A project team, made up of scholars and experts from the Chinese Academy of Governance, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing Normal University, and Chongqing Academy of Governance, has studied the economic reach of the nonprofit sector in China, in response to calls from peers in the field and entrusted by the Narada Foundation. Under the leadership of Professor Ma Qingyu from the Chinese Academy of Governance, the project team measured the economic scope of China’s nonprofit sector to the end of 2016, using a stratified systematic sampling method.

This comparative research project looks at the co-operation between state and social organizations (SOs) in China and Germany. It focusses on social service delivery in the area of integration of migrating populations with special attention to the fields of education, employment, vulnerable groups and social assistance (incl. legal aid) as a crosscutting issue to all of the fields. Within this subject area, the project wants to identify different models of state-SO co-operation and analyze which models are successful and why and where this co-operation is problematic. It aims to capture the different models of co-operation in Germany and China, to analyze and compare the underlying structures and to show potentialities for development.

This comparative research project looks at the co-operation between state and social organizations (SOs) in China and Germany. It focusses on social service delivery in the area of integration of migrating populations with special attention to the fields of education, employment, vulnerable groups and social assistance (incl. legal aid) as a crosscutting issue to all of the fields. Within this subject area, the project wants to identify different models of state-SO co-operation and analyze which models are successful and why and where this co-operation is problematic. It aims to capture the different models of co-operation in Germany and China, to analyze and compare the underlying structures and to show potentialities for development.

This comparative research project looks at the co-operation between state and social organizations (SOs) in China and Germany. It focusses on social service delivery in the area of integration of migrating populations with special attention to the fields of education, employment, vulnerable groups and social assistance (incl. legal aid) as a crosscutting issue to all of the fields. Within this subject area, the project wants to identify different models of state-SO co-operation and analyze which models are successful and why and where this co-operation is problematic. It aims to capture the different models of co-operation in Germany and China, to analyze and compare the underlying structures and to show potentialities for development.

This comparative research project looks at the co-operation between state and social organizations (SOs) in China and Germany. It focusses on social service delivery in the area of integration of migrating populations with special attention to the fields of education, employment, vulnerable groups and social assistance (incl. legal aid) as a crosscutting issue to all of the fields. Within this subject area, the project wants to identify different models of state-SO co-operation and analyze which models are successful and why and where this co-operation is problematic. It aims to capture the different models of co-operation in Germany and China, to analyze and compare the underlying structures and to show potentialities for development.

This comparative research project looks at the co-operation between state and social organizations (SOs) in China and Germany. It focusses on social service delivery in the area of integration of migrating populations with special attention to the fields of education, employment, vulnerable groups and social assistance (incl. legal aid) as a crosscutting issue to all of the fields. Within this subject area, the project wants to identify different models of state-SO co-operation and analyze which models are successful and why and where this co-operation is problematic. It aims to capture the different models of co-operation in Germany and China, to analyze and compare the underlying structures and to show potentialities for development.

This comparative research project looks at the co-operation between state and social organizations (SOs) in China and Germany. It focusses on social service delivery in the area of integration of migrating populations with special attention to the fields of education, employment, vulnerable groups and social assistance (incl. legal aid) as a crosscutting issue to all of the fields. Within this subject area, the project wants to identify different models of state-SO co-operation and analyze which models are successful and why and where this co-operation is problematic. It aims to capture the different models of co-operation in Germany and China, to analyze and compare the underlying structures and to show potentialities for development.

This comparative research project looks at the co-operation between state and social organizations (SOs) in China and Germany. It focusses on social service delivery in the area of integration of migrating populations with special attention to the fields of education, employment, vulnerable groups and social assistance (incl. legal aid) as a crosscutting issue to all of the fields. Within this subject area, the project wants to identify different models of state-SO co-operation and analyze which models are successful and why and where this co-operation is problematic. It aims to capture the different models of co-operation in Germany and China, to analyze and compare the underlying structures and to show potentialities for development.

This comparative research project looks at the co-operation between state and social organizations (SOs) in China and Germany. It focusses on social service delivery in the area of integration of migrating populations with special attention to the fields of education, employment, vulnerable groups and social assistance (incl. legal aid) as a crosscutting issue to all of the fields. Within this subject area, the project wants to identify different models of state-SO co-operation and analyze which models are successful and why and where this co-operation is problematic. It aims to capture the different models of co-operation in Germany and China, to analyze and compare the underlying structures and to show potentialities for development.

This comparative research project looks at the co-operation between state and social organizations (SOs) in China and Germany. It focusses on social service delivery in the area of integration of migrating populations with special attention to the fields of education, employment, vulnerable groups and social assistance (incl. legal aid) as a crosscutting issue to all of the fields. Within this subject area, the project wants to identify different models of state-SO co-operation and analyze which models are successful and why and where this co-operation is problematic. It aims to capture the different models of co-operation in Germany and China, to analyze and compare the underlying structures and to show potentialities for development.

This comparative research project looks at the co-operation between state and social organizations (SOs) in China and Germany. It focusses on social service delivery in the area of integration of migrating populations with special attention to the fields of education, employment, vulnerable groups and social assistance (incl. legal aid) as a crosscutting issue to all of the fields. Within this subject area, the project wants to identify different models of state-SO co-operation and analyze which models are successful and why and where this co-operation is problematic. It aims to capture the different models of co-operation in Germany and China, to analyze and compare the underlying structures and to show potentialities for development.

Classification is the foundation of legislation. The history of non-profit classification in China is short and the criteria are very unstable. Since the first laws were issued in the early 20th century, there has been only one general term for non-profit organizations (NPOs), which is “association”. Classification of associations, private non-enterprise units and foundations was not done for legal purposes until the late 20th and early 21st centuries, when three regulations were formulated and promulgated, one for each type of organization. Enactment of the Law of the People's Republic of China (PRC) on Donations for Public Welfare (1999), the Charity Law of the PRC (2016) and the General Provisions of the Civil Law of the PRC (2017) shows that the Chinese government is deepening and systematizing its regulation of non-profit entities. However, recent legislation such as the Regulation on the Administration of the Registration of Social Organizations (called the Draft) does not effectively connect the classification of organizations and legal persons with the laws above, nor use terms such as charity and public welfare in uniform ways. On the one hand, discussion of the classification of organizations, legal persons, public welfare and charitable entities shows that the classification of non-profit entities in China has always taken political classification as its core standard, and that the idea behind this approach is very coherent. On the other hand, the classification of non-profit entities is also constantly shaped by the social environment. There is always tension and some degree of rupture between the modern concept of charity introduced from abroad, the classification of legal persons, and the traditional Chinese culture of charity. Due to the absence of a law on non-profit organizations, it is difficult to establish connections and mutual coherence among the General Provisions of the Civil Law of the PRC, the Charity Law and the Draft.

This paper explores whether the co-production model is more effective than the government-centric model in the provision of rural child welfare services in rural China. What are the processes and patterns of co-production in service provision? The paper begins by introducing the transition in the logic of service provision in the public sector from New Public Management to New Governance Theory. Then it elucidates the state of rural public service provision in China, especially child-related services. It then introduces a case that employs a co-production model in delivering child welfare services in rural China. By comparing the different intervention effects of the co-production versus the government-centric model, the paper argues that the co-production model is a dynamic way to deliver public services.

Ever since 1988 when Mr. Deng Xiaoping, the chief architect of the reform and opening-up policy, proposed that “science and technology are the primary produc-tive forces”, China emphasized the contribution of science and technology to the development of economy and society. Therefore, science and technology associa-tions (S&T associations,科技社团, kejishetuan) organized by scientists and techni-cians have been encouraged by the government to serve the nation’s development strategy. On the one hand, the integration of science and public affairs calls for the collaboration between the government and S&T associations in order to implement the administrative reform that limits the government and optimizes government functions. On the other hand, in the international innovation-oriented competition, the construction of an innovative country also depends on S&T associations to take over the tasks of gathering science and technology talents and improving science literacy of the entire population.

The comparative research project LoGoSO Germany China focuses on the integration measures for migrants in four different cities. Berlin and Cologne in Germany and Guangzhou and Hangzhou in China are characterized by particular large numbers of migrants and a well-established philanthropic sector. This report outlines the policy traditions and integration measures of the four cities and compares the challenges for the municipalities as well as the role of social organizations (SOs) in the service provi-sion for migrants. While all cities have their own peculiarities and distinct features, the report finds that the main challenges for the local governments are similar. SOs are an important factor for developing new ideas and structures and all city administrations heavily depend on their assistance. In China, the main way to involve SOs are gov-ernment procurement of services while in Germany, SOs are important partners for the governments but mostly work independently and implement their ideas in their own way.

The report focuses on local refugee integration policy and its implementation by the public administration in Cologne. It starts by outlining the general administrative and social structures and traditions in Germany´s fourth most populous city and then turns to refugee integration in detail. The city understands integration as a long-term political goal cutting across various administrative departments. Therefore, several public bodies are involved in making and implementing integration policy. Coordinating entities have been introduced recently to facilitate the integration of refugees. Furthermore, the report highlights the specific integration policies of the city in the four research areas of the project: employment, education, vulnerable groups and social assistance. In these fields, Cologne implements federal and state programs. Additionally, the city deploys an integration budget in order to set up and subsidize local projects targeting the special needs of migrants and refugees. In most of these programmes, the municipality does not provide the services for refugees itself, but relies on the cooperation with non-profit organizations. They range from longstanding welfare associations to newly formed initiatives and migrant organizations. The report presents the involvement of these non-profit organizations in the policy fields under study.