China’s Education and Welfare System and the Impact of Other Countries’ Education and Welfare Policies on China

China’s Education and Welfare System and the Impact of Other Countries’ Education and Welfare Policies on China

Guo Ce^*, Mao Qinhan^*, Doris Padmini S Selvaratnam

Faculty of Economics and Management, University Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia

*Correspondent author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.915EC00729

Received: 29 July 2025; Accepted: 03 August 2025; Published: 03 September 2025

ABSTRACT

Social education and welfare policy is a life-cycle education support system constructed by the Government and society through financial input and institutional design, and is a central pillar of sustainable national development, combining the functions of economic promotion and social equity protection. Education, as a key social policy, runs through the entirety of an individual’s development, not only enhancing vocational skills, but also safeguarding the physical and mental development of children at an early age. Education benefits work in tandem with other safeguards to reduce the burden on families and enhance social resilience. At the level of equity, the policy blocks the intergenerational transmission of poverty by targeting support to disadvantaged groups. This paper will analyze China’s education welfare system and give institutional recommendations based on the education welfare policies of other countries.

Keywords: Education welfare policy social equity social policy

INTRODUCTION

Research Background

1. Driven by National Development Strategies

Education is the cornerstone of national development and a key force in achieving the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. Since the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, the state has continuously emphasized “prioritizing education development” and “ensuring that all people share in development outcomes,” explicitly proposing to “provide education that satisfies the people.” As an integral part of public policy, the education welfare system bears the core functions of ensuring educational equity, enhancing educational quality, and promoting social mobility.

As emphasized in the “14th Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development of the People’s Republic of China” and the “Outline of the Long-Term Goals for 2035”: “Improve the basic public education service system covering urban and rural areas” and “Increase the proportion of fiscal expenditure on education, with a focus on disadvantaged regions and weak links.”

2. Inequalities between urban and rural areas, regions, and groups remain prominent

Although China has basically achieved universal nine-year compulsory education and made significant progress in the gross enrollment rate in higher education, issues such as uneven distribution of educational resources, unequal access to education, and excessive educational costs remain prominent. Particularly in rural areas, among migrant children, and among children with disabilities, there are still gaps in the coverage of the education welfare system.

For example, data from the Ministry of Education shows that the quality of teachers in rural areas is still significantly lower than in urban areas; difficulties in enrollment and high educational costs for migrant children remain widespread.

3. Trends in the Transformation of the Education Welfare System

With changes in the socio-economic structure, the traditional welfare structure centered on “free compulsory education” is no longer sufficient to meet the diverse and multi-level educational needs. Extending welfare coverage from basic education to preschool education, secondary education, vocational education, and lifelong education has become an important direction for policy design. Meanwhile, the relationship between institutional welfare and government welfare, fiscal保障 mechanisms, and public-private cooperation mechanisms are also facing a new round of institutional restructuring.

Research Significance

(1) Theoretical Significance

1. Enriching Localized Research on Educational Welfare

Current domestic research on educational welfare systems primarily focuses on policy texts or single educational stages, with limited systematic exploration of the evolution, influencing mechanisms, and optimization pathways of China’s educational welfare structure. By constructing an educational welfare theoretical framework tailored to China’s social context, this research aims to bridge the gap between institutional studies and practical exploration.

2. Promoting the Localized Application of Welfare State Theory

While Western welfare state theories (such as Esping-Andersen’s “three models of welfare capitalism”) provide powerful tools for understanding social policies, their direct application in the Chinese context has limitations. Empirical research on China’s educational welfare system can drive theoretical innovation in China’s distinctive social welfare system.

(2) Practical Significance

1. Promoting Educational Equity and Social Justice

The improvement of the education welfare system is the fundamental guarantee for achieving “educational equity.” Research can provide data support and policy recommendations for the government in formulating relevant policies (such as fiscal transfers, universal preschool education, and educational assistance), thereby promoting more equitable development opportunities for disadvantaged groups.

2. Optimizing Resource Allocation and Fiscal Efficiency

In the face of fiscal pressures and diverse demands, how to enhance the precision and efficiency of education welfare expenditures while ensuring basic fairness is a key policy challenge. This research can provide more scientific decision-making basis for fiscal and education departments.

3. Promoting Common Prosperity and Intergenerational Mobility

LITERATURE REVIEW

Charles Hemmer (2005) regards the right to equal access to education as a fundamental human right. Becker and Chiswick (1966) studied the relationship between income and education and concluded that income inequality and educational inequality are positively correlated, while average educational attainment is negatively correlated.

Becker, Gregorio, and Lee used the Gini coefficient as a variable for income inequality and, based on cross-sectional data from more than 100 countries, found that equal distribution of education helps improve the distribution of residents’ income. Among these, the distribution of resources for compulsory education is the most equitable, and therefore it is most helpful in improving the distribution of people’s income.

Yaka Matsuda’s study found that “social education” has long been used in Japan as a means of lifelong learning and civic education, and that it intersects with “social work” at the level of practice, particularly in the areas of community development and resident support. (2021) At the same time, local governments and non-profit organizations play a key role in facilitating collaboration.

Hyewon Park and Kosuke Sakai’s comparative analysis of HESPs in Korea and Japan reveals the remarkable transformation of HESPs in both countries after 2000. (2023) Korea’s HESPs gradually changed from family policies to social policies, the target group was expanded from low-income families to all young people, and the status of young people was changed from “children” to “adults”. In contrast, Japan’s HESPs are still mainly family policies, with a slower expansion of the target group, and the status of youth is still regarded as “children”. The research in this paper suggests that the familialist character of welfare systems in East Asia is waning, but there are significant differences across countries.

Trends in China’s education welfare system

The developmental changes in China’s educational welfare system can be broadly categorized into the following stages:

1. Early stage of the founding of New China and before the reform and opening up of China

In September 1949, the First Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) established the cultural and educational policy of the new China, and in 1951 the first school system was set up; in 1952, the faculties and departments of the nation’s institutions of higher education were adjusted, and the system of colleges and universities was modeled on the Soviet Union’s. The State vigorously promoted literacy through night classes and other classes. The State vigorously promoted a literacy campaign and endeavored to improve the cultural quality of the nation through night schools and accelerated literacy classes. At the same time, a system of free education and scholarships was introduced to ensure that the working and peasant classes were given priority access to education.

2. Reform and opening up to the end of the 20th century

China broke the state’s monopoly on running schools and introduced a system of graded schooling, and private education began to flourish. A mechanism for raising education funds through multiple channels was established, and the level of financial expenditure on education increased, but changes in the policy on education fees increased the burden of education on families, and nine-year compulsory education was introduced nationwide on July 1, 1986, in an effort to raise the level of education for the entire population.

3.Since the 21st century

China has fully realized free compulsory education, and has implemented a policy of “two exemptions and one subsidy” for rural students at the compulsory education stage. Efforts to precisely alleviate poverty through education have been stepped up, the problem of school enrollment for the children of migrant workers who have moved to the cities has been solved, and the right of children with disabilities to receive education has been better safeguarded. Admissions and examination policies have been tilted in favor of disadvantaged groups, and education assistance policies for poor groups have been improved.

Welfare policies in China and other countries

1.The main problems of China’s current educational welfare

(1) The issue of imbalanced resource allocation has become increasingly prominent.

Significant disparities in educational resources between urban and rural areas: The uneven development of the economy between urban and rural areas has led to significant differences in the allocation of educational resources between urban and rural areas. Urban areas, with their economic advantages, have superior educational infrastructure and higher overall teacher quality compared to rural areas. Rural students face greater difficulties in accessing high-quality educational resources, and the gap in educational resources between urban and rural areas has become a key factor constraining educational equity.

Uneven distribution of educational resources across regions: From a regional perspective, education resources are highly concentrated in economically developed eastern regions, which have abundant reserves of high-quality educational resources. In contrast, central and western regions face relative shortages of educational resources. Taking the distribution of “211 Project” universities as an example, eastern developed regions like Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou have a large number of universities, while remote provinces like Yunnan and Guizhou have few. This significant disparity in the distribution of educational resources across regions hinders the comprehensive realization of educational equity.

(2) Significant shortcomings in welfare coverage

Challenges in education for migrant workers’ children: Due to household registration restrictions, children of migrant workers face numerous obstacles when enrolling in school and struggle to access high-quality educational institutions; left-behind children also face multiple challenges in education, mental health, and safety. In terms of education, they may lack adequate learning conditions and tutoring support; psychologically, prolonged separation from parents can lead to emotional deficits and mental health issues; and in terms of safety, the absence of supervision poses certain risks. These issues severely impact the healthy growth and comprehensive development of migrant workers’ children.

Weak educational support for special groups: Although the state has established a series of educational welfare policies targeting special groups such as people with disabilities, women, and the elderly, in actual implementation, due to insufficient resource allocation and inadequate enforcement of protective measures, these policies often fail to fully meet the educational needs of special groups. For example, some special education schools have weak teaching staff and outdated teaching equipment, unable to provide high-quality educational services for special students.

(3) Insufficient funding and management

Misconceptions about adequate funding: In recent years, China’s education funding has continued to grow, but in the compulsory education stage, the per-student operational funding in many areas only meets the national benchmark standard, failing to meet the actual needs of schools for daily teaching and development. Additionally, the wages and overall benefits of primary and secondary school teachers are generally low, affecting their work enthusiasm and occupational stability, which in turn has a negative impact on teaching quality. Furthermore, the per-student funding standards for inclusive kindergartens are relatively low, leading to funding shortages in areas such as teacher recruitment and the updating of teaching facilities, thereby constraining the development of preschool education.

Insufficient participation of social forces in education funding: Non-fiscal social education funding accounts for a low proportion of total education funding, and donation income is showing a downward trend. This reflects low enthusiasm among social forces for participating in education, with a need to strengthen their attention and support for the education sector. The scarcity of social education funding limits the diversification of educational resources and hinders the overall improvement of educational quality.

The level of performance management in education funding needs to be improved: In the allocation and use of education funding, management is not precise enough, leading to resource waste and low usage efficiency. Additionally, schools have limited autonomy in the use of education funding, making it difficult to flexibly adjust funding directions based on their actual circumstances, which affects the efficiency of funding use and the improvement of educational quality.

2. Development of Education Welfare Systems in Developed Countries and Implications

(1) Current development of education welfare systems in other countries

3.2.1 Japan’s education welfare system

(1) Definition of the connotation and classification of social education welfare

In the framework of Japan’s education system, “social education welfare” is a rich and wide-ranging concept, which encompasses adult education, non-formal education, out-of-school education, and various community activities. The Basic Law on Education defines it as “educational activities at the social level that meet the development needs of individuals and society”. The Social Education Law further clarifies its essential nature as a systematic educational activity. For example, the management of vocational training institutions belongs to the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, and is not within the scope of social education as defined by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. Private piano lessons, extracurricular tuition classes, sports training, etc. are also not included in the scope of social education benefits. Based on this, social education benefits can be divided into two categories: narrow and broad. Social, educational, and welfare in the narrow sense refers to the part that is clearly defined by law and administered by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. In a broad sense, social education benefits cover the relevant educational activities carried out by other non-governmental organizations or individuals.

(2) The core carrier of social education development – the public hall

The development of social education in Japan is supported by the “public hall” as the core supporting force. Born in 1946 after the promulgation of the new Constitution, Kominkan was founded to help people rebuild their values after the war through a model of mutual learning and self-directed learning. Under the active promotion of the central government’s policies, the public hall has rapidly spread and has become an important landmark institution in the process of democratizing education in Japan. As of 2008, about 15,943 public halls have been established nationwide, and a series of policies have been introduced to support them. For example, the 1960 Ten-Year Plan for the Spread of Municipal Public Centers and the 1988 renaming of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, and Education Bureau to the Lifelong Learning Bureau have provided strong policy guarantees for the development of public centers. In addition, as of 2008, 3,165 libraries and 1,245 museums have been established, and these public cultural facilities complement each other and contribute to the development of social education in Japan. The 2006 revision of the Basic Law on Education strengthened the concept of lifelong learning, and the 2008 revision of the Social Education Act also aimed to meet the new needs of social development in the new era, further promoting the improvement of Japan’s social education welfare system.

Data resource：WWW.CEICDETE.COM | World Bank

(3) The effectiveness and problems faced by the development of social education

Thanks to the effective implementation of a series of policies, Japan’s primary school net enrolment rate has remained stable at more than 98% since 1977, and has been increasing year by year and stabilizing at nearly 100%. However, enrolment rates are not static and fluctuate somewhat. On the one hand, the number of school-age children is on a downward trend. Japan’s total population has been declining since its peak in 2008, with children aged 6-11 declining by about 0.7 per cent per year, and this decline continued by the mid-2010s. Between 1975 and 2014, the proportion of the population under the age of 15 fell from 24.3 per cent to 12.8 per cent, which directly led to a significant reduction in the absolute number of children of primary school age. On the other hand, some children of primary school age have opted for special, non-formal or secondary education programmes, but they are not included in the primary school statistics system. As the number of students with special educational needs continues to increase, some school-age children go to vocational schools, and these enrollment data are not fully included in the net enrolment ratio (NER) statistics of mainstream primary schools. In addition, between 2008 and 2014, the number of foreign children in Japan increased by about 20 percent, and a small number of them were not covered by the official primary school net enrolment ratio statistics due to differences in language and school system, which also had an impact on the enrolment statistics.

3.2.2 Swedish educational welfare system

(1) Recent development trends

In recent years, Sweden’s education welfare system has shown the following significant developments: the Swedish government continues to increase its investment in education. For example, SEK 700 million will be increased in financial support for pre-school, primary and after-school care in 2025, while SEK 900 million will be allocated to improve the quality of pre-school education. In addition, the government requires schools to increase support for disadvantaged students and reduce the educational gap between different groups of students by formulating relevant policies and measures. At the same time, Sweden also provides special education benefits for ethnic minorities such as the Sámi and for children with hearing impairments or severe learning disabilities, ensuring that all students have access to education in a level educational environment and equal educational opportunities.

(2) The main manifestations of the education and welfare system

1. Tuition fee waiver: From kindergarten to high school, Swedish public schools are exempt from tuition fees for both domestic students and EU/EEA students. In addition, from primary school to master’s degree, Sweden also implements a tuition-free policy for eligible students, which greatly reduces the educational burden of families and promotes the equitable development of education.
2. Free Lunch Guarantee: Public schools provide students with nutritious and balanced free lunches with reasonable combinations to ensure that students have sufficient energy in the learning process. Free lunch not only helps students’ physical health, but also cultivates students’ collective consciousness and good eating habits.
3. Free medical services: The school is equipped with professional medical personnel to provide students with free basic medical services, including regular physical examinations, first aid treatment and disease prevention. Through early detection and resolution of students’ health problems, we can ensure students’ physical health and provide strong support for students’ learning and life.
4. Continue to increase investment in education: The Swedish government will continue to increase education subsidies, increasing investment in pre-school education, primary education and after-school care by SEK 700 million (about 549 million yuan) in 2025, and providing SEK 900 million (about 706 million yuan) of financial support to improve the quality of preschool education. The continuous increase in investment in education provides a solid material foundation for the development of education in Sweden and helps to improve the quality and level of education.

Implications for China from Japanese and Nordic Education Welfare Policies

(1) Learn from Japan’s experience and promote the balanced allocation of educational resources

Japan has accumulated a wealth of practical experience in the balanced allocation of educational resources. China can learn from its practice, increase capital investment and policy support for areas with weak educational resources, make full use of modern information technology means, such as the Internet and big data, to promote the sharing of high-quality educational resources, narrow the educational gap between regions and between urban and rural areas, and achieve a balanced allocation of educational resources.

(2) Strengthen cooperation between vocational education and industry, and improve the efficiency of vocational education The internal training system of Japanese enterprises is perfect, and the government has also invested a lot of money to support vocational skills training, and the training content is closely integrated with the needs of the industry. China should strengthen the in-depth cooperation between vocational education and industry, establish a collaborative innovation mechanism for industry, academia, research and application, encourage enterprises to actively participate in the cultivation of vocational education talents, adjust the professional setting and curriculum content of vocational education in a timely manner according to market demand and industrial development trends, improve the pertinence and practicability of vocational education, and cultivate more high-quality skilled talents to meet the needs of social and economic development.

(3) Improve the lifelong education system and build a lifelong learning society

Japan attaches great importance to lifelong education and promotes the formation of a lifelong learning society through legislation and other means. China can further improve the lifelong education system, formulate relevant policies and regulations, encourage social forces to participate in lifelong education, establish diversified lifelong learning platforms and channels, and provide diversified learning opportunities and resources for people of different ages, so as to meet people’s needs for lifelong learning and promote all-round human development.

(4) Expand the scope of free education to ensure the fairness and justice of education

Public schools in the Nordic countries are free of charge from primary school to doctoral level, and school buses, lunches and other living guarantees are also provided. China can gradually expand the scope of free education, increase financial assistance for students from economically disadvantaged families, and establish a sound education funding system to ensure that every child can enjoy fair and quality education, and promote educational equity and social justice.

(5) Pay attention to the implementation of quality education and cultivate students’ ability to innovate

Nordic education focuses on cultivating children’s creativity, independent thinking ability and comprehensive quality. In the course of education reform, China should pay more attention to the implementation of quality education, reform traditional education and teaching methods, reduce students’ homework burden, encourage students to actively participate in practical activities and innovation competitions, cultivate students’ innovative spirit and practical ability, and improve students’ overall quality and competitiveness.

(6) Optimize the tax structure and improve the efficiency of the use of education funds

The Nordic countries underpin a high-welfare education system through high taxes. At the same time, China can strengthen the supervision and evaluation of the use of education funds, establish a scientific and rational mechanism for the allocation and management of education funds, improve the efficiency of the use of education funds, and ensure that education funds can be truly used for the development of education.

Suggestions

(1) Optimizing Resource Allocation to Promote Educational Equity and Balance

Currently, the uneven distribution of educational resources across regions and between urban and rural areas is a prominent issue in China. To address this situation, it is necessary to increase investment in areas with insufficient educational resources. In terms of infrastructure, efforts should be made to improve the educational conditions of schools in underdeveloped areas, update teaching equipment, and construct modern teaching buildings, laboratories, libraries, and other facilities. Additionally, establish urban-rural school alliances to facilitate deep cooperation between high-quality urban schools and underdeveloped rural schools.

Educational resource needs vary across different educational stages and should be allocated reasonably. In the preschool education stage, prioritize expanding resources. The government should increase investment in preschool education, expand the number of inclusive kindergartens, and enhance preschool education coverage. In the vocational education sector, strengthen resource development. Improve facilities such as training bases to provide students with more practical operation opportunities and enhance their vocational skills. At the same time, strengthen cooperation with enterprises, adjust professional programs and course content based on market demand, enhance the attractiveness and quality of vocational education, and cultivate more high-quality technical and skilled talents for society.

(2) Improve the financial aid system to safeguard students’ right to education

Precise financial aid is a crucial measure to ensure educational equity. Based on students’ actual circumstances, provide differentiated financial aid schemes. For students from extremely economically disadvantaged families, offer full tuition waivers and living expense subsidies; for students from moderately economically disadvantaged families, provide partial tuition waivers or scholarships. Additionally, strengthen supervision of financial aid funds to ensure they are accurately and promptly distributed to students in greatest need, preventing waste or misuse of funds.

Financial aid should not be limited to tuition and living expenses but should also cover learning materials, extracurricular tutoring, and social practice activities. Furthermore, the scope of financial aid should be extended to more areas beyond compulsory education, such as adult education and continuing education. Providing financial aid to adults with learning needs helps them enhance their personal qualities and vocational skills, thereby promoting the development of a lifelong learning society.

(3) Strengthening teacher development to improve educational quality

Teachers are the core force driving the development of the education sector, and improving teacher compensation is key to attracting outstanding talent to the field. Establish a mechanism for adjusting teacher salaries based on economic development levels and changes in the cost of living. Simultaneously, provide teachers with a good working environment and welfare benefits to enhance their professional appeal and sense of belonging.

Establish a long-term teacher training mechanism to provide teachers with regular professional training and further education opportunities. Training content should cover educational theory, teaching methods, and information technology applications to help teachers continuously update their educational concepts and improve their teaching skills. Encourage teachers to participate in educational research and innovative practices, and support teachers in conducting research projects and educational reform experiments. Recognize and reward teachers who achieve outstanding results in educational research and innovative practices to stimulate their innovative enthusiasm and work initiative.

（4）Pay attention to special groups and achieve educational equity and inclusiveness

Improve the special education system and protect the rights and interests of children with disabilities

Children with disabilities are a special group in the education system. The special education system should be improved to provide them with personalized education plans and rehabilitation services. Strengthen the construction of special education schools, equip them with professional teachers and rehabilitation equipment, and meet the learning and rehabilitation needs of children with disabilities. At the same time, promote the development of inclusive education to facilitate their social integration.

CONCLUSION

In modern times, the fundamental role of education has become more and more prominent, and it has become the key to guaranteeing “process equity” for citizens. In reality, however, the “Matthew effect” has intensified, and the inequality of educational resources is a major contributing factor. Many families place their hopes for a change in their lives on education, which makes the role of education welfare as the core guarantee for the realization of process equity crucial.

In recent years, the issue of educational equity in China has attracted much attention, becoming a focal point of people’s livelihood for many years in a row, reflecting both the awakening of civil rights awareness and the importance of education, as well as the existence of shortcomings in the education welfare system. Unlike the national education system, the education welfare system focuses on the protection of basic human rights and the right to development, so as to build up the bottom line of equity. In light of the current development of China’s education welfare system, such as the balanced promotion of compulsory education, the continuous improvement of the education subsidy system, and other practical achievements, it is necessary to continue to optimize the education welfare policy based on the national conditions and to raise the level of protection, so that the sunshine of education fairness can benefit more groups.

REFERENCES

1. Deen J. (2007) Higher Education in Sweden: International Higher Education Monitor.
2. Enschede: University of Twente, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS).
3. Trends and issues in studies on social stratification and education. The Journal of Educational Sociology, 93, 151–91.
4. A genealogy of the views of social education in Japanese social work theory: A consideration of its position. Problems of Social Work, 10, 48–76.
5. Valentina Di Stasio（2017）：Education as social policy: Anintroductionhttps://doi.org/10.1177/0958928717728712
6. Andres L, Pechar H (2013) Participation patterns in higher education: a comparative welfare and production régime perspective. European Journal of Education48(2): 247–261.
7. Beblavý M, Thum A, Veselkova M 3(2013) Education and social protection policies in OECD countries: social stratification and policy intervention. Journal of European Social Policy23(5): 487–503.
8. Beller E, Hout M (2006) Welfare states and social mobility: how educational and social policy may affect cross-national differences in the association between occupational origins and destinations. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility24(4): 353–365.
9. Blossfeld H-P, Buchholz S, Skopek J, et al. (2016) Models of Secondary Education and Social Inequality: An International Comparison. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
10. Assessment of Welfare Packages in Secondary Schools: An Implication on Educational Managershttps://doi.org/10.33084/neraca.v10i1.8404
11. Willemse, Nienke, and Paul De Beer. “Three worlds of educational welfare states? A comparative study of higher education systems across welfare states.” Journal of European Social Policy 22.2 (2012): 105-117.
12. Kitamura, Yuto, Toshiyuki Omomo, and Masaaki Katsuno. Education in Japan. Springer Singapore, 2019.
13. Duke, Benjamin C. The history of modern japanese education: constructing the national school system, 1872-1890. Rutgers University Press, 2009.
14. Bunar, Nihad. “Migration and education in Sweden: Integration of migrants in the Swedish school education and higher education systems.” NESET II ad hoc Question 3 (2017): 1-19.
15. Högberg, Björn, et al. “Consequences of school grading systems on adolescent health: evidence from a Swedish school reform.” Journal of education policy 36.1 (2021): 84-106.