慈悲创新为中美之间架设相同的桥梁(双语)_中国必发bifa研讨院
关于我们--机构引见
首页
国际必发bifa快讯

慈悲创新为中美之间架设相同的桥梁(双语)


编者按

中美两国当局之间的商业战愈演愈烈,而与之构成光显比照的则是中美两国善士和社会企业家之间的协作与开展。著作人在2018年斯坦福大学慈悲百姓社会(Philanthropy and Civil Society,简称PACS)与北京的代表团停止交换。

在谈到美国和中国的百姓社会举动者怎样协助处理一些环球最紧急的题目时,著作人理解到,单方有许多的类似之处。


2018327日至28日,斯坦福PACS与乐平基金会在北京大学结合举行了第七届研讨会。这场集会由200名中国善士、非营利和社会企业向导者、先生以及学者参与,他们听取中美专家关于慈悲范畴的应战和机会。

以下内容是研讨会时期呈现的最明显的趋向

认识崛起

新型财产和慈悲法案正在推进中国新一轮的慈悲海潮。2004年的中国,亿万大亨只要屈指可数的三团体,但在2016年却猛增到了568环球团体超高净值资产超越5000万美元的人群中,中国也占到了8%。

这些新的中国的百万大亨和亿万大亨用慈悲来协助处理中国贫穷乡村教诲和生齿老龄化等社会题目。

中国在2016年经过的首项慈悲法也使慈悲救济变得愈加容易,这惹起了社会各界的少量慈悲救济,比方阿里巴巴团体结合开创人马云向中国公立医院救济了4400万美元等。

别的,我们看到来自中国富饶家庭的20多岁和30岁出头的年老人有一种激烈的责任感,他们看法到了回馈社会的紧张性,而且开端动手树立和向导家庭基金会。 

赞助拓展

美国和中国的善士盼望提供的不只仅是资金,他们在寻求时机、支付日期、运用技艺和网络支持来缩小他们财政捐助的影响力

比方,社会危害协作同伴构造(Social Venture Partners)赐与专业人士时机,让他们应用本人的专业技艺来支持非营利构造和社会企业构造。过来十年中,该构造在美国和中都城发达开展。

这种救济趋向的目标是应用更多资源去完成更大的社会代价。

 

才能建立

赞助者肯定要投资非营利和社会企业向导者的才能建立。

美国与中国非营利部分另一个类似之处在于,他们都急需资源和人才,而且这两个国度都面对着非营利构造任务职员薪水极低的应战,因而很难招到高质量的员工。

比方在美国,只要20%的资金可供构造外部运用,这意味着非营利构造和社会企业向导者无法投资才能培育,从而招致员工缺乏筹款知识、办理才能和战略计划等根本技艺。 

社企机会

关于中国企业而言,发明充溢生机的社会企业部分黑白常有潜力的。

从汗青上看,美国在非营利和营利性部分之间有着根深蒂固的界线,但由于慈悲奇迹在中国还处于抽芽阶段,因而贸易和社会必发bifa之间的界线绝对含糊,这为中国企业慈悲开展发明了宏大的时机。

近几年,中国社会企业活动不时开展,新的社会企业涌现出来,比方First response(一家向外地住民提供心肺苏醒等救生技艺的共益企业)Kiaterra(一家专注于监测和绘制环球氛围地图的首创公司)。此中,Kiaterra的数据来自他们出售给家庭运用的氛围质量监测仪。

 

协作向善

在中国,慈悲奇迹的个人主义形式正在发达开展。正如哈佛大学肯尼迪学院传授克里斯托弗·马奎斯(Christopher Marquis)在引见他的研讨时说道,慈悲奇迹的结合举动在中国继续发达开展。

美国的公家慈悲基金会通常会以团体名字定名,并完全由其控制资产的分派。但在中国,赞助者通常会与同事和冤家共享资源、协作开展。这种做法是美国善士可以向中国偕行学习的。

现实上,中国慈悲文明创立之路并非一条平整小道。慈悲救济和非营利性运动依然遭到当局的严厉监控,这无疑会让那些能够与当局态度不符合的声响自愿禁言。

参与北京集会的人们所分发的热情证明白中国在慈悲范畴的向导位置日益加强,并且有能够在两国慈悲集团之间架起一座相同桥梁,使我们一切人都能发扬潜力最大限制地推进慈悲奇迹。


原题:Philanthropy And Innovation Between China And The United States


来路:Stanford Social Innovation Review

日期:2018年4月17日




Blaring news headlines about a developing trade war between the governments of the United States and China lie in sharp contrast to the emerging partnerships developing between philanthropists and social entrepreneurs from the two countries. As I learned while on a recent delegation from Stanford Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society (PACS) to Beijing there are far more similarities than differences when it comes to how American and Chinese civil society actors are helping solve some of the world’s most pressing problems.

On March 27-28, Stanford PACS co-hosted its seventh annual conference at the Stanford Center at Peking University with the Leping Foundation—one of the largest funders of social entrepreneurs and a leader of philanthropic education in China—bringing together an audience of more than 200 Chinese philanthropists, nonprofit and social enterprise leaders, students and academics, to hear from Chinese and American experts about challenges and opportunities in the field. The following are some of the most prominent trends that emerged from our two days together:

1. New wealth and a new Chinese charity law are powering a new wave of philanthropy in China. With the number of Chinese billionaires soaring from three in 2004 to 568 in 2016, and with 8 percent of the world’s super-high-net-worth individuals (those with more than $50 million in assets), these new Chinese millionaires and billionaires are using philanthropy to try to help solve China’s social ills, such as poor rural education and an aging population. China’s first-ever charity law passed in 2016 has made philanthropic giving easier, unleashing large philanthropic gifts, such as Alibaba Group co-founder Jack Ma’s $44 million gift to public hospitals in China. In particular, many young people in their 20’s and early-30’s from wealthy Chinese families have a strong sense of the importance of giving back and are building and leading family foundations.

2. Philanthropists in both the United States and China want to give more than just money. Donors in both countries seek opportunities to enhance their financial contributions with donations of time, skills, and access to their networks. For example, Social Venture Partners—an organization that connects professionals with opportunities to use their professional skills to support nonprofits and social enterprises—has been thriving in both the United States and China over the past decade. This trend toward giving more than just money is an opportunity to harness even more resources for the greater good.

3. Funders must invest in capacity building for nonprofit and social enterprise leaders. Another common thread between the United States and China’s nonprofit sectors is that they are starved for resources and talent. Both countries face the challenge that nonprofit staff are severely underpaid, thus making it hard to recruit high-quality employees. In the United States for example, only 20 percent of funding is unrestricted, which means nonprofit and social enterprise leaders are unable to invest in building capacity and are starved for basic skills such as management training, fundraising knowledge, and strategic planning support. To combat this challenge, as Jennifer Wei, organizational effectiveness officer at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation taught in her workshop, it is critical that foundations lead the way in funding nonprofit capacity building.

4. China has an opportunity to create a vigorous social enterprise sector. Whereas historically the United States has strongly entrenched boundaries between the nonprofit and for-profit sectors, because philanthropy is still nascent in China, there is an immense opportunity to blur the lines between business and social good. As a result, there is a growing social enterprise movement in China, with a wave of new social businesses emerging, such as First Respond—a B Corporation empowering local citizens with life-saving skills like CPR—and Kiaterra, a startup focused on monitoring and mapping the world’s air using data from an air quality monitor they sell for home-use.

5. A collectivist model of philanthropy is flourishing in China. Finally, as Harvard Kennedy School visiting professor Christopher Marquis noted in presenting his research, networked models of philanthropy continue to thrive in China. Unlike in the United States where wealthy individuals often create a private foundation with their name on it and take full control over distribution of the assets, in China funders often collaborate with colleagues and friends to pool resources for good. This approach is one that US philanthropists could learn from their Chinese peers.

Indeed, the path toward creating a culture of philanthropy in China isn’t lined with roses. Philanthropic giving and nonprofit activities are still heavily monitored by the government, undoubtedly having a chilling effect on initiatives that could be perceived as misaligned with or critical of the government, such as human rights. But the passion and energy of those who participated in the Beijing conference is evidence of growing leadership in the field of philanthropy in China, and the potential for cross-border bridges between philanthropic communities so that we can all maximize the potential of our philanthropic initiatives.