华人社会福利发展新思维:海峡两岸暨港澳视野下之“中国社会工作2.0”

New Thinking in Developing Social Welfare for Ethnic Chinese:A Cross-Strait Perspective on "Chinese Social Work 2.0"

本文从海峡两岸暨港澳的角度反思"中国社会工作2.0"这一话题,为探讨华人社会福利发展提供一个新的思路。首先将中国大陆专业社会工作现状、需求及进一步提升的必要性置于历史的脉络和比较的视野中加以分析,从建国头三十年不复存在到十一届三中全会后社会科学的恢复,之后社会工作重建三十多年历史却只有"十年"(2006-2016)辉煌,再到中共十九大提出社会主要矛盾已经转化。这些从总体公共政策(GPP)转变的高度作出了诠释,即:(1)求"平衡",就不能够继续奉行"GDP主义","经济国家"正退出历史舞台而"后经济国家"的时代已经来临;(2)求"充分",就仍要坚持以经济建设为基础,而不照搬"福利国家"公共政策模式。另一方面,港台社会工作界在大陆社会工作重建之初所做的贡献,近年来"两岸四地"日益密切的互动,以及国际交流的日益频繁,使得华人社会福利发展在大中华区(GreaterChina)逐步呈现一种"趋同",并在制度设计和专业道路上共同面对本土化与国际化、经济国家与福利国家等关系问题。就大陆的立场来说,新时代新思维要求所谓"中国特色"不再仅限于大陆特色,而这正是"中国社会工作2.0"的一个重要含义,即大陆社会工作无法孤立存在和发展,唯有海峡两岸暨港澳的视野和理解,才是华人社会福利发展新思维的标志。

This article reflects on the idea of ＂Chinese social work 2.0＂ from a cross-Strait perspective including Hong Kong and Macao in order to provide a new way of thinking for the development of social welfare for ethnic Chinese. The situation, issues, and needs of mainland Chinese social work for further advancement are reviewed in a historical and comparative perspective. So-called ~10 years of Chinese social work （2006-2016）＂ vs. a 30-year history of rebuilding social work in China's Mainland are explained with a ~Chinese GPP （general public policy） in transition＂ theory.This helps to deal with a seeming downturn of Chinese social work with various pitfalls and to understand the major decisions of the 19th CCP Congress with a historical backdrop and theoretical rationale. That is, （1） seeking ＂balance＂ means that China is formally parting with its ＂economic state＂ GPP which has been actually quitting historical stages since the turn of the 21st century; （2） seeking ＂sufficiency＂ means that China will stick to economic construction as the basis of its public policy rather than following a welfare state GPR Contributions of social work scholarship in Hong Kong and Taiwan to the rebuilding of professional social work in the mainland are reviewed. Interchanges among both sides of the Taiwan Strait, Hong Kong and Macao as well as international exchange are making social welfare for ethnic Chinese in Greater China ＂converge＂ to some extent. They face similar issues of internationalization vs. localization as well as ＂economic state＂ vs. ＂welfare state＂ in the design of welfare systems and professionalization of social work. From the viewpoint of the mainland, a new way of thinking in the new era will require so-called ＂Chinese characteristics＂ to take into consideration more than just the experience of the mainland. And this is one of the key meanings of ＂Chinese social work 2.0＂ , that is, professional social work in the mainland cannot exist and develop in isolation. A broader view and understanding to include both sides of the Taiwan Strait, Hong Kong and Macao is a key indicator of new thinking in developing social welfare for ethnic Chinese.