了7万个,目前还在以每年10-15%的速度增加。行业协会商会在为政府提供咨询、服务企业发展、优化资源配置、加强行业自律、创新社会治理、履行社会责任等方面发挥了积极作用。由于我国的行业协会商会随着政府机构改革以及部门的撤销而设立,与政府部门有着千丝万缕的联系。行业协会商会利用政府部门的权力获取利益的现象不在少数。2014年国家审计署发布报告,卫计委主管的中华医学会违规收取医药企业赞助8.2亿元。按照十八大以来的中央政策部署,强调理清政府、市场与社会之间的关系,发挥市场在资源配置中的决定作用,因此国家开始推动行业协会商会的去行政化工作。2015年7月,中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅印发《行业协会商会与行政机关脱钩总体方案》。国家推出该方案,旨在切断行政机关和行业协会商会之间的利益链条,促进行业协会商会的独立运行。该脱钩方案规定要完成“五脱钩五规范”:机构分离,规范综合监管关系;职能分离,规范行政委托和职责分工关系;资产财务分离,规范财务关系;人员管理分离,规范用人关系;党建、外事等事项分离,规范管理关系。随后,国务院开始推进全国性行业协会商会的脱钩试点工作,计划在三年内完成全部试点工作。2015年9月,民政部出台《全国性行业协会商会负责人任职管理办法(试行)》文件。在该文件中规定了全国性行业协会商会负责人候选人产生程序,取消了过去负责人候选人基本由各业务主管单位推荐的人事管理职责。此外,该办法规定全国性行业协会商会负责人不设置行政级别,不得由现职和不担任现职但未办理退离休手续的公务员兼任。领导干部离退休三年之内,不得到行业协会商会兼职。通过该办法,彻底在人事方面将政府部门与全国性行业协会商会分离。

 

 

4、国家正在有序形成社会组织综合监管体系,确保在社会组织规模扩张的同时监管到位

随着社会组织蓬勃发展,如何建立适应当前社会组织发展趋势的监管体系是民政登记机关迫切要考虑的问题。针对目前社会组织种类不断繁多,数量庞大的特点,国家提出要建立社会组织的综合监管体系,该体系主要包括法律监管、政府监管、社会监督、社会组织自律等方面。根据最新颁布的《慈善法》,各级民政部门应当依法履行职责,对慈善活动进行监督检查,对慈善行业组织进行指导。民政部在2015年出台了多份文件,对综合监管的相关方面进行制度设计。2015年5月,民政部出台《关于探索建立社会组织第三方评估机制的指导意见》。该意见提出建立社会组织第三方评估机制是完善社会组织综合监管体系的重要内容。第三方评估机制将有利于加强对社会组织的事中事后监管。2015年年底,民政部起草了《民政部关于健全社会组织退出机制的意见(征求意见稿)》。该意见规定了社会组织退出的种类、依据、程序,规范了社会组织登记管理机关依法履行的职责。2016年3月,民政部出台《社会组织登记管理机关行政执法约谈工作规定(试行)》,对社会组织约谈工作的实施程序进行了详细的规定。据悉,民政部正在考虑出台一份关于社会组织综合监管的综合性文件。

与此同时,地方登记管理机关面临着更多监管不足的挑战,仅仅依靠过去的年度检查、登记评估等方式已经难以实现监管的目标。广州、深圳、北京、上海等地开始尝试新的制度设计。广州市在2015年出台了关于综合监管的1+4系列文件:《关于加强和完善社会组织综合监管工作的意见》,以及4个配套文件《广州市社会组织信息公示办法》《广州市社会组织抽查监督办法》《广州市社会组织登记管理机关行政处罚工作规程》《广州市取缔非法社会组织工作规程》。2015年下半年,广州市民政局颁布了《广州市社会组织重大事项报告工作指引》,从而加强对社会组织重大事项的规范管理。2014年10月,深圳市民政局制定了《深圳市社会组织抽查监督办法》。该办法规定,深圳各级登记机关依据社会组织管理的相关法律,按年度或者不定期地抽取一定数量的社会组织进行检查。从11月开始,深圳市社会组织管理局先后对40家社会组织进行了抽检。抽检中发现社会组织主要在内部治理、规章制度、活动开展、财务收支方面存在诸多问题。2015年10月,北京市民政局探索政府监管的新模式,出台了《北京市社会组织行政约谈办法》。根据该办法,北京市各级登记管理机关以约见、谈话方式,督促、建议、指导社会组织建立、执行以章程为核心的各项内部管理制度,警示、劝诫社会组织履行法定义务、纠正其不当行为,调解社会组织内部矛盾、纠纷。2015年,深圳市社会管理管理局建立社会组织法定代表人谈话制度。2014年,上海民政局出台了《关于完善社会组织综合监管体系,促进社会组织健康发展的指导意见》。在该意见中提出要通过健全内部治理机制、建立重大事项报告制度、加大信息公开力度、促进同业规范等方面加强社会组织自律,通过明确部门管理职责、淡化日常监管、建立分类监管机制等方面改善政府监管。2015年,上海市静安区社团管理局、相关职能部门、社会组织共同参与社会组织诚信信息共享平台,从管理和服务两方面加强社会组织的信息公开。通过该平台,将静安区社会组织的资金、活动、行为纳入到监管之中。

二、 中国民间对慈善立法的回应以及慈善行业建设

2015年慈善公益事业取得丰硕成果。根据民政部最新统计,截止2015年12月底,全国共有社会组织65.8万个。其中社会团体32.6万个,基金会4719个,民办非企业单位32.7万个。2015年社会组织比2014年60.6万增加了8.6%。[1]

根据基金会中心网的统计, 截至2015年12月31日,全国基金会总数达4846家,较2014年增加609家,年增长率14.37%。其中,公募基金会1550家,占31.99%;非公募基金会3296家,占68.01%。2015年新增的公募基金会仅有61家,增量较去年减少了4家;非公募基金会有548家,占当年新成立基金会总数的89.98%,增量与去年基本持平。2015年新成立基金会的地域分布整体上仍以广东、北京、上海、江苏、浙江五省为主,共有330家新成立基金会,占当年新成立基金会的54.19%。

2015年全国(大陆地区)登记注册志愿者约1亿人,占人口总数的7.27%;实际参与志愿服务的活跃志愿者总量为9488万人,2015年志愿者捐赠率为6.9%,捐赠志愿服务时间为15.59亿小时,全国志愿者捐赠价值为600亿元。与2014年相比,2015年活跃志愿者捐赠总量增加了487万人,增长率为5.4%;志愿者捐赠率提升了4.9%,志愿者捐赠时间增长了3.37亿小时,增长率为27.5%。志愿者捐赠价值增长了157亿元,实际增长率为29%。

2015年,预期社会捐赠总量将达到992亿元。其中,基金会系统接受的捐赠总额预估为374亿元;慈善会系统的捐赠款物预估为362亿元;民政系统接受的社会捐赠款物56.23亿元,其他机构200亿元。加上全国志愿服务小时折算价值600亿元,和预估彩票公益金社会公益使用量340亿元,全核算社会慈善公益总价值预计将达到1932亿元。

尽管2015年预期的社会捐款捐物总量略低于2014年,不过,由于2015年志愿服务人数增长、服务时间延长导致志愿服务小时折算价值有明显增长,致使2015年与2014年相比,全核算社会慈善公益捐赠总价值有所增长。这表明,志愿服务在中国的成长已经有了显著效果。

 

 

1、公益行业对《慈善法》、《境外非政府组织法》的关注与讨论

自2014年以来,国内关注慈善的学术机构以及公益行业平台型机构积极参与《慈善法》的立法研讨,特别是在《慈善法》一审稿、二审修改稿、三审稿分别公开征求意见阶段。这样的立法研讨机制,一方面促进了国内公益界对于《慈善法》的关注与讨论,另一方面反馈到国家立法机关,从而有效地回应了《慈善法》开门立法思路。2015年,国内公益界在《慈善法》的三个公开征求意见阶段,都做出了积极的意见反馈,并且通过与立法机关的反馈机制,在很大程度上影响了《慈善法》的立法内容。在一审稿中,国内公益界对于慈善组织网络募捐、个人公开募捐、慈善信托、税收优惠等方面的内容给予了重点讨论。在二审稿修改稿中,国内公益界重点关注了慈善组织网络募捐、个人公开募捐、税收优惠、志愿者实名登记、信息公开等方面的内容。在三审稿中,关于公募基金会的管理费用含义及比例限定成为了讨论焦点。

 

 

从上个世纪九十年代,国际NGO开始有规模地进入中国开展工作。根据统计,目前在中国开展工作的国际NGO数量在7000家左右。长期以来,国际NGO不仅是国内公益组织稳定的资助渠道,同时也为国内公益组织的公益理念和专业化提升做出了巨大的帮助。2015年《境外非政府组织管理法(草案)》(二次审议稿)的公布,引发了国际NGO与国内公益组织的极大关注。《境外非政府组织管理法》(二次审议稿)的立法目的、立法内容以及立法后续对国际NGO、国内公益生态的影响是中国公益行业讨论的焦点所在。关于《境外非政府组织管理法》的立法目的基于国内安全考虑,着重要从组织层面和行为层面有效规制国际NGO。《国内安全法》几乎是在同一时间公开二次审议稿,也从侧面证实了《境外非政府组织管理法》在社会安全与稳定方面的立法意图。立法内容着眼于安全与稳定的立法目标,着重强调对境外非政府组织的筛选与管控,从而与国际NGO在国内存在与发展产生结构性冲突。在该草案中,明确了公安部门将负责境外非政府组织的登记管理,这也是国际NGO和中国公益行业有争议的一点。公安部门作为负责国内安全的强制性权力部门,能否实现对境外非政府组织的专业管理值得商榷。中国公益界建议能否由民政部门负责境外非政府组织的登记管理,实现境内境外公益组织管理的一致性。对于《境外非政府组织管理法》出台的后续影响是国际NGO和国内公益界最为关注的。国际NGO在考虑该法出台之后,如何能够合法地在中国存在并开展工作。如果按照该草案的规定,国际NGO在国内的活动空间将会受到很大的制约,一定程度上影响开展活动的独立性。同时,对于国内公益界考虑的是,国际NGO在很大程度上将无法成为支持国内草根组织以及倡导性公益组织的资金渠道,进而影响到了国内公益生态的多元性。

 

2、99公益日引发了公益组织更加重视公众筹款,并通过互联网将筹款者和捐款者深度连接

互联网+在2015年成为最热门的话题。国内各个行业都在推动与互联网的深度融合。中国公益行业也不例外。中国的公益行业正在借助国内移动互联网平台的巨大增量,重构公益的传统结构,公众正在成为指尖公益的主体。2015年,腾讯公益平台捐款总额超过5.4亿,是2014年的5.4倍;捐款人次超过2300万,是2014年的4.7倍;总筹集项目7241个,是2014年的6.4倍。超过95.32%的捐赠额是在移动端完成,仅有4.68%的捐赠额来自于PC端;而在2014年,有接近4成的捐赠来自于PC端。

2015年,腾讯公司联合多方发起了一年一度的全民公益活动——99公益日。公益日在欧美非常普遍,美国在每年圣诞节后的周二是全民Giving Tuesday(给予星期二),英国在奇数年的3月份会举办Red Nose Day (红鼻子日)。99公益日将借助腾讯公司产品“连接”的功能,将公众与公益、捐赠者与受赠者连接起来,形成公益连接器,推动公益真正走向大众。腾讯公司为了发挥杠杆作用,投入了9999万配比资金,鼓励更多的公众参与公益。根据统计,99公益日三天时间,公众通过腾讯公益平台捐款1.279亿元,共有205万人次参与捐款,捐款金额和捐款人数均创国内互联网的募捐记录。共有95家公募组织的2178个在筹项目,涵盖扶贫、助学、疾病救助、助残、妇女儿童、环境保护、动物保护、传统文化保护、公共建设、人文关怀、社会创新等各领域。通过首次99公益日,我们可以看到以下特点:第一,当下的公益组织依然非常缺钱,对于腾讯的配比资金尤为看重。2178个公益项目背后的公益组织为了获得更多的腾讯配比资金,通过刷朋友圈等方式动员大量的支持者从9月7日凌晨零点开始捐款,截止到上午10点,当天3333万元全部配捐完。因此,腾讯基金会紧急修改了规则,开始限制公众和公益项目的配捐金额。如果腾讯不修改规则,9999万的资金完全可以一天配完。“如何薅鹅毛”、“3天哄抢1个亿,欢庆99屌丝节”、“公益组织的套捐行为”这些公益文章的标题真实地反映了行业的现状。此外,公益组织发起的项目存在的各种问题需要值得反思筹款的目的是解决社会问题,还是解决机构缺钱的问题。第二,99公益日作为腾讯公司发起的公益大型互联网活动,这一活动预示着资本将开始借助技术的机制影响中国的公益行业与关注公益的公众。我们在关注互联网技术对于中国公益行业的显著支持之外,也要看到技术对于中国公益的重构作用。99公益日在发起规则方面的规定,如通过互联网和移动互联网来展示筹款项目,公众捐款必须要将银行卡绑定微信支付, 通过配捐机制来动员公益组织和公众的踊跃参与,以及配捐金额和配捐时间的调整等,这些技术性规则构建出了一个新的公益“场域”,公益组织和公众如果要进入这个场域,就必须要对之适应。第三,此次99公益日有205万人次参与了捐款。如果我们算上没有捐款但是也通过社交媒体传播的公众,公众参与的人数显然是一个非常庞大的数字。腾讯公益最终没有对205万人次发布相关的统计数据,但是我们有必要对这一群体做出一些初步的判断。由于腾讯规定配捐数额以微信端和手机QQ进入的乐捐为准。我们主要分析微信群体。根据2015年8月腾讯发布的微信用户数据统计,微信用户的平均年龄在26岁,86.2%的用户在18-36岁。微信用户的绝大多数的职业来自:企业职员、自由职业者、学生、事业单位员工四类职业。通过微信用户的年龄和职业分布,可以粗略估计此次99公益日的捐赠群体主要来自于城市里的知识群体和中产精英群体。这样的群体也是目前中国公益组织公众筹款的主要目标群体。因此,99公益日真正动员全民公益的参与还有较长的过程。

 

 

3、中国慈善行业学术性机构及行业支持联盟不断涌现

2015年注定将是中国公益研究与教育方面值得纪念的一个年份。清华大学公益慈善研究院成为了第一家关注公益慈善领域的国家级新型智库。2015年4月26日,由民政部与清华大学联合成立了清华大学公益慈善研究院。清华大学公益慈善研究院的战略目标是全力推进公益慈善研究和人才培养体系建设。清华大学在1998年由王名教授成立NGO研究中心并在2000年改名为清华大学NGO研究所。作为民间公益领导人培养的银杏伙伴计划项目在2015年7月20日成立了北京银杏基金会。该基金会由银杏伙伴、南都公益基金会、浙江敦和慈善基金会、心平公益基金会、中国人民大学非营利组织研究所共同发起。该基金会主要业务范围支持优秀公益人才和组织发展,开展相关研究、培训、交流等活动。2015年11月12日,由比尔及梅琳达·盖茨基金会联席主席比尔·盖茨、美国桥水公司联席首席投资官、北京达理公益基金会理事瑞·达利欧、老牛基金会创始人、荣誉会长牛根生、北京巧女公益基金会会长何巧女、浙江敦和慈善基金会名誉理事长叶庆均等五位中美慈善家联合倡议成立深圳国际公益学院。深圳国际公益学院将立足深圳,重点打造“公益慈善组织管理”、“社会企业与社会创新”、“社会服务与社会工作”、“家族慈善与传承”、“公益慈善筹款”、“公益慈善与人文”等专业教学研究体系,建设以提升培养慈善家、慈善组织高级管理人才为主,以社会服务认证教育和大众教育为依托的应用型公益慈善教育培训和知识传播体系。2015年12月8日,中国慈善研究院有限公司在香港正式注册为独立研究机构,具有香港政府认定的免税资格。作为北京师范大学中国公益研究院的姐妹机构中国慈善研究院有限公司的宗旨是:搭建面向全球与未来的中港慈善交流与合作平台;加强中港慈善交流与合作的频度、广度、深度与行动力;提升中港公益慈善领域知识转化和经验适配;增进中港社会的理解与互信。

 

  1. Academic organizations and alliances for support continue to emerge within the charity sector

 

 

2015年4月,北京瑞森德筹款研究中心、南都公益基金会、深圳壹基金公益基金会、中国扶贫基金会、浙江敦和慈善基金会等5家机构联合发起,面向中国公益行业筹款专业人员创立的会员制平台公益筹款人联盟。2015年9月,公益组织服务联盟在第四届中国慈善展览会上成立。公益组织服务联盟(益联盟)是由支持公益行业发展的第三方服务机构联合组建,为社会各主体参与公益事业提供综合性的一条龙服务,包括人力资源、保值增值、筹款服务、财务支持、法律支援、传播服务、IT技术支持、知识产权、项目评估、活动策划、志愿者管理等十一个服务模块。2015年9月, 由中国红十字基金会、中国妇女发展基金会、中国社会福利基金会、中华少年儿童慈善救助基金会、北京天使妈妈慈善基金会、春晖博爱儿童救助公益基金会共同发起的中国儿童大病救助联盟成立。该联盟未来主要发挥两个方面的作用:第一,提供行业服务,为联盟成员提供信息咨询、资源对接、活动协调服务;第二,政策倡导,推动公益组织与政府在儿童大病救助领域创新合作模式,为国家医疗救助政策提供公益建议。2015年11月,教育公益联盟在第四届中国教育公益组织年会上正式亮相。21世纪教育研究院、北京好未来公益基金会、北京新东方公益基金会、中国扶贫基金会、西部阳光农村发展基金会、桂馨慈善基金会、蒙牛集团、耐克体育公益部、奇育教育等在内的9家机构为联盟的工作委员会成员,作为联盟的执行机构。2016年3月,和众泽益志愿服务中心联合全国12家平台机构及基金会发起中国民间志愿服务全国联盟网络。

 

4、中国公益行业在国家提倡双创的背景下积极推动社会企业在国内的发展

社会企业这个概念是个舶来品。英国文化教育协会在中国社会企业的发育方面发挥了关键性作用。2009年以来,英国文化教育协会连续三年在中国开展了社会企业家技能项目。英国文化教育协会从2013年开始与七家合作伙伴联合发起中国首个社会投资平台,旨在帮助成熟的社会企业获得社会投资机会以及先进的管理支持,同时搭建中英社会投资机构和基金会与社会企业之间资源对接的桥梁,倡导以社会投资的创新模式促进社会的可持续发展。通过2013年和2014年两届社会投资平台开办的创投竞赛,33家优秀社会企业从700多份申请中脱颖而出。社会投资平台为他们成功对接了总额超过1,900万元人民币的投资机会和专业支持,形式包括股权投资、债权投资、无息贷款、资助以及孵化服务等。

自2014年以来,国家提出大众创业、万众创新的政策后,社会企业既能解决社会问题,同时又能产生经济利益进而实现项目可持续这一特征引发公益行业的极大兴趣。近两年来,中国公益行业也开始重视社会企业,多个关于社会企业和社会投资的平台相继推出。2014年,由16家机构共同发起了中国社会企业与社会投资论坛,以整合资源共同推动社会企业和社会投资的发展。同年,友成企业家扶贫基金会联合众多合作伙伴发起国内首个社会价值投资联盟,遵循“共建、共享、共赢”的原则,将成为连接政府、市场、社会,跨界合作、协同创新的社会公共服务平台,并遴选具备社会、商业双重价值的项目及资源。2015年6月18日,中国社会企业与社会投资论坛首届年会在深圳举行。在此次大会上,徐永光认为中国社会企业和社会投资将出现四大发展模式与趋势:第一,民非+公司的双轮驱动模式,第二,政府+民间的公私合作模式,第三,公益基金会+私人资本的多元投资模式,第四,公平+效率的社会经济发展模式[3]

 

 

 

2015年9月,由北京大学公民社会研究中心、北师大中国公益研究院、南都公益基金会、深圳市中国慈展会发展中心和社会企业研究中心等五家机构发布了《中国慈展会社会认证办法(试行)》。该办法参考了国内外社会企业认证经验,并借鉴了ISO质量认证体系相关要素,将组织目标、收入来源、利润分配、组织管理、注册信息等作为社会企业核心认证要素,并将对通过社会企业认证的机构提供资金、人才、孵化方面的支持。2015年,共有7家企业被认证为国内首批的社会企业。对于社会企业的认证,也有公益人士持不同观点。顾远认为,社会企业的认证应该是在社会企业群体有了一定成熟度之后才可以做,其次他认为对社会企业认证并非只能依赖政府,同时只有对社会企业有基本共识才可以认证[5]。当然,对于公益行业的社会企业热潮也并不都是高调赞扬,也有公益人士的批评声音。他们认为公益行业对于社会企业的大量资源投放,其实没有考虑到社会企业在解决社会问题方面的不彻底性,以及对于倡导类公益项目的资源挤压作用。

 

52015年,公众参与和环境公益诉讼正在成为民间环保行动的重要方式。

2015年2月,前中央电视台调查记者柴静制作的纪录片《穹顶之下》在网络上热播,一方面预示着更多像柴静这样的公众个体对环境意识正在觉醒,同时可以看出更多公众对于环境议题的高度关注。2015年,公众环境研究中心、广州绿网在工业污染议题方面形成了动员公众参与的有效机制。公众环境研究中心开发的蔚蓝地图APP将全国所有政府的环境污染信息汇总,通过APP的方式发布,广泛发动公众监督和消费者的选择力量,从而将污染数据转化为污染行动。目前,蔚蓝地图的关注用户超过了200万。2015年,广州绿网环境保护服务中心对中国环评行业的调查报告引发了媒体广泛关注。这篇调查报告将我国环评行业的乱象公之于众。环保部在一个月之后就迅速开展了关于环评行业的专项整治行动。广州绿网不仅监督环评机构,同时推出了绿网——这个网站包括了4万多个项目的环评报告内容以及地理位置,公众可以快捷查询所处位置的环境风险。

2015年,新《环保法》正式实施。根据媒体统计,2015年,仅有9家社会组织成为环境公益诉讼的原告,如福建绿家园在福建长汀县禽畜养殖造成水污染公益诉讼案件中担任原告,莆田绿荫滨海湿地研究中心与绿发会作为共同原告提起公益诉讼等。此外,社会组织还在一些环境公益诉讼中作为支持起诉人,如安徽绿满江淮作为绿发会诉常州永泰丰化工有限公司案件的支持起诉单位。2015年,全国34个省级行政区中只有14个省、直辖市受理了环境公益诉讼个案[7]。2015年,自然之友和福建绿家园提起的首例民间环境诉讼案以环保组织胜诉告终。该案的胜诉标志着环保组织可以运用环境公益诉讼来遏制环境污染。

 

6、国内多个公益组织受到质疑,乃至爆出丑闻

2015年《慈善法》中规定了个人不得公开募捐的条款,引发了广泛的讨论。百色助学网事件直接揭示出个人募捐存在的弊端与问题。据报道,百色助学网由王杰创办于2006年,是一家从未在当地民政部门注册的网络助学平台。百色助学网事件其实反映出了在中国基层个人募捐存在着的制度监管与行业自律的困境。百色助学网由于帮助解决当地的失学问题,受到了当地媒体的宣传,从而基层政府一定程度上默许了该助学平台在无合法身份的情况下持续运作了九年。由于百色助学网地处中国公益发展的薄弱地区,缺乏公益机构相互之间的监督。因此,百色助学网之所以能够长期存在是基层政府无力监管与行业监督缺乏而形成的。按照《慈善法》的规定,不具有公开募捐资格的组织或者个人基于慈善目的,可以与有公开募捐资格的慈善组织合作,由该慈善组织开展公开募捐,募得款物由具有公开募捐资格的慈善组织管理。这一规定将堵住个人募捐的法律漏洞,同时为个人发起筹款提供法律通道。

2015年9月,媒体曝光中华少年儿童慈善救助基金会下设的星光专项基金在两年前已经关闭,但是多名脑瘫患者还在等待该基金的救助。通过对该基金的调查发现,星光专项基金筹集了140万资金、67万物资,但是基金的管理费及行政人员支出达到了86万。2013年,中华少年儿童慈善救助基金会发现星光专项基金的资金用完,决定停止该基金协议。在终止的决定中指出了星光专项基金存在的七个问题:工作缺乏规划、拖欠借款、员工管理不善、不提交工作报告、拖欠基金会费用等。对星光专项基金事件的关注实际上将专项基金长期存在的监管问题暴露了出来。按照国家的法律,基金会可以设立相应的专项基金,但是对于专项基金的管理及监管是当前法律无法涉及的“空白地带”。星光专项基金的问题让政府意识到一定数量的专项基金面临的监管困境。在2015年年底民政部出台了《关于进一步加强基金会专项基金管理工作的通知》,要求基金会、业务主管单位、登记管理机关强化对专项基金的监管。

 

 

7、公益组织在政府的边界中寻求生存与发展的博弈

2015年8月,四川索玛慈善基金会因为一篇四川凉山彝族自治州四年级小学生木苦依伍木的一篇“最悲伤的作文”导致了机构2012年创办的索玛花小学限期拆除以及机构领导人被拘传的结果,从而引发了国内公益界和社会的广泛关注。2015年,索玛慈善基金会的理事长黄红斌在7月的一次例行支教检查中,看到了木苦依伍木的这篇写着“饭做好,去叫妈妈,妈妈已经死了”的作文——《泪》,就分享到微信朋友圈,后续开始在网络上热传。这篇文章为木苦依伍木和索玛基金会带来了92万元的捐款,同时也导致了公众对于凉山当地政府的批评。很快,索玛花爱心小学所在的乡政府下发了《索玛花爱心小学限期拆除违建通知》。随后,迫于公众舆论,西昌市政府举行新闻发布会,通报为何要拆除索玛花爱心小学。紧接着,索玛慈善基金会理事长受到了当地公安部门的拘传。索玛花基金会通过一篇小学生作文其实揭开了凉山地区社会问题的真实面,这一点使得地方政府的形象受到了打击,从而索玛基金会与凉山地政府和谐的关系破裂。因此,基层式的公益组织始终都面临着一个具有挑战性的平衡能力:如何能够在引发公众关注当地社会问题并实现资源募集的同时尽量能够与地方政府保持相互间的“默契”。

 

2015年12月,自然大学、天津绿领两名志愿者在福建省宁德市进行工业污染调查中被当地警方以涉嫌卖淫嫖娼带走调查。最终,两名志愿者无罪释放。在此之前,北京的一名环保志愿者到宁德拍摄湿地保护,被宁德市无线电管理局没收了航拍设备。宁德市政府部门之所以如此关注民间环保人士,是因为媒体曝光了当地镍合金产业污染和环评造假事件的后续影响。

2015年以来,中国特定公益领域的机构或者关闭,或者歇业,严重的情况是机构工作人员受到了刑事拘留。2015年5月,一家倡导妇女权利平等的机构杭州蔚之鸣中心宣布机构关闭。2015年12月,番禺打工族文书处理服务部、佛山南飞雁社工中心等劳工机构的工作人员被警方采取了刑事强制措施。2016年1月,中国第一家专门从事妇女法律援助及研究的公益组织北京众泽妇女法律咨询服务中心(原北京大学法学院妇女法律研究与服务中心)宣布自2016年2月1日起歇业。权利倡导类公益组织在中国的境遇并不是个例。根据英国卫报报道,全世界大约有一半的国家对倡导类公益组织都采取了控制措施,数以万计的组织被波及。世界范围内,无论是民主国家,还是威权国家都在管控公益组织,背后的逻辑是国家认识到公益组织的发展正在削弱国家的权力。按照唐昊的观点,在经济发展而权力集中的国家,管控INGO是出于权力集中的需要;在经济落后而政治民主的国家,管控INGO是出于经济发展的需要[9]

 

8、国内公益组织通过参与尼泊尔地震救援加速其国际化进程

2015年4月25日,尼泊尔发生8.1级地震。中国民间组织在经历过汶川地震、玉树地震、芦山地震、鲁甸地震之后具有了很强的救援能力,第一时间响应尼泊尔地震。相比于过去中国公益组织参与海外人道援助注重捐款捐物,此次地震救援中国民间组织实现了大规模的出境救援,派遣多支救援队进入尼泊尔。中国红十字会、壹基金、中国扶贫基金会、爱德基金会、中国社会福利基金会、中华思源工程扶贫基金会等机构所属的民间救援队、蓝天救援队、中国妇女发展基金会参与了紧急救援。中国扶贫基金会、爱德基金会、中国青少年发展基金会等机构参与了尼泊尔灾后重建工作。中国基金会救灾协调会同联合国开发计划署(中国办公室)、亚洲基金会、救助儿童会等国际伙伴,建立“尼泊尔4•25地震中国社会组织应急响应协调中心”。中国扶贫基金会安平基金、卓明灾害信息服务中心也提供了相应的传播与信息支持。此次,中国政府没有对社会捐赠渠道限制,很多参与的民间组织都进行了社会募款。根据中民慈善捐助信息中心的统计,此次尼泊尔地震捐赠超过了2.2亿元,资金捐赠占到了70%,约为人民币1.7亿元[11]。中国公益组织参与尼泊尔地震救援也反映出面临的挑战:中国公益组织的救援专业性不足、中国公益组织适应海外环境的能力不足、中国公益组织与国际及当地组织之间协调与沟通不足、中国公益组织之间相关的协调与支持缺乏稳定机制。

 

2015年4月,水污染地图和空气污染地图绘制者,公众环境研究中心主任马军成为斯科尔基金会(Skoll Foundation)社会企业家奖首位华人获得者。2015年9月,云南绿色流域管理研究及推广中心获得了联合国开发计划署颁发的赤道奖。这是继2014年潘得巴协会获得该奖项之后再次颁给中国的慈善组织。2015年10月,21世纪教育研究院长杨东平获得法国“人文之家”基金会(fondation maison des sciences de l’homme)颁发的2015年度“查理与莫妮克-莫拉泽奖”(Prix Charles & Monique MORAZE),以表彰其数十年来在推动中国教育改革事业中的贡献。2015年由港澳台慈善基金会面向两岸三地的爱心奖首次进入内地。2015年度,内地的公益人邓飞、朱常青获得爱心奖。

2015年,在基金会救灾协调会与四川大学-香港理工大学灾后重建与管理学院的组织下、中国民间组织代表团首次参加第三次联合国世界减灾大会。此次减灾大会上达成了《2015-2030年仙台减灾框架》。2015年,联合国千年发展目标基金、中国妇女发展基金会、美中友好协会联合主办了女性公益可持续发展国际论坛,以纪念世界妇女大会召开20周年。

中国公益组织正在加快走出去的进程,这与国家提出一带一路的构想相关,同时也是公益组织成熟的标志。2015年,中国扶贫基金会相继在缅甸、尼泊尔注册为合法的国际非政府组织。爱德基金会先后在埃塞俄比亚首都亚的斯亚贝巴设立了中国公益组织第一家非洲办公室,同时还在瑞士日内瓦设立第二间海外办公室。此外,中国的公益组织正在积极倡导将公益组织纳入到国家对外援助的制度框架中。

《慈善法》在2016年9月1日施行,作为我国慈善事业的第一步基础性综合性的法律,将开始对中国公益行业产生重要的影响。中国的公益组织将从双重管理的体制全面转变为民政部门直接登记,极大地促进公益组织的增量发展。公募资格将会全面放开,公益组织在经过一定年限,将会取得公募许可。中国的公众募款将改变过去政府主导的模式,真正实现民间向公众募款,实现公益资源的市场配置。税收优惠有望全面落实,公益组织都可以获得免税资格。慈善信托的实行将激活民间资产进入公益行业,带来规模巨大的慈善资产。慈善信托的收益将会解决中国公益行业长期缺乏资金的瓶颈。公益组织此后要面临更高要求的信息公开,这将在很大程度上提升公益组织的透明度和公信力。于此同时,《慈善法》中关于网络募捐指定慈善信息平台、公募基金会管理费用等方面的规定,一定程度上落后国内当前的发展状况。关于网络募捐由民政部指定慈善信息平台,现有的网络筹款平台是否都会包含进去以及慈善信息平台的指定标准需要拭目以待。关于公募基金会管理费用限定在百分之十,将会抑制该类基金会的发展。另外,关于个人募捐,《慈善法》并不限制个人求助,但是对于个人募捐明确予以限制。

 

[1] 2015年4季度全国社会服务统计数据:http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/sj/tjjb/qgsj/201602/20160200880171.htm

[2] 2015, Fourth Quarter, National Statistics and Data of Social Services:http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/sj/tjjb/qgsj/201602/20160200880171.htm

[3]徐永光:《社会企业与社会投资的中国趋势》,南都公益基金会http://www.naradafoundation.org/content/4598

[4]Xu Yongguang: “Chinese Trends of Social Enterprise and Social Investment,” Narada Foundation. http://www.naradafoundation.org/content/4598

[5] 顾远:《社企认证有待氛围成熟》,《公益时报》,2015年11月24日http://www.gongyishibao.com/newdzb/html/2015-11/24/content_12698.htm?div=-1

[6] Gu Yuan: “Social Enterprise Certification Waits for the Right Atmosphere to Mature,” China Philanthropy Times, Nov 24, 2015 http://www.gongyishibao.com/newdzb/html/2015-11/24/content_12698.htm?div=-1

[7] 刘蓉:《2015年仅9家社会组织成为环境公益诉讼原告》,《经济日报》,2016年3月22日

[8] Liu Rong: “In 2015, Only 9 NGOs filed as plaintiff in public interest lawsuits,” Economic Daily, March 22, 2016

[9] 唐昊:《全球化时代的“权力扩散”,金砖国家如何管理境外NGO》,《凤凰周刊》,2016年第3期

[10] "The Age of Globalization and "Diffusion of Power," How Brazil, Russia, India, and China Manage Foreign NGOs," Phoenix Weekly, 2016, No. 3.

[11] 中民慈善捐助信息中心:《4.25尼泊尔强震捐赠报告》,2015年5月12日。

[12] China Charitable Donations Information Center: “Report on Donations of the April 25 Nepal Earthquake,” May 12, 2015.

 

[1] 董强 中国农业大学人文与发展学院副教授、博士。

[2] Dr. Dong Qiang – Associate Professor at the College of Humanities and Development Studies of China Agricultural University.

Translated by Gregor Grossman and Kelly McCarthy

No related content found.

Share: