Establishing a Social Governance Model Based on Collaboration,Participation, and Common Interests: Value, Structure and Roadmap

Yan Kegao & Ren Binbin＊

Abstract: The 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) put forward the proposal of establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests, with the aim of developing new approaches to social governance and further modernizing China’s social system and capacity for governance. As a structuralized social relation addressing diversified governance bodies, the model has consolidated the social governance innovations achieved since the 18th CPC National Congress. Focusing on three dimensions — “value,” “structure”and “roadmap,” this paper tries to interpret the value connotations and defining features behind the model and explores its development roadmap.Such a social governance model is a response to political, social and public value appeals, and an adjustment to the order of governance bodies, resource allocations and the benefit distribution structure. Its construction is a systematic and long-term project, which should aim continuously at satisfying people’s ever-higher needs, perfecting laws and regulations, cultivating a pool of specialized organizations and talents, exerting the technology advantages of the Internet in governance, and promoting socialization, legalization,specialization and intellectualization in social development.

Keywords: social governance model; collaboration; participation; common interests

1. Introduction

The Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee put forth the overall goal of deepening reform and opening-up in all respects, urged the Party and the government to innovate the social governance system and methods, and called for a shift from “social management” to “social governance.”Under the guidance of the “Five Development Concepts” (Innovation, Coordination, Green, Open and Sharing), the Fifth Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee proposed to “refine social governance and establish a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests.” As the focus has shifted from “innovating the social management system” to “establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests,” China’s social governance structure has been constantly optimized and adjusted and an inclusive structure with Chinese characteristics in which the Party committee, government and social forces all participate has gradually taken shape. On this basis, coupled with a summary of the practical and theoretical innovations in social governance and a keen and accurate understanding of the basic social contradictions in China, the 19th CPC National Congress set the strategic task of “establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests”to make further headway in developing and modernizing the national governance system and usher in a new phase of social governance of socialism with Chinese characteristics through hard work.

In terms of political science and sociology, the term “model” is a description of basic social relations characterized by holistic dimensions and relative stability.①Fei, 2006, p.25The social governance model reflects the collection of power relations, resource proportions and interaction modes between governance bodies in a certain governance field.②Wang, 2016In nature, it is a structuralized social relation among governance bodies that aims to maintain social order.③Zeng, 2016Currently, “establishing a social governance model based on collaboration,participation, and common interests” is the overall requirement of the CPC Central Committee for embarking on a new leg of the journey toward modernizing social governance with Chinese characteristics in the new era.④Yang,2018As China has reached a new starting point in building socialism with Chinese characteristics for a new era, making clear the model’s concepts and connotations and enumerating the model’s defining features by theoretically keeping abreast with new concepts are of great significance to promoting the construction of such a social governance model in an orderly manner.

In order to make practical and theoretical progress in establishing the model, and to gain ground in developing and modernizing the national governance system, we will interpret the model’s value connotations and defining features and explore the practical development path to its establishment from the dimensions of “value,” “structure” and “roadmap.” We also hope that by answering what, why and how this social governance model provides theoretical guidance and support for the establishment and orderly development of this distinctively Chinese socialist model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests in the new era.

2. The value connotations of establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests

Since the beginning of its reform and opening-up, China has experienced rapid economic growth due to the emancipation of productive forces. While promoting people’s diversified and multi-level demands,economic development has also triggered a series of social problems and increased social instability. Since the 18th CPC National Congress, the Party and the government have been well aware that reform and openingup has entered a deep water zone, that economic development has ushered in a new normal, and the political priority has been shifted from “productivity” to “people’s livelihood.”①Fan, 2017Because of this the CPC has proposed to “innovate the social governance system” and “establish a social governance model based on collaboration,participation, and common interests.” This proposal marks an effective transformation of the value concepts the government has in the face of increasingly prominent social contradictions.

2.1Political value

The appeal of political value for establishing a social governance model based on collaboration,participation, and common interests is manifested by the leadership of the Communist Party of China in social governance innovation. As China’s ruling and leading party, the Communist Party of China is at the core of the leadership in developing socialism with Chinese characteristics, and ought to be in the same positioned in transforming the social governance structure and developing a national governance system.②Zhang & Dai, 2016Ever since reform and opening-up began, China has seen a rapid development of economy, but its social development,which has long been overlooked, has badly lagged. In the current China with diversified social structures and complicated interest structures, the imbalance in social distribution leads to the widening gap in wealth,intensifying social contradictions, as well as the frequent mass disturbances. According to the Development Report of Rule of Law in China, from 2010 to 2016, a period of high incidence of mass disturbances in China with a year-on-year growth rate were mainly of informality and immediacy, occurring in wide fields including the economy, culture, society and ecology. Frequent social issues and growing public dissatisfaction have made the construction of a social governance system ever more daunting and challenging. The 19th CPC National Congress put forward that, to establish a social governance model based on collaboration, participation,and common interests, the Communist Party of China is urged to play and adjust its role at the core of the leadership in social governance innovation. Guided by scientific theoretical designs, the Party should create a sound political environment for the construction of a social governance system, in a bid to promote the benign and harmonious operation among diversified social governance bodies.

The 19th CPC National Congress proposed to establish a social governance model based on collaboration,participation, and common interests under which the Party committees exercise leadership, the government assumes responsibility, non-governmental actors provide assistance, and the public gets involved. As shown in this positioning, the “collaboration” needs to affirm the participation of diversified governance bodies and consolidate the leadership of the Party committee. Under this model, the “collaboration” of governance bodies has political legitimacy, power and elbowroom. Since the Communist Party of China is at the core of leadership in the construction of socialism in the new era, the Party committee is in a position to exercise overall leadership and coordinate the efforts of all involved, thus providing the political and organizational guarantee for the orderly participation of diversified governance bodies in establishing the model.①Xu, 2014In addition, it also shows that the centralized Party and government leadership is compatible with diversified and decentralized social governance bodies, and the Party leadership is by no means an obstacle, but a premise and guarantee to establish the model. This has laid the groundwork to gather strength and promote the cooperation between diversified governance bodies.

2.2 Social value

The social value of establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation,and common interests reflects society as a subfield of national development that is independent from the government,②Jiang, 2014and has become an organic governance body in “participation” of the model. When China was a planned economy, China’s political, economic, cultural and social development were closely interwoven and deeply integrated, leading to extremely sluggish social development. Since adopting the policy of reform and opening-up, Chinese society, as an important part of national development, was over-absorbed by politics and had to give way to economic development. The government showed heavy cognitive bias to social development as only one item on the agenda of government management.③Fan, 2014Thankfully, the concept of social governance has been awakened since the 18th CPC National Congress, and the Chinese government has continued to improve social governance systems and governance capacities. The 19th CPC National Congress further proposed to establish a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests which revealed not only the acknowledgement of the Chinese government of the value of social development, but also the self-cognition of the law of social development. In the meantime, establishing such a social governance model has enhanced the public recognition of “sociality,” marking a breakthrough for Chinese culture faced with the dilemma of recognizing “sociality.”④Shen & Du, 2016

“Society” has long been regarded by the Chinese government as an abstract concept, that is, a monolithic,unified, and non-differentiated entirety. It is about the “governance of society,” and it belongs to extragovernmental management. A social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests advocates the “participation” of various social governance bodies, which highlights the social agency and the initiative of governance bodies and manages to stimulate the enthusiasm of diversified governance bodies and improve the endogenous governance of society through activating all social parts. Take fostering social organizations as an example, from 2013 to 2016 the number of social organizations increased from 547,000 to 702,000, covering more than a dozen fields such as science and technology, ecological environment, culture, sports. They are playing a significant role in safeguarding social rights and interests and meeting the needs of social public services. During the establishment of the model, social organizations were more than the objects of governmental governance but are now gradually becoming non-governmental social governance forces and important governance bodies.

2.3 Public value

The public value of establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests embodies the value of “putting people first,” and the achievements will be shared by all Chinese people. Since the 18th CPC National Congress, the “people centered” development thought has become the underlying logic in reforming the social governance of socialism with Chinese characteristics.①Li, 2017Furthermore, as a concept of development, “common interests” has become a key leading concept of the Thirteenth Five-Year Plan, requiring that we must remain committed to the principle that development is for the people, reliant on the people, and that its fruits are shared by the people. Based on the scientific judgment of the historical stages of China’s development, the 19th CPC National Congress insisted that China has entered a new era of socialism with Chinese characteristics and what we now face is the contradiction between unbalanced and inadequate development and the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life. With roots in people’s diversified and multi-level demands, establishing a social governance model based on collaboration,participation, and common interests, proposed by the Party Central Committee, aims to share the fruits of reform and advance the comprehensive progress of individuals and society. Given this, the pubic value of the model is not only the goal of building socialism with Chinese characteristics in the new era, but also the inherent requirement of socialism with Chinese characteristics. It fully reflects the value orientation of China and the Party to serve the people.

During the establishment of the model, each governance body acts as an organization that, under the leadership of the Party committee, takes part in solving social problems to maximize public social interests.The theory of organization publicness demonstrates that publicness is not only the linkage between a state,its market and the public but also the governance goal of the state to cooperate with the market and the public.②Gao & Li, 2011For the government, publicness is the first attribute and the internal requirement for its performance of public functions. With the rapid development of modern public management, enterprises are no longer just a way to meet private needs, but gradually become a basic means of providing public products. They play an irreplaceable role in meeting social and public needs and providing high-quality public services, and their inherent publicness is increasingly visible. Social organizations, as a carrier of collective public actions,contain such basic functions as safeguarding public rights and interests and pursuing public values. Therefore,the public value of the model is not limited to merely one specific type of organization. Every governance body can play a part in creating public interests and improving social welfare.③Zhou, 2016

3. Structural adjustments for establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation and common interests

Since reform and opening-up began, although the continuous optimization of economic structure has greatly upgraded China’s social structure, the slow speed of social systems and regulations improvement heavily lagged the fast differentiation of social structures, resulting in a disjointed allocation of social elements and structural imbalances in social development.④Wang & Zhang, 2017; Wang & Zhang, 2017Currently, China is deepening reform and opening-up in an all-round way and Chinese society is entering a transitional period. The adaptability of social structures has become the base upon which China can reform its national governance system and govern modernization progress.①Zheng & Li, 2005As a structuralized social relation among social governance bodies, the model is essentially a structural adjustment of social governance elements. From the perspective of the social development structure,the resolution of establishing the model proposed at the 19th CPC National Congress is meant to promote the establishment of interactions and restrictions mechanisms between social governance elements, so that the social structure can embark on the track of balanced development.

This model is far different from the traditional one by nature. The traditional governance model is a practice of static and stable thoughts that value the “center-to-margin” relations with the Party and government as the main body, through which social order maintains stability while social risks and problems can be addressed. On the contrary, the model, as a structuralized social relation, reflects a kind of dynamic and coordinated thought. By defining the positions and relations of all governance bodies, it seeks to optimize the social governance structure, secure a stable social order, build a benign social ecosystem, and ensure the orderly development of social governance bodies. Adjusting the structure of the model is mainly adjusting the positions of governance bodies, and refreshing resource allocations and benefit distributions. This enhances the functions of governance bodies in marginal areas and promotes the orderly development of a multi-centered governance model through optimizing the positions of governance bodies, shifts the resource allocation structures led by authority distributions to a demand-oriented system through upgrading the resource allocation structures and gradually transforms the intergroup interest differentiation into the common sharing by the public through improving the benefits distribution structures of social development achievements.

3.1 Adjustment of the order structure of governance bodies: from “center-to-margins” to“cooperation between diversified governance bodies”

The order structure of governance bodies means that all scientifically and reasonably positioned governance bodies can play their roles through specifying their roles and functions, and they can shape behavior aggregates and a relatively stable governance structure through sorting out their inter-relations. In the establishment of a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests,specifying the roles, functions and positions of governance bodies far out values sorting out their interrelations. If we understand social governance models only from the relations between governance bodies, we tend to explain the functions and relations of these bodies from their individual perspective and fall into the dilemma of “reductionism.”②Zhang, 2017The structural position of social governance bodies determines their values and behavioral choices, that is, the specific position in a structuralized governance model affects their governance functions and the adjustment of their inter-relations. As Freeman indicated, specific social subjects, as they are in different positions in the social structure, would have or exhibit corresponding features, functions,behaviors, and outcomes.③Lincon & Zhang, 2008, p.34

In traditional social management models in China, the government lies at the center and all social governance bodies are in marginal areas. Due to the excessive emphasis on the Party and government’s control over society, marginal governance bodies are constantly marginalized and their development obviously mismatches their governance functions, which hinders their expansion on social governance functions.The report of the 19th CPC National Congress proposed to establish a law-based social governance model under which “Party committees exercise leadership, government assumes responsibility, non-governmental actors provide assistance, and the public gets involved.” Meanwhile, it elucidated the orders and positions of governance bodies while establishing the model, therefore drawing up the basic blueprint of a cooperative governance model with diversified social governance bodies thus transforming the structure of governance bodies from “center-and-margin” to “cooperation between diversified government bodies.” First, due to the specific logic and practical needs of China’s current development, the Party committee has always maintained the core position in the establishment of social governance models and played a leading role in socialist construction.①Han, 2018The position adjustment of marginal governance bodies in establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests drives the change of the Party’s leadership style. Instead of a commander that, as they once used to be, took full charge of everything whether it was important or trivial, the Party committee leaders should turn their priority to strengthening the link between the Party, the government, democratic parties, enterprises, and social organizations and enhancing the Party’s leadership in the social governance model. Second, the government has gradually become the sub-center of social governance. In the traditional social governance model of China, the government occupied the center and played the role of political leader. As a structural cell above all social structural cells, the government treats social management as an important administrative function. Social governance models gradually weaken the central position and the leading role of the government, making it a structural cell of equal rank with governance bodies that mainly undertake the responsibility of providing public services and macrocontrol. Finally, social cooperation and public participation show that various social governance bodies have gradually become the center of marginal governance, which expands the boundaries of the social governance model. As social organizations gradually gain political legitimacy with increasingly enhanced functions,they are emerging as the main suppliers of public services. The orderly political participation of the public to construct a complete grassroots democratic system has become an essential part of diversified and cooperative social governance.

3.2 Optimization of the resource allocation structure: from administrative leadership to administrative guidance

The co-governance of diversified governance bodies cannot proceed without resources. As the legal basis of co-governance, the allocation of social governance resources has an influence on the public activity space and the effectiveness of governance behaviors of governance bodies. Public power is generally considered as the basic strength in the allocation of social governance resources. Due to the limited social resources aggregate in the period of the planned economy, social power was immature and incapable of resources allocation. By virtue of public power, the government allocated social resources by means of administrative instructions, maximizing the development and utilization of limited social resources. As a great cause can be accomplished with congregated efforts, it fueled economic development. After the reform and openingup, China saw ever maturing market mechanisms and rapid growth in the market economy. The traditional resource allocation methods led by the administration showed two major drawbacks: First, compared with the market mechanism, it was compulsory, leading to low resource utilization rates and the waste of a great number of resources; second, it had become an unfair for some interest groups to snatch social and public interests, posing a serious threat to social equity. Against such a backdrop, the government gradually came to realize that traditional administration-led resource allocation runs contrary to the needs of the times. The 19th CPC National Congress proposed to establish a social governance model based on collaboration, participation,and common interests, requiring the government to play a leading role in social advancement and resources allocation through policy advocacy, in a bid to improve resource efficiency and transform the administrationled resource allocations to administration-guided allocations.

In traditional social management models, there is a closed resource allocation structure based on social public power that administratively leads social governance resources.①Li & Xu, 2011The objective needs of society therefore are usually neglected resulting in a less-than-desirable resource fluidity which is prone to the solidification of social classes. In contrast, administrative guidance in establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests highlights the guiding role of the government in resource allocation. Considering the positions, roles and functions of governance bodies in the model, the government,targeting resource demands and following the principle of seeking truth from facts, allocates governance resources through policy advocacy to achieve Pareto optimality. Administration-guided governance resource allocation is a dynamic development process that is flowing, open and inclusive. During the establishment of the model, social governance resources would flow from the government to social governance bodies in the center of the marginal areas. The flow of resources enhances the flexibility of the model and improves the capability of society to minimize risks. In the meantime, governance bodies in marginal areas will gradually attach themselves to the establishment of the model and will emerge as a functional part while attracting social attention and acquiring governance resources. The governance resource allocations under the guidance of the government in the cause of establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests accelerates the governance model with diversified and cooperative governance bodies, and such co-governance promotes the fostering of multi-centered governance bodies.

3.3 Improvement of the benefit distribution structure: From benefit differentiation to public sharing

The improvement of the benefit distribution structure is the mission of improving people’s livelihoods through the practice of building socialism, and the key to maintaining social equity and preventing social polarization between the rich and the poor. Before China’s reform and opening-up, the country monopolized all scarce resources, and the public was divided into groups that acquired resources and shared public benefit, reflecting the totality of the then social structure. Since reform and opening-up began, however, the rapid development of the market economy has improved the living standards of the public and promoted the differentiation of the social structure. On the one hand, the differentiation increased element categories and brought about the heterogeneity of the society. On the other hand, it widened the gap between these elements while forging a gap between rich and poor and a gap between group interests.②Sun, 2004, p.56In addition, the market mechanism overemphasized efficiency and mishandled the relationships between efficiency and equity for a long time. More than the gross inequalities in the distribution of public benefit, the dividends from social reform were distributed to a small number of people and interest groups, further differentiating public benefit to hands of groups.①Zhou & Zhang, 2012If such a situation was left untreated, some social groups would feel a sense of loss due to the improper public benefit distribution structure and would then change their positive mindset and become negative on society, sowing the seeds of social conflicts and contradictions. Establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests gives top priority to public benefit. It aims to share the fruits of social and economic development with all by perfecting the benefits distribution structure. So as a result, social welfare can be shared by the public rather than by a few groups, thus defusing public discontent and stabilizing social order.

Improving the benefit distribution structure echoes the call of common interests. “Common interests”essentially is about improving people’s livelihoods. It calls for more attention to social equity in the structural adjustments of social governance models, more efforts to narrow the wealth gap between individuals, between urban and rural areas and between regional development, as well as solutions to the imbalance among developing groups, industries and cities. The improvement of benefit distribution structures in establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests focuses on the following three aspects. First, building a platform for group benefit consultations and collective actions.Consultation is the basis of realizing the governance structure with diversified and cooperative governance bodies. Communications with stakeholder groups can reduce the inequality of interest distribution caused by information asymmetry. For this reason, governance bodies and resources need to be dynamically adjusted,according to which these bodies can coordinate to resolve the conflicts of interests, promote interest balance and share interests. Valuing the fundamental role of redistribution in social equity is the second focus. The sharing principle in establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests is the manifestation of redistribution in the context of the market economy.②Wang, 2017In adjusting the benefit distribution structure, attention should be paid to the quality of life of low-income groups, poor groups and marginalized groups, as well as the development levels of eastern, central, and western cities in China. By leveraging transfer payment service and social security systems, the adjustment is expected to bridge the gap between groups, urban and rural areas and cities. For the last, but not the least, efforts should be made to promote the equalization of basic public services. As the basic rights and interests of the public, public services should be inclusive and sustainable and endeavor to improve quality and expand serving areas, giving more people access to the results of social governance and avoiding the possibility that public service becomes the private service of some interest groups.

4. Roadmap to establishing a social governance model based on collaboration,participation, and common interests

The report of the 18th CPC National Congress expounded the basic strategy of building socialism with Chinese characteristics for a new era and clearly pointed out that the overall goal of deepening reform in all respects is to improve and develop socialism with Chinese characteristics, and to promote the modernization of the national governance system and its capacity. For this purpose and for further innovating social governance systems, the 19th CPC National Congress proposed to establish a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests, promote the social governance to be socialized,legalized, intellectualized and specialized. Establishing such a social governance model is a systematic and long-term project that entails continuous and multipronged efforts from the national system, law, talents and technology, and explores the roadmaps to establishing the model through comprehensive methods.

4.1 Satisfy people’s ever-higher needs and promote the socialization of social governance

“Putting people first” is the core of Scientific Outlook on Development on constructing socialism with Chinese characteristics and the fundamental purpose of the Chinese Communist Party to serve the people wholeheartedly. To promote the socialization of the model, China should practice the mass line in social governance and tap the strengths of all social parts to solve social issues and meet people’s higher needs. First,the Party should be committed to realizing the fundamental interests of the overwhelming majority of the people as the starting point and objective, always adhering to the mass line, safeguard the central role of the people through institutional innovation, and mobilize all the masses to advance community-level governance.Second, the Party should walk along with the government to improve diversified governance bodies, support social forces-driven government reforms, expand the elbowroom of social organizations and foster their public service capabilities, and overcome the drawbacks in the social governance structure. Third, increasing attention should be paid to community-level governance. The report of the 19th CPC National Congress put forward, “We will strengthen the system for community governance by shifting the focus of social governance to the community level.” Community-level governance is a crucial manifestation of a socialist democracy and a major institutional measure of the self-governance, self-education, self-service and self-supervision of the people. Efforts should be made to enhance its mechanism innovation by right of promoting the organic integration of communities, social organizations and social work, making the social governance model more efficient in self-governance.

No matter what kind of social structure, the purpose of deepening reform is to promote social equity and justice, meet the people’s material and cultural needs, and improve people’s well-being. To realize socialization, China and the Party are urged to practice the core values of fairness and justice and create a society where people are fair, obey the rules and enjoy opportunities and rights. China has entered a new era of building socialism with Chinese characteristics and the principal contradictions facing Chinese society have evolved into the contradictions between unbalanced and inadequate development and the people’s evergrowing needs for a better life. Given the current circumstances, China has basically made it possible for people to live decent lives and the needs to be met for the people to live better lives have become increasingly broad. Not only have their material and cultural needs grown, their demands for democracy, rule of law,fairness and justice, security, and a better environment are also increasing. It is necessary therefore to boost innovation in social services through the establishment of a social governance model based on collaboration,participation, and common interests, strive to build a citizen-centered public service model, reshape the benefit distribution structure with the people above all, and meet people’s higher social needs.

4.2 Shape the thought of law-based governance and improve the legalization in social governance

Laws and regulations are the basic guarantees for establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests. As part of the efforts to make the model lawful, the principle of law-based governance should be developed and law-based approaches should be adopted to promote the orderly participation of diversified governance bodies. The Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee made clear the major tasks of “comprehensively advancing the law-based governance of China.” Promoting the development of legalization has been determined as an important part of the modernization of national governance. With a view to providing a basic guarantee for establishing such a social governance model, the 19th CPC National Congress proposed to “carry out lawmaking in a well-conceived and democratic way and in accordance with law, so that good laws are made to promote development and ensure good governance.” In fact, promoting the modernization of the national governance system and its capacity by China and the Party is to form a “state-market-society-public” co-governance pattern in the building of the rule of law in China with a law-based government and a law-based society to realize social governance in an effective way.①Tang, 2014Establishing a social governance model based on collaboration,participation, and common interests require great efforts that must include cultivating and carrying forward the culture and spirit of law-based governance, address social issues with the principle of law-based governance, improve the legalization of the model, and protect the rights and interests of diversified social governance bodies.

Furthermore, we must not lose sight of the fact that promoting the rule of law in establishing the social governance model not only means empowerment, but also defines the bottom line for behaviors. When establishing the model, we need to improve basic laws and regulations on social governance, solve social issues with law-based approaches, and see to it that there are laws to go by, that laws are observed and strictly enforced, and law-breakers are prosecuted. First, for the government, it should act in a standardized and legislated way, its traditional administrative control measures should be amended, and its behavior should be constrained. It should stand firmly to solve social problems with relevant laws and regulations. Second,for diversified governance bodies, it is necessary to put in place relevant laws, clarify their interrelations,coordinate the distribution of interests, and restrict the act in excess of authority and such misbehaviors as the abuse of power and imbalances between rights and responsibilities, ensuring their orderly participation in the establishment. Third, for the public, their rights should include a guaranteed of participation, to know and to supervise by innovating law-based governance models to see that they have qualification, capacity and confidence to take an active part in establishing the model under the laws and regulations.

4.3 Cultivate a pool of professionals and respect the objective law of social development

The specialization of social governance lays the groundwork for establishing a social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests. In comparison to traditional extensive social management models, from a specialized perspective, one based on collaboration, participation, and common interests respects the objective laws and characteristics of social development, and adopts specialized methods to train talents and solve social problems. Reform and opening-up in China has now entered a deepwater zone where social problems not only jeopardize politics, economy, our culture and other aspects with increased complicacy, but also infiltrate into many fields of study. Cultivating a pool of professionals is the key to establishing the model. In this regard, the Party and the government should place more emphasis on cultivating a pool of specialized high-quality organizations and talents, analyzing and approaching social problems with specialized knowledge and technology on a case-by-case basis. Included with the required abilities are also keen insights and diligent analysis, which make it easy to tackle governance challenges and minimize the obstacles to social development and social transformation. Cultivating this pool of professionals requires government officials to constantly improve their knowledge, skills and management abilities and establish a sense of service to provide professional public services with excellent attitudes, a professional spirit and high standards.

Division of labor is an inevitable product of social productivity; thus, it must follow the objective law of the development of social productivity. It improves the work efficiency of social governance bodies,optimizes the effect of the governance model, and drives the birth of a functional society with a shift from the centralized governance model to a network-like decentralized approach.①Xuan, 2014In addition, division of labor also means the increase of occupation types and specialized talents, indicating that social governance is gradually becoming specialized. It promotes society to differentiate into different fields with clear boundaries,individuals gradually to become independent and encouraging contact and interaction with other individuals.Frequent contact and interactions have replaced the hierarchical structure in traditional social management models with the diversified governance structure in the social governance model based on collaboration,participation, and common interests. In this sense, in deepening the division of labor, unceasing efforts should be made to deepen institutional arrangements, protect the basic rights of individuals, promote social occupation classification and induction training, and support the expansion of diversified governance bodies in accordance with the objective law of social development.

4.4 Tap the technology advantages of the Internet in governance to realize intelligent governance

With the ever more complicated and dynamic social issues of today, communications between social governance bodies are of great value. Nevertheless, information exchange barriers lead to decentralized and low governance efficiency which falls short of expectations. Scientific and technological innovations in recent years have gradually emerged as a major technical support for social governance. Internet technology is booming, and big data makes social information more open and transparent. Technical governance is gradually rising as an essential part for the government in social governance, which promotes the intellectualization of the social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests. With the Internet as technical support, diversified social governance bodies, by integrating social governance data, have refreshed their information communication, gradually built up a relationship network and expanded participation channels forcing the government to respond to society’s demands with increased political transparency, which has flattened the “castle politics,”②Zheng, 2014, p.106innovated social governance methods and improved the efficiency of social governance.

Moreover, intelligentizing the social governance model based on collaboration, participation, and common interests should rely on the construction of smart cities. This requires the government to break down interest barriers and divisions of departments, improve the integrity of government in urban governance through Internet technology, increase channels for public participation, and make urban management, public services,public decision-making, public security and social management more intelligent. The intellectualization in smart cities construction, as such, requires that all urban governance bodies diagnose urban development problems accurately and timely with cloud computing and cloud platforms, thus achieving “targeted governance,” that is, solving specific urban problems with tailored approaches. Supported by big data technology, local governments in China are actively practicing intelligent governance through mechanism innovations. For instance, since mobile internet technology has been applied in urban management, urban construction, transportation and ecological environmental protection, Tianjin people can participate in urban governance, forming a new intelligent “Internet+” urban governance model under which everyone plays a part. By leveraging big data, Anshun Economic and Technological Development Zone in Guizhou Province has launched network-based management in communities, building an intelligent community management platform, which promotes information resources sharing and the organic integration of communities, social organizations and social work.

(Translator: Ai Qingqing; Editor: Yan Yuting)

This paper has been translated and reprinted with the permission of Hubei Social Sciences, No. 5, 2018.