政策简读（二）（2012年2月）：广东和云南的试验

 谢世宏（Shawn Shieh）中国发展简报英文主编

在2012年早些时候，广东省在媒体眼中已然成为非营利组织注册和管理方面的创新者。1月，广东省有关部门宣布自7月开始，非营利组织注册不再需要主管单位，这在过去被视为注册的主要障碍。广东省还宣布了一系列其他措施，使广东成为非营利组织注册管理方面最为开放的地区。广东能够形成这样一个开放的环境，得益于广东的最高领导人--省委书记汪洋的推动。他公开表达了对非营利组织的支持，并对在这方面改革不力的地方官员进行了批评。

其后，民政部对广东的改革举措表态支持，不由让人产生这样的预期：中央层面正在对非营利组织注册管理的相关规定进行修订，将采纳广东的做法。

这些近期出现的进展，可被视为共产党在去年发布的“十二五”规划中所强调的“社会管理创新”的延续。社会管理创新是政府在规范和管理社会和社会组织方面所进行的创新。

 在政府对社会组织的规制方面，可以观察到两个明显的趋势。其一是降低社会组织注册和筹资的门槛，其二则涉及社会组织管理的规范化。

从广东等地的地方政府许可社会组织不需要主管部门直接进行民政登记的试验，可以看出第一个趋势。近来，广州市还宣布将取消对社会组织筹资方面的限制。（参见www.chinanpo.gov.cn/web/showBulltetin.do?id=51370&dictionid=1940&catid.) 

在中国，除了红十字会和公募基金会，社会组织在总体上没有公募资格。有广东学者曾告诉我，广东将有更多的放松社会组织筹款限制、强化社会组织免税资格的改革计划出台。广州宣布的措施与学者的说法正好相吻合。筹资、免税和注册方面的问题，一同构成了中国社会组织发展的最大障碍。广州的举措，表明广东在降低社会组织门槛方面明显处于领先位置。

其他地区似乎也在步广东后尘。最近，上海市宣布将在今年进行社会组织注册管理方面的类似试验。（详见www.chinadevelopmentbrief.org.cn/newsview.php?id=4646）

而社会组织的规范化管理趋势，可以从云南省规范对国际组织的管理，以及民政部发布《公益慈善捐助信息披露指引》看出端倪。规范化管理通常是以加强非营利部门的专业化能力的名义出台的，但也可以被理解为政府强化社会组织管控的一种努力。

近期宣布将出台的两项举措，可归入此类意图。其一是北京市民政局将为社会组织建立单独的编制体系，希望借此提高社会组织从业人员工资福利待遇，以及非营利部门的专业化水平。（详见www.chinadevelopmentbrief.org.cn/newsview.php?id=4635）

此外，财政部和民政部联合发出了一项通知，要求重大公益项目结束后，基金会须接受注册会计师事务所的专项审计，审计报告向社会公布。该通知适用于民政部门登记注册的基金会、境外基金会代表机构和其他具有公益性捐赠税前扣除资格的公益性社会团体。（详见www.chinadevelopmentbrief.org.cn/newsview.php?id=4693）

在未来数月和数年内，我们预计上述这些趋势将继续延续下去，中央和地方政府将在如何更好地管理社会组织方面全力应对。值得观察的一个地方，是第二个趋势中以规范管理为名的措施，是否会对社会组织的活动形成更多的障碍，从而对前一个降低门槛的趋势形成反向作用。

POLICY BRIEF NO.2 (FEBRUARY 2012): The Guangdong and Yunnan experiments in 2012

In early 2012, Guangdong province was still in the news as the trailblazer in reforming the registration and management system for nonprofits.  In January, provincial authorities announced that by July 2012, they would eliminate what has been the main obstacle to nonprofit registration: the requirement to find a professional supervisory unit that would sponsor the nonprofit.  They also announced a series of other measures that made Guangdong the most open province with regard to nonprofit registration and management.  This push for a more open environment for nonprofits has been credited to Guangdong’s top leader – provincial party secretary Wang Yang who is also a member of China’s Politburo and possibly may enter the Politburo Standing Committee – China’s most powerful decision making body – in October when the top leadership will be reshuffled.  Wang Yang has come out publicly to state his support for nonprofits and criticize local bureaucrats for not making it easier for nonprofits to register.

Since then, the Minister of Civil Affairs has come out endorsing the Guangdong reforms, raising expectations that the long-awaited national-level revisions to the nonprofit registration and management regulations would incorporate the Guangdong measures.

These recent developments can be seen as a continuation of the CCP’s emphasis on “innovative social management” in the 12th Five Year Plan (2011-2015) issued last year.  Innovative social management refers to the government carrying out innovations in the way it regulates or manages society and social organizations (China’s term for nonprofits).

With regard to the government’s regulation of social organizations, two distinct trends can be observed.  One involves lowering barriers to social organization registration and fundraising.   The other involves standardizing management of social organizations. 

We can see the first trend in the local-level experiments in Guangdong and other localities that will allow a social organization to directly register with Civil Affairs without first finding a professional supervising unit (generally a government agency or parastatal organization authorized to serve as a supervising unit) willing to sponsor it.   Recently, the city of Guangzhou (the provincial capital of Guangdong) announced it was also going to be removing restrictions on fundraising for social organizations.   (For the news article, see http://www.chinanpo.gov.cn/web/showBulltetin.do?id=51370&dictionid=1940&catid.)  For most of China, other than the Red Cross and public fundraising foundations, social organizations in general are not allowed to fundraise publicly.  The Guangzhou announcement is consistent with what scholars in Guangdong have told me about more planned reforms in line with relaxing restrictions over fundraising and strengthening the tax-exempt status for social organizations.  Together with the registration issue, the issues of fundraising and tax-exempt status pose some of the biggest obstacles for China’s social organizations.   The Guangzhou announcement shows that Guangdong is clearly taking the lead in lowering barriers for social organizations.
Other localities appear to be following Guangdong’s lead.  Recently, Shanghai announced it would be carrying out similar experiments with registration this year.   For the news article, see /newsview.php?id=4646

The second trend of standardizing the management system can be seen in Yunnan province’s efforts to standardize management of international NGOs, and the recent information disclosure guidelines issued by the Ministry of Civil Affairs for charitable donations.  This standardizing trend is often justified in the name of strengthening and professionalizing the nonprofit sector, but it can also be interpreted as an effort to strengthen government control over social organizations.

Two recent announcements fall into this category.  One issued by Beijing Municipality’s Civil Affairs bureau is to establish a human resource system for social organizations.  The bureau hopes that this move will help to raise the salaries of social organization staff and promote the professionalization of the nonprofit sector.  For the news article, see /newsview.php?id=4635

The other is a Notice issued by the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Civil Affairs which calls for major charitable projects to be audited after their completion, and the results of the audit made public. The Notice applies to major projects undertaken by foundations, representative offices of foreign foundations and public welfare social organizations that qualify for tax-exempt charitable donations.   For the news article, see /newsview.php?id=4693

We should expect both of these trends to continue in the coming months and years, as the government at both central and local levels wrestle with how to better manage social organizations.  One area to watch is whether the second trend will raise more barriers to social organization activity, in the name of standardization, and thereby counteract the first trend which seeks to lower the barriers.