Abstract
In an era with rapidly developing social organizations, the policies and strategies made by the government and its role in social organizations have been the focus of research. Indeed, extraneous civil society theory and corporatism theory have certain explanatory power. However, these two theories do not quite conform to the national situation of China. Based on this background, this paper is conducted with a focus on administration of social organizations by the government. With an analysis of both theory and current status, this paper breaks through the traditional uniaxial relationship and puts forward that the relationship between the government and social organizations is actually biaxial. That is to say, the effect of the government is indispensable and its two roles of support and control on social organizations are separated. On this basis, we further expound the model of support and control in the biaxial relationship.
Highlights
Background of RealityControl and DependenceUsually, development of social organizations has two routes
In an era with rapidly developing social organizations, the policies and strategies made by the government and its role in social organizations have been the focus of research
The second theoretical model provides such enlightenment to this research that the two functions of support and control have been separated. This separation indicates that the degree of control over social organizations by the government has no correlation with the kinship relationship between the two
Summary
In an era with rapidly developing social organizations, the policies and strategies made by the government and its role in social organizations have been the focus of research. Research of this kind does enrich explorations of a country in social relations in terms of theory, and helps to clarify roles of the government played in development of social organizations Both the traditional civil society theory and corporatism theory expound the relationship between a nation and its society, which has, to some extent, explained the mode of action by the government in social organizations. Social organizations in China differ from social organizations in other countries which own rich social capital The former have grown up and developed in the historical atmosphere of upholding the great unification and under the main background of emphasizing separation of government administration from commune management, separation of public service units from government, separation of associations from government and building a public government. What is the relationship between the government and social organizations in China? From the perspective of government functions, this issue can be further concretized as whether government functions are necessary, and, if they are necessary, what is the mode of action by the government?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
