The Well-being of Five-Guarantee Households (FGs) in Rural China
Xiaolin Wu
Zhou Enlai School of Government, Nankai University, China,
Jinmin Wang
Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University, UK
Abstract
The deepening economic reform in China has changed the institutional foundations of rural social welfare
system. The Chinese government has been making great efforts to establish a new rural welfare system to
protect the vulnerable groups. This paper has examined the well-being of rural FGs in the less developed
provinces of China. With a comparative analysis of the well-being of rural FGs in Hunan province, Central
China and Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, South-western China, it is argued that the well-being of
FGs could not be guaranteed in rural China if they only depend on the public services offered by the
government. FGs village can be a useful social care model to improve the well-being of rural FGs in the
less developed regions of China.
Keywords: FGs, well-being, rural China
Corresponding author: Jinmin Wang, Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University,
Nottingham, NG1 4BU, UK. Email: [email protected]
1
Introduction
The deepening economic reform in China has changed the institutional foundations of rural social welfare
system (Benjamin, Brandt and Rozelle 1998; Chan, Ngok and Phillips, 2008). The Chinese government
has been making great efforts to establish a new rural welfare system to protect the vulnerable groups. The
FGs are undoubtedly some of the most vulnerable citizens in rural China. Because of the vast regional
differences and imbalances, the central government has adopted a pragmatic approach to undertake social
welfare reform. The local governments in different provinces are allowed to make experiments with
different program designs (Zhang and Sun, 2011).
China started to implement a rural welfare system after the People‟s Republic of China was founded in
1949. In 1956, the First National People‟s Congress (NPC) published a directive entitled Exemplary
Charter for Advanced Rural Cooperatives, in which the rural communes were required to provide „Five
Guarantees‟ including food, clothing, fuel, education and burial expenses to the farmers in extreme need,
who had absolutely no responsible kin to care for them or who were too old, too young or too sick to
support themselves (Office of the State Committee on Agriculture ,1981). Since then, the vulnerable group
has been called 'Five-Guarantee Households'（FGs）. The central government prioritises providing FGs
with a base line of public services. After China started to undertake economic reform in 1978, the local
government was required to take main responsibility for the well-being of rural FGs. However, some local
governments in the middle and western provinces of China did not have enough funding to provide
adequate social care for rural FGs due to the fiscal difficulties (Zhang and Sun, 2011). For example, 2.74
million out of 5.71 million FGs in rural China were not supported by the government scheme in 2003 (Wu
and Zhao, 2007). In 2005, each dispersed FG in Zhuzhou County and Xiangtan County of Hunan Province
received RMB 400 and RMB 480 from the local government respectively, which only amounted to about
10 percent of average net income of local farmers (Wu and Peng, 2007). Even in wealthy coastal
provinces, the local government can not meet the psychological needs of rural FGs (Wu, 2010).
This paper has examined the well-being of rural FGs in the less developed provinces of China. The main
research questions are how the Chinese government can deliver better public services to the rural FGs in
the less developed provinces and how the social actors can be motivated to work with the local
government to help improve the well-being of rural FGs? With a comparative analysis of the well-being
of rural FGs in Hunan province, Central China and Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, South-western
China, it is argued that the well-being of FGs could not be guaranteed in rural China if they only depend
on the public services offered by the local government. FGs village can be a useful social care model to
improve the well-being of rural FGs in the less developed regions of China.
The paper is organized as follows. Section two reviews the evolution of FG policy in rural China and
academic disputes on how to deliver effective public services to rural FGs. Section three is research
methods. Section four makes a comparative analysis of the well-being of rural FGs in Hunan Province,
2
Central China and Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, South-western China. The final section is the
conclusion and future research.
The Evolution of FG Policy in rural China
With the founding of the People‟s Republic of China in 1949, the FGs were given priority to enjoy social
welfare. In 1953, the Central Government of China formulated a policy of Food and Money Distribution
for Famine Relief in Rural Areas, which gave the destitute elders the first priority of social support. The
first constitution of the People‟s Republic of China in 1954 had a provision that any Chinese labourer who
loses their ability to work due to old age or illness has the legal right to material assistance, which provides
a legal foundation for FG system. The National Agricultural Development Programme and Exemplary
Charter for Advanced Rural Cooperatives passed by the National People's Congress in 1956, required
agricultural cooperatives to guarantee the needy members, including FGs, with adequate welfare for their
daily lives including food, clothing, fuel, education and burial expenses. These provisions were the origin
of FG policy in rural China (National People's Congress,1991).
Afterwards, the FG policy went through four main transformations (Table 1). In the first phase from
1956 to 1977, the rural cooperatives and communes were responsible for the well-being of FGs under the
direction of the state. The central government stipulated that the members of cooperatives who were
vulnerable could use communal welfare funds to maintain their basic livelihood. Two percent of the net
income of the cooperatives was set aside for cultural and welfare affairs. In December 1958, the Sixth
Session of the Eighth Chinese Communist Party Conference passed Resolutions on Some Questions
Concerning the People’s Communes, which encouraged the construction of nursing homes for the FGs.
Under the policy, the cooperatives would pay living expenses for the FGs. Nonetheless, the central
government only formulated a legal framework for supporting the FGs. As rural collectives varied widely
in different parts of China, there was no uniform standard for the implementation of FG policy (Hong and
Fang, 2004). If the cooperative could not distribute free grain, they usually made alternative arrangements
of subsidized work-points. In some poor communities, only food was guaranteed while the other four
guarantees were ignored (Davis-Friedmann, 1978).
In the second phase from 1978 to 2001, the townships were responsible for the well-being of FGs
under the direction of the state. After the economic reform started in 1978, it became very difficult for the
townships to collect communal welfare funds to implement the FGs policy because collective communes
were disintegrated in rural China. Therefore, FGs had to rely on the limited help offered by some local
villagers. The Ban on Arbitrary Charges and Suppression of the Levy on Farmers and Guidelines on Rural
Five-Guarantee Support Schemes were introduced in 1985 and in 1994 respectively, requiring the
townships to guarantee the basic livelihood of FGs by establishing new communal welfare funds. The new
communal welfare funds were financed through levying rural residents and township and village
enterprises (TVEs). However, some local governments diverted the welfare funds for FGs to other projects
(Wu and Wan, 2009).
3
In the third phase from 2002 to 2005, the local government supported the FGs with the funds from the
agricultural tax. China undertook the tax reform to reduce financial burdens of farmers at the beginning of
2000. The central government abolished almost all the charges, fees, and levies on farmers, except for
agricultural tax, which increased to 7 percent (Yep, 2004). However, most of the local governments
charged the farmers a surtax of 20 percent. Therefore, farmers had to pay 8.4 percent, with 1.4 percent
earmarked for village administration and social welfare. As a result, the well-being of FGs actually
deteriorated in some areas, because some counties were too poor to take care of FGs without receiving the
subsidy from the central government. At the end of 2002, only 52 percent of FGs (about 3 million people)
obtained the welfare benefits. Meanwhile, the subsidy for FGs from the central government decreased.
FGs who lived in the nursing homes received only a yearly subsidy of RMB 1,691 on average in 2002
compared with RMB 2,173 in 2001. Those FGs who lived in their own homes received RMB 958 in 2002
on average compared with RMB 1,262 in 2001. In some provinces, only the burial of destitute elders was
guaranteed (Gong, 2004). In 2004, the Ministry of Civil Affairs (MCA), the Ministry of Finance and the
National Development and Reform Commission, issued The Circulars on Improving the Five-Guarantee
Support Provisions. The circulars required that all villages should allocate some funding for the FGs from
extra agricultural tax income after the normal expenditure of the village community. The county and
township governments should subsidize the villages with financial difficulty (Yang and Zhang, 2004).
Since 2006, the State Council adopted New Guidelines on Rural Five-Guarantee Support Provisions,
explicitly stating that the local governments should include FGs within their fiscal budget for the first time.
The central government would subsidise the local governments that face financial difficulty in
implementing the FGs policy. In some wealthy provinces such as Shanghai City, Zhejiang province, East
China and Guangdong province, South China, the FGs pension has increased by 60-70% since 2006. But it
is still hard for some provinces in the middle and western part of China to do so due to the reduction of
fiscal income after abolishing agricultural tax in January 2006 (Huang and Wu, 2010). In addition, most of
FGs in China still lack psychological support (Wu and Peng, 2007).
Currently there are two opposing viewpoints on how to establish an effective social care system for
rural FGs. One is to move the elderly FGs from dispersed villages to collective nursing homes so as to
cater to their material and spiritual needs (Hong, 2004). The collective support of existing nursing homes
would improve the living conditions of the vulnerable group (Wang, 2004). However, there are concerns
that the limited resources for FGs would be wasted with high administrative costs (Gong, 2004). Wu and
Peng (2007) argued that the choices of FGs should be taken into account because many FGs prefer living
in their own homes, where they have spent most of their lives. In addition, Gu and Jiang (2004) suggested
that responsibility should be further clarified between the central government and the local government.
4
Table 1 The Evolution of FGs Policy in China
Periods
1956-1978
1978-2001
2002-2005
FGs Policy
Exemplary Charter
for Advanced Rural
Cooperatives
Guidelines on Rural
Five-Guarantee
Support Schemes
(1994)
The Circulars on
Improving the FiveGuarantee Support
Provisions (2004)
New Guidelines on
Rural FiveGuarantee Support
Provisions (2006)
2006 onwards
Adjusted Fiveguarantee
Standards for 31
Provinces (2007)
Financing
Communal
welfare funds
Tax from
rural
residents as
well as from
township and
village
enterprises
1.4 per cent
of extra
agriculture
tax levied by
counties.
Funding for
FGs were
shifted to the
provincial
and county
level fiscal
budget.
Fiscal
income from
the local
government
and subsidies
for the poor
regions from
the central
government
Policy Goals
Guarantee
Clothing, Food,
Housing,
Education(for
orphans) ,and a
Proper Burial
of FGs
The townships
should
guarantee the
basic livelihood
of FGs by
establishing
new communal
welfare funds .
All villages
should allocate
some funding
for the FGs
from extra
agricultural tax
income after
the normal
expenditure of
the village
community.
The living
standards of
FGs should be
higher than
average local
villagers,
keeping in pace
with the
increase in
local living
standard.
Factors
Affecting the
Well-being
of FGs
Well-being of
FGs
Low
economic
level; Leftist
line; the
Cultural
Revolution
The basic livelihood
of FGs was
guaranteed.
Financial
crisis of
townships
The well-being of
FGs improved, but
some local
governments
diverted the welfare
funds for FGs to
other projects.
Tax reform in
2004
The well-being of
FGs deteriorated in
some areas because
the FGs subsidy
from the central
government
decreased.
Abolition of
agricultural
tax in 2006
The number of FGs
covered and the
amount of coverage
increased, but most
of FGs still lack
psychological
support.
Sources: Compiled by the authors.
The central government should provide the funds while the local governments deliver the public
service. Hong and Fang (2004) advised that both the central and local government should adjust the
support systems respectively to improve the welfare of FGs with rapid economic growth in China. Zhang
and Gu (2004) recommended that China need an effective supervision and evaluating system to maintain
the life quality of FGs. Gong (2004) also argued that the life of FGs would not improve until an effective
legal system regarding the welfare of FGs was formulated and implemented. Lowry (2009) suggested that
micro-level research is needed to complement macro-level studies of well-being of the elderly FGs in rural
5
China. The research fills the gap of studying the material, psychological, spiritual and security needs of
rural FGs in the less developed parts of China on a micro-level basis.
Research Methods
Both qualitative and quantitative research methods were used to collect the primary data. Denzin (1970)
argues that using different methods will add to greater validity and reliability than a single method
approach. This approach has been used to help overcome any potential bias or sterility which Collis and
Hussey (2003) argues may be evident in a single method approach.
The main research methods of the paper are semi-structured interviews and structured questionnaires.
The questions asked within the questionnaires were questions which could easily have been asked as open
ended questions within an interview. The questions cover living standards and social needs of FGs in
terms of clothing, food, housing, healthcare, adequate burial, social life, psychological needs, life
expectations and their attitudes towards the public services delivered by the local government. The field
notes were taken in the survey.
The fieldwork took place in Hunan province and Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, which are both
less developed provinces with a large number of rural FGs. There were 520,000 FGs in Hunan province
(Health Department of Hunan Province, 2010) and 362,000 FGs at Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region
in 2009 (Ding, 2011). 281 structured questionnaires with open-ended questions were collected from 200
villages at Wangcheng County, Xiangtan County and Zhuzhou County in Hunan province in July and
August 2009. The sample FGs, who were over 60 years old, were chosen randomly from the nursing
homes and villages in these four representative counties. Among the 281 FGs, 221 were male and 60 were
female. The age range of 86 FGs were 60-65; 67 FGs were 66-70; 65 FGs were 71-75 and 63 FGs were
more than 76. 27 structured questionnaires with open-ended questions were collected at three villages of
Gongcheng Yao Autonomous County, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region in September 2009. Among
the 27 FGs, 13 were male and 14 were female. The age range of 3 FGs were 60-65; 14 FGs were 66-70; 6
FGs were 71-75 and 4 FGs were more than 76.
To analyse the qualitative data collected in the interviews, a thematic approach was taken. Thematic
analysis, according to Bryman and Bell (2007), allows the researcher to search for themes in field notes.
By conducting the interviews in a semi-structured way before distributing the survey, it allowed for further
investigation to any themes suggested in the interviews.
A Comparative Analysis of the Well-being of FGs in Rural China
The well-being of FGs in Hunan Province, Central China
6
The survey indicates that the public services were not delivered as expected in Hunan province (Table
3). In terms of clothing, over 46.98% of respondents in the survey had not bought any new clothes in the
previous five years. 23.13% of FGs did not have enough cotton-padded clothes to keep warm in winter.
The basic demand for food was satisfied, but some suffered from malnutrition. Since the food sources of
nursing homes mainly relied on village levies, the situation worsened with the abolition of agricultural tax
in Hunan Province in 2005. About 7.27% of FGs in the survey got less than their demands. As for the
dwelling place, all the FGs in the survey had their shelters, but the condition of most houses was poor and
some even leaked on rainy days for those dispersed FGs. The FGs living in nursing homes enjoyed the
best accommodation and each was allocated a single room. However, 12.73% of dispersed FGs lived in
the abandoned houses. Most of FGs did not have enough money to cure their diseases in Hunan province.
The ratio reached 86.67% for dispersed FGs. 65.52% of the FGs living in nursing homes had to bear their
own medical costs. As far as burial matters are concerned, all the FGs had to deal with their own funerals
in their lifetime. FGs living in nursing homes were generally asked to pay RMB 500-800 for their funerals.
In rural China, the most influential social organisation is village committee elected by all villagers who
can determine the allocation of resources and social support within the village (Wu, 2010). However, very
few FGs care about their rights to vote in local elections. The survey indicates that the ratio of FGs who
had never participated in village elections was 27.76%. Those who occasionally participated in the
election reached 40.35%, and those who participated in the entire election process was only 26.33%. The
low participation ratio of vulnerable FGs in the local election definitely weakened the public decisionmaking process.
Table 2 The well-being of FGs in Hunan Province in the Survey
Five guarantees
Clothing
The well-being of FGs
23.13% of FGs did not have enough warm clothes
Food
7.27% of FGs got less than their demands.
Housing
12.73% of FGs did not have regular shelter
Medical affairs
86.67% FGs bore their own medical costs
Burial matters
All the FGs had to prepare their own funerals during their
lifetimes
Sources: Compiled by the authors
There was not any social life supported by the local government partly because it was not specified in
The New Regulations for Rural Five-Guarantees Households. The local government officials usually
attached more importance to large-scale infrastructure or other economic projects rather than social care
programmes because the promotion of local government officials were mainly based on their performance
in terms of local GDP growth instead of the improvement of social welfare. Therefore, only 15.15% of
FGs remarked that their head of village had visited their house every two months.
7
The survey also indicates that the FGs had a thin network of relationships in Hunan province. About
58.18% of dispersed FGs were extremely isolated without any friends. Only 34.54% of FGs often chatted
with other old villagers. There was not much social assistance for FGs from their neighbours or other
villagers in the research sites except for some old clothes. In addition, there was no charity and voluntary
organization for FGs.
The well-being of FGs in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, South-western China
Generally speaking, the successful implementation of social welfare policy is subject to the fiscal income
of local governments in China (Yang, 2005). However, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, one of the
less developed provinces located in south-western China, has created a feasible social care model for rural
FGs by making full use of social resources. Since 2003, 5,589 FGs villages have been established to
accommodate more than 80,000 FGs. The social care model followed the guideline of “supported by the
state, directed by the local government, managed by village committee, built within the local villagers,
residing collectively and undertaking self-management” (Chen, 2007).
Gongcheng Yao Autonomous County had 2,405 FGs in total with six nursing homes and forty-six
FGs villages in 2009. The construction of every FGs village was granted RMB50,000 by the provincial
government of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, and the rest were collected by the village
committees and the villagers (Figure 1). Specifically, the provincial and local government provided the
subsidy for construction. The village committee donated the necessary land. The villagers contributed
some voluntary labour and construction materials. The society made some donations. FGs proceeded with
self-management .
The interviews with FGs in Shangjian village, Tongle village and Yuewan village has shown that the
living standards of most FGs had improved. Except for insufficient medical treatment, they had adequate
supply of clothes, bedding, food and housing. All the respondents were satisfied with their current living
conditions. The funerals were treated properly.
The “FGs village”is operated as follows. Firstly, FGs‟ villages helped the elderly people maintain
close social ties and develop new relationships like a big family. Deci and Ryan(2001, p. 1254) indicate
that “of all factors that influence happiness, relatedness is at or very near the top of the list. Furthermore,
loneliness is consistently negatively related to positive effects and life satisfaction”. Compared with other
FGs living alone in dispersed places, the FG village enriched the scope of their social interactions and
strengthened their personal social network. 88.89% respondents had more interactions with other FGs in
the same village. FGs living in the village also developed mutual assistance networks and enriched their
social life. They could not only develop companionship in FGs villages, but also go back to visit their
relatives and friends in their previous villages because FGs villages were not far from their homes. Some
old people could continue to do some farming, which had positive impacts on good health, life satisfaction
and self-esteem of the FGs.
8
Secondly, this model helped the local government deliver better public services at a lower cost. The
living standards of FGs improved considerably after living in the FGs village. The local government
employed village administrators for cooking, cleaning and organizes FGs to plant vegetables, raise
chickens or ducks. The local government need only bear the cost of RMB 5,000 per FG on average for the
construction of one special FG village, which cost only one fourth of a nursing home.
Thirdly, this model was conducive to mobilize social resources to participate in the care about rural
FGs. In China, all the land belongs to the state, so FGs village was owned by the village committee. The
local villagers not only donated construction materials such as wood and tiles, but also helped to build the
FGs village voluntarily. The construction of FGs village increased the efficiency of making use of public
welfare resources in rural China. In addition, the FGs village had also contributed to the democratic
practices in rural China because the head of each FG village was elected by the FGs themselves.
In summary, the elderly people who are residing at „FG village‟ in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous
Region enjoy a better material, social and political life than those in Hunan province. The public services
for rural FGs were delivered more effectively by forming sound partnerships between rural FGs, the
village committee and the government at various levels (Figure 1).
Figure 1 The social care model of ‘FGs village’ at Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Southwestern China
Constructing materials and
labour by villagers, land
donated by village committee
Managed by FGs themselves,
forming new close ties and
maintaining original
networks
FGs Village
Financial support and daily
care by the local government
Sources: Compiled by the authors.
9
Conclusions
The FGs are undoubtedly some of the most vulnerable citizens in rural China. The well-being of this
vulnerable group indicates fairness and justice of the whole society. The comparative analysis of the wellbeing of rural FGs in the two less developed provinces has shown that it is important for the local
government to make full use of social resources to improve the well-being of FGs in rural China. The „FGs
village‟ in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region offers a good social care model to improve the social
well-being of rural FGs for other less developed provinces in China because it not only meets the level of
local economic development, but also take into account of life habits of rural FGs in the less developed
regions. It is hard for the local government to establish the nursing homes to accommodate all the FGs in
the less developed regions with the fiscal income.
However, we have to realize that the social care model of rural FGs village can be improved further
when it is spread to other less developed regions. Firstly, more opportunities need to be created for the
elderly FGs to take part in the social activities and enrich their lives. Secondly, it is critical for the local
government to guarantee the funding of constructing FGs village and explore the feasibility of treating the
projects as rural infrastructure. Thirdly, it is meaningful to explore if the FGs village can be included in the
rural social aid system.
10
References
Benjamin D., Brandt L. and Rozelle S. (1998) Aging, well-being, and social security in rural North China. Population and
Development, 26, 89-117.
Bryman A., and Bell E. (2007) Business Research Methods. 2nd Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chan C. K., Ngok K. L. and Phillips D. (2008) Social Policy in China: Development and Well-being. Bristol: The Policy
Press.
Cheng G.(2008) Problems and reflections for Five-Guarantees in Anhui province, Statistical Education,1:42-44.
Chen W. (2007) Preliminary discussions on constructions of Five-guarantees‟ village in Guangxi, The Border Economy and
Culture,4,103-104.
Collis J. and Hussey R. (2003) Business Research: A practical guide for undergraduate and post graduate students. 2nd
Edition. Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan.
Davis-Friedmann, D. (1978) Welfare practices in rural China. World Development, 6, 609-619.
Denzin, N. (1970) The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods. Chicago: Aldine.
Deci R. M. and Ryan E. L. (2001) On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic
Well-being, Annual Review of Psychology, 52, pp. 141-66.
Ding K. J. (2009) A new model of rural social welfare: „FGs Village‟ of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. [online]
Available: http://www.chinainnovations.org/Item/28712.aspx [Accessed 2 June 2011]
Gong S. (2004) Institutional problems and countermeasures for Five-guarantees pension, Jiangsu Social Sciences, 3, 231236.
Gong W. B. (2005) A social security revolution: Construction of 'Five Guarantees Villages' in Guangxi and its lessons for
public administration, Journal of China National School of Administration, 5, 23-26.
Gu, X. and Jiang, W. (2003) Reform of the system constraints in Five-guarantee work, Social Welfare, 12, 8-16
Guan X. P.(2006) A study on the goal, principle and model selection of China's rural social aid system, Journal of East
China Normal University(Social Science), 6，29-35
Health Department of Hunan Province (2010) 10 projects that benefit the health reform outcomes released, Changsha
Evening News, 31st Dec, P 1.
Hong D. Y. and Fang L. J. (2004) Problems and solutions: A research on rural Five-guarantees work in post-collective era,
Journal of Renmin University of China,1,1-7.
Huang J. H. and Wu J.M. (2010) Operation of the Five Guarantees Supporting in rural areas after the tax reform and its
problems, Journal of Jiangxi Normal University( Social Sciences),3, 114-121.
Lowry D. S. (2009) Aging, social change, and elderly well-being in rural China: Insights from mixed-methods village
research, Population Studies Centre Research Report 09-691, University of Michigan.
Jing T.K. (2004) Lowest fairness and soft coordination of social security, Sociology Studies, 6, 34-42
National People‟s Congress(1991) Compilation of Literature of National People's Congress of the P.R.C. Beijing: China
Democracy and Legal System Press.
Office of the State Committee on Agriculture (ed.) (1981) Compilation of Important Documents of Collectivization
Agriculture (1949-1957) (the 1st volume). Beijing: Central Party School Edition Association.
Wu X. (2009) Research on the social relief for of elderly vulnerable groups in ancient China: An analysis on the relationship
between state and citizens, Journal of Macao Polytechnic Institute, 3,1-16.
Wu X. and Peng Z.(2007) A review of the researches on „Five-Guarantees‟, Market and Population Analysis, 2, 77-80.
Wu X. and Zhao Z. (2007) Social protection to Five-guarantees in a harmonious society, China Population Resources and
Envirnment,5,138-142.
Wu X. and Wan G. (2009) A research on the social security policy for the „Five-Guarantees‟ and its practice since the
founding of New China, Northwest Population, 5,51-55.
Wu X. and Zuo G.(2009) Five-guarantees‟ right for living in countryside and their moral defence, Morality and Civilization,
1,108-112.
Wu X.(2010) The current policy and living conditions for „Five-guarantees‟ in China, Population and Development,3:81-86
Yang F.(2005) On China's governmental responsibility for social security, Social Security System,1,40-45
Yang T. and Zhang S. F. (2004) Problems and solutions of current Five-guarantee system in China's rural Areas, Jiangsu
Social Sciences, 3, 217-223.
Yep R.(2004) Can “Tax-for-Fee” reform reduce rural tension in China? The process, progress and limitations, The China
Quarterly , 177: 42-70.
Zhang X.B. and Sun L.X. (2011) Social security system in rural China: An overview. [online] Available:
http://www.catsei.org/upload/WP/WP3/18-D19-Rural_Social_Security_System.pdf [Accessed 2 June 2011]
11