The numbers from China’s National Civil Service Administration are sobering: 3.72 million applicants were deemed eligible for the national exam, competing for a 1.35% acceptance rate. That puts the ratio of test-takers to available positions at 74-to-1. Looking at the data in recent years, it’s clear to any observer that the country’s “civil-service exam fever” cannot be sustained.
Unlock exclusive discounts with a Caixin group subscription — ideal for teams and organizations.
Subscribe to both Caixin Global and The Wall Street Journal — for the price of one.
Digest Hub
Back
[para. 1] The first paragraph presents compelling statistics: 3.72 million applicants were eligible for China’s national civil service exam, which has an exceptionally competitive acceptance rate of 1.35%. This means there are about 74 candidates for every available government position. The scale of this competition has raised concerns that the current trend of “civil-service exam fever” is unsustainable and might reflect deeper issues in employment expectations and opportunities in China.
[para. 2] This “fever” marks a reversal from the early 1990s when China's youth abandoned secure government jobs—often referred to as “iron rice bowls”—to seek opportunities in business. Back then, the collective mindset was to leave the structured state sector and pursue riskier, entrepreneurial avenues. Today, however, the same demographic is desperate to enter the very system their predecessors left, indicating significant shifts in career ambitions and socioeconomic factors.
[para. 3] The roots of this change trace back more than 30 years, when reforms aimed at establishing a “socialist market economy” inspired a nationwide wave of entrepreneurship. Government employees and state-owned enterprise workers left for the private sector, creating a generation of influential entrepreneurs, commonly known as the “Class of ’92”. At that time, market participation was seen as a gateway to personal advancement and economic transformation, despite its challenges and uncertainties.
[para. 4] The tables have now turned due to a combination of a slowing global economy and challenges facing the private sector, which have eroded confidence in entrepreneurial opportunities. For today’s youth, job stability offered by government positions is increasingly valued as economic “safe harbors”. Many now prefer managing entrepreneurs within state structures to becoming entrepreneurs themselves. While this reflects a rational desire for security, it raises alarms about a potential decline in societal innovation and economic vibrancy.
[para. 5] The growing allure of the civil service is also reshaping academic and career preparation. Elite universities offer free exam preparation, sometimes at the expense of traditional academic exploration. Even high school subject choices are informed by future prospects in the civil service exam. The concentration of talent in such a narrow career channel is sparking debate about whether this trend is excessive and counterproductive.
[para. 6] Sustaining a large cohort of government-supported workers strains China’s “three guarantees” (basic welfare, salaries, and operating costs). A larger bureaucracy, according to historical political warnings, leads to greater inefficiency and interference in economic affairs—a detriment to a thriving market economy. Administrative reforms have attempted to address these issues but have not eliminated them. The article also cautions that today’s “iron rice bowl” may not offer the long-term security it promises.
[para. 7] The opportunity costs associated with civil service mania are significant. When talented individuals dedicate their efforts to test preparation rather than innovation, scientific research, or entrepreneurship, societal development suffers. High-achieving graduates taking low-impact bureaucratic jobs represents a misallocation of human capital, diminishing both individual and societal progress.
[para. 8] Historical examples reinforce the perils of an oversized bureaucracy. In the late Han, Northern Song, and Ming dynasties, excessive officialdom led to inefficiency, fiscal strains, and even societal decline. These precedents highlight the need for dynamic talent distribution and a spirit of innovation—not just risk-avoidance.
[para. 9] The article argues that the state should provide a stable environment, not become a catch-all sanctuary for risk-averse talent, and that markets should be made more attractive and less daunting. Lasting security comes not from government jobs, but from personal competitiveness and a fair developmental environment.
[para. 10] Since the number of government positions is inherently limited, rejuvenating the market— rather than expanding the state bureaucracy — presents the true path forward for China’s development.
[para. 11] Zhang Fan is noted as the opinion editor at Caixin Media, who authored the analysis summarized here.
Copyright © 2024 Caixin Global Limited. All Rights Reserved.
Sign in with Google
Sign in with Facebook
Sign in with 财新