LIU Hongchun*

 

Abstract: As the “third sector”, social organizations are increasingly involved in human rights affairs in the era of governance through cooperation. They play an important role in the construction of a human rights community with the core of “common human values”, and together with the government and other relevant subjects, they become the guarantors of human rights. By sorting out the main contributions of social organizations and successful experiences participating in human rights governance, it can be seen that they timely support relevant policies and laws and the participation through certain modes are successful experiences of social organizations in participating in human rights governance. Under the guarantee of the mechanism of effectiveness and risk control along the whole chain before, during and after the process, these contributions and experience will provide better Chinese experience and Chinese programs to promote global human rights governance and the progress of human rights cause in the world.

 

Keywords: social organizations· go global · human rights governance· common values of human· a Community with a Shared Future for Human Beings

 

 

General Secretary Xi Jinping once elaborated on the new characteristics of the Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. One of the “new” characteristics is that it will be an era in which China moves closer to center stage and makes greater contributions to human beings”.¹ According to a scholar, “with the transnational and global human rights issues increasing, many human rights issues are no longer limited to one country, nor can one country handle the challenge alone. 

 

All countries need to work together to handle the global challenge. It is necessary to actively promote the internationalization and globalization of human rights based on China’s position, viewpoint and method and the international consensus on human rights, to make due contributions to the maintenance of the global human rights order. China is duty-bound as a responsible great power to promote reform of the global governance system for human rights. Through human rights dialogue and cooperation, especially in extensive consultation and co-governance in the field of human rights, China’s institutional discourse power on human rights issues will be enhanced.”² On this basis, China “adheres to the concept of global governance of extensive consultation,joint contribution and shared benefits, actively participates in the reform and construction of the global governance system, and continuously contributes to wisdom and strength. In the field of human rights, we are actively involved in international human rights dialogue and cooperation and participate in global human rights governance”.³ The white paper titled Seeking Happiness for People: 70 Years of Progress on Human Rights in China mentions that as a key member of the international community,China raises high the banner of peace, development, cooperation, and mutual benefits, staunchly safeguards world peace, promotes common development, and advances development through cooperation while promoting human rights through development. It fully participates in global human rights governance, and works strenuously to advance the international cause of human rights.⁴ Practice has proved that to contribute to global human rights governance, the construction of a human rights community with the core of “common human values”⁵ requires the substantial and effective participation of social organizations,⁶ especially the substantial assistance of social organizations as the “third sector”.⁷ Therefore, at the First Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation in 2017, General Secretary Xi Jinping proposed to strengthen the exchanges of non-governmental organizations and build a cooperation network of non-governmental organizations along the Silk Road. In 2019, at the Second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, General Secretary Xi Jinping once again proposed strengthening exchanges among non-governmental organizations, and over the following five years, China will invite 10,000 representatives of political parties, think tanks, non-governmental organizations and other countries that have jointly built the Belt and Road to come to China for exchanges. Meanwhile,social organizations in countries along the Belt and Road are being encouraged and supported to carry out extensive cooperation to improve people’s livelihoods. The government has also set up a $3 billion South-South Cooperation Fund to support domestic and recipient countries’ non-governmental organizations, domestic and foreign think tanks, and international organizations to implement foreign aid projects in other developing countries to eradicate poverty, improve people’s livelihoods and raise the level of social development. Over the next five years, there will be major policies and measures to carry out government purchase services for foreign aid and livelihood projects. The areas of purchase will be diversified, with special emphasis on education, agriculture, poverty alleviation, culture, health, support for vulnerable groups and other areas.⁸

 

 

For better global human rights governance, sovereign states, intergovernmental international organizations, non-international law subjects (such as non-governmental international organizations that are non-governmental and transnational allied) and other non-governmental organizations as subjects of international law need to participate in various specific human rights affairs, to protect the relevant individual rights and collective rights through indirect means such as sanctions and trials, as well as humanitarian assistance, environmental protection, community development, medical education and other means. Some scholars believe that the “relationship between the government and social organizations is to build a cooperation system between the two sides to realize the overall effect, the consistency of interests, the integration of functions and smooth communication”.⁹ Social organizations can play an important role in the innovation of global human rights governance, which is determined by their roles and functions in human rights governance. As the “third sector”, social organizations are not only providers of public services, but also advocates of public decision-making. As for their political functions, those mainly comprise communication with the government, influencing government decision-making, supervising the government, and democratic autonomy. As for its social functions, social organizations can provide various public services in flexible and diverse ways, and work properly in various fields such as education, medical and healthcare, old-age care, earthquake relief, envi-ronmental protection, poverty alleviation, and rural development.¹⁰ It is precisely because of the role played by social organizations that the awareness of social organizations’ participation in human rights governance in our country has rapidly improved, and the global human rights governance cause has been well developed. In 2019, China had ten social organizations¹¹ with consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council, hitting an all-time high. In 2017, the Gansu Rainbow Volunteer Club registered a local organization in Nepal, namely Rainbow in Nepal. In March 2019, Beijing Pinglan Public Welfare Foundation launched the demining operation of Chinese non-governmental organizations to assist Cambodia. In April 2019, Kunming Yundi Behavior and Health Research Center was established in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. The Action Plan for Yunnan Social Organizations Going to Laos has launched many platform plans to support social organizations to “go global”. In December 2019, Sichuan Haihui and relevant Thai public welfare organizations held the Chiang Mai Summit Forum in Haihui International Public Welfare Park. These activities show that small social organizations in China have become a new force to “go global”. According to empirical research and literature review, under the guidance of the old “humanitarian intervention” and the new “responsibility for protection” concepts of international protection of human rights and the “human rights diplomacy” strategies of relevant countries, some sovereign states, intergovernmental international organizations, including comprehensive and worldwide international organizations such as the United Nations, regional international organizations such as the European Union, specialized international organizations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Labour Organization, and other subjects of international law, as well as non-governmental international organizations that are non-governmental and transnational allied, have been participating in human rights affairs through traditional projects such as humanitarian assistance, environmental protection, community development, and medical education, as well as through seminars, research projects, and training courses. According to public information, at present, Chinese social organizations mainly participate in humanitarian relief, medical assistance, educational assistance, environmental protection, action research and improvement of governance capabilities. There are the following five aspects with exemplary significance. 

 

In terms of humanitarian assistance, social organizations such as the Red Cross Society of China, the China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation, the China Welfare Foundation, the China Children and Teenagers’ Fund, Amity Foundation and the Blue Sky Rescue Team have carried out disaster relief work such as rescue missions, disaster assessment, material distribution and post-disaster reconstruction. Representative projects include humanitarian relief in the Horn of Africa drought, the Indonesian tsunami, Hurricane Katrina in the United States, the Pakistan earthquake, the Haiti earthquake, and the donation of food, clothing and defense drugs to refugees affected by the Kokang War in Myanmar. In September 2019, the first International Academy of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies was established in Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, marking that China is transforming from accumulation of experience in humanitarian relief to the construction of a knowledge system, and that our experience in disaster prevention and mitigation is being applied in the world’s humanitarian relief system.¹² In October 2019, Beijing Pinglan Public Welfare Foundation, in conjunction with China Association for NGO Cooperation, Amity Foundation, Shenzhen Children Fund Public Welfare Foundation, Beijing Normal University’s Risk Governance Innovation Research Center, and Waterdrop Public Welfare Initiative, launched the China Civil Network for International Humanitarian Assistance.

 

Concerning the protection of health rights, social organizations such as the Red Cross Society of China, the China Foundation for Peace and Development, the China Association for NGO Cooperation, the China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation, and the Yundi Behavior and Health Research Center help local patients receive free surgical treatment, donate surgical equipment, and help local medical personnel to receive professional training. Representative projects include the “Brightness Action” campaigns in Malawi and Zimbabwe in Africa launched by the China Association for NGO Cooperation, enterprises and hospitals, the Smiling Children School Meals project in Ethiopia and Sudan launched by the China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation, knowledge publicity, intervention services and treatment activities for AIDS, hepatitis C, congenital heart disease and other diseases in four counties in northern Myanmar, Vietnam’s Lao Cai, Cambodia and other places implemented by Yundi Behavior and Health Research Center.

 

Regarding the protection of the right to education, the China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation, the China Youth Development Foundation, the Chinese Language and Culture Education Foundation of China, the Yundi Behavior and Health Research Center, and the Ruili Women and Children Development Center carry out the protection of the right to education through school construction, donation of teaching materials, improvement of teaching ability, and granting of scholarships and grants.Representative projects include “China-Africa Project Hope”, building “Hope Primary School”, Ruili Women and Children Development Center’s Computer Application Level Training Program for Faculty, and Scholarships and Grants in Muse, Myanmar, as well as a series of educational assistance activities carried out by the Yundi Behavior and Health Research Center in Myanmar’s Maija Yang Refugee Camp Central Primary School, Myanmar’s Kachin Myitsone Hydropower Station Relocation Community, and Cambodia’s Battambang City School. In 2019, Gansu Rainbow Volunteer Club launched Rainbow School, which provides support for orphans, youth development, education for needy children, and other projects in Nepal. In July 2019, Tibet Good Will Foundation and Nepalese non-governmental organizations jointly launched the third training project to improve the employment skills of Nepalese youth.

 

On the protection of environmental rights, Amity Foundation, the Global Environmental Institute and the Social Resources Institute participate in environmental rights protection by helping recipient countries with environmental protection and clean energy projects. Representative projects include the Sri Lanka Biogas Project, Myitsone Hydropower Station Stakeholder Exchange and Community Development Project of GEL and China Power Investment Corporation. In 2019, many Chinese social organizations conveyed the voice of Chinese social organizations at international environmental protection conferences such as the United Nations Climate Change Conference and the Asia Clean Energy Forum. The “Ant Forest” project launched by Alipay won the “Champions of the Earth”, the highest environmental protection honor of the United Nations, and the “Beacon Awards”,¹³ the highest award for tackling climate change.

 

With respect to governance knowledge and capability improvement, the China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation, the China Association for NGO Cooperation and the Yunnan Youth Foundation have carried out projects such as “China’s International Social Responsibility Research Topics and Forum”, Poverty Alleviation Capacity Building Class for Sudan’s Social Organizations, and Myanmar’s Kokang Charity Organization Capacity Training Course to improve governance knowledge and abilities.¹⁴

 

 

The social nature of non-government organizations and the publicity of human rights governance determine that social organizations can effectively make up for the deficiencies of other forms of governance. Practice has proved that human rights governance problems such as mistakes in human rights policy formulation caused by government failure, the inefficiency of humanitarian assistance, and corruption caused by power rent-seeking of government staff has long been discussed worldwide. However,due to their social basis, professionalism and non-governmental characteristics,social organizations can effectively fill the governance gap left by government failure in global human rights governance. Especially in some specific fields, the governance capability and role displayed by social organizations may be better than that of the government.¹⁵ Through summarizing and investigating the situation, the core experience we have drawn from the process of social organizations’ participation in human rights governance in our country is excellent institutional support formed by policies and laws and effective choice of participation modes.

 

 

As a scholar has said, “a good institutional link will achieve a reasonable insti-tutional structure, thus realizing institutional coordination”. The essence of the institutional structure is to establish an institutional order in many policies and laws by linking up policies and laws. Meanwhile, social organizations need good institutional support in participating in human rights governance.¹⁶ In recent years, to speed up the implementation of the “going global” strategy, the state has successively issued more than 100 rules, regulations and policies related to the “going global” strategy, including some relevant systems of social organizations.

 

At the national level, according to statistics, in 2000, some social organizations in our country went out to carry out some human rights work in some developing countries. They introduced some domestic human rights work methods and experiences to Southeast Asia, Africa and other countries, contributing to the human rights cause and protection in these countries and accumulating some experience for global human rights governance. To encourage and support social organizations to go global, relevant policies and laws also provide normative guarantees in due course. For example, in 2012, the State Council issued the Opinions on Promoting the Development of the Red Cross Cause which stipulates that one of the five legal duties of the Red Cross Society of China is to carry out international humanitarian relief and non-governmental diplomacy. In August 2016, the General Offices of the Central Committee of CPC and the State Council issued Opinions on Reforming the Management System of Social Organizations and Promoting the Healthy and Orderly Development of Social Organizations, well defining the important role of guiding social organizations to go global, proposing to “guide social organizations to carry out orderly foreign exchanges, give full play to the auxiliary and cooperative role of social organizations in foreign economy, culture, science and technology, education, sports, environmental protection and other exchanges, and play an important platform role in non-governmental foreign exchanges”. In 2016, the Measures for the Administration of Application and Implementation of South-South Cooperation Fund Projects (Trial) (Draft for Comments) emphasized and pointed out the role of social organizations in the fields of education and medical care, poverty reduction and development, biodiversity and ecological environment. In 2016, the Welfare Donations Law of the People’s Republic of China stipulates that “the procedures for overseas donation of property and the conditions for exemption and exemption of import duties”. The International Department of the Central Committee of CPC of CPC has issued Guidelines for Chinese Social Organizations Going Global jointly with the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Civil Affairs.

 

At the local level, in July 2019, Yunnan issued the first guiding document for social organizations going global — Action Plan for Yunnan Social Organizations Going to Laos, which encourages Yunnan social organizations to carry out work in the fields of poverty reduction, medical and health care, disaster prevention and mitigation, alternative planting, ecological environment protection, culture and education, youth exchanges, etc. The plan sets the period from 2019 to 2022 as the stage of foundation laying, promotes the implementation of the registration of Yunnan social organizations in Laos, and focuses on many livelihood projects with small capital demand, good social benefits and more consideration of the grassroots in the border provinces and cities between China and Laos. It sets the period from 2023 to 2025 as the stage of consolidation and promotion, focusing on expanding Yunnan social organizations to implement various livelihood projects in Laos and improving the development mode of Yunnan social organizations in Laos.¹⁷ Besides, the China Association for the Promotion of International Exchanges, a non-governmental organization, has held many training courses on the capacity-building of local social organizations to “go global” in a timely and effective manner to enhance the capabilities of social organizations to “go global”. In 2019, 80 representatives from 70 local and some national social organizations from provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities participated in the training held in Kunming, Yunnan. More than 80 representatives from more than 70 social organizations from 10 provinces and municipalities participated in the training held in Jinan, Shandong.¹⁸

 

 

As for the choice of internationalization path for social organizations going global, some scholars have put forward the Theory of Five Modes, namely, Territorial Partnership Type, Private-Run and Government-Subsidy Type, Social Organization-Enterprise Cooperation Type, Borrowing a Boat to Go to Sea Type, and Social Media Cooperation Type. ¹⁹ This paper holds that, judging from the existing experience, there are four mature and successful modes for China’s social organizations’ participation in human rights governance: Territorial Partnership Type, Private-Run and Government-subsidy Type, Social Organization-Enterprise Cooperation Type, and Borrowing a Boat to Go to Sea Type.

 

The Territorial Partnership Type means that in the process of participating in human rights governance, social organizations establish long-term cooperation relations in human rights work with the consensual social organizations in the territorial countries, and make use of the geographical advantages of consensual social organizations to provide various legally agreed supports for Chinese social organizations to participate in the specific work of human rights governance. The proponents of the Theory of Five Modes” found through a sample survey questionnaire of representative social organizations that this mode scored the highest among the five modes, with 91.3 percent in favor. The proponents of the Theory of Five Modes suggest that social organizations should go global to participate in various governance work including human rights and adopt the Territorial Partnership Type internationalization mode as the first choice.²⁰The Territorial Partnership Type is a common mode used by international social organizations and social organizations in developed countries in participating in human rights governance. It is also a relatively mature and successful mode proved by years of practice. The key to the effective implementation of this mode is that social organizations and relevant functional departments that go global to participate in human rights governance need to understand the cooperation intentions and implementation capabilities of local political, policy, legal, economic, cultural and social organizations directly related to human rights governance. For example, Amity Foundation, which has adopted this mode, is a successful example of participation in human rights governance in environmental rights, educational rights, and health rights.

 

The Private-Run and Government-subsidy Type means that social organizations have gone out to participate in human rights governance, and the government openly gives funds from humanitarian assistance funds to support them to participate in human rights governance according to law. The proponents of the Theory of Five Modes found through a sample survey questionnaire of representative social organizations that the mode ranked second among the five modes, with 89.9% in favor. The proponents of the Theory of Five Modes suggested that social organizations go global to participate in various governance work including human rights and take the Private-Run and Government-Subsidy Type internationalization mode as the second choice.²¹ Data show that the governments and functional departments of the United States, Britain, Japan and the West have also adopted a “Private-Run and Government-Subsidy Type” to help their social organizations participate in human rights governance. China’s Yundi Behavior and Health Research Center has carried out a series of educational assistance activities in Myanmar’s Maija Yang Refugee Camp Central Primary School, Myanmar’s Kachin Myitsone Hydropower Station Migration Community, and Cambodia’s Battambang City School. These human rights governance funds that effectively promote the protection of the right to education come from foreign aid funds from the Yunnan Provincial Department of Commerce.

 

The Social Organization-Enterprise Cooperation Type means that to better enhance the participation effect, the social organizations having already gone out to participate in human rights governance choose to cooperate with the suitable enterprises to participate in governance. This mode is easier to give full play to the comparative advantages of social organizations in liaison with the international community, social organizations in the host country, enterprises and communities where the project is located, to achieve a win-win governance effect. The proponents of the Theory of Five Modes found through a sample survey questionnaire of representative social organizations that the mode ranked third among the five modes, with 87.1% in favor. The proponents of the Theory of Five Modes suggested that social organizations go global to participate in various governance work including human rights and take the Social Organization-Enterprise Cooperation Type internationalization mode as the third choice.²² According to the research, some human rights governance work in which China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation and PetroChina have participated in Sudan is a mode of Social Organization-Enterprise Cooperation Type. The Addax mode of Sinopec is also strong evidence of the Social Organization-Enterprise Cooperation Type. Myitsone Hydropower Station Stakeholder Exchange and Community Development Project of the Global Environmental Institute and China Power Investment Corporation effectively protected environmental rights and other rights of local residents. Moreover, the experience of global human rights governance shows that the Social Organization-Enterprise Cooperation Type is an indispensable mode for the development of human rights in the world.

 

The Borrowing a Boat to Go to Sea Type means that China’s social organizations agree and cooperate with the international social organizations that have intensive experience in participating in global human rights governance, make use of the experience network, good reputation and resources of international social organizations in participating in human rights governance, and then participate in human rights governance by agreement cooperation, mutual benefit and reciprocity in the same recipient country. The proponents of the Theory of Five Modes found through a sample survey questionnaire of representative social organizations that the mode ranked fourth among the five modes, with 86.3 percent in favor. The proponents of the Theory of Five Modes suggested that social organizations go global to participate in various governance work including human rights and take the Borrowing a Boat to Go to Sea Type internationalization mode as the fourth choice.²³ Because the key to Borrowing a Boat to Go to Sea Type is to find a consensual and feasible organization, including cooperation with the human rights governance of the United Nations system. At present, the China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation is a successful case of this mode by effectively borrowing the network of international social organizations to participate in human rights governance.

 

 

Judging from the ideological impetus, the concept of human rights has been deeply rooted in the hearts of the people. However, neither hierarchical and rational government organizations nor utilitarian and commercial market organizations can fully carry the work of human rights governance and risk control by themselves. “As an intermediary organization between the state and the society, social organizations are sometimes closer to the state and sometimes closer to society. Once formed, they have a certain nature of being independent of both the state and society.” It is “this special temperament” that enables social organizations to reach cooperation intentions with the host country and jointly promote the development of global human rights in the process of participating in human rights governance. Social organizations can also defend individual human rights at necessary moments. Therefore, it is the best choice to use the power of social organizations.²⁴ As an important executor and participant of China’s foreign aid, the South-South Cooperation Fund, understanding between peoples and other international affairs, social organizations shoulder the important task of carrying out humanitarian assistance, and safeguarding and promoting people’s livelihoods, human rights, public diplomacy and other work. However, modern society is risky. Social organizations going global carry out their work across a large range. Political systems, stages of economic development and cultural customs vary greatly from country to country. How to reduce risks in a challenging environment has become an unavoidable problem in practice. More importantly, all kinds of risks do not exist in isolation, but are interrelated and superimposed on the whole process of social organizations going global to carry out their work, exposing social organizations to huge risk. If the effectiveness of the whole process and the whole chain and the mechanism of risk control are missing, going global by social organizations is not only difficult to effectively promote the Belt and Road Initiative, the construction of a Community with a Shared Future for Human Beings and the construction of new international relations, but also may cause waste and loss of financial resources, hinder the building of image of China as a responsible major power, and even endanger the survival and development of social organizations abroad. 

 

According to the research results, the effectiveness and risk control of social organizations’ participation in human rights work are relatively good at present. However, in the face of the complicated international struggle situation and China’s international strategic layout, it is still urgent to establish and improve the mechanism of effectiveness and risk control along the whole chain before, during and after the process. Moreover, over the past 40 years since the launch of the reform and opening-up policy, the social organization supervision system has gradually transformed²⁵ from “control supervision” to “compliance supervision”. It is suggested that the International Department of the Central Committee of CPC, alongside the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Civil Affairs, the Ministry of Finance, China International Development Cooperation Agency, etc., draw lessons from the following compliance-related policies and laws for enterprises going global: Guidelines for Compliance Management System (2017), Several Opinions on Regulating Overseas Operation of Enterprises (2017), Code of Conduct for Overseas Investment and Operation of Private Enterprises (2017), Guidelines for Compliance Management of Overseas Operations of Enterprises (2018), Measures for the Implementation of Accountability for Illegal Operations and Investment of Central Enterprises (Trial) (2018), Guidelines for Compliance Management of Central Enterprises (Trial) (2018), Opinions of Sinopec on Strengthening Management of Enterprises in Accordance with Laws and Regulations (2018), Integrity and Compliance Management Manual of Sinopec Group Co., Ltd. (2019), Implementation Opinions on Strengthening the Construction and Su-pervision of Internal Control System of Central Enterprises (2019), Guiding Opinions on Social Organizations Going Global and Operation Manual for Chinese Non-governmental Organizations Going Global. Under the “guidance of constructing a legal person system of social organizations with clearly defined rights and responsibilities, coordinated operation and effective checks and balances, and constructing a modern social organization system with the separation of government administration and enterprise management, clearly defined rights and responsibilities and autonomy according to law, they should improve the individual and comprehensive laws, regulations and policies of social organizations in a timely manner, strengthen the supervision of social organizations and the construction of law enforcement and supervision systems. They need to actively guide social organizations to carry out self-education, self-restraint, self-supervision and self-service, in a bid to realize the sound development of social organizations”.²⁶ They should also launch compliance policies and laws on the effectiveness and risk management of social organizations going global in a timely manner and clearly define the entry/exit and reward and punishment mechanisms with the emphasis on foreign aid projects in the fields of education, agriculture, poverty alleviation, culture, health, and support for vulnerable groups, which are characterized by government’s purchase of services.

 

 

As risks are generally characterized by uncertainty, “making a decision before the process” has also become a true portrayal of the risk reduction activities of social organizations. From a social point of view, the biggest challenge of risk control before the process lies in the fact that it is difficult to implement it universally and effectively in practice. It is mostly an open guiding principle and cannot put forward applicable norms for specific risk areas.²⁷ Regarding this issue, in the process of social organizations going global to participate in human rights governance, on the one hand, it is necessary to establish a corresponding participation evaluation mechanism before the process, and the evaluation shall include basic information on project countries, the need and space for social organizations’ participation, relevant policies and laws, the relationship between the strategies of specific actions involved by the project countries and the overall strategic vision of social organizations and development, fund arrangement and evaluation of expatriate talents, methods and risks of funds flow in and out of the country, establishment, consolidation and evaluation of relationships among government departments, local social organizations, communities and beneficiary groups, relevant enterprises in the project and other partners and other stakeholders, checking for rules and regulations that respect human rights, avoid discrimination, avoid disputes, pay attention to participatory and sustainable development, transparency and credibility, and project quality, actively build partnerships and promote learning community projects, and prevent conflicts and risks caused by factors such as fairness, cultural differences, and poor communication. On the other hand, attention should also be paid to the choice of partners, which takes into consideration basic information such as organization registration, annual organization inspection and audit reports, project’s special audit reports and other financial information, value concepts, cooperation appeal points, fields and regions, government resources, legality and standardization, personnel team information, existing project experience and project feedback, cooperation methods, responsible subjects and division of responsibilities in cooperation, and signing of legally effective cooperation agreements. A typical relative successful case: in July 2018, at the China-Nepal Non-Governmental Organization People’s Livelihood Project Docking Meeting jointly organized by the China Association for NGO Cooperation and Nepal’s Social Welfare Committee, 25 Chinese non-governmental organizations and 34 Nepalese non-governmental organizations held talks on cooperation needs in the fields of education, poverty alleviation, medical care, disaster prevention and relief. Finally, 11 Chinese non-governmental organizations reached cooperation intentions with Nepal’s Social Welfare Commission and other non-governmental organizations and signed 13 cooperation agreements or memorandums.

 

 

Shortly after the Belt and Road Initiative was fully launched, a series of “Black Swan” incidents such as “the success of the British Brexit referendum”, “Trump was elected as US President” and “the failure of the Italian constitutional amendment referendum” occurred one after another around the world, mirroring the rise of populism and trade protectionism in the world and the awareness of “de-globalization”. Both Syria, Yemen, Myanmar and other countries along the Belt and Road, which are still at war, and Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries mired in terrorism, are facing complex human rights issues and gaps between humanitarian needs and resources.²⁸ It can be seen that while participating in various complex human rights activities, social organizations are facing diversified risks. Compared with risks before and after the process, risk control during the process is a factor that can determine the “survival” of social organizations. Therefore, social organizations going global to participate in the process of human rights governance need to improve the corresponding mechanisms for risk control during the process, focus on factors such as timely assessment of the inability of partners to match the project capacity requirements, failure to find suitable beneficiaries, conflicts among beneficiary communities (groups), inability to match project funds in time, project progress lagging, project failure to complete promised outputs, long cross-border fund allocation period, high project implementation cost, and implementation capacity and professionalism. It is also necessary to strengthen the internal management of overseas employees (including overseas assignment and recruitment, visa period for overseas employees, employee training, salary management), volunteer training, safety management and other organizations. Meanwhile, relevant departments have established a safety risk assessment mechanism for social organizations’ external work, regularly released the assessment results of the safety situation in relevant countries and regions, provided timely early warning information, and guided social organizations to do a good job in safety risk prevention.

 

 

Risk control after the process is the last pass for social organizations going global to participate in human rights governance. Therefore, it is necessary to take the elements proposed in the risk management framework as the mainline to improve the monitoring of human rights projects after the process, in which social organizations go global to participate. The main objective of project monitoring is to ensure that the project achieves the expected objectives. Meanwhile, good monitoring can respond to the sponsors in a timely manner and make a good preliminary data reserve for the mid-term evaluation and the final evaluation. Using the balanced scorecard, project monitoring can be divided into financial monitoring which aims to master the financial efficiency of project implementation and the adjustment and arrangement of funds in the next stage through monitoring, focusing on monitoring the return on capital investment, costs, the utilization rate of assets, the structure of assets, etc., monitoring of relevant stakeholders which monitors the benefits, satisfaction and impact scope of the project, and internal management monitoring, such as monitoring internal innovation ability, staff’s ability to cooperate with relevant stakeholders, ability to develop business, and the management level of the resource management chain. Finally, the project evaluation needs to clearly inform the third party of the logical framework of the project design, provide the third party with the project evaluation report framework, good monitoring records and monitored highlights and weaknesses, require the third party to use qualitative and quantitative methods, while focusing on participatory evaluation methods. Giving full play to the added value of monitoring after the process in risk control and management, project process optimization and improvement in the process of social organizations going global is conducive to comprehensively improving the effectiveness of human rights governance in social organizations. A typical relative successful case: in December 2016, to comprehensively and deeply summarize the experience of Chinese social organizations in participating in earthquake humanitarian assistance in Nepal and Ecuador, and effectively deal with the risks in various stages of future participation, several foundations, including China Foundation for Poverty Alleviation, Amity Foundation, One Foundation, China Youth Development Foundation, China Women’s Development Foundation, China Social Welfare Foundation and

more than ten non-governmental rescue teams, which participated in the rescues, held a summary meeting in Beijing.

 

 

In the era of cooperative governance, integrating the concept of a Community with a Shared Future for Human Beings into the concept and practice of social organizations going global to participate in human rights governance is the latest development of China’s global human rights governance program. In March 2017 and March 2018, the UN Human Rights Council repeatedly wrote “Building a Community with a Shared Future for Human Beings” into its resolutions, marking that “A Community with a Shared Future for Human Beings” has become a “new plan” to promote the concept of global human rights governance and social organizations going global to participate in human rights governance and promote the construction of a human rights community. In short, social organizations that go global to participate in human rights governance should “uphold the principle of primacy of national interests and the modernization needs of the national governance system and governance capability, we should find out the coordinate position, find out the combination point and focus point of services, undertake good missions and responsibilities, and provide productive, living, ecological and social services that the government is difficult to provide or not good to provide, and the market is unwilling to provide.”²⁹ However, the top-down policy and top-level legal planning of the government and its functional departments should be guided by the principle of ‘common values of human’ which is a “human rights proposition and concept with international applicability”. With the core of “paying close attention to the characteristics of the development and change of social organizations, promoting the cultivation and development of social organizations in different categories prudently and steadily according to actual needs, setting all kinds of social organizations on demand, and accelerating the transformation and development of social organization management from extension expansion to connotation deepening”,³⁰ the right to choose independently should be given to social organizations, thus providing legitimate support for social organizations to participate in human rights governance and the construction of a human rights community. Meanwhile, under the guidance of diversified policies and laws and empowering top-level planning, the social organizations should participate in human rights governance by adopting a bottom-up multi-mode, obtain “social capital”³¹ and “social legitimacy”³² to participate in human rights governance through social construction, and rely on the mechanism of effectiveness and risk control along the whole chain before, during and after the process, and finally, based on “double-legitimacy”, pay special attention to “helping developing countries form self-development ability, and form a community of human destiny development ability”.³³

 

(Translated by DONG Mingzheng)