The Challenges of Implementing Collaborative Governance in Hong Kong: Case Study of a Low-Income Family Community

  • Helen K. Liu
  • Bin Chen
Part of the Governing China in the 21st Century book series (GC21)


The delivery of social services to low-income families that may be struggling with a variety of challenges often requires a high level of coordination from service providers in different fields. In Hong Kong, in particular, a series of policies and centers aimed at fostering integrative approaches have been established in order to enhance collaboration among service providers at the community level. Some of these include Integrated Children and Youth Services, Integrated Home Care Services, Integrative Family Service Centres (IFSCs), and Integrated Community Centres for Mental Wellness. However, families still find themselves having difficulties in muddling through the system in order to get their problems solved, and service providers find themselves facing unrealistic demands and struggling between managing caseloads and coordinating with different community actors.


Social Service Colonial Government District Council Social Service Provider Collaborative Governance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abbott, Andrew. 1995. “Things of Boundaries.” Social Research 62 (4): 857–882.Google Scholar
  2. Agranoff, Robert and Michael McGuire. 1998. “Multinetwork Management: Collaboration and the Hollow State in Local Economic Policy.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 8 (1): 67–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Belilios Public School. 2012. “Belilios Public School 2011–2012.” Accessed March 15, 2013.
  4. Centre for Civil Society and Governance. 2010. Serving Alone: The Social Service Sector in Hong Kong: Annual Report on the Civil Society in Hong Kong 2009. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  5. Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. and Graebner Melissa E. 2007. “Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and Challenges.” Academy of Management Journal 50 (1): 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., and Balogh, S. 2012. “An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 22 (1): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hayes, James. 1996. Friends and Teachers: Hong Kong and It People, 1953–87. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Kallis, Giorgos, Michael Kiparsky, and Richard Norgaard. 2009. “Collaborative Governance and Adaptive Management: Lessons from California’s CALFED Water Program.” Environmental Science & Policy 12 (6): 631–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kettl, Donald F. 2006. “Managing Boundaries in American Administration: The Collaboration Imperative.” Public Administration Review 66 (s1): 10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lee, Eliza W. Y. and Helen K. Liu. 2012. “Factors Influencing Network Formation among Social Service Nonprofit Organizations in Hong Kong and Implications for Comparative and China Studies.” International Public Management Journal 15 (4): 454–478.Google Scholar
  11. Leung, Joe Cho Bun. 2010. “Social Capital and Community: A Review of International and Hong Kong Development.” In Social Capital in Hong Kong: Connectivities and Social Enterprises, edited by Sik Hung Ng, Stephen Yan-Leung Cheung, and Brahm Praksah, 121–149. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.Google Scholar
  12. Lipsky, Michael. 1980. Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  13. Mazmanian, Daniel A. and Paul A. Sabatier. 1983. Implementation and Public Policy. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar
  14. Provan, Keith G. and H. Brinton Milward. 1991. “Institutional-Level Norms and Organizational Involvement in a Service-Implementation Network.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 1 (4): 391–418.Google Scholar
  15. Provan, Keith G. 1995. “A Preliminary Theory of Interorganizational Network Effectiveness: A Comparative Study of Four Community Mental Health Systems.” Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (1): 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Quick, Kathryn S., and Feldman, Martha S. 2011. Boundaries and Inclusive Public Management. In Public Management Research Association Conference, Syracuse, New York. Access on August 1st 2014.
  17. Sinn, Elizabeth. 2003. Power and Charity: A Chinese Merchant Elite in Colonial Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Social Welfare Department. 2000. Social Welfare Services Lump Sum Grant Manual Edition 2. Accessed January 15, 2015. Scholar
  19. The Pentecostal Church of Hong Kong. 2012. 竹園區神召會. Accessed March 15, 2013. _itrc/flagday2012_whoarehelped.pdf. Tsang, Sandra. K. M., & Consultant Team (2010). BuildingEffectiveFamilyServices:Review on the Implementation of the Integrated Family Service Centre Service Mode. Accessed on August 1 st, 2014.–10/english/panels/ws/papers /ws0614cb2–1619-1-e.pdf.Google Scholar
  20. Tung Wah Group of Hospitals. 2012. 東華三院. Accessed March 15, 2013.
  21. Wong, Aline K. 1972. The Kaifong Associations and the Society of Hong Kong. Taipei: Orient Cultural Service.Google Scholar
  22. Wong, Aline K. 1995. The Kaifong (Neighborhood) Associations in Hong Kong. Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilm International.Google Scholar
  23. Working Party on Social Welfare Policies and Services. 1991. White Paper: Social Welfare into the 1990s and Beyond. Hong Kong: Government Printer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Yijia Jing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Helen K. Liu
  • Bin Chen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations