Monday, September 25, 2017

Progress as of August in Implementing the Overseas NGO Law


After a slow start, the Ministry of Public Security (MPS) and its provincial Public Security Bureaus (PSBs) seem to be finding their stride in implementing the Overseas NGO Law with the rate of registering representative offices and filing “temporary activities” quickening over the last few months. As of August 22, the MPS Overseas NGO Office website shows a total of 185 representative offices, of which around 88 (48%) were registered just in the last three months.  The representative offices were registered in around 20 of China’s 32 provincial-level units, with the highest number concentrated in Beijing, Shanghai, Yunnan and Guangdong. Because some NGOs have registered more than one representative office, the actual number of foreign NGOs that have registered in China is somewhat lower than 185. Most of these NGOs are from Hong Kong, the U.S., Japan, Germany and South Korea, and fall into two main groups: 1) NGOs and foundations working on development issues such as education, health, disaster relief, poverty alleviation and environment; and 2) business and trade associations. For the latest data and tables, see ChinaFile's terrific China NGO project.

The progress made in the last few months also shows that the MPS authorities have made some headway in getting PSUs to agree to sponsor foreign NGOs interested in registering a representative office. Finding a willing PSU has been a major stumbling block to registration in the past. NGOs such as the Nature Conservancy, Ford Foundation, Asia Foundation, Give2Asia, Environmental Defense Fund, and the Heinrich Boll Foundation, to mention some prominent examples, had been unable to register under the 2004 Foundation Management Regulations in large part because they were unable to find a willing PSU. Over the last few months, all of these NGOs have found a willing PSU and successfully registered. In some of the more challenging cases in which the NGO worked in multiple issue sectors, the MPS was able to bring in new PSUs that had not been on the original PSU directory to sponsor these NGOs. The most notable of these is the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries (CPAFFC) which is serving as the PSU for the Ford, Asia, Heinrich Boll, Konrad Adenauer and Rosa Luxemburg Foundations, as well as Give2Asia[i]

The MPS website also shows that foreign NGOs filed for 228 “temporary activities” with the large majority of these being filed in the last 4-5 months. Here again, some NGOs have filed for multiple temporary activities (Oxfam Hong Kong alone has filed for more than 30) so the actual number of NGOs that have filed successfully is well below 228. Most of these activities are being filed in the western and southern provinces of Sichuan, Guizhou, Guangdong and Yunnan followed by Shaanxi, Beijing, Gansu and Anhui. The NGOs filing these activities mostly come from Hong Kong, the U.S. and Germany. In contrast to NGO representative offices, which have been in both the trade/business and development sectors, the large majority of NGOs filing temporary activities work on development issues concentrated on youth, education, poverty alleviation, health, disaster relief, capacity building, environment, and disabilities.

There is of course still a great deal of work ahead for both the MPS and overseas NGOs. While the numbers of NGOs that have registered rep offices and filed "temporary activities" may look promising, they are far less than the actual number of overseas NGOs working in China which official sources estimate at around 7000. Given the amount of time required for MPS and provincial PSBs to create the infrastructure, coordinate with other relevant departments, and train staff, it should not be all that surprising that only a few hundred NGOs have succeeded. Finding willing PSUs remains a problem as only a handful of the eligible PSUs are sponsoring overseas NGOs. On the NGO side, some are in the process of preparing their paperwork, but an even larger number are simply playing a wait-and-see game and finding ways to work around the law. There is still a significant grey area for NGO operations. We'll see how much and how fast that will change after the 19th Party Congress in October.


[i] The CPAFFC was founded in 1954 as a national GONGO (government-organized NGO) specializing in foreign affairs. Over the years, it has cooperated with numerous NGOs, participated in civil society activities and acted as a catalyst for developing China’s relationship with the world. Since its establishment, CPAFFC has formed friendly relationships with over 500 non-governmental organizations from over 150 countries.]

Monday, May 8, 2017

More Analysis of the 62 Registered Foreign NGOs

Following up on my last blog post showing the most recent stats on foreign NGOs that registered a representative office by month and province (Table 1), I decided to also break them down by sector (Table 2) and by country/territory of origin (Table 3) to see what the numbers would reveal. The source was a list of registered foreign NGOs available on the Ministry of Public Security's website. 

Table 1: Number of ONGOs that have registered a representative office by month and province


Jan
Feb
March
April
Total
Beijing
22
1
1
4
28
Guangdong
5

3
2
10
Shanghai
6


8
14
Sichuan


1
1
2
Yunnan



9
9
Jiangsu



3
3
Gansu



1
1
Guizhou



1
1
Jiangxi



1
1
Total
33
1
5
30
69


In total, 62 NGOs were listed as registering a total of 69 representative offices. Five of the 62 NGOs had succeeded in registering a representative office in more than one province. These included:

  • MSI Professional Services, a faith-based NGO doing poverty alleviation work (agriculture, community health and development, business development, education and youth, etc.) which had registered a rep office in Sichuan and Yunnan; 
  • Project Hope, a NGO which works on health care, had rep offices in Beijing and Shanghai
  • U.S. Soybean Export Council which had rep offices in Beijing and Shanghai.
  • U.S.-China Business Council which had rep offices in Beijing and Shanghai.
  • World Vision Hong Kong, a NGO which works on community and youth development, poverty alleviation and disaster relief, had rep offices in Guangdong, Yunnan, Guangxi and Jiangxi.
  •  
For Table 2, I had to create broad categories and settled on making a distinction between: 1) membership associations engaged in commerce, trade and scientific/technical research; 2) development-type NGOs providing social services (mostly health-related, child welfare, and poverty alleviation, and environmental); and 3) NGOs engaged in education and cultural exchange. (Note: In an earlier version of this post, I used the term "social service" instead of "development" but an astute reader noted that environmental NGOs generally do not provide social services, but rather usually do advocacy. I'll use the term "development" for now until I can think of a better solution.)

Table 2: Number of ONGOs registered by sector/field


Development
Education/
Culture
Econ/
Trade
Sci/
Tech
Think-tank
Total
Beijing
18
2
7

1
28
Guangdong
3
2
5


10
Shanghai
2

11
1

14
Sichuan
2




2
Yunnan
9




9
Jiangsu

1
2


3
Gansu

1



1
Guizhou
1




1
Jiangxi
1




1
Total
37
5
25
1
1
69


The largest sectors were development with 37 NGOs, and economic/trade associations with 25. I also created a separate category for think-tanks, in this case the Paulson Institute which was registered in Beijing.  The Paulson Institute is a U.S. think tank founded by Henry Paulson, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs and former Treasury Secretary under President George W. Bush.

Not surprisingly, most of the registered development NGOs were concentrated in Beijing and Yunnan, a province which has a long history of involvement by foreign NGOs mostly working in the environmental, health and poverty alleviation sectors. Most of the economic and trade associations were concentrated in the industrial/commercial centers of Beijing, Shanghai and Guangdong as we would expect.

In terms of country of origin (Table 3), the largest number came from the U.S. with 25. Here again, this was no surprise given the size of the nonprofit sector in the U.S. compared to other countries. What was more unexpected was the number of Hong Kong-based NGOs (20) that had managed to register, nearly as many as from the U.S., and far more than those from European countries. Many of these were social service, or educational/cultural NGOs, rather than economic/trade associations, contrary to what we might think given Hong Kong's position as a commercial center. Several of these NGOs were established by ethnic Chinese, faith-based, quite small and not well-known, in contrast with the much larger, well-known NGOs such as the Gates Foundation, Save the Children, Family Health International, Conservation International and World Wildlife Fund from the U.S. and Europe. In fact, an internet search on a number of them turned up almost no information about their mission, organization, governance or activities. Many had also not been previously registered as a rep office of a foreign foundation with the Ministry of Civil Affairs under the 2004 Foundation Management Regulations. The ability of these Hong Kong-based NGOs to register a rep office quite early on suggests that capacity and expertise may not count as much as an organization's cultural/ethnic affinity, connections, and history working in the PRC, but that may also be pure speculation on my part. Still their presence on the list does raise the question of how these NGOs were able to get a head-start on many of their better-resourced counterparts.

Table 3: Number of ONGOs registered by country/territory


BJ
GD
SH
YN
SC
JS
GS
GZ
JX
Total
U.S.
16

9
2

1



28
HK/Macau
5
7
1
4
1


1
1
20
U.K.
1


1
1
1
1


5
France
2








2
S. Korea
1
1







2
Switzerland
1


1





2
Germany
2








2
Taiwan

1



1



2
Spain


1






1
Australia



1





1
Japan

1







1
Canada


1






1
India


1






1
Russia


1






1
Total
28
10
14
9
2
3
1
1
1
69