陈方豪教授谈华侨系列研究 Fanghao Chen on Diaspora Networks and Overseas Chinese Investment
本文于 2026 年 6 月 13 日同日发布于微信公众号 Impactful Research 与本网站。
Published on 2026-06-13 on both the WeChat official account Impactful Research and this website.
来源：Google图文
Impactful Research 的读者朋友们，大家好！
这段时间，电影《给阿嬷的情书》热度攀升，让更多人开始关注 华侨与故乡之间的情感纽带。很多人第一次接触“侨批”，可能并不是通过经济学研究，而是通过文学作品或历史故事。有人把侨批称为“家书”，甚至有人把它理解为一封封跨越海洋寄回故乡的情书。从经济学的视角来看，这些看似充满情感色彩的联系，往往也承载着资金、信息、信任与社会网络的流动。
本期开拓者系列，我们邀请到了暨南大学管理学院助理教授，广东产业发展与粤港澳台区域合作研究中心副研究员陈方豪，分享他在侨资领域的研究经历，并分享一些供年轻学者与博士生尝试研究华侨领域的建议。陈方豪在北京大学国家发展研究院取得经济学专业博士，研究方向为族群网络的经济学，特别是海外华人网络作为中国与全球经济之间贸易、资本、技术和知识流动的中介，重点关注它们的历史形成、长期存在以及在不断变化的地缘政治环境下支持中国产业升级和中国企业国际扩张的演变作用。
本文正文内容约12,000字，全文阅读需约25分钟
本期访谈主要问题
1. 作为长期研究华侨经济史的学者，您最初是如何进入这一研究领域的？又是什么让您意识到，这些跨越国界的乡土联系背后蕴含着值得经济学关注的重要问题？
2. 您近年来持续关注华侨、跨国网络与中国经济发展的主题。从更宏观的角度来看，您觉得为什么“华侨研究”（华侨网络、侨汇、侨批以及华人间的跨国社会联系）正在重新受到经济学家的关注？或者说您为什么觉得这一研究方向很重要？
3. 很多人对于华侨的印象停留在历史叙事层面，例如“下南洋”“爱国华侨”等故事。作为经济学研究者，您认为华侨最值得被经济学研究的地方是什么（本质是一种资本来源、信息渠道、社会网络，还是一种特殊的制度安排）？为什么这些社会联系能够跨越时间和空间持续发挥作用？这种力量究竟来源是什么（文化认同、信任机制，还是经济利益）？
4. 在研究华侨问题时，您觉得最困难的地方是什么？无论是数据获取、历史资料整理，还是将历史现象转化为可检验的经济学问题，这个领域似乎都面临许多挑战。您是如何克服这些困难的？
5. 除了数据和历史文献之外，您是否有一些来自实地调研或日常交流的观察？例如在东南亚国家与当地华人社群接触时，有没有哪些见闻或对话让您真正感受到华侨网络的存在，并影响了您对这个研究领域的理解？
6. 长久以来经济学界存有争议：前述宗族关系网络属于非正式制度，学界围绕其与正式制度究竟是替代关系还是互补关系持续研讨。关系网络究竟促进发展，还是阻碍发展？有一种观点认为，人际关系和社会网络能够帮助市场形成；另一种观点则认为过度依赖关系可能妨碍现代市场制度的发展，您的看法是什么呢？
7. 您的研究的内容在经济学与社会学、民族学跨学科研究过程中，难免遭遇不少难题，比如很多人会质疑你只做了一个族群，相关选题的外延延展性与结论普适性不够。作为跨学科领域的研究，怎么更好地与其他学科对话，以及如何应对历史学家的批评？
8. 最后一个问题，您围绕华侨、侨批、宗族和跨国网络已经开展了一系列研究。回头来看，从最初的研究问题到今天形成一系列的研究，您是如何一步步拓展这些问题的？在这个过程中，新的研究想法通常来自哪里？如果让您展望未来十年，您认为华侨、跨国网络与发展经济学领域最值得关注的问题是什么？有哪些重要问题仍然没有被充分回答？
Zhang：作为长期研究华侨经济史的学者，您最初是如何进入这一研究领域的？又是什么让您意识到，这些跨越国界的乡土联系背后蕴含着值得经济学关注的重要问题？
Zhang: As an economic researcher on overseas Chinese communities and histories, how did you first come to this field? At what point did you realize that these cross-border hometown networks embodied important issues that deserve the attention of economists?
进入这个话题，其实和我的家庭背景有很大关系。我老家在泉州，那里是著名的侨乡，也是古代海上丝绸之路的重要起点之一。我母亲那边的家族——也就是我后来做族谱研究的那个家族——就是一个非常典型的华侨家族。我外公的一位表兄在改革开放之前就去了印尼经商，改革开放以后又陆续回到家乡投资，捐资助学、兴办工厂。所以，对侨资和华侨的关注，其实是我从小耳濡目染形成的。因此可以说，这个话题从一开始就离我的生活并不遥远。
My decision to enter this field is closely connected to my family background. I come from Quanzhou, a well-known hometown of overseas Chinese and historically the starting point of the Maritime Silk Road. My mother’s family (the family whose genealogy I have been researching) belongs to a traditional overseas Chinese clan. One of my grandfather’s cousins moved to Indonesia before China’s Reform and Opening-up to pursue business opportunities, and after the reforms, he gradually began sending money back home and investing in factories. Influenced by these family experiences, I grew up listening to stories about overseas Chinese, and those stories gradually inspired my interest in understanding the role of overseas Chinese investment.
后来读博的时候，我师从张晓波老师。张老师长期研究产业集群，我也跟着他做了很多企业调研。同时，我读了他写的《中国产业集群的演化与发展》一书。[1]在这本书里，他总结了几种产业集群发展的典型模式，比如苏南模式、温州模式，以及闽粤模式。当时张老师对浙江和江苏的产业发展做过大量研究和实地调查，但像闽粤地区这种依托侨资、港资发展的模式，在他此前的研究中涉及得相对较少。这让我开始意识到，侨资可能是一个很有研究价值的切入点。另外一个契机是，我读博期间选修了新结构经济学研究院王歆老师开设的FDI课程。那门课让我对外资问题产生了更系统的认识。后来，我把这些想法结合起来，去和张老师讨论：能不能把侨资作为一种“种子资本”，研究它在产业发展和经济转型中的作用。 张老师非常支持我的想法，也正是在他的鼓励下，我正式进入了这个研究领域。
During my PhD study, I worked closely with Professor Zhang Xiaobo,whose research focused extensively on industrial clusters. Working with him, I conducted numerous firm-level surveys and read his book, The Evolution and Development of Industrial Clusters in China.(In Chinese).[1] In it, he identifies several major models of industrial cluster development in China, including the Sunan model and the Wenzhou model, as well as what he refers to as the Fujian–Guangdong model. At the time, much of his empirical work had focused on Zhejiang and Jiangsu, while the Fujian–Guangdong model (characterized by the role of overseas Chinese and Hong Kong invested) had not yet been fully explored in his research.
Another important turning point came ,when I took an FDI course taught by Professor Wang Xin at the New Structural Economics Institute. Eventually, I brought these strands together and asked Professor Zhang whether I could study overseas Chinese investment ( its role as a “seed”)in industrial development. He was very supportive, and that was how I entered this field.
Zhang：您近年来持续关注华侨、跨国网络与中国经济发展的主题。从更宏观的角度来看，您觉得为什么“华侨研究”（华侨网络、侨汇、侨批以及华人间的跨国社会联系）正在重新受到经济学家的关注？或者说您为什么觉得这一研究方向很重要？
Zhang：In recent years, you have consistently focused on overseas Chinese communities, cross-border networks, and China’s economic development. From a more macro perspective, why do you think the study of overseas Chinese communities(including diaspora networks, remittances, qiaopi (overseas Chinese remittance letters), and social ties among Chinese)—is attracting renewed attention from economists? More broadly, what makes this line of research particularly important in your view?
对，其实华侨问题受到广泛关注，并不是第一次了。我觉得这里面有一个比较有意思的规律：**每当华侨群体与国家发展产生重要交集的时候，人们就会重新开始关注华侨。 **最早可以追溯到清末。当时以康有为、梁启超为代表的一批改革派希望在国内推动变法，但改革失败后，他们流亡海外。在这个过程中，他们接触到了大量华侨群体。一方面，这些华侨在当地已经积累了相当可观的经济实力；另一方面，他们也让这些改革者看到了海外社会的发展状况。因此，许多人开始意识到，中国的发展或许需要借鉴国外的一些经验和模式。后来，孙中山等革命者同样长期在海外活动。由于在国内难以开展政治活动，他们很大程度上依靠海外华侨的支持来推动革命事业。无论是筹集资金、组织网络，还是传播思想，华侨都发挥了非常重要的作用。
In fact, this is not the first time that overseas Chinese communities have attracted scholarly attention. There seems to be an interesting recurring pattern: whenever overseas Chinese communities become closely connected to national developmentat key historical moments, scholarly and public interest in the topic tends to emerge.
One example dates back to the late Qing period. Reformers such as Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao initially focused their efforts on promoting reform within China. When political constraints intensified, many of them went abroad, where they encountered overseas Chinese communities. They found that many overseas Chinese had achieved considerable economic success abroad and were also exposed to the development in foreign countries. This experience reshaped their thinking, leading them to believe that China should learn from these development patterns in order to strengthen and modernize the country. Another group of people who came later, most notably Sun Yat-sen was also in exile overseas. They drew heavily on the support of overseas Chinese communities to help advance revolutionary movements back in China. At that time, overseas Chinese were also widely discussed and closely followed in China. The Qing government wanted to cultivate ties with overseas Chinese, partly because China lacked the foundations of domestic capitalism. Many of the entrepreneurs who invested in China were not foreigners, but overseas Chinese. In fact, many of the leading capitalists during the Republican era had overseas Chinese backgrounds. Given the limited domestic resources and institutional environment for the development of capitalism, overseas Chinese occupied a particularly influential position and became a major focus of public and political attention.
第二次华侨受到广泛关注是在改革开放时期，这也是我进入这个研究领域的一个重要切入点。当时我在王歆老师的FDI课程上发现，大部分关于中国FDI的研究都依赖工业企业数据库。但这个数据库最早从1998年开始记录企业信息，因此很多研究实际上只能关注中国加入WTO前后的阶段。然而，对于侨资以及港澳台资本而言，它们真正发挥关键作用的时期恰恰是在改革开放初期，特别是20世纪80年代和90年代。对于理解中国经济转型而言，这一时期非常重要，但现有常用数据库却无法覆盖，因此很多相关问题难以开展系统研究。很巧的是，张晓波老师团队当时拥有一套工商注册数据。在那个年代，这是一份非常稀缺的数据资源。我发现这套数据能够追溯到改革开放初期，于是开始尝试利用工商注册数据研究华侨和侨资问题。这样一来，研究视角就不再局限于1998年之后，而能够进一步延伸到改革开放早期，去考察侨资在中国经济发展过程中究竟发挥了怎样的作用。
The second wave of attention came during China’s Reform and Opening-up period, which also became a key starting point for my own research. In Professor Wang Xin ’s FDI course, I realized that most studies on foreign direct investment (FDI) in China relied on industrial firm datasets, which only began in 1998(largely limited to WTO-related topics). The segment of foreign-invested enterprises associated with overseas Chinese capital(including investment from Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan)played its most significant role during the 1980s and 1990s. Those years contain the most important data for this research, but the necessary data are not available in existing databases, which makes related empirical work difficult to carry out. Fortunately, Professor Zhang Xiaobo had access to business registration data(a highly scarce resource at the time),which I also came across. This allowed me to use firm registration data to study overseas Chinese issues and extend the research perspective to the early years of China’s Reform and Opening-Up.
至于为什么今天华侨研究又重新受到关注，我觉得还是因为华侨与国家发展的轨迹再次发生了交集。过去很长一段时间，中国更多是一个吸收外资的国家，大家关注的是FDI如何进入中国、推动中国的发展。但最近这些年，越来越多中国企业开始出海，我们正在逐渐进入一个对外直接投资（OFDI）的时代。随着企业走向海外，它们自然会接触到当地的华人社群和华侨企业。从这个角度来看，华侨企业其实是一批更早完成“出海”的先行者。它们已经在当地扎根、生存并发展起来，因此能够为今天的中国企业提供很多经验和借鉴。对于现在的出海企业来说，如何适应当地环境、建立社会网络、实现长期发展，都是必须面对的问题，而这些恰恰也是华侨群体过去长期积累下来的经验。如果把时间拉长来看，会发现这里面存在一种有意思的循环。最早的时候，很多华侨是因为各种原因离开中国，到海外谋生。等他们在当地站稳脚跟之后，又通过投资、捐赠等方式反哺家乡，成为推动中国经济发展的重要力量。今天，随着中国经济不断发展壮大，我们又开始向外进行投资和布局。在这个过程中，人们重新开始关注华侨群体，重新思考他们积累的经验和形成的网络能够为中国企业出海提供什么样的帮助。所以我觉得，这背后其实像是一个历史意义上的大循环。华侨曾经帮助中国连接世界，而今天，当中国企业进一步走向世界时，我们又重新回到了这个话题。
As for why overseas Chinese are attracting renewed attention today, I think it is because the trajectories of overseas Chinese communities and national development have intersected once again. For a long time, China was primarily a recipient of foreign direct investment (FDI), and research focused on how foreign capital entered China and contributed to its development. In recent years, however, more Chinese firms have begun expanding abroad, and China is gradually entering an era of outward foreign direct investment (OFDI).
As firms go global, they inevitably encounter local Chinese communities and overseas Chinese businesses. In many ways, these businesses are early pioneers of globalization—they have already established themselves, adapted to local environments, and accumulated valuable experience. For Chinese firms expanding overseas today, challenges such as adapting to local institutions, building social networks, and achieving long-term growth are precisely the kinds of issues overseas Chinese communities have navigated for decades.
Viewed over a longer historical horizon, this reveals an interesting cycle. Many overseas Chinese originally left China to build livelihoods abroad. After establishing themselves, they often contributed to China’s development through investment, philanthropy, and business ties. Today, as China increasingly invests overseas, attention has once again turned to overseas Chinese communities and the networks and experience they have built. In this sense, it feels like a historical full circle: overseas Chinese once helped China connect with the world, and now, as Chinese firms deepen their global presence, we are returning to the same question from a new direction.
Zhang：很多人对于华侨的印象停留在历史叙事层面，例如“下南洋”“爱国华侨”等故事。作为经济学研究者，您认为华侨最值得被经济学研究的地方是什么（本质是一种资本来源、信息渠道、社会网络，还是一种特殊的制度安排）？为什么这些社会联系能够跨越时间和空间持续发挥作用？这种力量究竟来源是什么（文化认同、信任机制，还是经济利益）？
Zhang：Many people’s understanding of overseas Chinese communities remains rooted in historical narratives—stories of emigration to Southeast Asia or patriotic overseas Chinese. As an economist, what do you see as the most important aspect of overseas Chinese communities for economic research? At a fundamental level, should they be understood primarily as providersof capital, channels of information, sources of social networks, or even as distinctive institutional arrangements that facilitate economic exchange? More importantly, why have these social ties been able to persist and remain influential acrosstime and geography? In your view, what ultimately sustains their strength—cultural identity, trust-based mechanisms, economic incentives, or the combination of these factors?
我觉得它折射了一个重要的问题：正式制度与非正式制度之间究竟是替代还是互补。 这其实是我那篇 Journal of International Economics[2]文章很重要的框架，编辑问我们的研究跟之前做移民网络（对FDI促进）的文章最大的区别是什么。我的回答是，这里面有一个非常重要的中国语境：在中国，长期以来存在“侨务”这样一种特殊的制度安排。它本质上是一种基于身份和社会关系的“人格化政策”。 也就是说，它更多依托于血缘、地缘、乡缘等社会网络，是一种带有非正式制度色彩的治理方式；相比之下，西方国家的发展路径更强调“去人格化“的正式制度。它们倾向于尽可能减少个人身份因素对制度运行的影响，而是依据一套普遍适用、相对抽象的规则来组织社会和经济活动。[注解1]至少在很长一段时间里，我们的社会运行中都包含着比较多基于人际关系和身份网络的因素。过去，西方学界在比较中西方发展路径时，普遍认为东方之所以相对落后，一个重要原因就是没有建立起非人格化的制度体系。当然，现在回过头来看，这种解释多少带有一些事后归因的色彩。随着中国的发展，越来越多学者也开始重新思考：究竟是什么因素造成了这种差异，以及过去那些被认为不利于发展的因素，是否在特定历史条件下也发挥过积极作用。
It raises an important question: Are formal institutions and informal institutions substitutes or complements to each other? **This forms a key theoretical framework in one of my articles published in the Journal of International Economics.[2]One question raised by the editors was how our study differs from the existing literature on migrant networks and their role in promoting FDI. My response was that the difference lies fundamentally in the Chinese context.In China, there has long been a unique institutional arrangement called qiaowu (overseas Chinese affairs). **Qiaowu is a kind of “personalized policy” based on identity and social relationships. In other words, it relies heavily on kinship ties, hometown connections, and other social networks, making it closer to an informal institution. By contrast, Western countries have generally developed more impersonal formal institutions. The goal is to reduce the role of personal identity and instead govern economic and social activities through a set of general and abstract rules. [Note1]At least for a long period of time, China’s social and economic development remained deeply associated with interpersonal factors. A common argument in Western scholarship has been to compare Chinese and Western development trajectories and ask why the East lagged behind. They often attribute it to the absence of impersonal institutions. But such explanations can sometimes feel retrospective or overly deterministic. Now that China has achieved remarkable economic development, more and more scholars have started to revisit this question: What actually caused these differences? And could some of the factors that were once seen as obstacles to development have, under certain historical conditions, played a positive role instead.
东南亚的经济就是依托华人发展的，在“亚洲四小龙”阶段，曾经有一种思潮叫“儒家资本主义”。当时不少学者注意到，那些发展较快的东亚和东南亚经济体中，往往都有华人群体的广泛参与，于是开始反过来思考，儒家文化中是否存在一些有利于经济发展的因素。这种“儒家资本主义”与西方讨论的资本主义并不完全一样。西方关于资本主义的经典叙事，往往强调宗教伦理和企业家精神，认为个人创业和财富创造具有某种宗教意义。而儒家资本主义则更强调家族传承，比如积累财富、发展事业，很大程度上是为了家族延续和后代发展，通过家族网络不断扩大和延续这种影响力。
The economies of Southeast Asia have, to a significant extent, been shaped by the contributions of overseas Chinese. During the rise of the “Four Asian Tigers,” a school of thought known as “Confucian capitalism” also emerged. Observing that ethnic Chinese communities played an important role in many of Southeast Asia’s rapidly growing economies, scholars began to work backward to explain this pattern.The argument was that certain features of Confucian culture were particularly compatible with capitalist development, though in ways distinct from Western capitalism. Western capitalism has often been understood as being shaped by religious influences, emphasizing entrepreneurial initiative and the idea that economic success aligns with a kind of divine calling. By contrast, Confucian capitalism places greater emphasis on family continuity and intergenerational transmission (the accumulation of wealth not only for individual success, but to pass on to future generations) expanding the strength and influence of the family lineage.
Zhang：在研究华侨问题时，您觉得最困难的地方是什么？无论是数据获取、历史资料整理，还是将历史现象转化为可检验的经济学问题，这个领域似乎都面临许多挑战。您是如何克服这些困难的？
Zhang：During your research on overseas Chinese communities, what was the largest challenge and how did you overcome it? Do you find it difficult in data collection, the collection of historical materials, or translating historical stories into testable economic questions?
华侨是一个由研究对象定义的学科，我觉得它最大的挑战在于跨学科领域。它可以跟不同的学科交叉，这是既是优势，也是劣势。 优势在于，你可以和不同领域的学者交流。不同学科的人往往会从不同的角度理解同一个问题，从而为你提供非常多样化的视角和启发。但劣势也恰恰来自这里，毕竟这是一个相对小众的研究领域，尤其是在经济学和管理学内部，真正从事相关研究的人并不多。因此，在论文发表和学术交流过程中，有时很难迅速获得同行的共鸣，很多人会觉得这个话题没有一般性的学术意义。所以我觉得，一种做法就是与不同领域的学者合作，看看他们会如何利用各自学科的理论框架来切入。
Overseas Chinese studies is defined more by its research subject than by a particular discipline, so one of the biggest challenges is crossing disciplinary boundaries. It intersects with a wide range of disciplines, which is both its strength and its weakness. Its strength lies in the opportunity to engage with scholars from many different fields, each of whom brings a distinct perspective to the topic. This allows for a highly diverse range of insights and intellectual input. At the same time, this is also where the challenge lies. Because it is a relatively niche field, there are often few direct peers within any given discipline—for example, in economics or management. As a result, it can be difficult to gain recognition from disciplinary audiences when publishing research, as some may see it as lacking broader theoretical relevance or generalizability. This makes cross-disciplinary collaboration especially important: researchers need to work with scholars from different fields and think about how the topic can be approached through the conceptual frameworks of those disciplines.
我们其实很早就在做收集“侨批“这个工作，但过去一直很难实现技术上的量化。我会专门去读华侨研究方面的书，回老家时也会去华侨博物馆，看博物馆研究人员出版的研究成果。不过，直接利用侨批开展研究的难度非常大，因为大部分侨批都是手写的，字迹识别本身就很困难，需要专门的研究人员长期进行修复、整理和辨别。很多研究人员可能花一辈子的时间，才能把这些以图片形式保存下来的侨批转化成我们能看得懂的文字资料。某种意义上说，我们今天能够开展相关研究，也是站在这些巨人的肩膀上。一般来说，研究华侨的学者往往聚焦于某一个地区，彼此之间的交流和比较相对有限，很少有人去做跨地区的系统比较。我们的优势在于，可以利用新的技术手段把这些已有成果整合起来，从量化的角度重新去看：不同地区之间到底有哪些差异，它们共同的宏观特征又是什么。 这些都是过去比较难做到的事情。
We began collecting qiaopi (overseas Chinese remittance letters) quite early, but for a long time there was no practical way to analyze them quantitatively. I read specialized books on overseas Chinese studies, and whenever I returned to my hometown, I would visit overseas Chinese museums and read research published by museum scholars.Directly working with qiaopi is extremely difficult. Most are handwritten and often hard to decipher, requiring dedicated specialists to restore, transcribe, and interpret them. In many cases, researchers spend an entire career studying qiaopi just to turn archived images of these letters into texts that others can actually read and use. We then build on those results for further research—in many ways, we are already standing on the shoulders of giants.
Generally speaking, scholars of overseas Chinese studies tend to focus on a particular locality or community, and there is relatively little exchange across these subfields. Comparative work across regions is rare. What we bring, in a sense, is a technical advantage: the ability to integrate findings produced by different scholars and examine them quantitatively. This allows us to ask broader questions that earlier research struggled to address:what are the differences across regions, and what broader macro-level patterns characterize overseas Chineseas a whole?
Zhang：除了数据和历史文献之外，您是否有一些来自实地调研或日常交流的观察？例如在东南亚国家与当地华人社群接触时，有没有哪些见闻或对话让您真正感受到华侨网络的存在，并影响了您对这个研究领域的理解？
Zhang：Beyond datasets and archives, I am curious whether your fieldwork or personal interactions have also influenced your understanding of overseas Chinese communities. For instance, when engaging with local Chinese communities in Southeast Asia, were there any moments or conversations that made the role of overseas Chinese networks feel especially tangible to you—and perhaps even changed the way you think about this field?
给我印象最深的是马来西亚，因为那里的华人相关资料和实物保存得非常好。 有一次，我在外公家族的族谱里看到一份当年修族谱时留下的调查记录，上面详细列出了各个国家需要联系的宗亲会。我当时发现，马来西亚对应的宗亲会是槟城的诗峰社。以前华人下南洋是在海外寻根问祖，而对我来说，正好相反——我是以研究为契机，到马来西亚去“寻叶”。
Malaysia stands out in my memory. It has probably done the best job of preserving materials related to the overseas Chinese community. One interesting experience came from my grandfather’s clan records. While looking through them, I found notes from an earlier effort to update the family genealogy. The records listed the clan associations that needed to be contacted in different countries. What surprised me was that the contact point for Malaysia was the Shifengshe in Penang. In the past, many overseas Chinese used these networks to trace their roots back to China. In my case, research has given me a chance to do the reverse—to go to Malaysia and trace the paths of those who left. Instead of searching for roots, I found myself searching for the branches and leaves that had spread overseas.
在那边实地走访的时候，我能感受华人习俗被保留得很好：拜妈祖和土地公、建宗祠等传统习俗都还在延续，并且与当地多元文化融合很好，我能够在一条路上同时看到基督教堂、清真寺、印度的寺庙以及华人宗祠。为了解释这个现象，有学者提出华人在国外作为少数族群，需要想办法团结才能生存。这时他们会去寻求一个共同的身份标识，而文化作为重要的联系纽带，能帮助他们“抱团“并且认可自己身份，因此这些习俗被留存下来延续至今。另外，不同地区华人之间的命运差异其实很大，这和他们所处的社会环境有关。在一些国家和地区，历史上曾经存在比较严重的排华现象。为了更好地融入当地社会，很多华人选择隐姓埋名，把自己的姓氏改成当地人的姓氏，语言习惯也逐渐发生了变化。与此同时，也有一部分华侨后来回到国内，被安置到国家设立的“华侨农场” [注解2]，并在国内重新安居下来。
During my field visits in Malaysia, I was struck by how well Chinese traditions have been preserved. Traditional customs such as worshipping Mazu and local deities, as well as building ancestral halls, are still part of people’s everyday life. What impressed me most was how naturally these traditions coexist with local cultures.You can see churches, mosques, Hindu temples, and Chinese ancestral halls on the same street.
Some scholars argue that, as a minority group living overseas, Chinese communities often needed to build solidarity in order to survive and thrive. In doing so, they looked for a shared sense of identity. Culture became an important source of connection, helping people maintain community ties and affirm who they were. This may explain why many of these traditions have been preserved across generations.There are also significant linguistic differences among Chinese communities in different parts of the world. One reason is that overseas Chinese populations faced very different fates depending on the country where they settled. In some places with strong anti-Chinese sentiment, many overseas Chinese chose to adopt local names and change their surnames to blend in with the local population. Over time, their language evolved as well. Others eventually returned to China and settled in government-sponsored Overseas Chinese Farms[Note2], where they built new lives and communities.
Zhang：长久以来经济学界存有争议：我们所聊到的宗族关系网络属于非正式制度，学界围绕其与正式制度究竟是替代关系还是互补关系持续研讨。关系网络究竟促进发展，还是阻碍发展？有一种观点认为，人际关系和社会网络能够帮助市场形成；另一种观点则认为过度依赖关系可能妨碍现代市场制度的发展，您的看法是什么呢？
Zhang：For a long time, economists have debated the role of kinship and relationship networks. These networks are generally viewed as informal institutions that may serve as substitutes or complements for formal institutions. Do you think networks promote development, or do they hold it back? One view is that personal ties and social networks help markets function by facilitating trust, information sharing, and cooperation. Another view is that excessive reliance on relationships may hinder the development of modern market institutions and formal rules. How do you see this issue?
我并不认为二者是非此即彼的对立关系 ，针对这个议题，社会学的观点值得借鉴。社会学往往将二者视作两极对立，马克·格兰诺维特（Mark Granovetter）认为所有的经济行为都嵌入到关系网络中 。回到现实生活来看，存在经济学意义上的一个市场，很多市场行为仍然与人际关系密切相关。从某种意义上说，市场关系本身就是人际行为在宏观层面的表现。比如，经济学里讲供给和需求决定市场出清，并形成均衡价格。但在现实世界中，往往是某个人先发现了一个机会，然后通过人际关系把这些市场信息传播出去，吸引更多人进入这个行业，最终又形成新的供给、需求和均衡价格。
**I do not see the two as mutually exclusive. **In fact, sociologists offer helpful insights. Sociologists often treat the two as opposing forces. **For example, Mark Granovetter argues that all economic actions are embedded in social relationships and networks. **Thinking back, in reality, even if such a market did exist in the economic sense，many market activities are closely tied to interpersonal connections. What we observe in the market is often the aggregate outcome of social interactions. In a textbook model, supply and demand interact to clear the market and determine an equilibrium price. In the real world, however, opportunities are often discovered by particular individuals. They then spread information through their personal networks, attracting more people into an industry or activity, which in turn leads to a new market equilibrium.
当然，很多相关研究也给了我不少启发。比如，浙江大学的柯荣住老师专门研究过温州的民间标会。标会作为一种民间金融组织，建立了一套独特的跨期交易机制。在特定环境下，这类非正式金融安排的运作效率甚至可能高于银行等正规金融机构。[3]其原因在于，以银行为代表的正规金融市场通常依靠标准化规则进行运作。它会将个体之间复杂的差异浓缩为一些可观测的指标，例如收入、抵押物、学历等，并据此进行授信和定价，但难以获取每个人所掌握的私人信息。相比之下，温州标会通过竞标形成利率，能够更充分地反映参与者的资金需求和私人信息。在这种情况下，非正式金融反而可能比正式金融更有效率。归根结底，正规金融主要依赖标准化制度和可观测信息进行资金定价，而温州标会这类民间金融则能够在此基础上进一步利用个体的私人信息，从而实现更精准的资金配置和定价。
Of course, I am inspired by the evidence offered by a number of studies. One example is the work of Professor Rongzhu Ke from Zhejiang University on biao hui, a traditional rotating credit association in Wenzhou. As a form of informal finance, biao hui created a unique mechanism for intertemporal lending and borrowing, and in some cases operated more efficiently than formal financial institutions such as banks. [3]The reason is that formal financial markets, represented by banks, tend to suppress individual heterogeneity by compressing differences into a limited set of observable indicators(such as mortgage status, collateral, or educational background)while overlooking variations in individuals’ willingness to pay or acceptable interest rates. By contrast, Wenzhou biaohui determines interest rates through a bidding process, which allows it to more effectively reveal participants’ private information. In this sense, informal finance can, under certain conditions, achieve more efficient outcomes than formal finance.
In summary, formal financial systems rely on standardized institutions and observable indicators to price credit, but they lack access to private information. Informal mechanisms like Wenzhou biaohui, in contrast, incorporate individuals’ private information alongside observable signals, enabling more accurate pricing of capital.
另埃丝特·迪弗洛（Esther Duflo）与马修·杰克逊（Matthew O. Jackson）等学者曾在印度农村开展过一项实验。[4]他们发现，要推广一项政策，最有效的方式之一就是找到当地社交网络中最具中心性的人，并通过这些人进行传播。这个研究实际上将社会网络的结构特征直接纳入了分析框架。我国侨务政策就是典型案例：通过联系侨领能够激发的社会资源比一般的外商更多。
For another example, Esther Duflo, together with Matthew O. Jackson and others, conducted field experiments in rural India.[4]They found that one of the most effective ways to spread a new policy or idea was to target individuals who occupied central positions in local social networks. This study incorporated the structure of social networks into the analysis. Qiao wu policies provide a similar example. Establishing connections with overseas Chinese community leaders can mobilize social resources more effectively than with ordinary foreign investors.
Dai：您的研究的内容在经济学与社会学、历史学、民族学跨学科研究过程中，难免遭遇不少难题，比如很多人会质疑你只做了一个族群，相关选题的外延延展性与结论普适性不够。作为跨学科领域的研究，怎么更好地与其他学科对话？
Dai：Your research intersects economics, sociology, history and ethnic studies.Some may question whether focusing on a single group limits the broader relevance or generalizability of the findings. As an interdisciplinary field, how can your research on overseas Chinese communities engage more effectively with other fields?
我觉得我们的研究成果对其他学科也有一定价值。我们做的并不仅仅是重复检验已有假说，而是利用中国的数据和经济学的研究范式，去拓展相关学科对这些问题的理解。 比如，研究侨资企业的人文学者往往拥有非常丰富的历史资料和个案积累，但通常不会特别关注量化分析。因此，对于一些总量特征的判断，或者更精细的概念界定和比较研究，经济学的方法可以提供一些新的补充。
I think the work we do can also be valuable for eother fields. Our goal is not simply to re-test existing hypotheses. Rather, we use Chinese data and the tools of economics to help expand the boundaries of history studies. For instance, scholars in history and the humanities who study overseas Chinese businesses might lack quantitative training. As a result, they often find it difficult to assess the overall welfare of a phenomenon or to develop precise definitions and measurements. Economic approaches can help fill this gap by providing more systematic ways to define concepts and analyze patterns.
经济学科的研究方法刚好可以补充他们无法做到的事情，我最近发表在 Journal of International Economics[2]上的文章整理出来的数据库可以作为副产品产出，反馈给公众进行使用。在这篇文章中，我们构建了一个华人姓氏译名对照数据库，最初的目的是更准确地识别海外华人姓氏。由于姓氏译名具有较强的客观性和稳定性，我们可以根据姓名的拼写方式，对其族群来源地进行较为可靠的判断。过往研究者大多局限单一国别，研究者各自梳理当地拼写规则，始终缺少跨区域整合。我们则进行多地区拼写规则的汇总整合，形成的数据库对外开放共享，可供海内外华侨研究人员免费取用，这也是我们在交叉学科研究领域做出的一点学术贡献：把相关资料作为公共学术资源对外开放，通过开源共享，方便学界同仁与爱好者依托这套资料系统开展相关学习与研究。 电影《给阿嬷的情书》带动了华侨议题的研究热度，不少跨领域学者主动找我交流，我的研究也乘了电影的东风。
Economic methods can help address some of the questions that scholars in other fields often find difficult to tackle. For example, the database we constructed for our paper in the Journal of International Economics [2]was also designed as a by-product that could be shared with other researchers. One output of the project was a database of Chinese surnames and their overseas transliterations. Our original goal was to improve the identification of ethnic Chinese individuals in international datasets. Because surname spellings often reflect the place of origin, the database allows us to make reasonably accurate inferences about a person’s ancestral background based solely on the spelling of their name. In the past, most researchers worked within a single country context and developed their own understanding of local naming conventions. What was missing was a broader effort to bring together these different systems across regions. We tried to do exactly that by collecting and integrating surname spellings from multiple countries and regions into a single database.
We will make this database publicly available, and it can be used free of charge by researchers working on overseas Chinese communities around the world. I see this as one of the contributions we have been able to make through interdisciplinary research. By making these materials openly available, we hope to provide a shared resource that scholars, students, and anyone interested in the topic can use for future research and learning.
More recently, the film Dear You is drawing greater attention to overseas Chinese communities and their history. As a result, many scholars from different fields who became interested in these topics reached out to discuss their ideas with me. In a sense, my own research has also benefited from the broad interest that the film brought to the subject.
另一个问题是，在与西方学界对话时，关注这样一个少数族群究竟有什么意义？我觉得可以从两个方面来看。一方面，从研究发展的角度来说，我后续计划开展关于海外华人技术发明的研究，这类研究需要纳入不同族群的数据进行横向比较。因此，对华人群体的识别和研究，本身就是开展比较分析的重要基础。另一方面，回到研究本身来看，学术研究未必需要迎合所有受众。立足本土视角，深入理解华人群体在全球范围内的发展历程和演化脉络，满足国内读者和研究者的探索需求，这件事本身就具有很强的的研究意义。
Another question often comes up when engaging with Western scholars: what is the value of studying a relatively small minority group such as the overseas Chinese? I see the answer from two perspectives. First, from a research standpoint, some of my future projects will examine technological innovation among overseas Chinese communities. To understand whether the patterns we observe are unique or more general, it is important to compare overseas Chinese with other ethnic groups. In that sense, studying a minority group is a necessary starting point for broader comparative research. Second, there is the value of the research itself. Academic research does not always need to appeal to the widest possible audience. By focusing on our own historical and social context and tracing the global experiences of Chinese communities, we can answer questions that are meaningful to domestic readers and researchers. That alone provides a strong justification for this line of research.
Zhang：最后一个问题，您围绕华侨、侨批、宗族和跨国网络已经开展了一系列研究。回头来看，从最初的研究问题到今天形成一系列的研究，您是如何一步步拓展这些问题的？如果让您展望未来十年，您认为华侨、跨国网络与发展经济学领域最值得关注的问题是什么？有哪些重要问题仍然没有被充分回答？
Zhang：A final question, you have built a stream of research on overseas Chinese communities, qiaopi, kinship networks, and transnational connections. Looking back, how did your research evolve from an initial question into a broader research agenda? Looking ahead, what do you see as the most important questions in the study of overseas Chinese communities over the next decade? Are there major issues that you believe remain underexplored?
我的研究叙事主要是围绕侨资展开的。 从研究方向来看，大致可以以改革开放为界，向前和向后延伸。一个方向是追溯到更早的历史时期，研究华侨网络的形成与来源、族谱中的信息、跨国家庭的运作方式，以及民主革命时期孙中山如何动员和组织海外华人群体。另一个方向则是延伸到当代。过去几十年间，出现了一批新的华侨群体，他们在美国等国家接受教育、掌握先进技术，同时仍与中国保持着密切联系。这些人很多活跃于人工智能、半导体等前沿行业。未来一个值得关注的问题是，在中美关系日趋复杂的背景下，这类华侨群体将如何发展，以及如何在两国之间寻找自己的位置。
Looking back, **my main focus of the research was on overseas Chinese investment. **Broadly speaking, I see two directions, divided by the period of China’s reform and opening-up. One direction is to look further back in history and study the origins and formation of overseas Chinese networks, the information contained in clan genealogies, the operation of transnational families, and how overseas Chinese communities were mobilized and organized during the revolutionary period led by Sun Yat-sen. The other direction is to move closer to the present. In recent decades, a new group of overseas Chinese investors has emerged. Many of them studied in the United States, acquired advanced technologies, and still maintain ties with their families in China. Many work in fields such as artificial intelligence and semiconductors. One question is how they survive and navigate the increasingly tense relationship between China and the United States.
最早的研究主要是从国内视角出发，聚焦于侨乡地区。后来，随着国外资料的不断丰富，研究者也开始利用海外数据和档案开展研究，关注点逐渐从侨资扩展到华商群体。就目前而言，我觉得一个比较值得研究的问题是技术在华人网络中究竟发挥了什么作用 。现有研究更多关注市场中的博弈机制，而专门从族群网络角度展开的讨论相对较少。结合我的实地调研和数据分析，我认为族群因素在其中可能发挥着非常重要的作用。
Earlier studies usually started from a domestic Chinese perspective and focused on overseas Chinese hometowns. Later research has begun to use materials from abroad, and the focus has gradually shifted from overseas Chinese investment to overseas Chinese business communities. One question I find particularly important is the role of technology within overseas Chinese networks. Existing research tends to focus on market mechanisms and strategic interactions, while relatively little attention has been paid to ethnic networks as a distinct analytical perspective. Based on both fieldwork and data, I believe ethnic ties continue to play a crucial role in shaping how these networks function.
[注解1]西方政治制度中的“去人格化”（Depersonalization），源自德国社会学家马克斯·韦伯（Max Weber）的“官僚制理论”。它的核心含义是：权力、决策和行政运行必须基于明确的法律和规章制度，而不是依赖领导者的个人魅力、情感或家族血统。在东方制度语境下，权力人格化即制度、法理具象化为个体权威，权力运行依附个人禀赋而非成文规制。
[Note1]The concept of depersonalization in Western political institutions can be traced to the theory of bureaucracy developed by the German sociologist Max Weber. At its core, depersonalization means that authority, decision-making, and administrative operations should be grounded in clearly defined laws and formal rules, rather than in a leader’s personal charisma, emotions, or family ties. In contrast, within many Eastern institutional contexts, the personalization of authority refers to a system in which institutions and legal principles are embodied in individual authority figures, and the exercise of power depends more on personal attributes and discretion than on rules and procedures.
[注解2]“华侨农场”是中国在20世纪50年代起，为集中安置被迫回国定居的归国华侨和难侨（简称归难侨）而设立的国有农业企业。它们带有特殊的历史背景，是中国社会结构中的重要组成部分。
[Note2]“Overseas Chinese farms” refer to state-run agricultural settlements established in China from the 1950s onward to resettle returned overseas Chinese and displaced Chinese migrants who were forced to return. Created under specific historical circumstances, these communities became a distinctive part of China’s social landscape.
学者简介：
陈方豪现任暨南大学管理学院助理教授，广东产业发展与粤港澳台区域合作研究中心研究员，北京大学国家发展研究院经济学博士；我的研究方向为族群网络经济学，重点关注海外华人网络在贸易、资本、技术与知识流动中，作为连接中国与全球市场的中介作用。当前研究聚焦于海外华人社群的历史形成、跨国网络的长期演化与持续机制，及其在地缘政治格局变动背景下，对中国产业升级与企业国际化发展的影响。
参考文献：
[1]张晓波, 阮建青. (2011). 中国产业集群的演化与发展. 浙江大学出版社.
[2]Fanghao Chen, Ruichi Xiong, Xiaobo Zhang,Familiar strangers: The role of diaspora networks in foreign investment and long-run development,Journal of International Economics,2026,104293,ISSN 0022-1996.
[3]Fang, H., Ke, R., & Zhou, L. A. (2015). Rosca meets formal credit market (No. w21683). National Bureau of Economic Research.
[4]Banerjee, A., Chandrasekhar, A. G., Duflo, E., & Jackson, M. O. (2019). Using gossips to spread information: Theory and evidence from two randomized controlled trials. The Review of Economic Studies, 86(6), 2453-2490.
| 责任编辑 | 张帆 戴若尘 |
整理翻译｜陈舒婷
校对｜陈方豪