China's unique definition of "social work," as in the Communist Party's department of Society Work

Party-building, primary-level governance, and social stability—Renmin University professor unpacks the connotations of "social work" in the Chinese context.

Social work is often seen outside China as a professional discipline focused on helping individuals navigate life’s challenges and integrate into society. However, social work in the Chinese political context is different, according to the power that defines it. Even the term “society” itself carries layered connotations. This complexity can make political terms like “social work” in Communist Party of China (CPC) documents and the role of the CPC Central Committee’s Society Work Department anything but confusing for international audiences.

李迎生 Li Yingsheng, Professor at the School of Sociology & Research Centre for Sociological Theory and Methods, Renmin University of China, as well as Vice President of the China Social Work Academy, last week offered a comparative analysis of the Chinese political concept of “社会工作” (social work) and its Western counterpart. He examines differences in service providers, target groups, priorities, and, in particular, the Chinese definition of “society” as outside the Party and state apparatus, public institutions, and state-owned enterprises.

Li laboriously tried to make some good points that people with knowledge and experience of Chinese politics and policy may be able to understand, for example by shedding light on the structure, policies, and existing institutions of social work in Chinese politics and policy.

Overall, however, since the article is intended for a highly educated, unusually interested, and politically minded Chinese audience, it may help the international audience a bit, but perhaps not very much. Still, it’s better than nothing!

By the way, as a rule of thumb, the word 社会 "social", if used as an adj. in the current Chinese context, should usually mean “non-governmental.”

Thearticle was published on the theory page of Guangming Daily on June 13, a newspaper run by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC). It is also available on the official WeChat blog of Guangming Daily.

“社会工作”：中国语境及其自主创新价值

“Social Work”: The Chinese Context and Its Value in Independent Innovation

In his important instruction on social work, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasised that social work is a crucial component of the Party and the state’s operations. He noted that whether a good job can be done in social work is key to the Party’s long-term governance, the nation’s enduring stability, social harmony, and the well-being of the people. The Resolution of the CPC Central Committee on further deepening reform comprehensively to advance Chinese modernisation, adopted at the Third Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Committee, explicitly states that “We will improve the institutions and mechanisms for social work.”

Against the backdrop of China’s steadfast pursuit of socialist social governance with Chinese characteristics and its drive to foster high-quality social work in the new era, the question arises: how should “social work” be understood in the Chinese context? How does it correspond to Western or international conceptions of social work—i.e. as an academic discipline or a professional practice? Where does its distinctive value for independent innovation lie? Each of these issues warrants in-depth exploration.

Social work in the Chinese context: an international comparative perspective

In Western or international discourse, “社会工作” is a direct rendering of “social (社会) work (工作),” often described as “professional social work.” It employs scientific methods to help disadvantaged groups overcome life challenges and integrate more smoothly into their social environment. The concept emerged from modern Western efforts at social service to address social problems created by excessive marketisation. In this context, “social” functions as an adjective meaning “relating to society,” standing in contrast to “commercial” or “market-oriented.”

The evolution of capitalist market economies is marked by a core tension Karl Polanyi called the “double movement.” Capital accumulation and economic growth demand the broadest possible commodification of human labour, yet human existence as a social species precludes turning people wholly into commodities. From this vantage point, social work arises to redress the problems of excessive marketisation and commodification, enabling those whose basic needs go unmet in the marketplace to achieve self-reliance. Whereas physicians and psychotherapists treat physiological and psychological disorders, social workers address challenges of social adaptation.

In the Chinese context, however, the connotation of social work is far more nuanced and complex. Here, the term “社会” functions as a noun, roughly corresponding to “society” in English, as evidenced by the official translation of “Society Work” Department of the CPC Central Committee.

Although “society” as a noun can encompass everything from humanity as a whole to the smallest community, the “society” invoked in Chinese social work should not be understood so broadly. In my view, the term carries at least two dimensions. First, it denotes the societal subsystem that exists alongside the economic, political, cultural, and ecological spheres. Second, it refers to social entities outside the Party and state apparatus, public institutions, and state-owned enterprises, for example, mixed-ownership enterprises, non-public enterprises, new types of economic organisations, new types of social organisations, and new forms of employment. [Collectively termed “两企三新”—literally, “two types of enterprises and three new sectors.” Party building in these five categories is a key focus of the CPC Central Committee’s Society Work Department.]

These dimensions may also be examined at the macro, meso, and micro levels:

At the macro level, social work chiefly involves broad efforts in societal development and social governance.

At the meso level, it falls into three streams: the Party’s social work, government social work, and social work carried out by mass organisations.

In the new era, the Party’s social work centres on Party building within new types of economic organisations, new types of social organisations, and new forms of employment; it also extends to Party-led community governance, development of primary-level government authorities, and uniting and serving the people. Government social work spans education, healthcare, housing, social security, judicial rehabilitation, and rural revitalisation. Social work carried out by mass organisations covers services delivered by trade unions, the Communist Youth League organisations, women’s federations, and foundations.

At the micro level, social work serves communities, enterprises, social organisations and individuals, as well as families.

A comparison of social work concepts between China and the West reveals distinct differences in connotation and scope. These differences are primarily reflected in four aspects:

First, levels of operation. In the Chinese context, social work operates at macro, meso, and micro levels, whereas Western or international social work primarily focuses on the micro level.

Second, target groups. Chinese social work serves not only individuals, families, organisations, and communities but also various fields and social groups within the nation-state, and even extends to international domains.

Third, priorities. Chinese social work emphasises social development and governance, aiming to foster social harmony and solidarity. Meanwhile, Western or international social work concentrates on individual welfare services and micro-level interventions that help people adapt to society.

Fourth, methodologies. In China, social work involves multiple stakeholders, whereas Western social work is primarily the domain of professional social workers.

The Party’s social work embodies the core meaning and essential requirements of social work in the new era

As previously discussed, the Party’s social work primarily operates at the meso level while also bridging macro and micro levels of social work. It demonstrates strong political and mass-oriented characteristics while meeting scientific and professional standards, offering a vital lens for grasping the core meaning and essential requirements of social work in the new era.

First, the “social” sphere emerged from the vigorous development of the socialist market economy. The sweeping shift from a planned to a market economy has fostered a burgeoning non-state sector. Structural changes in society have enlarged the scope for community self-governance, steadily widening the arenas in which citizens manage public affairs on their own initiative. The rise of a digital and intelligent society has produced a growing array of new types of economic organisations, new types of social organisations, and new forms of employment, making social integration and cohesion a fresh challenge for state governance.

These new changes, circumstances, and challenges demand new methods and measures for upholding Party leadership and fostering innovative social governance. In response, the CPC Central Committee has strengthened top-level design and strategic planning, opened additional channels to connect with the people through targeted social work, and promoted their orderly participation in state governance. Such measures broaden and solidify the social foundation for the Party’s long-term rule while enhancing the effectiveness of national governance.

Second, primary-level communities are the main stage for the Party’s social work. Their importance for social development and governance appears in two respects. First, as nodes linking countless households, they are both everyday living spaces and front lines where social tensions surface. How well they are governed directly affects the people’s sense of fulfilment, happiness, and security, and therefore bears on the Party’s long-term rule and national stability. Second, the Party advances primary-level social development and governance chiefly by building a community of social governance that weaves together governmental, social, market, and individual resources, enabling close coordination and interaction among multiple actors.

Primary-level communities serve as key platforms for new types of economic organisations, new types of social organisations, and new forms of employment. They are the Party’s primary venues for gathering public opinion and for uniting and serving the people. They also provide a vital platform for coordinating communities, social organisations, social workers, community volunteers, and charitable resources.

Third, Party building and mass work are the primary methods and approaches of the Party’s social work. Party building provides the organisational bedrock for mass work, while mass work is a core component of Party building. The Party’s social work grows chiefly out of mass work, embedding Party leadership in primary-level governance and day-to-day tasks such as serving the “two types of enterprises and three new sectors.” Using the Party’s guidance, these efforts reorganise society, bolster cohesion and centripetal force, and build a solid social foundation for consolidating the Party’s governing base and modernising national governance.

China now has more than 84 million people in “new forms of employment,” and hundreds of millions working in new types of economic and social organisations that span every sector and stratum of production and daily life. Strengthening Party building and mass work in these emerging areas has become the foremost task of the Party’s social work in the new era.

The value of independent innovation in social work within the Chinese context

Accelerating the development of philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics essentially requires constructing China’s independent knowledge system. Social work within the Chinese context differs significantly from its Western or international counterparts, highlighting the urgent need to move beyond the confines of Western theory and practice. China’s own political, cultural, and social realities, as well as its governance needs, must ground the creation of foundational theories, practical frameworks, and institutional mechanisms for social work with Chinese characteristics.

Develop foundational theories tailored to China’s social work context.

First, uphold Marxism as the guiding ideology. Since the 18th CPC National Congress, General Secretary Xi Jinping has delivered a series of important remarks on social work, social development, and social governance. These remarks set out, in depth, the basic principles, value orientations, development pathways, priority tasks, and institutional safeguards of social work, forming the theoretical bedrock of social work in the new era.

Second, stay grounded in the practical needs of Chinese-style modernisation. In Western or international settings, social work rests on individualistic values and stresses a “person-in-environment” perspective, in which the individual adapts to society. Chinese social work, by contrast, highlights the reciprocal construction of people and their surroundings. It not only emphasises stimulating the inherent potential of individuals as service recipients to adapt to their surroundings, but also explores how the environment shapes individuals and how the activation of individual potential and endogenous motivation can, in turn, influence the environment. This perspective goes beyond the micro-level focus of Western or international practice and establishes the reciprocal construction of individual and society, state and society, and Party and society as the foundational theories of Chinese social work.

Third, be guided by socialist core values to foster the creative transformation and innovative development of fine traditional Chinese culture. Concepts like “a social governance system based on collaboration, participation, and shared benefits,” “a community of social governance,” and “common prosperity” should be incorporated into social work, setting social work objectives apart from Western individualism. By drawing on traditional Chinese cultural values such as “benevolence,” “harmony,” “universal love,” and “order,” a localised ethical framework for social work should be developed, characterised by principles like “the unity of family and nation” and “the collective first.”

Develop practice systems tailored to China’s social work context.

First, establish a methodological framework suited to China’s social work practice. Explore intervention methods and strategies that align with Chinese social relations, going beyond the Western/international model of “case-group-community-social administration.” For example, draw on the Party’s social work practices, such as the mass line methodology, Party-building strategies, and the Fengqiao model for promoting community-level governance in the new era to develop social work methods that are distinctly Chinese.

Second, create social work intervention models that address the governance needs of the new era. The “Party-building + social work” collaborative governance model represents an innovation in primary-level governance. By integrating social work within primary-level Party organisations (e.g., Party-mass service centres, integrated family service centres, community centres), this model establishes a service mechanism characterised by government leadership, social work support, public sector coordination, and mass participation, which has been widely adopted across the country. Focusing on social work’s key priorities—new types of economic organisations, new types of social organisations, and new forms of employment, Party-led community governance, primary-level government authorities development, and uniting and serving the people—it is also essential to further explore suitable social work intervention models, such as the “Party building + social work + platform companies + community + consumers” service model for those in new forms of employment like food delivery workers.

Third, keep pace with the advancement of digital and intelligent technologies and establish innovative social service models, such as “internet + social work,” metaverse social work, and smart social work. This will drive the intelligent, specialised, refined, and efficient transformation of social governance.

Promote mutual learning between Chinese and international social work.

Developing China’s autonomous theoretical and practical systems of social work, grounded in national conditions, traditional culture, and developmental needs, while emphasising its political, governance-oriented, multi-level, social, and mass-oriented characteristics, is crucial for advancing high-quality social work development. At the same time, innovating and enhancing Chinese social work requires integrating beneficial international experiences.

As General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out, “Highlighting national characteristics does not mean rejecting academic achievements from other countries. Rather, it means refining this distinctiveness to align with the development needs of contemporary China and the world through comparison, analysis, critique, absorption, and enhancement.” “Foreign theories, concepts, discourses, and methods must be carefully analysed and evaluated, adopting what is applicable and avoiding the rigid application of unsuitable elements.”

Chinese social work, grounded in efforts in social development and governance in the new era, draws from and refines traditional resources and practical experiences in social development and governance, while absorbing and drawing on theories and practices from Western or international contexts that reflect universal principles of human social development and governance. This is bound to lead to innovations in social work theory and practice, contributing China’s solutions to social development and governance for developing countries.

Liu Jianjun: the false faith in social sciences