Conflict-mediation, consensus-building, and co-production: Three models of co-governance in China’s neighborhood regeneration

Existing literature on co-governance has extensively discussed how the state interacts with various actors beyond the government to promote urban development. In China, the discourse and practice of co-governance illustrate different trajectories from the West. As the urban development strategies in China shifted from property-led expansion to inner-city neighborhood regeneration, the importance of multiscalar participation in governing community affairs has been increasingly emphasized, moving beyond the government-market dichotomy and emphasizing negotiation and collaboration among the government, market participants, stakeholders, and the public. Based on practical experience and participatory action research in Guangdong province, we identify three models of co-governance in recent neighborhood regeneration practices: (1) the state-led co-creation model for conflict-mediation purposes, which primarily relies on local government and party organization to mediate inherited conflicts and rebuild local trust for promoting the regeneration agenda; (2) the professional-led place-making model for consensus-building purposes, which focuses on reshaping daily habits and beautifying public spaces to achieve consensus-based aspirations for neighborhood development; and (3) the co-production model, driven by society-community partnership, which reflects the emergence of new commons, encompassing dynamic reconfigurations on both socio-economic and institutional dimensions. Through case studies in Guangzhou and Foshan, specifically in the Enninglu, Keyuan, and Dongfeng neighborhoods, we illustrate how local governments enhance the inclusiveness and effectiveness of neighborhood governance by engaging various third-party actors, such as local enterprises, community planners, and residents’ self-help groups. Local governments are skillfully avoiding direct confrontation with residents by incorporating community planners and empowering social actors to promote co-production among multiscalar participants. By examining the emergence, functioning, and dilemmas of different co-governance models in China’s latest neighborhood regeneration practices, this study enriches the existing framework of the state-market-society landscape, demonstrating the plurality of the state’s governance intentions and highlighting the political space in which grassroots governance is constituted.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transactions in Planning and Urban Research
Published
2024-11-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/27541223241293407
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Urban Planning and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
11.75

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Conflict-mediation, consensus-building, and co-production: Three models of co-governance in China’s neighborhood regeneration

Shenjing He, Nannan Zhao, Gao Rui, Shifu Wang et al.
6 citations
Transactions in Planning and Urban Research
Urban Planning and Governance
11.75
article

Conflict-mediation, consensus-building, and co-production: Three models of co-governance in China’s neighborhood regeneration

Shenjing He, Nannan Zhao, Gao Rui, Shifu Wang, Yuting Liu
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Existing literature on co-governance has extensively discussed how the state interacts with various actors beyond the government to promote urban development. In China, the discourse and practice of co-governance illustrate different trajectories from the West. As the urban development strategies in China shifted from property-led expansion to inner-city neighborhood regeneration, the importance of multiscalar participation in governing community affairs has been increasingly emphasized, moving beyond the government-market dichotomy and emphasizing negotiation and collaboration among the government, market participants, stakeholders, and the public. Based on practical experience and participatory action research in Guangdong province, we identify three models of co-governance in recent neighborhood regeneration practices: (1) the state-led co-creation model for conflict-mediation purposes, which primarily relies on local government and party organization to mediate inherited conflicts and rebuild local trust for promoting the regeneration agenda; (2) the professional-led place-making model for consensus-building purposes, which focuses on reshaping daily habits and beautifying public spaces to achieve consensus-based aspirations for neighborhood development; and (3) the co-production model, driven by society-community partnership, which reflects the emergence of new commons, encompassing dynamic reconfigurations on both socio-economic and institutional dimensions. Through case studies in Guangzhou and Foshan, specifically in the Enninglu, Keyuan, and Dongfeng neighborhoods, we illustrate how local governments enhance the inclusiveness and effectiveness of neighborhood governance by engaging various third-party actors, such as local enterprises, community planners, and residents’ self-help groups. Local governments are skillfully avoiding direct confrontation with residents by incorporating community planners and empowering social actors to promote co-production among multiscalar participants. By examining the emergence, functioning, and dilemmas of different co-governance models in China’s latest neighborhood regeneration practices, this study enriches the existing framework of the state-market-society landscape, demonstrating the plurality of the state’s governance intentions and highlighting the political space in which grassroots governance is constituted.

Transactions in Planning and Urban ResearchVol. 3(4)
Guangdong University of Technology (CN), University of Hong Kong (HK), South China University of Technology (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, China Postdoctoral Science Foundation, Guangdong Office of Philosophy and Social Science
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Urban Planning and Governance
11.75
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.