This article examines the government purchase of social services in China as a window by which to investigate the evolving relations between the party-state and social organizations. Going beyond the conventional focus on state–non-governmental organization (NGO) dynamics in urban areas, we explore the expanded role of social organizations in rural service provision under state-led campaigns of rural modernization. Engaging with institutional theory and the consultative authoritarianism thesis, we argue that NGOs initially operated in an emerging organizational field where they exercised considerable autonomy in setting agendas and designing services. As the party-state's incentives to utilize and co-opt the social work profession grow, however, we observe a trend towards incorporation, wherein social workers now play a bigger role alongside the strengthening of state control over the sector. Through tracing the inception and eventual termination of a decade-long social service project in Guangdong, this article shows how state incorporation might undermine the future role of NGOs in rural development.

As part of a broader direction of welfare and governance reforms, China has launched a policy to contract welfare services out to social organizations. Scholars have explored the implementation of the policy in a few socioeconomically advanced cities such as Guangzhou, Shenzhen and Shanghai. In this article, we examine how local governments lacking nongovernmental services suppliers or resources for contracting respond to the policy. We developed a framework of multiple logics to analyse services contracting in a county-level city in eastern China. We found that local officials follow three logics in implementing the policy: to meet the central state's targets, to balance policy outcomes and risks, and to stimulate a more participatory society. This generates a mix of policy behaviour, including entrepreneurialism, welfarism, innovation, risk-sharing and collaboration. We thus argue the interplay of the logics determines the local policy process of services contracting in China.

In this article, we examine the administrative functions that have been carried out by social organizations (SOs) in China since 2013. We use evidence from Guangdong to demonstrate that the transfer of authority to SOs is selective, tends to create more burdens for local government, and generally does not lead to greater autonomy for SOs. We focus on five types of SOs that are undertaking new administrative functions with varying degrees of operational autonomy, which relates to the consultative authoritarian model proposed by Jessica Teets. Consultative authoritarianism allows for the expansion of relatively autonomous SOs and the development of indirect state control mechanisms. The model is designed to improve governance without democratization by expanding the role played by intermediaries such as SOs in public administration and service delivery. The evidence from Guangdong permits us to conclude that the transfer of authority to SOs allows for innovations in public administration, but that politics continues to motivate government decisions as to which functions are suitable for SOs to undertake, casting doubt on the ability of the Chinese Communist Party to achieve sustainable improvements in local governance and public service provision.

This article considers whether social organizations (SOs) in China have acquired more autonomy over time under the socialist market economy. To discern whether SOs are changing under the corporatist system, we use quantitative data analyses of a 2001 to 2004 survey of SOs in China. We find that the later the SOs were founded, the more autonomy they have and die more oriented they are to representing their constituents' interests. The data also verify that the later SOs were formed, the greater their desire for freedom from the party-state. Furthermore, SOs that are more autonomous tend to be more critical of the SO management system, but this holds only for SOs founded before 2000. After 2001, no correlation occurs between autonomy and the expressed desire for more freedom.

Previous studies have found no relationship between scholar participation and public project performance. Building on the work of Lindblom (1977; 1990), I propose a model depicting scholars' roles in social organizations and governance. A study of thirty-two cases of large public works projects in China and seventeen projects in thirteen other countries shows a moderately positive relationship. The study further shows the greatest influence on project success occurs when participating scholars serve as information brokers and entrepreneurial activity organizers. Successful scholar participation occurred through five working principles: (1) there is dispersed and specialized knowledge production; (2) there is dispersed and asymmetric knowledge possession; (3) knowledge-driven volitions and consensus are criteria for knowledge; (4) the satisfaction of diverse and heterogeneous individual needs is realized through knowledge-driven institutional arrangements; and (5) there are multiple methods of knowledge application. In general, scholar participation seems to be more effective in projects in which there is low political intervention, and in village and county projects. The results of the study provide a theoretical and empirical foundation for further research on scholar participation in social organizations.