Religious Philanthropy in China, Taiwan and Hong Kong

Religious Philanthropy in China, Taiwan and Hong Kong This essay argues that differences in religious ecologies, between China and the polities of Taiwan and Hong Kong are necessary but insufficient explanations for their different approaches to the reliance on religious actors for the delivery of social services. I discuss briefly two other explanations for the differences in policy outcomes: the legacies of colonial and semi-colonial rule, and the influence of ruling party ideologies, before I shift to an historical neo-institutional approach, which contrasts the path dependency of past policies of usurpation directed by the CCP at religious institutions between 1949 and 1978, and the policies of cooptation adopted in Taiwan and Hong Kong during the same period. I argue that although the Chinese government has affirmed with increasing clarity in recent years its interest in an approach that encourages the cooptation of religious institutions, the previous approach of usurpation has undermined the resources of religious institutions, left many religious actors distrustful of authorities, and continues to influence many constituencies that could oppose the approach of cooptation. To substantiate this argument, the essay proceeds as follows: it first discusses the different strategies available to states as they accumulate symbolic power, underlining the role of religious institutions in that process; then it contrasts the results achieved by religious philanthropy in Taiwan and Hong Kong in the provision of a wide array of services, on the one hand, with the difficulties faced by their counterparts in the delivery of social services in China, on the other; and finally it reviews some of the explanations for the discrepancies observed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Asian Journal of Social Science Brill

Religious Philanthropy in China, Taiwan and Hong Kong

Asian Journal of Social Science, Volume 43 (4): 435 – Jan 1, 2015

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/religious-philanthropy-in-china-taiwan-and-hong-kong-6ig4Y68yqe
Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright 2015 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.
ISSN
1568-4849
eISSN
1568-5314
DOI
10.1163/15685314-04304006
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This essay argues that differences in religious ecologies, between China and the polities of Taiwan and Hong Kong are necessary but insufficient explanations for their different approaches to the reliance on religious actors for the delivery of social services. I discuss briefly two other explanations for the differences in policy outcomes: the legacies of colonial and semi-colonial rule, and the influence of ruling party ideologies, before I shift to an historical neo-institutional approach, which contrasts the path dependency of past policies of usurpation directed by the CCP at religious institutions between 1949 and 1978, and the policies of cooptation adopted in Taiwan and Hong Kong during the same period. I argue that although the Chinese government has affirmed with increasing clarity in recent years its interest in an approach that encourages the cooptation of religious institutions, the previous approach of usurpation has undermined the resources of religious institutions, left many religious actors distrustful of authorities, and continues to influence many constituencies that could oppose the approach of cooptation. To substantiate this argument, the essay proceeds as follows: it first discusses the different strategies available to states as they accumulate symbolic power, underlining the role of religious institutions in that process; then it contrasts the results achieved by religious philanthropy in Taiwan and Hong Kong in the provision of a wide array of services, on the one hand, with the difficulties faced by their counterparts in the delivery of social services in China, on the other; and finally it reviews some of the explanations for the discrepancies observed.

Journal

Asian Journal of Social ScienceBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2015

Keywords: Religious philanthropy; social policy; China; Taiwan; Hong Kong; path dependency; symbolic power

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off