Plight and Path of Rural Collaborative Governance from the Subjective Perspective of Epistemology〔*〕

Shu Yongjiu,Li Lu

(College of Marxism Sichuan Agricultural University,Yaan Sichuan 625014)

Ⅰ.The rural collaborative governance bodies under the subjective perspective of epistemology

The subject and object in the epistemology system are two poles,one is unable to exist nor to form a complete cognition structure,play normal cognition function nor to perform a complete cognition activity without the other.Chen Bailing ever proposed from the perspective of epistemology that “the problem of the interaction between subject and object is not the same with the fundamental problem in Philosophy that what is the origin among thinking and existence,spirit and substance”.〔1〕Therefore,from the subjective perspective of Marx’s epistemological system,the interaction between subject and object is not equal to the fundamental problem in Philosophy.There are four specific manifestations for the subject in epistemology:individual subject,group subject,social subject and human subject.Individual subject refers to individuals that carry out relatively independent activities based on certain conditions for survival and spiritual development provided by nature and society,they form individual consciousness.Group subject refers to the organizations,social groups,political parties or social levels formed in a certain social relationship based on common beliefs,goals and interests,they form group consciousness.Social subject refers to the social collectivity living together within a certain geographical area that share the same political and economic conditions as well as the same regional cultural identity.Human subject refers to the entire human beings from different countries and regions and races that have the inherent unity of recognizing and transforming nature.In the past,the research on the rural collaborative governance was often limited to the collaboration of village subject,which is in fact not comprehensive because the main subjects of rural collaborative governance are group and society.The group body mainly refers to the political parties,institutions,organizations and groups in the administrative area of a village.The social body mainly refers to the collection of village subjects between administrative villages and the collection of governance bodies between urban and rural areas within a certain geographical area.

1.The main body of village collaborative governance

The main body of rural collaborative governance refers to the organization,institution or individual that takes a single administrative village as the governance unit and as an importance part in rural governance.The diversified trend of rural governance has been recognized by the scholars,but there are still differences in the classification of the governance bodies:dichotomy and trichotomy,the latter is more suitable for the classification of the governance body of village synergy collaborative governance.Jin Taijun (2002) believed that “There are three main bodies in rural governance:state (government),rural elites and mass peasants”.〔2〕Yin Min’e (2016) divided the main body of rural governance into three levels,“the state level mainly composed of township governments,villagers committees and villagers’ congress;social level represented by all kinds of non-governmental organizations emerging in the countryside;individual level represented by most farmers and local elites”.〔3〕The paper agrees with the three-level classification above,but considering the villagers’ committees and the villagers’ congress of the state level are the grass-root self-governing organizations that don’t represent the public power of the state,they cannot be divided into the national level.Based on the above analysis,the paper believes that the three levels of village synergy governance bodies should be the national level represented by township governments,party organizations at both town level and village level;the social level represented by village committees,villagers’ congress and other relevant social organizations;and individual level with the village elites as important individuals.

2.The main body of inter village collaborative governance

The main body of inter village collaborative governance is the collection of village governance subjects with the same or similar goals and functions between administrative villages,it’s suitable to be classified by the dichotomy method,for example,the classification of “bodies inside the system and bodies outside the system”〔4〕proposed by scholars Ma Chao,Li Xiaoguang et al (2015),and the classification of “institutional bodies and non-institutional bodies”〔5〕based on macro institutional perspective proposed by Zhang Yan’e (2010).The classification of the main body of inter village collaborative governance takes two or more administrative villages in a certain geographical area as the target,which takes the village governance bodies of related interest as a collection and make them the main bodies of rural synergy governance,so as to achieve effective collaboration of single administrative villages.Based on the above analysis,an innovative way of classification can be concluded as authoritatively inter village governance bodies and non-authoritatively inter village governance bodies,of which the former one mainly refers to the organization or unit that represents the right of state,including township government,grass-root party organization and village committee that represents the interests of the people,the latter one mainly refers to the social organizations,the villagers and village elites.

3.The main body of urban and rural areas collaborative governance

The main body of urban and rural collaborative governance is the collection of governance bodies between urban and rural areas within a certain geographical area.From the subjective perspective of epistemology,the main bodies of urban and rural as well as of inter village collaborative governance belong to the social subject category of epistemology.The main body of urban and rural collaborative governance is to take the villages within the radiation of county as the governance target based on the integration of urban and rural regional political and economic bodies,take the synergetic governance collection with the same function and goal in urban and rural areas as the main body of collaborative governance with the logic of dichotomy so as to achieve synergy governance of governance bodies within certain urban and rural areas.Therefore,the governance bodies can be divided into authoritatively urban and rural governance bodies composes of organizations or units including city governments,grass-root party organizations,neighborhood committees and village governments,township and village level party organizations as well as village committees and non-authoritatively urban and rural governance bodies composed of urban enterprises,social organizations,residents,entrepreneurs and rural social organizations,villagers and village elites.

Ⅱ.The plight of rural collaborative governance under the subjective perspective of epistemology

As with the deepening of a series of reforms in the rural areas,rural economy,culture,social life and ecological construction have developed rapidly and achieved periodical results.With the rapid pace of modernization and the new goal of rural revitalization strategy,the current governance model can hardly meet the requirements of the new era,in addition,the disadvantages of rural governance accumulated over a long period have become more prominent.From the subjective perspective of epistemology,the plight of collaborative rural governance lies in the following aspects:

1.The lack of coordination between the main bodies of village governance

The main bodies of village governance have presented a diversified trend,which does not necessarily means to be in apple pie order,actually,in reality,it’s a universal phenomenon that the main governing bodies shuffle responsibilities and act on their own will without mutual cooperation.

Firstly,in the national level,for one thing,grass-root political power conflict with villagers’ self-government right.Under the operation of “township administration and villager’s self-government” system,township government is the grass-root political power that represents state power,the realization of its functions depends on strengthening the administration of the village committee.Therefore,the conflict between the village committee’s role of government agent and the villagers self-government right often occurs,which leads the village committee to undertake the administrative tasks from the township government on the one hand,and to take the helm of village affairs on the other hand.When the requirements of the higher government go against with villagers’ will,the dual identity of the village committee conflict,so that the work cannot be carried out in a normal and orderly manner.In addition,village Party branch and village committee are two important governance organizations at village level,due to the unclear boundaries of rights and liabilities as well as the cross of work contents,once there are differences in work ideas,it’s easy to cause internal loss of governance bodies.The dual roles of the village committee makes it to undertake the administrative affairs outside its authority scope but not trusted or supported by the villagers,thus the efficiency of rural governance will be reduced and the villagers self-government function will also be weakened.For another thing,the relationship between village Party branch and village committee is in-coordinated.The village Party branch is the extension of the Party at grass-root level,and village committee is the main body of village affairs,being two most important organizations of rural governance,they are the direct organizations to manage village affairs,and there are no laws or regulations on their scope of responsibilities.Therefore in the process of governance,there are many overlaps between their function scopes and incongruous factors between the relationship of the two groups.The de-administration of village Party branch has made deviations in the positioning of core leadership function and practice.The enhanced villagers’ self-government consciousness and optimized structure of the village committee members has expanded the management power and scope of village committee which is the main body in actual governance.The responsibility ambiguity between village Party branch and village committee has secondarily increased the friction between them two groups.

Secondly,in the social level,the development of rural society organizations start late,with low degree of development and narrow coverage,and plays a small role.Traditional gentry governance mode is collapsed,state power and new rural non-governmental power are weakened.With the accelerated process of urbanization,the phenomenon of rural hollowing is becoming more and more serious,the loss of rural elites has added negative factors to the development of rural non-governmental organizations which links farmers with common goals and interests,plays a positive role in village affairs,and has the potential to bridge the effective communication between farmers and government.However,such organizations potentially have a game relationship against government due to different compositions and standpoints,different goals and requirements.Rural non-governmental organizations and township government can hardly completely trust each other,it’s difficult for the government to take advantage of the organizations for effective governance,therefore,rural non-governmental organizations can hardly obtain government policies and resource support,and government can hardly become the positive driving force for the construction of non-governmental organizations.Rural non-governmental organization is hard to develop,first,it lacks suitable system soil and government support;second,it lacks new talents and lagged behind;third,single non-governmental organization type,difficult to play a role in developing economy,mediating disputes,providing social services,developing rural culture and so on.

Lastly,in the individual level,for one thing,the villagers lack in sense of law and democracy.Restricted by factors such as the economic level,traditional concept and education degree,most villagers have no knowledge of their own civil rights and are not concerned about village affairs which is a must according to law.Nowadays,the farmers’ democratic consciousness has been promoted,and a few villagers have a certain sense of political participation,however,affected by the traditional difference sequence pattern in rural society and the concept that human relationship is greater than law,villagers often ignore democratic and legal ways and means in the process of democratic election,in expression and maintenance of their own rights and interests and in participation in village affairs.For another thing,our country has long been under the urban and rural binary structure,which results in a big gap between urban and rural economic development,so most village elites go to urban areas for a living,what left in rural areas are women,children and old people and lacks the backbone for rural economic development and governance.Village elites are the spokesperson for the interests of the peasants,and also the important source of rural non-governmental organizations.To some extent,they help the government to deal with public affairs and coordinate the relationship between the government and peasants.The mass loss of village elites is the root and violent representation of the rural society hollowing phenomenon,the root reason for the lack of self-governance ability in the rural area is the lack of young generation equipped with thoughts of democracy,progress,openness and tolerance to provide active support for rural society or to provide talent support for development of rural economy and promotion of rural governance reform.

2.The lack of coordination between the main bodies of inter village governance

Rural governance is not the governance of a certain village or a certain town,only focusing on local governance is the metaphysics of rural collaborative governance,the synergy among inter village main bodies is also the connotation of rural collaborative governance.Nowadays,there lacks mutual coordination between inter village governance bodies.Firstly,the lack of coordination between inter village authoritative bodies.The authoritative bodies are composed of township government,village committee and village Party branch that only notice the competitive relationship between villages and villages,towns and towns,which virtually set up a barrier in communication and coordination,this is lack in coordination consciousness.There are some contradictions and conflicts within the authoritative bodies,and due to the unclear boundary of power and responsibility,no body is willing to shoulder the burden of external coordination,this is lack in coordination implementation.Rural area is facing double challenges of frequent conflicts and decline of rural society in the transition period,the problems of system and mechanism interwoven with the problems of economic development,environmental governance and rural atmosphere reform,this is lack in coordination environment.Secondly,the lack of coordination between inter village non-authoritative bodies.The non-authoritative bodies are composed of rural non-governmental organizations,villagers and village elites that on the one hand cannot get the government information and coordination support,and on the other hand between them there is a certain geographical gap.It’s difficult for the inter village non-authoritative bodies to coordination without the government help or the knowledge to each other.

3.The lack of coordination between the main bodies of urban and rural areas

Rural governance matters not only the rural area,but also the overall situation of the integration of urban and rural areas.Currently,rural governance should not only focus on giving full play of the functions of the various rural governance bodies,but also seek more help from the governance bodies and strengths from outside the rural society,for example the urban strengths that have long been ignored in rural governance.Obviously,it’s deficient in coordination between urban and rural bodies,the development of rural and urban economy,politics,culture and society has been in a double-track system for a long time,which lead to the isolation of rural and urban areas and weak of the original foundation of rural and urban coordination.Since the implementation of urban and rural overall planning,the cooperative environment has been improved to some extent,but there are still problems,on the one hand,the existing management system and market system need to be improved,and on the other hand,the system and mechanism to promote urban and rural integration and cooperation are still imperfect,the coordination environment is still complex,and the synergistic mechanism is not mature.As for the authoritative bodies,in thinking,they are not completely free from the traditional governance pattern and lack coordination consciousness;in practice,they are limited by governance environment and mechanism that the urban and rural coordination is only formalized and lack practical exercise.As for the non-authoritative bodies,though urban and rural non-governmental organizations play an important role in the urban and rural collaborative governance,they lack the public power and authority imparted by law,therefore,there are problems such as slow development,weak autonomy,low social recognition and deficiency in function.As a result,in the process of governance,the urban and rural social organizations are confronted with the awkward dilemma that inside it’s impossible to be the bridge between the government and public,outside it’s difficult to act as the link between rural and urban coordination.It’s rather difficult for the urban and rural governance bodies to cooperate with each other.

Ⅲ.The path of rural collaborative governance under the subjective perspective of epistemology

Rural governance is a cyclic process based on practice,which starts from knowledge,tests with practice and then comes back to knowledge.In the process of promoting the integration construction of rural and urban areas,the coordination of village,inter village,urban and rural main synergy bodies is trapped in dilemma,so the multi bodies should play their subjective initiative so as to properly handle their relationship,and realize the double leap of governance concept and governance practice.

1.Clear the boundary of right and responsibility of the main body in village governance

Village area is the material carrier of traditional village governance,its main body is in the core position in rural governance.Thus in the village governance system,it’s necessary to limit the boundary of responsibility by the unit of governance body,so as to strengthen the collaboration between the multi bodies.And in addition,it’s a need to straighten out the relationship between the authoritative bodies,reduce conflict and internal friction;and to strengthen the power of non-authoritative bodies,enhance the ability of collaborative governance.

Start from the authoritative governance bodies.First of all,township government is the state’s management unit at grass-root level,it’s the traditional authority to manage public affairs.As the most grass-root management unit of the government,it has its legal status.So we can take the three biggest authoritative bodies as “element” unit,on which premise,township government should be the first main element.Therefore,with the innovation reform of rural governance,the functions of township governments should also be developed,the main manifestation is to weaken its function in economic management,transfer from omnipotent government to a service-oriented government,strengthen service guarantee function,play its role in coordination and leadership.The township government should simplify administrative procedures and delegate powers to lower levels on the premise of fully clarify the finance and power relationship of village and town affairs,shift the focus of work to work such as optimization of the pattern and level of social management,provision of public goods and services,safeguarding the peasants’ democratic power and perfecting the supervision of power,so that the government can return to its own function.Secondly,the village Party branch is the Party’s grass-root organization in rural areas,the relevant state laws clearly stipulated the core position of the Party’s organization at grass-root level.However,the village Party branch and the village committee are same in governing object and governing field,the boundary of the two groups is vague,which leads to intersecting and divergence in work and cause internal friction.There is no mechanism or rules to solve internal frictions,they are solved all by the leaders’ personal charm.The primary purpose of collaborative governance is to clarify their responsibilities.How to improve the leadership style of grass-root organizations in the new era is also a new topic.As the grass-root organization of the Party,the village Party branch should play the role of political leadership and ideological guidance,undertake the responsibility of propagating the Party’s policies,point out the direction for the village’s firm development,train talents,complement the principle of coming from the masses and go back to the masses,for example listening to the appeals of the masses,protecting their legal rights and interests,coordinating the relationship between the masses and government,keeping close connections with the masses,and coordinate the relationship between different governance bodies,so as to enhance their cohesion power.Thirdly,as grass-root self-government organization,the village committee connects the township government and peasants,thus becoming an important carrier for villagers to exercise democratic power and perform the status of the master.The main duty of the villagers’ committee is to guide and help villagers to govern,educate and serve themselves in a certain geographical area,and in addition,to stabilize the village order,develop its economy and manage its public affairs with the leadership of the Party committee.Therefore,it’s a necessity to clearly define the powers and responsibilities of the township government and village committee,avoid over administration of the village committee,fundamentally balance the double roles of the village committee,so as to realize villagers self-governing in the real sense.The village authoritative body should formulate a clear and reasonable list of powers according to law,realize the division of Party power,political power and autonomy right,and on which basis to realize collaborative governance of township government,village Party branch and village committee.

Start from the non-authoritative governance bodies.First of all,there is a kind of non-governmental social organization—the rural non-governmental organization,which is organized in an orderly way based on common goals and interests.Such organization can be divided,according to function,into economic cooperative organizations,social welfare funds,elderly associations,women’s associations and so on.Their common social appeal helps to unite rural folk strengths and explore channels for appeals,helps to fully stimulate the vitality of rural society,promote the integration of rural economy and market economy,helps to undertake part of the functions of providing social public goods and services,and helps to build harmonious and friendly rural relations,activate rural cultural life.The rural non-governmental organizations should closely connect with all aspects of the villagers’ social life and effectively convey the peasants’ reasonable interests appeal which has been ignored to the township government and village committee,so that it can establish effective interest expression channels for the villagers between the government and the village committee.Secondly,villagers are the basic units of the rural society.As the target of rural governance,villagers know best what’s insufficient in rural governance.Therefore,we should cultivate the villagers’ consciousness of democracy and law,give full play to the function of villagers’ participation,break down the clan concept that limit the democratic election of village cadres,make the really competent people to be the leaders of the village;improve villagers’ collective consciousness and mission consciousness by stating policies,open legal,fair and public channel for interest appeal,encourage villagers to put forward their own reasonable demands,advise on the management of village affairs,take appropriate measures to enable villagers to effectively supervise the village committee and the process of governance so that villagers can really be the master,and additionally,encourage all the villagers to participate in the management of rural affairs,which can not only identify the sticking point in rural governance,but also fully mobilize the enthusiasm of the masses and give full play to their wisdom.Thirdly,village elites is an important strength for rural governance.For one thing,village elites can set a good example and promote village regulation and rural legalization process,moreover,compared with ordinary villagers,village elites are stronger in democracy and law awareness,and they are more outstanding in achieving prosperity and governing,so they can play a leading role in the villagers’ orderly participation in village management and enrichment.For another thing,village elites are intermediaries that connect villagers and villagers,villagers and village committee and rural social organizations,as well as villagers and township government.The policies of township government and village committee can be Bettie known and understood by the delivery of village elites,in turn,the urgent needs of the villagers and rural social organizations can be fed back to village committee and township government through village elites.Misunderstandings between government and the public can be reduced by the communication and mediation of rural elites,thus the rural social relations can be more harmonious.But the village elites are kind of self-interested,therefore,we should pay attention to strengthening the supervision on village elites at the same time of exploring their potential in collaborative governance,so as to prevent them from forming an alliance with the rural clans and evil forces that destroy rural order.The non-authoritative village bodies should make clear their own position and function,realize democratic election,management and supervision through political participation within legal scope,realize positive interaction between authoritative and non-authoritative organizations so as to realize new synergy between village governing bodies.

2.Enhance the governance cooperation between inter village main bodies

The collaborative governance between inter village main bodies is an important part in rural governance,it plays an important role in the modernized development of agriculture and modernization of rural governance.The rural governance effectiveness will be greatly reduced if each administrative village goes its own way.Therefore,coordinating the development of villages is a powerful measure to solve problems such as lack of coordination and out-of-balance development.Due to the strong dependence of inter village collaborative governance on the support of grass-root government,the grass-root government should play the role of caller,intermediator or coordinator in the process of inter village collaborative governance.As to inter village authoritative main bodies,township governance should vigorously advocates them to learn from each others strong points and formulate effective codes of conduct to ensure the orderly development of collaborative governance.Township government should firmly make government affairs public and set up example village column to solve the problem of information asymmetry;regularly hold village governance experience exchange meetings to eliminate misunderstanding and confrontation.The authoritative bodies can develop multi village joint development of modern planting and feeding,rural e-commerce and rural tourism;provide assistance for cultural activities organized by inter village non-governmental organizations;carry out multi village joint sports activities;and carry out multi village joint comprehensive environmental regulation.The non-authoritative bodies should form the governance synergy led by village elites based on rural social organization,relying on the mass peasants,which will form a collaborative governance system that meets the needs of inter village authoritative and non-authoritative bodies.

3.Establish a new normal of mutual development between urban and rural governance bodies

Considering the basic goal,rural governance should not be limited to the good governance of rural society,but should be integrated into the urban and rural integration system.To stimulate the endogenous and exogenous forces of relevant departments or organizations to the greatest extent,and finally form a new pattern led by grass-root Party committee,directed by township governments,implemented by village committees and neighborhood committees,and with the mass participation of urban and rural social organizations and elites.

First of all,break the barriers between urban and rural areas,implement the dual track of urban and rural welfare reform and social security system,equate urban and rural public service supply.Secondly,transform the advantages of developed market economy,sound public service system and good second and third industry system of the urban area into the driving force for the great-leap-forward development of rural area;and in turn,transform the spirit of diligence,mutual help and solidarity maintained in rural area into the power of promoting the improvement of interpersonal indifference,interest supremacy,individualism and other social customs in urban area.Thirdly,intensify efforts for promoting the cooperation and exchanges between urban and rural social organizations,on which basis to give full play to the powerful role of these organizations in regional economic development,public services,medical education and social welfare;integrate some urban and rural social organizations,continue to strongly support the township enterprises and public welfare organizations.Urban and rural elites and villagers should set up a cooperative concept,learn advanced technology and management experience from urban agricultural scientific research and technical personnel,economic management talents,internet marketing and other talents so as to change the traditional mode of extensive agricultural development,provide scientific research and talent support for the promotion of agricultural industrialization,guide and support the peasants to start their own business and vitalize rural market.

:

〔1〕Chen Bailing,Some Issues About Correct Evaluation of Materialism and Empiriocriticism, Social Sciences in China,1989(06),pp.77-92.

〔2〕Jin Taijun,A Political Sociology Analysis Of The Interaction Among Three-Level Powers in Rural Governance, Strategy and Management,2002(02),pp.105-114.

〔3〕Yin Min’e,Pluralism and Synergy:the Path Choice in Constructing New Relationship between Rural Governance Bodies,2016(06),pp.46-50,2017-03-14.

〔4〕Ma Chao,Li Xiaoguang,Development Logic and Realization Path of Rural Multi-Body Collaborative Governance, Journal of Shanxi Agriculture University(social science edition),2015,14(07),pp.674-678.

〔5〕Zhang Yan’e,Analysis of Several Issues Related to The Rural Governance Bodies, Rural Economy,2010(01),pp.14-19.

Notes:

〔1〕〔2〕〔3〕 Marx Engels Selected Works (Volume 2),Beijing:People’s Publishing House,1995.

〔4〕〔Soviet〕Ba-Wa-Kopnin,translated by Ma Xun,Zhang Yun, Introduction To Marx’s Theory of Epistemology,Beijing:the Party School of CPC Central Committee Scientific Research Office,Truth-seeking Publishing House,1982.

〔5〕Cao Boyan,Zhou Wenbin,Zhang Chunsheng, Cognition and Freedom,Shanghai:Shanghai People’s Publishing House,1983.

〔6〕Xia Zhentao, Introduction of Epistemology,Beijing:People’s Publishing House,1986.

〔7〕Fei Xiaotong, Rural China,Beijing:Zhonghua Book Company,2013.

〔8〕Liang Shuming, Theory of Rural Construction,Beijing:The Commercial Press,2015.

〔9〕Li Hongzhen,Cao Wenhong, Epistemology,Axiology and Ontology:The Three Dimensions of Marx’s Ideology Theory,Southeast Academic Research,2012(05),pp.6-12.

〔10〕Wang Weiguo,Reconstructing Marx’s Epistemology, Journal of Yan’an University (Social Science Edition),2005(02),pp.32-34,57.

〔11〕Zhu Min,The Fundamental Problem of Marx’s Epistemology Theory, Seek Truth From Facts,1981(07),pp.22-29.

〔12〕Wang Kongque,A Survey of Research on Epistemology, Sichuan Social Science Community,1993(03),pp.35-37,55.

〔13〕Ma Chao,Li Xiaoguang,Development Logic and Realization Path of Rural Multi-Body Collaborative Governance, Journal of Shanxi Agriculture University (Social Science Edition),2015,14(07),pp.674-678.