This essay examines how the term 'empowerment' ('funeng' in Chinese) takes on different meanings and implications in various fields and social practices across China and the West.
Credit: Suzi Kim on Unsplash.
Huang Yunjing is a Lecturer at Hong Kong Shue Yan University.
This essay explores how the term ‘empowerment’ (“赋能” in Chinese) has emerged as a catchphrase in various fields and social practices across China and the West. It examines two distinct approaches to empowerment, delving into how cultural nuances and contextual factors influence its interpretation and application to convey differing values. The idea of providing a comparative exploration of the term ‘empowerment’ (赋能) was sparked by a conversation with friends who once worked at a state-owned real estate company in South China. At that time, I had just returned from the UK, and it was our first gathering in the post-COVID era. During our discussion, we talked about the translations of recent catchphrases in China, and one term stood out: “赋能”. My friend asked how to translate this term into English, noting its popularity in the writing of policy and publicity documents at her company, as well as in various other Chinese companies. Intrigued, I searched for “赋能” on WeChat Moments and found numerous articles shared by my friends across different fields that featured the term.
When I told my friend that “赋能” translates to ‘empowerment,’ she was amazed by the apparent precision between the Chinese and English terms. However, as I delved deeper into the meaning of “赋能” within the Chinese context, I realised that despite the literal accuracy, the underlying connotations of ‘empowerment’ and “赋能” are remarkably distinct within their respective social and cultural frameworks. The concept of ‘empowerment’ that I am familiar with is deeply rooted in community engagement across various fields, particularly in museums and heritage sectors. In this context, ‘empowerment’ signifies the elicitation of bottom-up engagement, fostering alternative meaning-making, and encouraging counter-narratives in terms of engaging the public and community.
In Western contexts, the term ‘empower’ is extensively utilised in community engagement and policy-making within cultural and social sectors. For example, the World Health Organisation (WHO) uses the concept of ‘community empowerment’ to articulate their health promotion goals, describing it as the process of enabling communities to take control of their circumstances, exercise their rights, and achieve their goals. Here, ‘empowerment’ signifies the way individuals gain ownership over the factors and decisions that influence their lives, by increasing their assets and capacities to access resources, form partnerships, build networks, and find their voice. Additionally, ‘enabling’ suggests that true empowerment cannot be given by others; individuals must empower themselves by acquiring different forms of power. This approach views people as their own primary assets, with external agents serving to catalyse, support, or accompany communities on their journey to empowerment.
Key to this concept of empowerment is that individuals are the ones being empowered, with the aim of fostering greater autonomy, self-confidence, and social equality. In the Chinese context, however, the usage of the term ‘empowerment’ (“赋能”) can differ significantly, often applied within business and industrial sectors. Here, ‘empowerment’ is rooted in Management Studies and has become a common term. Currently, there are two prominent usages observed. First, empowerment is framed as a top-down narrative in leadership, where it involves training and providing resources to employees, thereby enhancing their skill sets and fostering personal growth. Within this usage, empowerment further refers to granting employees more rights and autonomy in decision-making processes, which also contributes to their personal development. The second usage of the term ‘empowerment’ addresses it to a different subject – a specific industry. ‘Empowerment’ has become a catchphrase in the headlines of numerous articles promoting various sectors. For instance, technological advancements empower green and sustainable travel; the development of AI empowers the creative industry; and design creativity empowers popular culture and digital technology. This discourse on industry empowerment highlights a strategic redistribution of power, aiming to position these sectors as key influencers capable of driving significant economic and social change, thus enabling them to become ‘powerful’ industries.
The differing applications of empowerment in Western and Chinese contexts reveal significant implications for how empowerment is perceived and enacted to highlight and convey different values. In the example of the Western contexts, the focus on community and individual empowerment underscores a commitment to fostering social equality and personal autonomy. This approach empowers individuals to become active agents in their own lives and communities, enhancing their capacity to influence outcomes and drive social change. It reflects a bottom-up perspective, where empowerment is seen as a personal and collective journey towards greater control and self-determination.
In contrast, the Chinese application of empowerment within business and industrial sectors highlights a more structured and hierarchical approach. Here, empowerment is often a top-down process, where leaders and managers provide the necessary tools, training, and autonomy for employees to grow and excel. This reflects a focus on organisational development and efficiency, where empowerment serves as a strategy to enhance productivity and innovation within specific industries. By framing empowerment as both a leadership tool and a driver of industry advancement, this approach emphasises the role of structured support and resource provision in achieving empowerment goals.
In the Western community engagement approach, the term ‘empowerment’ implies a shift of power towards the individual, fostering a sense of ownership and personal agency. This perspective emphasises decentralisation, encouraging individuals and communities to take control of their circumstances and decisions. Conversely, in the management approach becoming prevalent in China, empowerment often suggests a retention of power at higher organisational levels, with a controlled dissemination of empowerment aimed at collective growth and efficiency. Here, leaders and managers play a pivotal role in enabling empowerment through structured support and resources.
Providing a comparative overview of these two approaches highlights the cultural and structural differences in how empowerment is conceptualised and enacted, reflecting broader societal values and power dynamics. Ultimately, the varying usages of the term ‘empowerment’ provide different perceptions regarding the conceptualisation and understanding of power—who holds it, how it is distributed, and how the power/knowledge nexus is challenged.
Overall, these differing usages of empowerment illustrate how cultural and contextual factors shape the concept’s interpretation and application. While both approaches aim to foster growth and development, they reflect distinct values and priorities, highlighting the dynamic nature of empowerment across different societal landscapes.