Introduction
The political incorporation of immigrants, defined as engagement in civic life, access to political rights, and participation in public decision-making, has generated substantial scholarship (Bloemraad, Reference Bloemraad2006; DeSipio, Reference DeSipio2011; Ramakrishnan & Bloemraad, Reference Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad2008). While research has traditionally centered on economic and social inclusion (Portes & Rumbaut, Reference Portes and Rumbaut2014), civic participation is increasingly recognized as both a fundamental right and a pathway to long-term belonging (DeSipio, Reference DeSipio2011; Ramakrishnan & Bloemraad, Reference Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad2008). Much of this scholarship, however, has examined individual-level predictors of participation, institutional and policy regimes, or immigrant-serving organizations operating within democratic settlement societies (Baglioni et al., Reference Baglioni, Calò and Numerato2022). Considerably less is known about the civic brokerage role of meso-level organizations under semi-authoritarian conditions (Lee, Reference Lee2025; Toepler et al., Reference Toepler, Zimmer, Fröhlich and Obuch2020).
Immigrant-serving nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) occupy this intermediary position, delivering essential services while mediating between newcomers and political institutions (Chaudhary, Reference Chaudhary2018; Garkisch et al., Reference Garkisch, Heidingsfelder and Beckmann2017). Yet how NGOs actively construct pathways to political incorporation, particularly through the discretionary practices of frontline workers, remains insufficiently theorized. Most existing accounts either document the fact of dual service-advocacy mandates or examine advocacy at the organizational level (de Graauw, Reference de Graauw, Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad2008; Mosley & Jarpe, Reference Mosley and Jarpe2019), without explaining how frontline practitioners connect routine service encounters to civic learning and participation. This gap is particularly salient in nondemocratic or semi-authoritarian contexts, where the space for civil society is contracting and overt advocacy carries significant regulatory and political risk (Jordan et al., Reference Jordan, Chui and Forth2020; Lorch & Sombatpoonsiri, Reference Lorch and Sombatpoonsiri2023). In such settings, how NGOs navigate between service delivery and civic action and what organizational and practitioner-level conditions enable this navigation remains an open question.
This study addresses this gap by advancing three arguments. First, semi-authoritarian political environments reconfigure rather than simply suppress civic action, producing a distinctive form of adaptive civic brokerage. Second, frontline social workers translate organizational strategies into rights education, civic learning, and opportunities for participation within routine service encounters. Third, organizational hybridity functions as an adaptive strategy through which NGOs preserve service legitimacy while sustaining limited forms of civic action. Together, these arguments position NGO-facilitated political incorporation as a relational, developmental process shaped by organizational conditions, practitioner discretion, and structural constraint.
The study draws on political incorporation, nonprofit advocacy and hybridity, and anti-oppressive social work scholarship. Political incorporation research provides a basis for understanding civic awareness, rights claims, and participation (Bloemraad, Reference Bloemraad2006; Ramakrishnan & Bloemraad, Reference Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad2008). Nonprofit scholarship helps explain how immigrant-serving NGOs respond to accountability demands and choose among cooperative, low-visibility, and narrative advocacy strategies (Carré et al., Reference Carré, Oosterlynck, Verschuere and Raeymaeckers2025; Mosley et al., Reference Mosley, Suárez and Hwang2023; Mosley & Jarpe, Reference Mosley and Jarpe2019). Anti-oppressive practice and macro social work draw attention to frontline discretion and to the ways individual service needs may be connected to empowerment and collective awareness (Mullaly, Reference Mullaly2010; Ramsundarsingh & Shier, Reference Ramsundarsingh and Shier2017). We use hybrid civic broker to describe organizations that combine service provision with civic and advocacy functions.
This study examines these dynamics in Hong Kong, a global city whose political environment provides a strategic case for observing how NGOs mediate immigrant incorporation under tightening civic conditions. Drawing on qualitative interviews and observations, this study asks how immigrant-serving NGOs in Hong Kong connect service delivery and civic action to support the political incorporation of mainland Chinese newcomers under constrained civic conditions. The analysis centers on organizational practices and practitioner accounts rather than independently measured immigrant-level outcomes. The findings reveal three interconnected domains of NGO engagement: empowerment and political socialization, community engagement and destigmatization, and institutional negotiation and advocacy.
Political incorporation, nonprofit advocacy, and social work practice
Immigrant political incorporation refers to the process by which immigrants are integrated into the political system of the host country, acquire the ability to influence public policies, and participate in civic life (Bloemraad, Reference Bloemraad2006; DeSipio, Reference DeSipio2011). This encompasses both formal indicators such as naturalization, voting rights, and office-holding, and informal mechanisms including participation in civil society organizations, community organizing, and political discourse (Ramakrishnan & Bloemraad, Reference Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad2008).
North American studies tend to emphasize individual-level predictors of civic behavior, treating electoral participation as a central measure of civic inclusion (Bloemraad, Reference Bloemraad2006; Ramakrishnan, Reference Ramakrishnan2006). By contrast, European scholarship focuses more explicitly on institutional and policy-based determinants of incorporation, attributing political incorporation to immigration law and political institutions (Brubaker, Reference Brubaker2002; Givens, Reference Givens2007). The comparative approach often centers on how immigration policies enable or restrict integration across domains (Chow, Reference Chow2025; Morales & Giugni, Reference Morales and Giugni2011). Both bodies of work, however, tend to underemphasize the role of organizations as meso-level actors in the incorporation process.
Within the interdisciplinary field of migration studies, scholars have historically focused on individual migrants or macro-level institutions, often overlooking the organizational infrastructures that may facilitate incorporation (Faist & Bilecen, Reference Faist and Bilecen2015). Immigrant-serving NGOs fill this gap by providing the institutional scaffolding that links immigrants to political systems (Reed-Danahay & Brettell, Reference Reed-Danahay and Brettell2008). These NGOs mediate structural barriers, cultivate social capital, facilitate collective action, and connect immigrant communities to civic and policy processes (Bloemraad et al., Reference Bloemraad, Chaudhary and Gleeson2022). Research highlights their importance in empowering low-wage and marginalized immigrants through community unionism and connecting immigrant communities to civic processes (Bloemraad et al., Reference Bloemraad, Chaudhary and Gleeson2022; Sun & Cadge, Reference Sun and Cadge2013; Yu, Reference Yu2014). However, the capacity of NGOs to foster political incorporation is shaped and often constrained by complex accountability relationships with funders, government agencies, and the communities they serve (Benjamin, Reference Benjamin2008; Ebrahim, Reference Ebrahim2005). These tensions are further intensified in semi-authoritarian contexts, where the space for civil society is shrinking, and service provision is often depoliticized through contractual and regulatory mechanisms (Jordan et al., Reference Jordan, Chui and Forth2020; Toepler et al., Reference Toepler, Zimmer, Fröhlich and Obuch2020).
Immigrant-serving NGOs frequently operate as hybrid organizations, combining professionalized service delivery with policy advocacy. This hybridity requires managing distinct accountability regimes and institutional expectations across funders, regulators, and communities while pursuing their missions. Recent work conceptualizes advocacy not as a singular activity but as a repertoire of goals, tactics, and motivations spanning insider and outsider strategies, symbolic and instrumental aims, and episodic versus sustained engagement (Mosley et al., Reference Mosley, Suárez and Hwang2023). In constrained political environments, organizations may favor low-visibility or narrative strategies that allow them to pursue advocacy while maintaining access to resources and limiting regulatory risk (Carré et al., Reference Carré, Oosterlynck, Verschuere and Raeymaeckers2025; Ebrahim, Reference Ebrahim2005; Mosley & Jarpe, Reference Mosley and Jarpe2019). In politically contested service environments, informal, trust-based relationships can support coordination when formal arrangements are weak or absent (Anasti, Reference Anasti2026). Frontline practitioners navigate these tensions through discretion, linking service encounters to civic learning opportunities and framing claims for different audiences to preserve legitimacy (Hasenfeld, Reference Hasenfeld2010; Lipsky, Reference Lipsky2010). This perspective complements migration scholarship on meso-level incorporation by specifying the organizational and practitioner-level conditions for civic engagement. It also extends macro social work’s emphasis on empowerment and AOP by showing how organizational accountability shapes collective agency (Mullaly, Reference Mullaly2010).
Applying the concept of political incorporation to Hong Kong requires conceptual refinement. The conventional benchmarks of formal political institutions have limited applicability in Hong Kong’s post-2020 political environment, where direct electoral participation has been structurally curtailed and civil liberties have narrowed significantly (Lee, Reference Lee2025). In this study, we therefore conceptualize political incorporation primarily as an informal, meso-level civic process involving the gradual acquisition of political awareness, rights consciousness, collective identity, and the capacity to engage in community-level civic action (Bloemraad et al., Reference Bloemraad, Chaudhary and Gleeson2022). This differs from civic integration (sociocultural adaptation) and social inclusion (access to welfare and employment), focusing instead on the development of political agency and capacity to engage with civic institutions and community governance (DeSipio, Reference DeSipio2011).
Chinese immigration to Hong Kong and the immigrant-serving NGO landscape
Chinese immigration to Hong Kong presents a unique case for examining immigrant political incorporation across divergent political regimes. Under the One Country, Two Systems framework, Hong Kong has historically maintained a comparatively liberal legal and civic environment relative to mainland China, operating as a semi-autonomous region with a distinct political culture and an active civil society. This has created a unique institutional environment in which immigrants from an authoritarian regime encounter a more pluralistic civic sphere.
Many mainland Chinese newcomers who rely on settlement-oriented services arrive through the One-Way Permit Scheme. The scheme operates principally as a family reunification and settlement pathway, institutionally distinct from admission routes based on employment, talent recruitment, or investment, whose entrants typically differ in resources, settlement trajectories, and reliance on social service organizations. Although these groups are ethnically Chinese, they are frequently perceived as cultural outsiders, economically burdensome, and politically suspect by local residents (Chiu & Choi, Reference Chiu and Choi2020). This hostility is partly organized through Hong Kong’s localism movement, which emerged in the mid-2010s and frames mainland immigrants as agents of cultural dilution and political encroachment (Kaeding, Reference Kaeding2017; Veg, Reference Veg2017). These stigmatizations are compounded by structural inequalities, including restricted access to welfare benefits, distinct legal statuses, and complex integration procedures (Jordan & Liang, Reference Jordan and Liang2014). Their political incorporation is further complicated by their prior experiences under authoritarian governance. Research shows that immigrants from closed regimes frequently exhibit limited political trust, minimal participatory experience, and low expectations for institutional responsiveness (Dimitrova-Grajzl et al., Reference Dimitrova-Grajzl, Eastwood and Grajzl2016; Goodman & Hiskey, Reference Goodman and Hiskey2008). These attributes shape how they interpret their new political context, and the transition into Hong Kong’s distinct civic environment often entails a process of civic resocialization (Chow & Ren, Reference Chow and Ren2023). Table A1 (Appendix A) provides an overview of major immigrant population categories in Hong Kong.
This pathway, however, has grown more precarious under the evolving political environment in Hong Kong. The 2014 Umbrella Movement and the 2019 Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement represented significant episodes of popular mobilization that ultimately failed to produce structural political change, contributing to civic fatigue and growing political disengagement (Lee, Reference Lee2025). The National Security Law in 2020, followed by electoral restructuring in 2021, further narrowed civil liberties, expanded state oversight, and reduced the number of directly elected Legislative Council seats. These developments are understood as a process of democratic backsliding, in which democratic institutions, civil liberties, and civic space are progressively eroded through legal and regulatory change rather than an abrupt authoritarian takeover (Lee, Reference Lee2025; Levitsky & Ziblatt, Reference Levitsky and Ziblatt2019).
The funding and accountability arrangements of immigrant-serving NGOs in Hong Kong shape their capacity for advocacy. Recurrent subvention from the Social Welfare Department (SWD) provides a relatively stable source of support but is accompanied by service-delivery benchmarks and reporting requirements, creating an ongoing accountability relationship with government. Organizations without recurrent subvention rely more heavily on project-based grants, charitable foundations, and community fundraising, resulting in different patterns of funding dependence and programmatic flexibility. These differences are particularly salient in Hong Kong’s post-2020 political environment, where overt advocacy has become increasingly constrained (Lee, Reference Lee2025). Government-subvented NGOs occupy a distinctive organizational position because they remain formally nongovernmental while delivering publicly funded welfare services, approximating Wolch’s (Reference Wolch1990) concept of the shadow state.
Materials and methods
Data collection
This study adopts an exploratory case study design as a plausibility probe, which assesses whether proposed mechanisms are plausible and worthy of more systematic comparative investigation rather than confirming generalizable findings (George & Bennett, Reference George and Bennett2005). To capture the diverse experiences and organizational strategies of NGOs, purposive sampling was employed to identify information-rich cases positioned to illuminate the phenomenon under study in depth rather than to produce statistically representative findings (Patton, Reference Patton2010). It is particularly appropriate for research questions concerning organizational processes and practitioner strategies (Flyvbjerg, Reference Flyvbjerg2006). We compiled an initial sampling frame from the Home Affairs Department, subvention lists of the Social Welfare Department, and public NGO directories, yielding 38 organizations with explicit immigrant-service mandates. From this frame, organizations were purposively approached following a maximum-variation logic to capture heterogeneity in legal registration, organizational type, resource scale, advocacy posture, and geographical coverage. Twelve organizations ultimately participated, as several otherwise eligible organizations could not be reached, yielding a sample designed for analytical diversity rather than statistical representation of the 38 identified organizations. Because the study focuses on organizations and practitioners rather than immigrant clients, the findings concern organizational practices and practitioner accounts rather than clients’ firsthand experiences.
Data were collected through in-depth, semi-structured interviews and participant observation between June 2023 and February 2024. Eighteen interviews were conducted with NGO staff, including program directors, frontline social workers, and administrative personnel, across 12 organizations. All interviews were conducted in Cantonese by the first author at each organization’s premises. To safeguard participant privacy, interviews took place in enclosed meeting rooms or private offices rather than open workspaces. Interviews followed a semi-structured guide, enabling participants to share narratives and perspectives while exploring predetermined thematic areas (McIntosh & Morse, Reference McIntosh and Morse2015). Topics included service provision, civic engagement, advocacy practices, and institutional constraints. The interviews ranged from 45 to 90 minutes, were audio-recorded with consent, and transcribed verbatim. Quotations were translated from Cantonese, and the term participants used for this population was rendered consistently as mainland Chinese newcomers. The full guide is provided in Appendix B.
The first author also engaged in volunteer work across several NGOs to observe daily operations, staff-client interactions, and public-facing activities. Observations were conducted on a weekly basis throughout the data collection period, with visits ranging from ~2 hours for focused activities such as food bank operations to full days for community outreach events. Organizational materials, including strategic plans, policy memos, educational brochures, and annual reports, were collected as a documentary data source for triangulation. The document corpus comprised over 500 pages, with annual reports dating back to 2004 for some organizations.
This study was approved by the University of Hong Kong Human Research Ethics Committee (Reference number: EA220475). All participants were informed of the study’s objectives, and verbal consent was secured before each interview. To protect confidentiality, all organizations and individuals were anonymized.
Data analysis
We conducted a reflexive, iterative thematic analysis of interview transcripts, fieldnotes, and organizational materials (Braun & Clarke, Reference Braun and Clarke2006). Analysis proceeded through familiarization and memo-writing, generation of initial codes capturing organizational strategies, accountability dynamics, and staff discretion, axial clustering of codes into candidate themes, and refinement of themes through constant comparison across organizational types and registration categories. We interpreted observational, interview, and documentary data together, using convergence across the three sources to strengthen the analysis.
The first author identifies as a Chinese immigrant, and the second author has a professional background in the NGO and migration sectors. Throughout the analysis, we considered how our positionalities might shape interpretation. Initial coding was conducted by the first author through manual line-by-line analysis. The second author independently reviewed and discussed emerging themes, and the research team engaged in ongoing consultation throughout the analytical process. To further strengthen interpretive validity, emerging themes were also discussed with participating NGOs, allowing for member checking of key analytical insights. We also acknowledge that the organizational setting and the political environment may have introduced some degree of self-censorship, particularly on topics related to political advocacy.
Organizational sample
The sample reflects the heterogeneity of Hong Kong’s immigrant-serving NGOs. Of the 12 organizations comprising the analytic sample, 7 are social service providers, 4 are faith-based entities, and 1 is an advocacy-focused NGO. Eight organizations are registered under the Companies Ordinance, while four are registered under the Societies Ordinance. Among the eight Companies Ordinance organizations, four received recurrent SWD subvention. None of the four Societies Ordinance organizations received recurrent subvention, although one reported occasional SWD support. Staff sizes vary widely from 2 to 500 full-time employees, and annual expenditures range from 3 million to 550 million HKD (~0.38 million to 70.4 million USD). Most organizations were established between the 1970s and 1990s. Table 1 summarizes the profile of each organization.
Summary of participating immigrant-serving NGOs
Table 1 Long description
Table 1 shows profiles of 12 immigrant-serving NGOs across 8 columns: number, type, registration, staff size, annual expenditure (HKD), SWD subvention status, founding decade, and major activities. Seven are social service providers, four faith-based, one advocacy-focused. Nine are registered under the Companies Ordinance, three under the Societies Ordinance. Staff sizes range from 1–10 to 200+ employees; expenditures from under 10 M to over 100 M HKD. Five receive SWD recurrent subvention. Most were founded between the 1970s and 1990s, with one active since the 1950s and one since the 2010s. Activities span rights education, civic empowerment, community destigmatization, symbolic protests, legal advocacy, resident corporation support, coalition building, and policy engagement with legislators and government departments.
Note: Budget data are calculated as 3-year averages. SWD recurrent subvention refers to recurrent funding from the Hong Kong Social Welfare Department. Not publicly available indicates missing financial reports for society-registered NGOs. Participating organizations generally do not restrict services to a single migration pathway or immigrant subgroup and may serve heterogeneous, overlapping populations of mainland Chinese newcomers and other residents with settlement-related needs. Volunteering activities were observed across multiple organizations. NGO 5 reported occasional SWD support but did not receive recurrent subvention.
Findings
Empowerment and political socialization
Practitioners across the 12 organizations primarily discussed their work with mainland Chinese newcomers, particularly settlement-oriented service users with limited prior exposure to civic participation. In practitioners’ accounts, these newcomers often associated public affairs with surveillance or compliance rather than participation. Staff members across all 12 NGOs reported that their service users tended to associate daily life with apolitical routines and exhibit little understanding of their rights within the Hong Kong context.
However, rather than interpreting this as apathy, these organizations consistently distinguished between political apathy and political unawareness. They framed political disengagement as a result of structural disempowerment and unfamiliarity with participatory norms, not a lack of interest or capacity. One social worker explained:
Mainland Chinese newcomers think they are inferior to local residents, so we must foster their self-reliance. They should know they have different rights - the right not to be discriminated against, and the right to be included in social welfare…We teach you the rights that you have. (NGO 2)
This civic learning is neither spontaneous nor neutral. Staff treated civic learning as part of empowerment-oriented practice rather than as a separate political activity. Community centers, language classes, and housing disputes provided everyday settings in which service users could learn about rights and participation.
For example, a frontline social worker shared how the organization supported immigrants in forming resident corporations to negotiate housing repairs and liaise with district officials:
Their building required maintenance, but many of them were unfamiliar with the necessary procedures. As a result, we took on the responsibility of assisting these mainland Chinese newcomers in establishing corporate organizations for their maintenance needs. Furthermore, we provided guidance on how to establish connections with government officials…they acquired valuable skills, such as engaging lawyers, negotiating with district officials, and learning various other techniques. (NGO 1)
In another example, NGOs responded to the exclusion of nonpermanent residents from a 2011 tax rebate policy by organizing community seminars to raise awareness and build capacity for advocacy. As a program director of NGO 7 reflected:
Numerous mainland Chinese newcomers lacked awareness of political engagement, but through our guidance, we empowered them to become proficient leaders…These individuals will offer valuable insights on policies concerning mainland Chinese newcomers and support others in similar situations.
These practices illustrate how macro social work can support both civic knowledge and opportunities to exercise civic agency.
Importantly, these strategies did not aim to produce model citizens. Instead, they made room for varied expressions of engagement from neighborhood organizing to silent protest and adapted to each immigrant’s capacity and comfort level. As one social worker explained, NGOs help immigrants understand local policy environments, engage critically with government actions, and develop a sense of political voice:
We will educate these immigrants about government policies, provide an understanding of social policies, and discuss the actions taken by the government. Many didn’t see themselves as political, but they realized they could change something. That moment matters. (NGO 9)
All 12 organizations implemented such initiatives, often supplemented with legal consultations, hotline services, and information dissemination via social media. While core practices of civic engagement were present across cases, we observed systematic differences among these organizations. Social service NGOs tended to embed civic learning within formal programs, such as Know Your Rights workshops linked to case management, while emphasizing procedural compliance, measurable outputs, and risk-sensitive language. Faith-based organizations, in contrast, were often more volunteer-driven and built civic confidence through relational strategies such as mutual aid, mentoring, and peer leadership, creating low-threshold entry points for immigrant participation. The advocacy-focused NGO (NGO 6) and two subvented social service providers (NGOs 7 and 12) concentrated on narrative work and policy outreach, serving as connectors that translated everyday challenges into institutional conversations. During fieldwork, for example, one social service provider (NGO 12) was observed distributing rights awareness and social program brochures at informational tables near immigration checkpoints. These differences shaped how organizations introduced service users to civic participation.
These accounts describe NGOs as civic brokers as well as service providers, engaged in political socialization and skill building. Practitioners presented sustained mentorship and education as ways to build civic competencies and to reframe service users as rights-bearing actors capable of shaping their social environments.
Community engagement and destigmatization
Social workers across organizations described a persistent challenge posed by the widespread stigmatization of mainland Chinese newcomers as either culturally backward or economically burdensome. Public narratives, often amplified by media outlets, framed immigrants as competitors for public resources or as politically suspect newcomers unable to assimilate. Practitioners described these portrayals as shaping public attitudes and undermining service users’ self-worth and sense of belonging. As one program director noted:
Sometimes they came in already apologizing. They have internalized the idea that they are a burden even before we talk. This is not their fault though because our community blame them with misperceptions. (NGO 3)
In response, immigrant-serving NGOs engage in a range of public education and media strategies designed to shift public narratives. NGO leaders collaborate with researchers and academics to produce evidence-based reports that challenge dominant anti-immigration discourses. For instance, NGO 6 works with university scholars to publish articles that frame housing shortages as structural failures, not immigrant-driven crises. As one program director explained:
The public tends to blame them [mainland Chinese newcomers] for overcrowding, but we show that the problem lies in decades of poor urban planning. That can shift the blame away from immigrants. (NGO 6)
Similarly, NGOs use statistical evidence to debunk stereotypes of mainland Chinese newcomers as welfare-dependent or politically manipulated:
Data shows approximately 30% of mainland Chinese newcomers reside in public housing, which aligns with the percentage of the Hong Kong population. However, only 5% of individuals who receive financial assistance are mainland Chinese newcomers, and the employment rate of mainland Chinese newcomers (54.2%) closely corresponds with the Hong Kong population (58.7%). (NGO 3)
NGOs deploy these figures strategically in local media, social-media infographics, and community workshops to build counter-narratives grounded in fact. These interventions extended beyond traditional casework into symbolic advocacy aimed at reframing the public meaning of immigration, particularly where direct political tactics were constrained. A program director at NGO 2 emphasized the power of storytelling in humanizing immigrants:
Our role is to act as a bridge, showcasing the positive aspects of mainland Chinese newcomers. We provide a platform for them to share their life stories, which we then promote on platforms such as YouTube and HK01… The actions of the central government [in mainland China] should not be attributed to these individuals.
These public-facing strategies aim to reduce stigma and foster a more inclusive social identity, but they are not without backlash. NGOs frequently face online harassment, accusations of political betrayal, and even physical threats. A program director from NGO 4 recalled:
During the years when there was a significant rise in the number of mainland visitors [to Hong Kong], we encountered instances where individuals came to our office and verbally attacked immigrants, telling them to go back… We are confident in our abilities to handle such situations and remain committed to our cause.
Despite resistance, immigrant-serving NGOs have adapted by reclaiming local narratives. One powerful example is the invocation of the Spirit of Lion Rock, an ethos of collective perseverance and social solidarity central to Hong Kong identity:
The tale of Lion Rock embodies the common narrative of immigrants collaborating and attaining prosperity… Mainland Chinese newcomers are indeed regarded as part of our own family. (NGO 2)
By positioning immigrants within this cultural framework, NGOs appeal to shared histories and values. They also advocate for dissolving perceived political and cultural boundaries between mainland Chinese newcomers and local residents:
Some of us support the pro-establishment camp, others support pan-democracy camp… Mainland Chinese newcomers are the same, they are the same as local people. (NGO 5)
These strategies reflect a key insight from nonprofit advocacy research. When formal political opportunities are limited, organizations may turn to cultural advocacy, mobilizing narrative and representation to claim legitimacy (Flanigan et al., Reference Flanigan, Haddad and Domaradzka2025). NGOs used media and storytelling to challenge dominant representations of immigrants, making public representation itself a form of advocacy where direct protest was constrained.
Yet this work also draws deeply from anti-oppressive practice. Rather than correcting individual beliefs through counseling or education alone, staff aimed to transform the collective narrative environment. By helping immigrants speak publicly about their experiences, staff sought to build confidence while challenging stigmatizing narratives.
Finally, NGOs promote community service and volunteering as a way to rebuild immigrant-local relations and challenge the perception of mainland Chinese newcomers as passive dependents. One NGO staff member described how their program helped immigrants identify their own skills and apply them in public service roles:
Mainland Chinese newcomers in Hong Kong are often viewed as a burden on society, but they possess valuable skills… Through [our] program, they can learn how to actively participate in public service initiatives. (NGO 5)
During fieldwork, we also observed these efforts in training programs that emphasized reciprocal contribution. Immigrants were encouraged to volunteer in food drives, elderly centers, and environmental clean-ups designed to foster visibility, build confidence, and demonstrate community value. Social workers framed these opportunities not as charity, but as public participation, linking them to broader goals of civic inclusion. Practitioners presented volunteering as a form of civic participation intended to assert presence and erode symbolic barriers to political incorporation.
These practices were oriented toward supporting political incorporation by building public legitimacy rather than by pressing formal rights claims. Civic inclusion depends on how newcomers are represented and positioned in public life as much as on the opportunities open to them. Across cases, social service NGOs tended to organize civic learning through formal programs, while several faith-based organizations relied more heavily on volunteering, peer support, and public testimony.
Institutional negotiation and policy advocacy
While immigrant-serving NGOs in Hong Kong work at the grassroots level to foster individual empowerment and community engagement, they also play an increasingly active role in institutional and policy advocacy. Most respondents expressed frustration with the government’s passive approach to immigration, particularly regarding the integration of mainland Chinese newcomers. They noted that services explicitly tailored to immigrants have been merged into broader family or community programs, obscuring the unique needs of this population. As a policy advocate put it:
What the Hong Kong government did was not enough. They did not adequately address integration, diversity, and other important values… It is unfortunate that the government is attempting to incorporate immigrant services into family issues, when in reality this group requires a range of different services. (NGO 6)
These NGOs frequently characterize mainland Chinese newcomers as people in-between, neither fully protected by policies aimed at Hong Kong’s Ethnic Minorities (the government terminology for all non-ethnic Chinese), nor prioritized like international migrants. In this policy vacuum, NGOs increasingly focus on structural change through legal reform and policy dialogue. As a social worker at NGO 4 emphasized:
The Race Discrimination Ordinance in Hong Kong currently protects ethnic minorities but does not include mainland Chinese newcomers [because the majority of our population is ethnically Chinese]. We propose the addition of resident identity into the ordinance. We’ve discussed this matter with the Equal Opportunities Commission, suggesting that mainland Chinese newcomers should have the right to vote.
Similarly, a program director at NGO 10 shared:
We visited the Legislative Council and Immigration Department to express our concerns and campaign for the rights of immigrants. We specifically focused on issues such as multiple-entry visas and the challenges faced by overaged children.
These engagements are strategic and sustained. NGOs write formal petitions, submit policy memos, and convene meetings with sympathetic legislators. They frame their proposals not only in terms of social justice but also through pragmatic arguments about social stability and economic efficiency. These practices favored negotiation with public institutions over direct confrontation. A social worker at NGO 5 explained:
We reach out to Legislative Council members who are open to hearing our concerns and invite them to our organization to witness the challenges faced by mainland Chinese newcomers. These instances highlight the hardships experienced by mainland Chinese newcomers in Hong Kong and prompt us to devise potential solutions.
Importantly, immigrant-serving NGOs tailor their advocacy to the political orientation of their audience. When engaging pro-establishment actors, they highlight immigrants’ contributions to social harmony and economic productivity. With pro-democracy allies, they invoke rights-based discourses and emphasize the injustice of prolonged family separation and policy exclusion. Observations during fieldwork supported this view. Many frontline social workers documented repeated administrative failures and accompanied clients through the appeals process. Their professional training enabled them to frame individual struggles as structural problems; their advocacy remained closely tied to professional ethics and frontline discretion.
NGOs ground their rights-based claims in legal frameworks such as the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This framing reflected both political caution and the accountability pressures associated with public funding. Many NGOs receiving recurrent SWD subvention operated within tight performance frameworks in which explicit demands for systemic change could jeopardize funding or invite regulatory scrutiny.
Beyond formal lobbying, immigrant-serving NGOs also stage symbolic protests and performative actions, especially on holidays such as Mother’s Day or Christmas, to dramatize immigrants’ struggles. These events often feature immigrant women and children, using visual and emotional cues to foster empathy among the broader public:
We rally many mothers and their children to march on the streets, with the aim of exerting pressure on the government to respond to our demands. Whether or not the government actually responds is not our primary concern. Our main goal is to raise awareness among the people of Hong Kong about the dire conditions faced by immigrants in such a prosperous city. (NGO 8)
These performative acts of resistance shift attention from institutional actors’ inaction to the lived realities of immigrants. Although these actions did not always yield immediate policy change, they brought immigrant concerns into public debate. Their work complicates simple dichotomies between service and activism, revealing instead a spectrum of political engagement shaped by strategic discretion, organizational accountability, and state-civil society dynamics.
Discussion
This study examined how immigrant-serving NGOs in Hong Kong connect service provision, community engagement, and advocacy, and how practitioners describe the contribution of that work to the political incorporation of mainland Chinese newcomers. The findings show that NGOs operate as hybrid civic brokers under constrained political conditions, working to build civic capacity among service users and to contest stigma while negotiating with public institutions. This contributes to migration, nonprofit, and social work scholarship by centering meso-level organizational processes in accounts of political incorporation that have historically focused on individual behavior or state-level institutions.
The study documents how immigrant-serving NGOs seek to cultivate civic awareness and agency through empowerment-oriented practice and civic learning. Much of the migration literature has equated political incorporation with citizenship acquisition, voting, or office-holding (Ramakrishnan & Bloemraad, Reference Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad2008). Our findings move beyond these institutionalized measures by documenting meso-level organizational interventions oriented toward civic resocialization. Through workshops, housing meetings, and language classes, NGOs sought to translate abstract rights concepts into concrete practices, a role particularly salient for immigrants from authoritarian backgrounds where civic participation is unfamiliar or viewed with suspicion (Goodman & Hiskey, Reference Goodman and Hiskey2008). NGOs reframed political disengagement as structural disempowerment rather than apathy, working to build confidence and legitimacy in line with empowerment and anti-oppressive practice (Mullaly, Reference Mullaly2010; Ramsundarsingh & Shier, Reference Ramsundarsingh and Shier2017). The findings support a view of political incorporation as a gradual process of civic learning in which organizations may play an intermediary role.
Practitioner accounts further point to a civic incorporation pathway among some service users, although immigrant-level outcomes were not independently measured in this study. Staff across organizations described service users who entered through basic service intake and, in their perception, later assumed peer-mentoring or organizing roles, negotiated independently with district officials, or joined public campaigns they had previously avoided. Practitioners interpreted these changes as shifts in both knowledge and self-perception. They described some newcomers as beginning to see themselves as rights-bearing community members rather than as burdens on the polity. Understood as practitioner perceptions rather than independently verified behavioral change, these accounts nonetheless align with social work scholarship on empowerment as a recursive process in which small civic experiences build confidence for larger ones (Mullaly, Reference Mullaly2010) and suggest a possible pathway through which meso-level organizational intervention may support political incorporation even under constrained civic conditions.
The study also highlights the role of NGOs in transforming community narratives and combating stigma. A central barrier to political incorporation in Hong Kong was the widespread stigmatization of mainland Chinese newcomers as culturally backward, economically burdensome, or politically suspect (Chiu & Choi, Reference Chiu and Choi2020). NGOs framed community engagement itself as a political act, combining service with symbolic advocacy. Staff strategically deployed storytelling, public testimonies, and volunteer integration to present immigrants as neighbors and contributors. These strategies reflect a broader pattern in nonprofit scholarship in which organizations turn to narrative and cultural advocacy when formal political opportunities are limited (Bloemraad et al., Reference Bloemraad, Gleeson, Graauw, Powell and Bromley2020; de Graauw, Reference de Graauw, Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad2008), and extend that scholarship by specifying how this operates in semi-authoritarian contexts where overt mobilization carries regulatory risk.
The article further shows how NGOs navigate institutional structures and pursue policy change under constrained civic conditions. Recent nonprofit research shows that organizations adapt their tactics to maintain legitimacy in restrictive environments (Cooper et al., Reference Cooper, Wang and Atouba2024; Mosley & Jarpe, Reference Mosley and Jarpe2019). State ties can provide access and resources while also constraining organizational autonomy, whereas greater distance may preserve independence but reduce influence (Bakko, Reference Bakko2026). Within the Hong Kong nonprofit sector, recurrent subvention similarly brings ongoing service-delivery and reporting obligations. Organizations did not fall neatly into categories of service providers or activists. Instead, they combined cooperative, rights-based, and narrative advocacy, adjusting their claims to different audiences. With pro-establishment actors, they emphasized immigrants’ contributions to social harmony and economic productivity. With pro-democracy allies, they instead invoked rights-based arguments and family justice. These practices illustrate how organizational hybridity enables NGOs to leverage their legitimacy as service providers while pursuing advocacy goals.
The research yields several practical implications. NGOs may consider integrating civic education into routine services, including rights-awareness modules within language classes or case management. Collaborative advocacy networks may also allow organizations to pool resources and coordinate policy demands across multiple stakeholders. For policymakers, the findings point to the value of more inclusive integration frameworks, including formal channels for immigrant consultation, targeted community-based funding, and expanded anti-discrimination protections.
The findings may also speak to settings beyond semi-authoritarian contexts, although such extensions must remain cautious. Migration between mainland China and Hong Kong is institutionally distinctive. It is intra-sovereign, governed by particular admission and residency arrangements, and shaped by identity boundaries and state–civil society relations that differ substantially from international immigration. We, therefore, draw on the literature on the welcoming movement in the United States, which examines how meso-level actors have countered restrictive federal immigration policies (Huang & Liu, Reference Huang and Liu2018; Kim & Bozarth, Reference Kim and Bozarth2021; McDaniel et al., Reference McDaniel, Rodriguez and Wang2019; Pottie-Sherman, Reference Pottie-Sherman2018; Tossutti & Cumiskey, Reference Tossutti and Cumiskey2026), only as a comparative lens on how organizations connect service provision and civic participation across institutional environments. Whether these adaptive strategies, including low-profile civic curricula, narrative reframing, and coalition-based advocacy, operate similarly in democratic welcoming-city contexts remains an empirical question for future comparative research.
Despite the significance of the findings, this study has several limitations. First, because the design centers NGO staff perspectives and did not include interviews with immigrant service users, the study is positioned to explain organizational intentions, practitioner strategies, and practitioner perceptions of change among service users, rather than to demonstrate changes in immigrants’ political identities or behaviors. Interviews with immigrant participants and longitudinal observation of civic engagement are therefore important directions for future research. Second, the purposive design prioritizes analytical over statistical generalization (Yin, Reference Yin2018). Organizations excluded from the sample, particularly those with more explicitly political mandates, may hold perspectives not captured here, and the theoretical claims about how semi-authoritarian environments reconfigure civic brokerage and how frontline discretion converts service encounters into political socialization are intended as propositions to be tested through future comparative work. Third, a more systematic comparison of how registration and funding arrangements shape organizational strategy was beyond the scope of this study and warrants dedicated future research.
Despite these limitations, this study offers important contributions to migration studies, nonprofit scholarship, and macro social work. It provides empirically grounded insight into how meso-level actors shape the process of political incorporation, thereby filling a gap between individual-centered and state-centered accounts of immigrant integration. The findings show that NGOs can serve as adaptive civic brokers even under adverse conditions, extending nonprofit research on how hybrid organizations enact advocacy in semi-authoritarian settings.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the NGOs and their social workers who generously participated in this research and contributed their time, expertise, and insights. Their commitment to supporting immigrant communities made this study possible.
Funding statement
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Ethical standards
This study was approved by the University of Hong Kong Human Research Ethics Committee (Reference number: EA220475).
Appendix A. Demographic table
Overview of major immigrant population categories in Hong Kong a
Table A1 Long description
Table A1 presents five immigrant population categories in Hong Kong. One-Way Permit holders: 40,818 arrivals in 2023 (910,499 cumulative 2002–2023), from mainland China, ongoing under a daily quota of 150. Top Talent Pass Scheme professionals: 49,737 approved applicants in 2023, from mainland China and internationally, active since 2022. Foreign domestic workers: 367,971 year-end stock in 2024, from the Philippines and Indonesia, present since the 1970s. Asylum seekers and torture claimants: approximately 15,000, from South Asia and Africa, arriving since the 2000s. Ethnic minorities: 301,344 in the 2021 census, from South Asia and Southeast Asia, multi-generational. Figures are not directly comparable as they represent different count types.
Appendix B. Interview guide
Note: The guide was used flexibly as a reference rather than a fixed protocol, as different organizations varied in their mandates, structures, and areas of expertise. Interviews were conducted in Cantonese by the first author.
Basic information
-
1. Could you briefly introduce your organization?
Probes: Could you tell me more about your registration status and why you selected this approach? What are your main financial sources? Could you tell me more about your social workers, for example, the number of registered staff and their experience in immigrant services? What are your core services?
-
2. Compared with other host societies, how would you describe the environment of Hong Kong for new immigrants?
Immigrant
-
1. Which immigrant groups do you serve and why?
Probes: Could you tell me more about the challenges new immigrants face, in the past and now? Could you describe the sense of immigrant identity among your clients and its consequences?
-
2. Compared to ethnic minorities and domestic workers, what are the advantages and disadvantages regarding NGO services for new immigrants?
-
3. What measures have you implemented to assist new immigrants?
Probes: Could you tell me more about how new immigrants build networks on their own? Could you describe any programs or activities addressing the psychological health of new immigrants? Could you share some examples of successful integration among new immigrants?
Government
-
1. How would you describe the government’s current immigration policy and attitude toward new immigrants?
Probes: Could you tell me more about how you inform new immigrants about government policy and what aspects you emphasize? Could you share your thoughts on why new immigrants are not protected by the anti-discrimination law?
-
2. Could you describe your experience contacting the government or legislators for immigrant services and share some examples?
Community
-
1. How would you describe the perception of new immigrants in the community?
Probes: Could you tell me more about how your organization responds to unfavorable public attitudes toward new immigrants? What strategies have you found the public accepts more readily?
-
2. Could you tell me how campaigns against mainlanders and negative perceptions linked to parallel importers have affected your work?
Network
-
1. Could you tell me more about how your organization cooperates with other organizations?
-
2. Could you describe how you use media to promote your work?
Open access
