How do Service NPOs Navigate Relative Autonomy in a Restrictive Environment?

• In Event: Civil society in non-democracies

Abstract

The general global trend of a shrinking civil society is evident, whether by accounts of Amnesty International (2019), Freedom House (2020) or CIVICUS (2018). Governments in many places have enacted new laws, imposed regulations, or introduced mechanisms to monitor civil society organizations (CSOs) for a whole array of reasons, including national security and social order. Restrictive CSO laws could be a carrot or a stick; it is for CSOs to decide their accommodation methods (Bogdanova et al., 2018). This paper aims to identify the coping strategies adopted by service non-profit organizations (NPOs) in Hong Kong in the face of the rapid decrease of civil space. We show how these coping strategies enable them to continue their work and remain relatively autonomous. The question of how anti-civil organization legislation affects public service delivery is important yet not fully addressed in the literature (Dupuy et al., 2021); it is hoped that the paper will add to the discussion in this area. Perhaps more importantly, the nonprofit literature has long argued that the state-society relationship, be it complementary or supplementary, is an important factor shaping the structure and development of the nonprofit sector; this study looks at the dynamics of how the morphosis of the state-society relationship affect nonprofits with a focus on their scoping strategies.
Studies have illustrated CSOs’ responses in politically restrictive contexts, especially international CSOs and advocacy organizations (Bloodgood & Tremblay-Boire, 2011; Dupuy et al., 2016). Our focus is on service NPOs, which are less politically sensitive and may even work to enhance the state’s legitimacy. Spires (2011) described the relationship between the government and grassroots NGOs in China as “contingent symbiosis” because, despite not obtaining the necessary registration, they were allowed to exist as they could relieve the government from particular social service provisions. Similarly, Zheng (2015) concluded that the NGO-government relationship in China was one of “dependent independence.” While NPOs depended on the government for their survival, they were instrumental in facilitating the social and economic development of the place where they served. Of course, the Chinese government exercised “graduated control” of different degrees, and NPOs’ response to the control will impact their future (Wu & Chan, 2012).
Since the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) government introduced the National Security Law in 2020, CSOs in Hong Kong are obliged to fulfill stringent requirements in their daily operations. This paper examines how service NPOs of different characteristics have adopted strategies to cope with the increasing restrictions with a view to negotiating space for services and maintaining a level of relative autonomy in the face of the restrictions. This study will draw upon a comparative case analysis focusing on four NPOs of different sizes and sources of funding. Interviews with representatives of these NPOs and relevant stakeholders will be conducted to identify and unpack the nuances involved in their scoping strategies in different domains of organizational functions, to assess the outcomes and implications of these strategies, and to highlight challenges ahead.

References

Bloodgood, Elizabeth and Tremblay-Boire, Joannie (2011). “International NGOs and National Regulation in an Age of Terrorism.” Voluntus, vol. 22 (1): 142-173.
Dupuy, Kendra; Fransen, Luc; and Prakash, Aseem (2021) “Restricting NGOs: From Pushback to Accommodation.” Global Policy, vol. 12, supplement 5: 5-10.
Dupuy, Kendra & Prakash, Aseem (2016). “Hands off My Regime! Governments’ Restrictions on Foreign Aid to Non-governmental Organizations in Poor and Middle Income Countries.” World Development, vol. 84: 299-311.
Bogdanova, Elena; Cook, Linda J. & Kulmala, Meri (2018). “The Carrot or the Stick? Constraints and Opportunities of Russia’s CSO Policy.” Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 70 (4): 501-513.
Spires, Anthony J. (2011). “Contingent Symbiosis and Civil Society in an Authoritarian State: Understanding the Survival of China’s Grassroots NGOs.” American Journal of Society, vol. 117 (1): 1-45.
Toepler, Stefan and Frohlich, Christian (2020). “Advocacy in Authoritarian Contexts: The Case of Disability NGOs in Russia.” International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, vol. 40, no. 11/12: 1473-1489.
Wu, Fengshi and Chan, Kin-man (2012). “Graduated Control and Beyond: The Evolving Government-NGO Relations.” China Perspectives, No. 2012/3: 9-17.
Zheng, Yuanfeng (2015). “Dependent Interdependence: The Complicated Dance of Government-Nonprofit Relations in China.” Voluntus, vol. 26 (6): 2395-2423.

Authors

• Wai-Fung LAM, Centre for Civil Society and Governance, the University of Hong Kong

• Elaine Chan, Centre for Civil Society and Governance, the University of Hong Kong

• Joyce Chow, Centre for Civil Society and Governance, the University of Hong Kong