In Depth: China Mulls Changes to Grassroots Governance

Summary

China's grassroots governance is structured around two key types of self-governing organizations: neighborhood committees in urban areas (around 119,000 across the country) and villagers' committees in rural areas (about 489,000 in total) [para. 7]. These committees have been enshrined in China's constitution since 1982, with specific laws first enacted in the late 1980s. As China has evolved over the decades, the legislative authorities are now moving to revise these laws to ensure that the committees remain effective and relevant to the rapid changes occurring in society [para. 8][para. 10].

The reform process started with draft revisions to the Neighborhood Committee Organization Law and the Villagers’ Committee Organization Law, which were reviewed by the National People’s Congress (NPC) on June 24 and subsequently released for public comment [para. 11]. The significance of grassroots committees has grown since the early days of the People's Republic, especially as work-unit-based governance and agricultural communes have declined. Neighborhood committees expanded their responsibilities as more urbanites lived outside state work units, while villagers’ committees took on greater roles in managing rural affairs, such as land allocation [para. 14-16].

China's economic reforms and accelerated urbanization since the late 1970s have made self-governance more challenging, as increased mobility and migration weakened traditional local ties. Despite these challenges, the role of the committees has continued to expand, now including mediating property and legal disputes, maintaining stability, supporting poverty alleviation, and aiding rural revitalization [para. 19-23]. This expansion has led to greater resource allocation to the committees and increased need for personnel and institutional capacity [para. 24].

A significant innovation in grassroots management has been grid-based governance, which divides communities into smaller, digitally managed units. Initiated in Beijing’s Dongcheng District in 2004 and implemented nationwide by the mid-2010s, this system supports closer community monitoring and coordination [para. 25-29]. Party documents and national congresses in 2017, 2021, 2022, and 2024 have reinforced the importance of modernizing and strengthening grassroots party-led governance, leading to the current legislative reforms [para. 30-32].

Key highlights of the draft revisions include clarifying the committees’ relationships with local governments and property management organizations. The reforms respond to concerns that grassroots committees have sometimes been treated as administrative appendages, particularly during periods like the COVID-19 lockdowns, despite having no formal law enforcement authority. The draft specifies that tasks assigned to committees must be legally compliant, with funding and responsibilities clarified, to prevent excessive burdens on grassroots organizations [para. 34-39].

Another focus is improving relationships between neighborhood committees, homeowners’ committees, and property management companies, as conflicts in urban areas over property management have become more pronounced. The draft proposes that neighborhood committees should have legal authority to guide, support, and – if suggested – oversee property management, helping to mediate disputes with residents [para. 41-49]. It also encourages empowering social organizations, NGOs, and community volunteers as key partners in grassroots governance [para. 50-53].

The proposed reforms mark the first major update to these laws since 2018. They expand and clarify democratic election procedures for committees, set rules for candidate qualifications (including the consideration of non-local residents and those with criminal convictions), and outline more transparent management, oversight, and public participation measures. These changes emphasize urban-rural integration and reflect calls to unify urban and rural governance laws into a consistent framework for a more modern, inclusive approach [para. 54-71].