Smart Cities

and Social Governance:

Guide for Participatory Indicator Development
 Smart Cities and Social Governance:
Guide for Participatory Indicator Development

 
Authors: Shuwen Zhou, Samantha Anderson, Boshu Cui, Shenglin Zhang

Research Team: Xiniming Du, Shenglin Zhang, Dongrui Jiang, Xiyu Zhang, Shuguang Liao, Dayong Li,
Pengying Zhang

This research paper should be referenced as: UNDP China (2017). Smart Cities and Social Governance:
Guide for Participatory Indicator Development. United Nations Development Programme in China, Beijing,
China.

This research paper is published in English and Chinese. UNDP China has strived to ensure the consistency
between the two versions of the paper. The English version should prevail in case of any ambiguity or
conflict in terms of the two versions.

All rights reserved. Any part of this publication may be quoted, copied, or translated provided that the
source is indicated. No part of this publication may be used for commercial purposes without prior written
permission from UNDP China.

DISCLAIMER: The analysis and policy recommendations of the research paper do not necessarily reflect
the views of United Nations Development Programme. The designations employed in the paper do not
imply the expressions of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations or
UNDP concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or its authorities, or concerning the
delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The recommendations of the paper are solely the views of the
researcher and do not reflect the views of any government or organisation.

UNDP China welcomes comments on the research paper via email to Ms. Zhou Shuwen (shuwen.zhou@
undp.org).

This and other research papers can be downloaded from www.cn.undp.org.

 Table of Contents
Foreword........................................................................................................................................................................1
Acknowledgements................................................................................................................................................3
Part I: Foundations for a participatory approach to the Guiyang social
governance and smart city research collaboration............................................................4
1.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................4

1.2 ‘Smart Cities’ and ‘Social Governance’ in the Chinese Context...................................................5

1.2.1 Smart city policy and development...............................................................................................5

1.2.2 Social governance................................................................................................................................7

1.2.3 Public participation in governance................................................................................................8

1.3 Bridging a 'bottom-up' method to the conventional 'top-down’ approach

(methodology).................................................................................................................................................9

1.3.1 Bottom-up vs. top-down....................................................................................................................9

1.3.2 Evaluating smart cities and social governance....................................................................... 11

1.3.3 Bottom-up assessment tool development............................................................................... 12

Part II: The Guiyang social governance and smart cities indicators.................................... 14
2.1 Guiyang social governance indicator system methodology.................................................... 14

2.2 Guiyang social governance indicator system................................................................................. 17

2.3 Value generation process for indicators............................................................................................ 23

2.4 Data collection and calculation............................................................................................................ 26

2.5 Updating and maintenance.................................................................................................................... 36

2.6 Result of indicators for Guiyang........................................................................................................... 36

Part III: Indicator Development in Guiyang: Tools and Processes......................................... 39

3.1 Background of the sample communities.......................................................................................... 39

3.2 Community mobilisation......................................................................................................................... 42

3.2.1 What is community mobilisation?............................................................................................... 42

3.2.2 Why is community mobilisation important?........................................................................... 42

3.2.3 What are the tools for community mobilisation?................................................................... 42

 3.2.4 What is needed for community mobilisation?........................................................................ 42

3.3.5 Mobilisation for the Smart Cities and Social Governance Research Project................ 43

3.3 Community and multi-stakeholder deliberation.......................................................................... 47

3.3.1 What is community and multi-stakeholder deliberation?.................................................. 47

3.3.2 Why is community and multi-stakeholder deliberation important?.............................. 48

3.3.3 What is needed for community deliberation?......................................................................... 50

3.3.4 Community deliberation for the Smart Cities and Social Governance
Research Collaboration.................................................................................................................... 50

3.4 Feedback to communities....................................................................................................................... 58

3.4.1 What is feedback to communities?............................................................................................. 58

3.4.2 Why is feedback to community important?............................................................................. 58

3.4.3 What are the tools for feedback?.................................................................................................. 59

3.4.4 Feedback to communities in the Smart Cities and Social Governance

Research Collaboration.................................................................................................................... 59

3.5 Learning — successes and lessons...................................................................................................... 61

References.................................................................................................................................................................. 65
List of Tables............................................................................................................................................................. 69
List of Figures........................................................................................................................................................... 69
List of Boxes.............................................................................................................................................................. 69
Appendix 1: Results of the brainstorming sessions....................................................................... 70
Appendix 2: Invitation letter to community deliberations....................................................... 73
Appendix 3: Data visualisation maps for selected communities.......................................... 74
Foreword
One of the unusual features of China’s development in the reform and opening up period has been its
ability to achieve levels of human development that are higher than what would be expected given its
stage of economic development. Thus, according to UNDP’s Human Development Index (HDI), which
measures achievements in life expectancy, education and income, even though China is still only an upper
middle-income country, it joined the group of countries that have an HDI score between 0.700 and 0.799,
considered to be highly developed, in 2011. According to UNDP’s 2016 National Human Development
Report: Social Innovation for Inclusive Human Development, while some of this can be attributed to
globalisation, it is largely due to continuous reform and opening up, a human-centred approach to
development, top-down design combined with local innovation and absorbing and innovatively
localising international experiences. However, as the NHDR also notes, while overall human development
has increased, it has done so with insufficient fairness and inclusiveness.

The Guiyang Smart Cities and Social Governance Research Collaboration is aimed at precisely addressing
the issue of fairness and inclusiveness in city development through a human-centred approach to
development, combined top-down and bottom-up project design and the innovative and localised
application of international tools. The Guiyang Smart Cities and Social Governance Research Collaboration
was initially conceived as a way to harness big data and other smart applications to assess Guiyang’s
social governance development. Building on earlier work that recognised the importance of public
engagement in local government assessment, UNDP partnered with Wing Cloud Big Data Co. Ltd. and the
Guiyang Municipal Government to conduct an assessment of social governance in two neighbourhoods
in Guiyang. The project engaged local residents in setting community priorities, and created a
multistakeholder process to enlist input from experts and government officials in establishing a set of
indicators that can track those priorities using available data. Beijing City Quadrant Technology Company
(UrbanXYZ) is assisting in gathering the relevant data and progress will be continually updated and
shared with neighbourhood committees and local residents creating a continuous feedback look for civic
engagement, government responsiveness and participatory government assessment.

From UNDP’s global experience in building the capacity of governments to conduct governance
assessments, we have learned that public participation in assessments mobilises public opinion and builds
a partnership between the people and the government, unlocking the social and economic development
potential of communities. This guide describes the process and tools that were used in the project and
presents the final set of indicators that reflect community priorities. Although the end product for this
project is an indicator system, the participatory tools and processes can be used in various contexts,
including community and urban development planning, city budgeting, and social policy planning. The
guide also describes the relevant national-level policies that have created an enabling environment for
participatory smart city development.

1
 Meanwhile, local governments need to address increasingly complex challenges and emerging social
issues, and implement effective and inclusive city governance with limited resources. Smart city
development, driven by big data and cloud computing, has the potential to bring about profound
changes in the governance of urban society. At its best, it can produce innovative governance and new
techniques and ideas for addressing urban problems. A smart city can contribute to achieving the goal
of social and environmental sustainability and creating inclusive and liveable cities, by collecting and
sharing information with high-tech support. But 'smart' approaches cannot do this alone. There must also
be robust public engagement that ensures that all residents have a voice in the development of their city
and in the direction and performance of their government.

UNDP China is proud to be partnering with the Guiyang Municipal Government, Wing Cloud Big Data Co.
and UrbanXYZ on this guide. I would like to extend my sincere thanks to all the participants in the project
and to the many colleagues in the United Nations System who provided valuable insights and assistance.

Agi Veres

Country Director

The United Nations Development Programme China Office

2
Acknowledgements
Thank you to Mr. Nicholas Rosellini, Resident Representative of United Nations in China, Ms. Agi Veres,
Country Director of UNDP China, Mr. Xu Hao, Deputy Mayor of the Guiyang Municipal Government, and
Mr. Xu Ning, Chairman of the Wing Cloud Big Data Service Ltd. Co.. for their support for the project.

Thank you to Mr. Mao Mingrui, Deputy Director of the Big Data Committee, China Society for Urban
Studies and the data research team from UrbanXYZ for the data processing and visualisation.

Thank you to Ms. Zhou Shuwen, Ms. Samantha Anderson, Ms. Du Xinming, Ms. Zhang Yunan and Ms. Hu
Fengrui of UNDP for the hard work in implementing the project in the field, and for the extensive research
and writing that went into producing the guide. Thank you also to Wu Qiong for background research.

Mr. Patrick Haverman, Deputy Country Director of UNDP China Office has been critical in keeping the
project moving forward.

We gratefully acknowledge Guiyang Municipal Government for providing the funding and data for this
project initiative, and participating in the deliberations.

Thank you to C.Y. Yeung and Huang Bingfeng of Intel and colleagues at Cinnovate and the Social
Innovation Study Group for facilitating the broader discussion around human-centred smart cities.

Thank you to Ms. Liu Yiqing for the accurate and elegant translation.

Thank you to the peer reviewers, Ms. Gu Qing of UNDP China Office, Ms. Paavani Reddy of UNDP Asia-
Pacific Regional Office, Mr. James Chan and Ms. Ren Jue for their valuable insights and feedback.

We sincerely hope that this report will help advance the involvement of the public in policy making, and
human-centred smart city development in China.  

3
 Part I: Foundations for a participatory
approach to the Guiyang social
governance and smart city research
collaboration

1.1 Introduction
The most recent government work report, delivered by Premier Li Keqiang on March 9,
2017 reaffirms the Chinese government’s commitment to improving social development
through providing support for employment and business start-ups, improving access to
quality education, increasing subsidies for basic health insurance, improving regulatory
measures in food and medicine safety, continuing to raise basic pension payments and
strengthen safety nets to protect left-behind children, the elderly and people living with
disabilities. The work report also commits the government to “…explor [ing] new forms
of social governance” which is elaborated as improving self-governance, community
governance and the role of social organisations as well as protecting legal rights,
especially of vulnerable groups including women, children and the elderly.

Since 2014, UNDP has been working with stakeholders such as Intel, Nesta and the
China Center for Urban Development to promote the concept of ‘human-centered’
smart cities. There has been a great deal of interest over the past decade in applying
innovative technological solutions to address urban challenges. However, many smart
city projects primarily focus on technology infrastructure or hardware, without a strong
understanding of how these projects will address human needs. The concept of human-
centred smart cities is to ensure that smart city projects are demand and need-driven
and appropriate to each city’s context.1

In October, 2014, UNDP was invited by Intel to join a study tour to Guiyang to look at
the practical application of human-centred smart city concepts and to discuss with
the Guiyang government the potential to further develop collaboration on smart city
development. Guiyang was selected as a pilot for the Ministry of Housing and Urban-
Rural Development’s smart city programme in 2013. The Guiyang Municipal Government
has been pioneering in the development of cloud computing and the use of big data
1. UNDP (2015). Rethinking
in multiple aspects of smart city development. During the study tour, UNDP introduced
Smart Cities: ICT for New- the work it had been doing on social governance indicators. The Guiyang Government
type Urbanization and Public
Participation at the City and
immediately invited UNDP to collaborate with Wing Cloud Big Data Service Ltd. Co., a
Community Level in China. private sector company with a mandate to incubate big data-based start-ups on a smart
Beijing. Available from http://
www.cn.undp.org/content/china/
social governance project that would simultaneously increase citizen engagement in city
en/home/library/democratic_ governance and highlight Guiyang’s practical experience in smart city development. The
governance/Rethinking-
Smart-Cities_ICT-for-New-
'Guiyang Smart Cities and Social Governance Research Collaboration' was launched at
type-Urbanization-and-Public- the Big Data Expo on 26th May, 2016.
Participation-at-the-City-and-
Community-Level-in-China.html

4
The Guiyang Smart Cities and Social Governance Research Collaboration engages
communities and expert stakeholders in developing a set of social governance indicators
to assist local government in assessing its progress with and increase transparency for
citizens in the provision of social services. Data for the social governance indicators is
gathered through and supported on smart platforms.

This guide describes the experience and lessons learned from the Guiyang Smart Cities
and Social Governance Research Collaborative, and provides tools for other cities seeking
to strengthen citizen engagement in urban decision-making and urban smart city
projects.

Part 1 gives an overview of the development and relevant policies in China on smart
cities and social governance. It addresses the utility of indicator systems and the value
of bottom-up versus top-down approaches to indicator systems as applied to local
government and explains the hybrid approach and major components of the Guiyang
Smart Cities and Social Governance Indicators. Part II introduces the indicators that
were developed through a participatory and multi-stakeholder process in Guiyang
and describes data sources and collection methods. Part III describes the participatory
methodology used to engage communities and other stakeholders in the selection of
indicators. It provides tools for this methodology and presents lessons learned from the
project.

1.2 ‘Smart Cities’ and ‘Social Governance’ in the

Chinese Context

1.2.1 Smart city policy and development

The concept of smart cities originated during the 2007--2008 global financial crisis. In
November 2008, IBM began work on a “smarter cities” concept as part of its Smarter
Planet initiative.2 By the beginning of 2009, the concept had captivated the imagination
of a wide variety of governments, organisations, and individuals across the globe. In
September 2009, the City of Dubuque and IBM announced their intention to make
Dubuque the first smart city in the United States.3 After that, smart city strategies were
2. IBM Corporation (2008). A
issued and developed in various countries, including Switzerland, Finland, Singapore, Smarter Planet: the Next Leadership
South Korea. Agenda. Turkey. Available from
https://www.ibm.com/ibm/
cioleadershipexchange/us/en/pdfs/
In 2009, in response to the financial crisis, the Chinese government announced a stimulus SJP_Smarter_Planet.pdf
plan to inject 4 trillion Yuan into China’s economy. IBM saw the commercial opportunities 3. Harrison, Colin; Donnelly, Ian
Abbott (2012). A Theory of Smart
in China, and held 22 smart city forums communicating with more than 200 mayors Cities. Available from http://www.
and nearly 2000 city officials. The term ‘smart city’ became widely accepted in China, interindustria.hu/ekonyvtar/
en/Smart%20cities%20and%20
and many cities, such as Nanjing, Shenyang, Chengdu, and Kunshan, began strategic communities/Publications/A%20
cooperation with IBM.4 At that time, IBM had already signed an agreement with the theory%20of%20smart%20cities.
pdf
Shanghai World Expo Bureau in 2008 as the main sponsor of the computer systems and 4. Li, Yongling; Lin, Yanliu;
consulting services for the Shanghai Expo. With the theme of “Better city, Better life”, the Geertman, Stan (2015). The
Development of Smart Cities in
Shanghai Expo incorporated high level information communication infrastructure and China. Available from http://web.
information technology into its displays.5 The successful application of smart buildings mit.edu/cron/project/CUPUM2015/
proceedings/Content/pss/291_li_
and planning in the Shanghai Expo has helped drive the nationwide construction of h.pdf
smart cities in China. 5. Ibid.

5
 In China, the government defines a smart city as “a new concept and model which
utilises the next generation of information technology, such as the Internet of Things
(IoTs), cloud computing, big data, to promote smart urban planning, construction,
management and services for cities”.6

In general, there are four types of government policy documents on smart cities. First,
there are specific plans or policies for smart cities, including long-term government
plans, construction schemes, guidelines, and project management methods. Second,
policy on smart cities is included in the overall government plans on the national
economy and social information development which include special sections for smart
cities policy. Third, there are policies on topics such as “urban information” or “digital city”,
which are similar with smart city goals. Fourth, there are pilot projects funded by several
central government ministries with a focus on the development of smart cities or related
infrastructure.

In September 2014, NDRC and seven other Ministries7 jointly issued a strategic policy
document, the "Guidance on Promoting Healthy Smart City Development". This Guidance
lays out principles for smart city development in China, including strengthening
comprehensive public services using smart technologies, promoting data collection and
sharing on digital platforms, supporting law enforcement, including taxation compliance
through smart technologies, and establishing e-government and online channels for
citizens to express opinions. The Guidance emphasises the need for smart cities to be
human-centred and practical, city-based, demand-driven and market-oriented while
minimising unnecessary government intervention.

In China’s New-type Urbanisation Plan released in 2014 by the State Council, Chapter 18
6. National Development and Section 2 identifies the construction of smart cities as a priority. The critical applications
Reform Commission (2014).
The Guidance on Promoting
for smart technologies in cities are identified as 1) broadband information networks; 2)
Healthy Smart City Development. informatisation of planning and management, including building public information
Beijing. Available from http://
www.sdpc.gov.cn/gzdt/201408/
platforms; 3) intelligent infrastructure in transportation, power, water and sewage, and
W020140829409970397055.pdf pipeline networks; 4) convenient public services; 5) industrial development; and 6) social
7. The seven ministries include:
Ministry of Industry and
governance.8
Information Technology (MIIT),
Ministry of Science and Technology By the end of 2015, three sets of smart city pilots had been issued, 337 cities in total. All
(MOST), Ministry of Public Security the directly-administered municipalities, 100% of sub-provincial cities, 89% of prefecture-
(MPS), Ministry of Finance (MoF),
Ministry of Land and Resources level cities and 47% of county-level cities are engaged in smart city development.9
(MLR), Ministry of Housing and
Urban-Rural Development The concept of ‘smart cities’ was first included in the government’s work report in 2015
(MOHURD), and Ministry of
Transport (MoT). and in 2016 and the expansion of the smart city pilots was identified as a goal in the 13th
8. State Council of the People’s Five-year Plan.
Republic of China (2014). National
New-type Urbanisation Plan (2014-
2020). Beijing. Available from
Since then, many other policies have been promulgated with specific reference to
http://www.51baogao.cn/uploads/ smart cities in areas such as manufacturing, transportation, medical industries, tourism,
xinxingchengzhenhua(2014-2020).
pdf [in Chinese].
geoinformation (mapping) internet, big data, cloud computing, etc. In general, the
9. Xiao, L. (2015). Development specific policies can be classified into five types: technology development, social
Trends for China’s Information
Market. Market Observer: 51-53.
development, sector development, industry applications, and governance. 10 Recently,
10. Sun, J.; Pei, L.; Zhou, Z.; Qiu, P. more emphasis has been put on technological development with the emerging of new
(2016) Multi-interpretation and
Qualitative Analysis of Smart City
technologies such as big data and cloud computing. Nevertheless, the government has
Policy Goals in China. Library and emphasised that smart city development should align with the principles of “new-type
Information 6: 25-32. [In Chinese]
urbanisation” put forward in the New-type Urbanisation Plan and be human-centred,
practical and demand-driven.

6
1.2.2 Social governance
In 1998, The State Council Organisational Reform Plan first put forward the concept
“Social Management” ( 社 会 管 理 ) when it defined the basic functions of government
as “Macro-control, Social Management and Public Services”. In 2011, Chinese President
Hu Jintao gave a keynote speech on social management innovation reiterating its
centrality to the Chinese Communist Party’s concept of governance, one that signalled
an acknowledgement that Chinese society was transitioning from one where the
centrality of the Party and government were all-encompassing to one where many new
organisations, actors and stakeholders had key roles to play. The Party and government
were therefore taking on more of a managerial role. Social management is a term that
has no direct English translation but generally refers to the regulation and control by
the government of social affairs, social organisations and social life under the rule of law.
Issues related to social justice, public security, social stability, and social services have
often been brought under the umbrella of social management.11

During the 3rd plenum of the 18th Party Congress, in November 2013, the term social
governance ( 社会治理 ) was introduced. Introducing the term governance was seen
as signalling a greater shift towards participation and collaboration between the
government and civil society.12

In the 13th Five-Year Plan, social governance is given a prominent role, in particular
in “Chapter 70: Enhance the social governance system”. According to the plan, the
government seeks to develop the social governance system under the Party’s leadership
through social cooperation, public participation, and rule of law, so as to achieve a good
interaction between government management, social regulation and residents’ ( 居民 )
autonomy. This chapter is divided into six sections, namely: to enhance government
management capacity and level, including through the use of science and technology
and by improving transparency, to strengthen community service, including improving
the delivery of social services and increasing the role of social organisations and
volunteers, improving the role of social organisations, including by clearly delineating
roles and responsibilities, enhance social self-regulation through improved ethics, legal
norms, family responsibilities and social behaviour, to improve the mechanisms of public
participation, including protecting people’s right to know, participate, make decisions
and oversee the government, and to guarantee the protection of human rights and
conflict resolution.

While the meaning of social governance continues to evolve, in this project, we are
building on a 2012-2014 UNDP project “Support for the Development of a Social
Governance Assessment Framework in China”, written in collaboration with the China
Centre for Comparative Politics and Economics under the Central Compilation &
Translation Bureau. That project identified the critical dimensions of social governance
to include human development, social justice, public services, social security, public 11. Yu, Keping (2012). China Social
Governance Assessment Index
security and public participation. It also builds on the UNDP research project "Engaging System. China Governance Review.
Public Participation in Government Performance Assessment in China” which reviews 12. Leng, Lim Teng (2014). Research
Report: Overview of Social
the history of public engagement in government performance assessment in China Governance in China. Available
and highlights eight case studies of good examples of effective public engagement from https://www.cscollege.gov.
sg/Knowledge/Pages/Overview-of-
in government assessment. This project recognises that while there are still barriers Social-Governance-in-China.aspx
to systematic public engagement in local government performance assessment (e.g.

7
 many local officials question the public’s ability to engage in impartial and objective
assessment), nevertheless more and more cities and towns recognise that public
participation contributes to the improvement of government performance through
integrating public needs into the performance management system, provides effective
external monitoring, and sets the direction for the improvement of government service
provision. Public participation can help the government obtain wider public support,
and facilitate the transformation of the government performance management system
from an "efficiency-based" to a "responsibility-based" system,13 thus strengthening the
legal basis of government activities.14

In addition the project is informed by UNDP’s work globally on governance assessment15

and local governance.16 UNDP’s global experience in building government capacity
for public sector assessments has shown that public participation in such assessments
contributes to mobilising public opinion and building the dialogue between government
and citizens, so that they can work together on a common vision for their society. By
better serving the needs of the people, government can improve the opportunities for
communities to realise their social and economic development potential. Through the
better interaction with government and the stronger delivery of services, communities
can invest their efforts in productive local development, supported by government
13. Dusenbury, Patricia J.; Liner, rather than held back by overly bureaucratic procedures. As well, UN Habitat’s
Blaine; Vinson, Elisa (2000). States,
Citizens, and Local Performance
"Guidelines on Decentralisation and the Strengthening of Local Authorities" set out
Management. Urban Institute. universal principles for local governance which highlight the need to ensure the wider
14. Wang, Xixin (2008). Public
Participation, Professional
participation and empowerment of citizens and a variety of stakeholders in local
Knowledge and Government governance as well as improved capacity for data gathering and increased transparency
Performance Assessment Model -
Exploring an Analysis Framework
and information-sharing by local authorities.17
for Government Performance
Assessment Model. Rule of Law and In light of this work, the Guiyang Social Governance and Smart City Research
Social Development: 14.
Collaboration made a critical shift from the earlier thematic research on social
15. UNDP (2011). Governance
Assessment Project Fast Facts. governance assessment with the Central Compilation & Translation Bureau to centre
Available from http://www.undp.
public participation in the development of an indicator system that can be applied in the
org/content/dam/undp/library/
Democratic%20Governance/ smart city building in the urbanisation process of China, with Guiyang as the first pilot.
DG%20Fast%20Facts/Fast_Facts_
This will be discussed in more detail in the following section, but first, recent policies
Governance%20Assessments_
Draft%203-BDP-SB.pdf supporting greater public participation in governance in China are reviewed.
16. UNDP (2016). Framework
for Local Governance and Local
Development. Available from http:// 1.2.3 Public participation in governance
www.undp.org/content/undp/en/
home/librarypage/democratic- Linked to improved social governance is the increased emphasis on the importance of
governance/local_governance/
integrated-framework-to-support- public participation ( 公众参与 ) in decision-making since the expansion of deliberative
local-governance-and-local-devel. practices starting in the 1980s as part of the rise of a wider range of participation
html
17. UN Habitat (2009). International including village elections and public hearings. China has implemented various reforms
Guidelines on Decentralization to increase the level of citizen participation in legislative and executive decision-making,
and Access to Basic Services
for all. Available from https:// including “public hearings, deliberative polls, citizens’ right to sue the state, initiatives to
unhabitat.org/books/international- make government information public, increasing use of People’s Congresses to discuss
guidelines-on-decentralization-
and-access-to-basic-services-for- policy, and acceptance of some kinds of autonomous civil society organisations”.18
all/ With the release of “Opinions on Strengthening the Power of the Chinese People’s
18. He, B.; Warren, M. (2011).
Authoritarian Deliberation: The Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC)” in 2006, public participation has been
Deliberative Turn in Chinese specifically included in a range of policy documents including the five-year plans. Legal
Political Development. Perspectives
on Politics, 9(2), p. 269. protection for public participation has been enacted through the “Legislation Law”,
“Pricing Law”, “Enactment of Administrative Regulations” and “Price-making Hearing

8
Law” and they provide legal protection for public participation. Legislation in the area
of environmental protection has been particularly far-reaching and includes: “Interim
Measures for Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment”, “Environmental
Information Disclosure Measures”, and “Guidelines on Promoting Public Participation in
Environmental Protection”. The revision of the 1989 Environmental Protection Law (EPL)
adopted at the 8th meeting of the Standing Committee of the 12th National People’s
Congress on April 24, 2014 is a particularly good example of both public engagement
and attitudes towards social governance. The draft law underwent 3.5 years of public
consultation, had over 14,000 inputs from stakeholders and was redrafted 4 times before
being finalised. The main area of revision was to broaden the criteria for which social
organisations had standing to sue polluters under the new law.

In addition, in September 2014, the Ministry of Environmental Protection held a national

seminar on public participation in the area of environmental protection. In June 2015,
the China People’s Political Consultative Conference and the State Council released the
“Opinions on Accelerating the Construction of Ecological Civilization” which included
provisions to improve the disclosure of environmental information, to protect people’s
rights to access information, and to encourage public participation. On July 2nd, 2015,
“Laws on Public Participation in Environmental Protection” was issued by the Ministry of
Environmental Protection and took effect in September 2015. This law aims to promote
proper public participation, to accelerate the pace of reform, and to promote the
transformation of economic and social development.

The central government has also been promoting public participation as an innovative
way to address China’s emerging urbanisation challenges. In 2008, the new Urban
and Rural Planning Law of the People’s Republic of China was issued, in which public
engagement was for the first time stipulated. The New-type Urbanisation Plan issued by
the State Council in 2014 emphasises the importance of public participation and positive
interaction between citizens and the government to improve urban governance.19 Many
local governments have implemented systems to garner more public input into decision-
making. For example, Harbin, Heilongjiang and Wuxi, Jiangsu have set aside parts of
their budget to be allocated through a participatory budgeting process while Wenling,
Zhejiang now has 70% of its budget decided through public consultations. Meanwhile,
since 2006, the local People’s Congress and citizens have participated in public service
19. State Council of the People’s
budgeting in Shanghai, although the process still solicits considerable input from policy Republic of China (2014). National
experts. All these cities use publicity, financial information disclosure, online voting New-type Urbanisation Plan
(2014-2020). Available from http://
and community public participation to make the community budgeting process more www.51baogao.cn/uploads/
democratic, open and transparent. Information and communication platforms as well xinxingchengzhenhua(2014-2020).
pdf [in Chinese]. See especially
are more and more being used to solicit feedback from citizens, increase government Chapter 19 Strengthen and
accountability and transparency, improve public services and provide lifestyle innovate city governance
20. UNDP (2015). Rethinking
information and platforms for community-building.20 Smart Cities: ICT for New-
type Urbanization and Public
Participation at the City and
Community Level in China.
1.3 Bridging a 'bottom-up' method to the Available from http://www.
cn.undp.org/content/china/
conventional 'top-down’ approach (methodology) en/home/library/democratic_
governance/Rethinking-
Smart-Cities_ICT-for-New-
1.3.1 Bottom-up vs. top-down type-Urbanization-and-Public-
Participation-at-the-City-and-
In many countries, regions and cities, a ‘top-down’ paradigm is the mainstream approach Community-Level-in-China.html

9
 in policy-making and resource distribution. Policy-making has long been considered a
highly technical job that needs ‘rational and comprehensive’ assessment and design, and
was only an arena for ‘experts’, academics, political leaders and so on. To enter it, the bar
for credentials was high. In China, emphasis is in particular put on ‘scientific’ approaches
to the development of good policies and sound distribution of resources.21

However, a top-down approach to policy, even if ‘rational and comprehensive’, can often
backfire. Experts may be unfamiliar with the local context and the needs of different
social groups, and expert policy development often leads to unpredicted side effects and
conflicts during policy enforcement; as well, outcome bias often favours vested interests.

In response to the disadvantage of top-down approaches, a bottom-up paradigm has

emerged, which values the role of ordinary people and communities who were often
disadvantaged by the outcomes of policy making, due to unbalanced power relations.
The advocates of bottom-up approaches believe that people should be given space to
express opinions, be empowered with analytical tools to propose ideas, and lead policy
making. Policy planners’ role should transform into that of facilitators. With deepening
degrees of participation, from ‘nonparticipation’, to ‘tokenism’, to ‘citizen power’,22 people
21. In China, scientific government can play increasingly bigger roles in decision making and shape a more just society.
policymaking was first raised at
the fourth plenary session of the
The global wave of government decentralisation has offered the chance for the
sixteenth Communist Party of
China (CPC) Central Committee expansion of bottom-up approaches. However, bottom-up approaches also have
meeting in 2004. At the conference,
limitations and are often criticised for a focus on current needs, unrealistic expectations
the Central Committee discussed
setting up a sound decision- from communities, long project cycles and high costs.
making mechanism that enables
the government to be fully aware Table 1: Bottom-up and top-down approaches to policy development
of the conditions of the people,
reflect their will, pool their wisdom Top-down approaches Bottom-up approaches
and value their resources, so as to
put decision-making on a more Features - Elite-led - Community-led
scientific and democratic basis. At
the seventh CPC Central Committee
- Special interests - Public interest
meeting in 2007, the concept of Pros - Clear policy goal - Community-centred
“Scientific Development” was first 23 24
put into the Party Constitution, - Aims to desired effect - Higher effectiveness (Smith, 2003)
thus becoming the basic guidance - Lower conflict incidence in implementation
for legislation and policy in China.
Scientific policy development - Enhanced public awareness and knowledge
goes hand in hand with scientific
(Ferguson & Low, 2005)
development and they serve
as administrative practice and - Empowerment of the local communities25
theoretical concept for the Chinese
government. Cons - Client-oriented - Time and budget consuming for decision
22. Arnstein, Sherry R. (1969). A - Policy and planning done making
Ladder of Citizen Participation.
Journal of the American Planning from current conditions - Myopic
Association, 35: 4, 216 — 224
- Lacks complexity - Raises expectations from communities that
23. The term ‘Desired effect’
indicates ideal results, that is, the may be unrealistic
results that are expected by the
policy makers.
24. Matland (2005). Synthesizing The combination of top-down approaches and bottom-up approaches have the
the Implementation Literature:
The Ambiguity-Conflict Model of potential to overcome the disadvantages of both, and amplify the advantages in the
Policy Implementation. Journal of policy making process.
Public Administration Research and
Theory, 5, pp. 145-174.
25. Petermann, T.; Troell, J. (2007).
African Regional Workshop on
Public Participation in International
Waters Management.

10
1.3.2 Evaluating smart cities and social governance
Indicators are important in holding governments and communities accountable to their
sustainability targets and goals. Indicators can provide data to guide policy-making
and allow for comparisons to be made across municipalities and regions. Indicators
are also communication tools and can help increase transparency and mobilise public
opinion. They are distinguished from raw data and statistics by having reference values
in the form of benchmarks, thresholds, baselines and targets. Such values have multiple
functions, but the most important is to transform meaningless data into information.
The use of indices can assist policymakers in identifying goals and disaggregate larger
targets into smaller parts. They also provide quantitative and unified results to evaluate
performances on various objectives for further comparison and ranking.

At the same time, overreliance on indicators as an evaluation system can result in over-
generalisation or skewed prioritisation of particular aspects of an issue because of the
way in which complex social issues are reduced to what can be measured by a set of
indicators. There is also the danger of “gaming the system/chasing the ranking”, where
actions that prioritise increasing rankings are pursued with no regard for negative
consequences or resources are diverted into areas easily measured by the selected
indicators.26 For example, GDP is often criticised as prioritising economic growth over
human well-being and alternative indicator sets such as UNDP’s Human Development
Index or Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness Index have long been used as a way to
expand the concept of human development beyond GDP. In attempting to reflect the
complexity of the area of evaluation, some indicator sets expand to cover more and
more areas, leading to challenges in data collection, interpretation and communication.
While indicators are a valuable tool, they are best used as part of a more comprehensive
evaluation process that encourages dialogue and collaboration to improve outcomes.

There are many international and Chinese indicator systems and assessment tools that
evaluate local governments from a variety of perspectives: sustainability, economic
performance and/or poverty, environment, technology, innovation, and governance
in multiple combinations. Local governance assessment should not be seen as a
subset of national governance assessment as local governance assessment provides
“…important information on issues specific to the local level, such as policies vis-à-vis
decentralisation, participation and local accountability…. the local level is in a daily and
intensive interaction with the citizens. Therefore, local assessments need to be much
more sensitive to the particular needs of groups of stakeholders and certain segments in
the local community.”27

Smart city assessment in China

Smart city evaluations have been launched in China by some of the major technology
companies such as TenCent, but these evaluations tend to focus on the private
sector company’s products. However, in 2016, the National Development and Reform 26. Hozapfel, Sarah (2014). The
Commission (NDRC) and the Central Network Office released the “Smart Cities Role of Indicators in Development
Cooperation Chapter 8. Available
Development Report 2015-2016”, the first comprehensive annual report on smart at http://www.oecd.org/dac/peer-
cities. NDRC, the Central Network Office, and the National Standards Committee also reviews/The-role-of-indicators-in-
development-cooperation.pdf
jointly issued the “Notice on the Implementation of Smart Cities Evaluation” and issued 27. UNDP Oslo Governance Centre
“Evaluation Indicators on Smart Cities (2016)” in November. NDRC is in the process of (2009). A User’s Guide to Measuring
Local Governance.
developing a standard index system to be applied country-wide as of 2019. In the overall

11
 framework of NDRC’s indicator system, there are nine first-class indicators including
four indicators that aim to evaluate cities’ capacity in urban planning, construction
and governance with the use of innovative technologies including the application of
internet, cloud computing, big data, spatial geoinformation, etc. Second-class indicators
in these aspects involve the level of information transparency and sharing, network
security, technological innovation, etc. Another five first-class indicators are used to
assess cities’ convenience, liveability, comfort, security and happiness. Relevant second-
class indicators include the intelligence of infrastructure, the convenience of public
services, the refinement of social management, the liveability of ecological environment,
the modernisation of industrial systems, etc.

Prior to this, the China Academy of Social Sciences released a smart city index in 2012 as
did the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. These indicator systems largely
focus on smart city hardware and technology, although the MIIT index is based on three
categories defined as smart technologies, smart governance, and smart services. The
indicators in the governance category, however, mainly examine local government
management capacity, for example, around city construction processes.

Social governance assessment in China

Indexes that specifically focus on social governance are less common in China, although
many, such as the Sichuan Academy of Social Science and UNDP’s Western China Urban
Sustainability Evaluation Indicators28 include social indicators such as employment and
housing. Peking University is also releasing a governance index in 2017.

Existing indices are mainly provided by governments or research teams with little
engagement with the public. However, the goal of improving social governance cannot
be achieved only by top-down efforts without public participation. If the participants
in developing an indicator system are mainly research experts and scholars, and few
other stakeholders such as city managers, or residents are included, this will diminish
the effectiveness and legitimacy of the indicators even if the indicators selected as the
result of an expert-driven process and a participatory process are largely the same. The
establishment of an indicator system needs the collaboration between government and
other stakeholders. Participation from the public in the process of defining indicators
determines to a large extent the effectiveness of the indicators. As can been seen from
the 13th Five-Year Plan, social governance and public engagement and participation are
inextricably linked. An evaluation system for local government performance in social
governance must also reflect the value of public participation.

1.3.3 Bottom-up assessment tool development

To maximise the effectiveness and legitimacy of the assessment tool for social
governance, this project reverses traditional methods. Researchers become facilitators
and technical supporters, going to the field with no hypothesis and theoretical
framework.

The whole process follows six steps:

28. SASS, UNDP (forthcoming). a) community deliberation to generate raw indicators;

2016 Sichuan Sustainable Cities
Development Report. b) information summarisation and terminology conversion by the project team;

12
 c) multi-stakeholder deliberation to supplement valuable indicators uncovered
by the communities, and to bridge the gap between community concerns,
administrative restrictions in government, and the existing data capacity;

d) indicator revision by the project team;

e) desk research for categorising indicators;

f ) finalisation of indicators

The goal of each deliberation is to reach consensus. Consensus first needs to be reached
within communities. Then, agreed-upon indicators must be subject to critiques and
another round of deliberation involving community residents, government officials, data
experts, social governance experts and NGOs/CSOs.

13
 Part II: The Guiyang social
governance and smart cities
indicators

2.1 Guiyang social governance indicator system

methodology
There is no consensus around methodologies to establish indices, not even general
agreement on the best conceptual frameworks or standardized options to measure local
government performance. In urban sustainable development many different approaches
have been developed: from international rankings of cities based on different criteria
such as quality of life, cost of living, innovation economy, city branding, personal safety
or eco-city, to compendiums of best practices, the use of future scenarios or self-
organizing maps.

The choices of component indicators of sustainability indices directly affect the results.
Indicators are used to compare baselines- the current state of affairs- to goals- what the
desired state in the future is. The selection process is inherently subjective, and inevitably
involve value judgments as to what is important. This is also true for the weighing and
aggregation process.29

The Guiyang Social Governance and Smart City Indicator System approaches indicator
development from a community engagement perspective. As described in Part III, the
indicators were developed through a participatory methodology that involved both
community members and expert input. The principles that are taken into account in the
Index development process include:

• The indicators reflect community concerns and priorities

• The indicators reflect social governance issues that have been prioritised in the
Sustainable Development Goals and by the Chinese government (e.g. increased
government transparency)

• The indicators reflect items under government jurisdiction or that government policy
influences

• The indicators reflect practical considerations concerning data collection and local
government workload

• The indicators reflect both result indicators and input indicators and subjective
indicators and objective indicators- in the sense that the data being collected is
subjective- people’s perceptions as measured, for example, through questionnaires-
29. UNDP Oslo Local Governance or objective- involving an impartial measurement such as counting the number of
Centre (2016). A User’s Guide to fire stations in a given community
Measuring Local Governance.

14
The Guiyang Social Governance and Smart City Indicator System is composed of three
levels. The first labels the overarching principle under which the other indicators are
organised. These are: ‘equitable development outcome’, ‘equitable urban resource
distribution’ and ‘just means for resource distribution’. The second level describes
the capability30/resource type that the indicators fall into. These range from health,
education, housing, and food, to transportation, public space, environment, safety
and citizen involvement in governance. The third level breaks down the capability and
resources categories into evaluative dimensions which are as comprehensive as possible
to cover the concerns discussed in deliberations, balanced with the availability of data
and data collection capacity. Accessibility, availability and affordability are commonly
applied evaluative dimensions.

Box 1: International Best Practices: Community

indicators

Box 1.1 Municipal-led, community-engaged: Whistler’s community indicators

system

Located in the Coast Mountains in British Columbia, Canada, Whistler is a well-

known destination mountain resort with 10,000 permanent residents and over
two million tourists each year. It is generally recognised as one of Canada’s leaders
30. ‘Capability’ in this report
in community sustainability planning, engagement and implementation. 31 refers to Amartya Sen’s capability
Whistler2020 is Whistler’s long-term integrated community sustainability plan and approach which differs from
approaches that focus on resources.
highest level policy document guiding development.32 A capability approach has a specific
focus on the quality of individual
Whistler2020’s Monitoring and Reporting Program tracks and reports the current lives. ‘Capability’ enables people to
status and progress toward the Whistler2020 vision and sustainability objectives achieve freedom for development.
In Sen’s work, capabilities include
through core indicators, strategy indicators as well as other contextual community education, health, and political
indicators. Core indicators provide a high level snapshot of community progress participation.
31. The Natural Step (2008). A
toward the vision. Strategy indicators provide more detailed information and Natural Step Case Study: The
measure progress toward the strategy descriptions of success. Contextual Whistler Case Study. Available from
http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.
indicators provide other important information about the resort community.33 The gmicglobal.org/resource/resmgr/
indicators are based on five guiding priorities, namely enriching community life, Docs/Whistler_NS_casestudy.pdf
32. Massy, Erica (2011). Whistler,
enhancing the resort experience, protecting the environment, ensuring economic Canada: Indicators of Sustainable
viability, and partnering for success. There are more than 90 indicators selected Community Development. Red
River College. Available from
through intensive community engagement processes and progress is reported at http://ericamassey.weebly.com/
least annually. Data is collected from Tourism Whistler, Statistics Canada, Whistler uploads/1/3/2/5/13250356/
whistlers_sustainable_
Community Life Surveys and local utility providers.34 The program provides a community_assessment_
number of benefits and essential functions, including tracking progress toward measuring_progress_in_the_21st_
century.pdf
Whistler’s vision, ensuring transparency and accountability to stakeholders, as 33. Resort Municipality of Whistler
well as educating and engaging Whistler businesses, residents and visitors. (2014). Whistler2020: Moving
toward a Sustainable Future.
Available from http://www.
Box 1.2 Community-driven: Cordoba’s indicator system whistlercentre.ca/sumiredesign/
wp-content/uploads/2014/02/
Whistler2020-Vision.pdf
In Cordoba, the second-largest city in Argentina, the Our Cordoba Citizen’s 34. Resort Municipality of Whistler
Network (Nuestra Cordoba) has established a set of 10 quality of life indicators (2016). Whistler2020. Available
from https://www.whistler.ca/
with quantitative and qualitative data indicating the city’s performance over time municipal-government/strategies-
in relevant dimensions, e.g. green space, particulate matter, wealth distribution, and-plans/whistler2020

15
 number of licensed vehicles, etc. Nuestra Cordoba is a non-partisan, non-
governmental network that works with the participation of more than 200 citizens
and 60 organisations including academia, civil society organisations, foundations,
private enterprise, research institutes, etc., in the city of Cordoba. It is associated
with the Latin American and the Argentinian Network for Fair Democratic and
Sustainable Cities and Territories.35 Its objective is to promote a city that is more
fair, democratic and sustainable. As part of its activities and at the beginning of
each mayoral term, the Our Cordoba Citizen’s Network presents the mayor with a
proposed “Plan of Objectives” for the administration’s consideration and adoption.
The Plan is intended as an instrument to enhance the clarity and transparency of
government’s proposed plans and actions. The 2015-2019 proposal covers three
themes, each of which has associated sub-dimensions and quantifiable objectives:
sustainable urban development (20 objectives), institutional development (19
objectives), and inclusive development (10 objectives).36

As noted above, the Guiyang social governance indicator system was developed from
community deliberation, refined with inputs from governmental officials and experts
from academia, NGOs and the data industry, and categorised with references to existing
theories. This section explains how the indicators were processed and categorised.

The second level and third level indicators were processed from raw indicators for issues
raised during community deliberations. The second is resource/capacity based. During
community deliberations, priority areas included health, education, housing, food,
transport, education, public space, public safety, environment and community services.
Multi-stakeholder deliberation contributed additional concerns include data and
information openness, and the role of NGOs and CSOs in providing social services. These
functional areas became the basis of the second level indicators.

The third level consists of the evaluative dimensions for each resource type and capacity.
Through discussion, key concerns emerged such as: whether some of the resources,
such as certain bus routes, kindergarten and primary schools, community clinics, etc. are
available at a reasonable distance from where residents live, the price of living resources,
access to services and facilities, the waiting time to solve problems, complaint channels
etc. (see Appendix 1). These concerns and raw language were processed, categorised and
labelled with four major evaluative dimensions: ‘availability’, ‘affordability’, ‘accessibility’,
and ‘efficiency’. In general, the definition of the four are as follow:

i. Availability: the existence and location of facilities and services37

35. OECD (2016). OECD Territorial
Reviews: Cordoba, Argentina.
ii. Accessibility: access to information and access to facilities and resources regardless of
36. Nuestra Cordoba (2015).
Available from http://www. age, gender, ethnicity, race, class, and physical ability. Access is evaluated from both a
nuestracordoba.org.ar/
spatial and temporal perspective
37. Ideally, urban facilities that
support daily activities such as bus
stops, food markets, community iii. Affordability: the price of facilities and services relative to income level
clinics, green and other public
spaces should be within 15 minutes iv. Efficiency: waiting time for problem solving under existing facilities and services,
walking distance. It can vary when
the cultural context changes. whether the facilities and services can efficiently prevent or quickly address incidences,
such as crime, fire, traffic jams etc.

16
Not all second level indicators have the full set of listed evaluative indicators. It depends
38. John Rawls (1971) proposed
on, first, whether they were identified as one of the key concerns during deliberations; two principles for social justice,
second, whether it is technically appropriate and necessary to designate the specific which are composed of liberty
and equality. The Liberty principle
concern to the second level indicators. For instance, availability of food is not a major argues that all people should be
concern in Guiyang, and accessibility of food was not raised during deliberations. given equal rights to basic liberties
-- resource in other words. In
Therefore, efficiency is not an evaluative dimension that is appropriate to assign to food. Rawls’ definition, some rights are
more significant or fundamental
Some second level indicators received additional evaluative indicators, such as ‘adequate compared to others (Rawls, 1971).
For instance, he argues that the
housing’. The indicators under this second-level indicator were developed out of
rights to possess daily necessities
concerns raised through community deliberation with reference to the definition of such as a home are part of basic
liberty, while the right to unlimited
adequate housing proposed by the UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner.
properties is not (ibid, 1971). The
These include affordability, habitability, availability of services, materials, facilities and equality principle establishes
distributive justice as one of the
infrastructure, accessibility of information and facilities, and cultural adequacy. The
components of Justice as Fairness.
indicator ‘habitability’ covers well people’s concerns raised during discussions, which 39. Iris Young’s (1991) important
contribution to the social justice
were about electricity, running water, heating, housing maintenance and so on.
debates was the concept of
institutional justice. Confirming
With reference to social justice theories, the second and third level indicators are that the distributive dimension is
categorised in three dimensions: development outcome, the distribution of resources for crucial in defining social justice,
Young explicitly points out that
development, and the means to access resource distribution. Development outcomes the contemporary philosophical
are the end results of resource distribution. Resource distribution itself is a direct result debates around social justice ignore
the institutional dimension, which
of fairness.38 Distributive justice cannot be achieved without institutional justice39 – the often determines the patterns of
means for resource distribution. Spatial justice and inter-group justice are both valued in distribution and results. As decision-
making processes for resource
this indicator system. distribution are usually dominated
and controlled by a few people,
the rules of the existing system
themselves may actually exclude
2.2 Guiyang social governance indicator system and oppress some groups of people
and result in situations where
As laid out here, the description gives a definition for each level 3 indicator. The it not possible to even achieve
justice as defined by procedural
conceptual basis gives the sources for each indicators. It specify whether the indicator justice supporters. In this sense,
references the community deliberation (community), theory (capability approach, social justice should ‘refer not only
to distribution, but also to the
the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the Human Development Index (HDI), UN institutional conditions necessary
Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, etc.), and/or the roundtable including for the development and exercise of
individual capacities and collective
experts (expert). communication and cooperation’
(Young, 1990:39). Distributive
justice should be achieved through
just distribution (Harvey, 1973).
The principles of social justice,
therefore, should be that people of
different groups should have equal
opportunities in: ‘(1) developing
and exercising one’s capacities and
expressing one’s experience, and (2)
participating in determining one’s
action and the conditions of one’s
action (ibid, 1990:37)’- which are
additional to the principles defined
by Rawls. In other words, people
from different social groups - age,
gender, race, ethnicity, religion and
physical ability - should be able to
build capacity and give voice to
their needs, be involved in decision-
making processes that may impact
their lives, as well as make decision
on whether they should do a
certain thing and what enabling
environment should be provided for
their own actions.

17
18
Table 2. Guiyang social governance indicators

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Code Description Conceptual basis

Equitable development Health equity Life expectancy 1 Life expectancy in different areas and Community, capability approach and HDI
outcome among different social groups
Self-reported health 2 Personal health reporting in different areas Community, capability approach
and among different social groups
Education equity Enrolment rate 3 Enrolment rate in different areas and Community, SDG, capability approach, HDI
among different social groups
Middle school graduation 4 Graduation examination performance in Community, SDG, capability approach, HDI
examination different areas and among different social
groups
Shared happiness General happiness 5 Happiness of people in different areas and Capability approach and HDI
among different social groups
Equitable urban resource Adequate housing Housing affordability 6 Rental price lower than one third of Community, UN Human Rights Office of the
distribution average income, High Commissioner
and housing price proportional to average
income
Habitability 7 Adequate space, protection from cold, Community, UN Human Rights Office of the
damp, heat, rain, wind or other threats High Commissioner
to health, structural hazards, and disease
vectors. High satisfaction with living
conditions
 Availability of services, 8 Access to safe drinking water, sanitation, Community, UN Human Rights Office of the
materials, facilities and energy for cooking, heating and lighting, High Commissioner
infrastructure sanitation and washing facilities, etc.
Accessibility of 9 Easy to retrieve rental/sale information, Community, UN Human Rights Office of the
information and facilities regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, race, High Commissioner
class and physical ability
Cultural adequacy 10 Respect and take into account the Community, UN Human Rights Office of the
expression of cultural identity and ways of High Commissioner
life
Adequate food Food affordability 11 Food prices proportional to income Community
Food safety 12 Availability of safe and healthy food in Community
markets
Adequate Availability of transport 13 Good public transport networks Community
transportation network connecting community and employment,
hospital, schools, recreational facilities, etc.
Accessibility of 14 Easy to retrieve public transport Community
40
information, service and information, inclusive operating hours,
facilities good supportive barrier-free facilities for
social groups regardless of age, gender,
ethnicity, race, class and physical ability
Affordability of service 15 Price proportional to individual income Community
Efficiency of transport 16 Low incidence of traffic congestion; high Community
system satisfaction with mobility

mobility.
to concerns over safety and
public transport system after

low-income groups who may

midnight is very important to

have night-time employment.

40. The operating hours of the

19
some social groups, for example,

low-income women and men and

reduce job options, and contribute
Insufficient night routes marginalise
20
considerable interest.
to enter the workforce at the
41. Operating hours for quality

workers who have not received

education period, night schools

education is not a primary issue

and continuing education are of

end of the nine-year compulsory
a quality education, or have had
low-income groups and migrant
is an argument for extending the

For many social groups including

opening hours of school facilities.
in the daytime in China, but there
Quality primary Accessibility of 17 Easy to retrieve quality education Community, SDG
41
and secondary information, facilities and information, inclusive operating hours,
education services good supportive barrier-free facilities for
social groups regardless of age, gender,
ethnicity, race, class and physical ability
Affordability of quality 18 Tuition fee proportional family income Community, SDG
education
Availability of services 19 Sound spatial arrangement of healthcare
and facilities services including community clinics
Adequate Accessibility of 20 Easy to retrieve healthcare information, Community
healthcare information, facilities and good supportive barrier-free facilities for
services social groups regardless of age, gender,
ethnicity, race, class and physical ability
Affordability of 21 Medical insurance reimbursement Community
healthcare proportional to individual income
Open public space Availability of public 22 Dense arrangement of public space in Community
space communities or neighbourhoods
Accessibility of 23 Easy to retrieve information of public Community
information, facilities and space, inclusive opening hours, good
services supportive barrier-free facilities for social
groups regardless of age, gender, ethnicity,
race, class and physical ability
 Safe habitat Availability of police, fire 24 Sound spatial arrangement of police Community
fighting facilities and stations, fire fighting facilities, fire corridors,
road lights road lights coverage and brightness, high
satisfaction with safety
Accessibility of facilities 25 Easy to report problems Community
and services
Responsiveness to 26 Short waiting time for solving problems Community
problems
Efficiency of facilities and 27 Low crime rate and fire incidence
services
Healthy environment 31 Clean air, safe water and soil, efficient Community
waste management, high satisfaction with
environment
Active community Accessibility of 32 Easy to retrieve information of community Community
services information, facilities and services and events, inclusive opening
service hours, good supportive barrier-free
facilities for social groups regardless of age,
gender, ethnicity, race, class and physical
ability
Activeness 33 Frequent community cultural and Community
recreational activities
Just means for resource Open public City data integration and 34 Zero silos for city data,42 and open data Community and capability approach
distribution information openness available to the public

can be easily accessed.

data, including healthcare,

21
education, transport, etc. being
42. This refers to cross-department

pooled onto one data platform that

22
Ladder of Participation.
43. Based on Arnstein’s (1969)
Openness of city and 35 Open governmental and community Community, experts, capability approach
community affairs information
Smooth channels City and community 36 Barrier free complaint channels at all level Community, experts, capability approach
for participation in complaint channel
public affairs Community organisation 37 Dense community organisation and active Community, experts, capability approach
and activeness service
Media oversight 38 Free critique from the media on public Experts, capability approach
affairs
Participatory 39 The degree43 of involvement of the public Experts, capability approach
mechanisms in decision- in urban planning, and other policy
making planning processes
2.3 Value generation process for indicators
Traditional household data and unconventional ‘big data’ can both be used to track
indicators developed based on community input. In this project, big data and traditional
government statistics are both used for the indicators. The unit for measurement is
one community 44 in the ‘big data’ data set. Government statistics are less detailed
geographically. Therefore, the ‘big data’ data set is aggregated to merge with the
government data set. As data is not available for all indicators, this practice only covers
some of the indicators. The advancement of data infrastructure is expected to make
measurements easier in the near future and indicators will begin to be tracked as data
sources become available. An interactive map is being developed to visualise the
indicators in the selected communities. When different indicator sets are chosen, it will
generate diagrams to show the performance in the communities. The map is expected
to become available in June 2017 and will expand as more indicator values are able to be
calculated.

The first step to generating values for the indicators is to identify the scope of research,
within which communities are identified as research objects. By combining online and
manual mapping, the project team outlined the boundaries of the communities and
then attributed data collected from online sources to each community as the value of
certain indicators. For indicators that require calculation, raw data collected from online
sources were inputted into different algorithms to generate results for the indicator
value. For indicators that require surveys or non-public government data, the value is
generated accordingly.

The methodology is as follows:

44. In this case, community refers to

the residential area administered
by one residents’ committee.
1. Defining scope of research

23
 2. Locating the central point of each community based on data from the Internet

3. Outlining boundaries of each community with online map as a reference,

and processing data

24
 4. Matching community data and the boundaries collected from the Internet
to provide value of certain indicators

5. Generating value using algorithms for indicators that require calculation

45. "Community Profile" is a data

Using the data application method of ‘community profile’45 developed by UrbanXYZ, the evaluation system developed by the
Beijing City Quadrant Technology
scope of research covers six administrative districts in Guiyang city: Wudang, Baiyun, Co., Ltd., (UrbanXYZ) which aims to
Yunyan, Guanshanhu, Nanming and Huaxi, where the boundaries of 903 communities use urban big data to enhance the
quality of community development
have been mapped out and the value of some indicators have been generated after data and management.
collection and calculation.

25
26
2.4: Data collection and calculation
Table 3: Data sources for indicators

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Code Description Potential data source

Equitable development Health equity Life expectancy 1 Life expectancy in different areas and among Census
outcome different social groups
Self-reported health 2 Personal health reporting in different areas and Census
among different social groups
Education equity Enrolment rate 3 Enrolment rate in different areas and among Government statistics
different social groups
Middle school graduation 4 Graduation examination performance in Government statistics
examination different areas and among different social
groups
Shared happiness General happiness 5 Happiness of people in different areas and Resident questionnaires
among different social groups Proportion of resident respondents that
are satisfied regarding certain questions
Equitable urban resource Adequate housing Housing affordability 6 Housing/rental price is proportional to income Open online data;
distribution Indicator value for Guiyang obtained in
May 2017
 Habitability 7 Adequate space, protection from cold, damp, Open online data;
heat, rain, wind or other threats to health, Indicator value for Guiyang obtained in
structural hazards, and disease vectors, and May 2017
high satisfaction with living conditions Scores for building quality in the
community from professional researchers
Scores based on organisation of
parking lots, illegal occupancy of
roads, disorganised parking and other
conditions from professional researchers
Resident questionnaires
Availability of services, 8 Access to safe drinking water, sanitation, See Note 1
materials, facilities and energy for cooking, heating and lighting,
infrastructure sanitation and washing facilities, etc.
Accessibility of 9 Easy to retrieve rental/sale information,
information and facilities regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, race, class
and physical ability
Cultural adequacy 10 Respect and take into account the expression
of cultural identity and ways of life
Adequate food Food affordability 11 Food prices proportional to income
Food safety 12 Availability of safe and healthy food in markets

27
28
Adequate Availability of transport 13 Good public transport networks connecting Bus stop coverage around the
transportation networks community and employment, hospital, communities
schools, recreational facilities, etc.
Subway station coverage around the
communities

Commuting distance of working

population residing in the communities

Average commuting hours of working

population residing in the communities

Average travel time from communities

to the recreational destination of
community residents

For No.1-2, see Note 2

For No.3-5, see Note 3
Accessibility of 14 Easy to retrieve public transport information,
information, service and inclusive opening hours, good supportive
facilities barrier-free facilities for social groups regardless
of age, gender, ethnicity, race, class and
physical ability
 Affordability of service 15 Price proportional to individual income
Efficiency of transport 16 Low incidence of traffic congestion, high Resident questionnaires
system satisfaction with urban mobility
Quality primary and Accessibility of 17 Easy to retrieve quality education information,
secondary education information, facilities and inclusive opening hours, good supportive
services barrier-free facilities for social groups regardless
of age, gender, ethnicity, race, class and
physical ability
Affordability of quality 18 Tuition fee proportional to family income
education
Availability of services and 19 Sound spatial arrangement of healthcare Healthcare convenience index of
facilities services including community clinics communities
See Note 4
Accessibility of 20 Easy to retrieve healthcare information,
information, facilities and inclusive opening hours, good supportive
services barrier-free facilities for social groups regardless
of age, gender, ethnicity, race, class and
physical ability
Affordability of healthcare 21 Medical insurance reimbursement proportional
to individual income
Open public space Availability of public space 22 Dense arrangement of public space in
communities or neighbourhoods

29
30
Accessibility of 23 Easy to retrieve information of public space,
information, facilities and inclusive opening hours, good supportive
services barrier-free facilities for social groups regardless
of age, gender, ethnicity, race, class and
physical ability
Safe habitat Availability of police, fire 24 Sound spatial arrangement of police stations,
fighting facilities and road fire fighting facilities, fire corridors, road lights
lights coverage and brightness
Accessibility of facilities 25 Easy to report problems
and services
Responsiveness to 26 Short waiting time for solving problems
problems
Efficiency of facilities and 27 Low crime rate and fire incidence, high rates of Resident questionnaires
services satisfaction with community safety
Green and protected Availability of facilities 28 Even spatial arrangement for waste Open online data
environment management and monitoring water, air, noise Indicator value for Guiyang obtained in
pollution, and the dense coverage of green May 2017
space in different areas
Average Air Quality Index in the past year
from the monitoring station that covers
the community, from the China National
Environmental Monitoring Center
 Green space rate in a 15 minute-walk
radius from the central point of the
community
Responsiveness 29 Short waiting time to address environmental
hazards
Accessibility of green 30 Open green space (not fenced) Open online data;
space Indicator value for Guiyang obtained in
May 2017

Green space rate in a 15 minute-walk

radius from the central point of the
community
Healthiness of 31 Clean air, safe water and soil, efficient Average Air Quality Index in the past year
environment waste management, high satisfaction with from the monitoring station that covers
environment the community, from the China National
Environmental Monitoring Center

Community public hygiene: scores

of public hygiene by professional
researchers

Resident questionnaires

31
32
Active community Accessibility of 32 Easy to retrieve information on community See Note 1
services information, facilities and services and events, inclusive opening hours,
service good supportive barrier-free facilities for social
groups regardless of age, gender, ethnicity,
race, class and physical ability
Activeness 33 Frequent community cultural and recreational Government official statistics
activities
Just means for resource Open public City data integration and 34 Zero silos for city data, and open data
distribution information openness available to the public
Openness of city and 35 Open governmental and community Government official statistics
community affairs information
Smooth channel for City and community 36 Barrier free complaint channels at all level Government official statistics
participation in public complaint channel
affairs Community organisation 37 Dense community organisation and active Government official statistics
and activeness service
Number of active community
organisations, including party
organisations, autonomous organisations,
intermediary organisations and
professional service organisations
Media oversight 38 Free critique from the media on public affairs Government official statistics
Participatory mechanism 39 The degree of the involvement of the public Government official statistics
in decision making in urban planning, and other policy planning
processes
Note 1:

Open online data are used for locations of facilities in this section.

Indicators for dining, shopping, entertaining, and convenience facilities are calculated
in the same way. For example, the dining facilities indicator is calculated using the
following steps. First, a “life circle” with a 15 minute-walk radius around each community
is mapped using Baidu Route Planning API. Next, the number of dining facilities in this
circle is counted. Third, the community with the greatest number of dining facilities
is established as a reference value and data from other communities are normalised
accordingly to generate the value for the dining facilities indicator.

Table 4: Types of facilities

Category Sub-category Type of facilities

Shopping Super markets and
facilities convenience stores
Shopping malls Shopping centres, department stores
Markets agricultural and sideline products markets, fruit
markets, vegetable markets, aquatic products
markets
Entertaining entertaining facilities Cinemas, Karaoke, Internet café, table and card
facilities game centres
Sport facilities
Convenience Financial services ATMs, banks
facilities Daily-life services Travel agencies, post offices, logistics and couriers,
telecommunication service centres, water
supply service centres, power service centres,
hairdressing and beauty salons, maintenance
centres, photo shops, public baths and massage
parlours, laundries, remover companies

Table 5: Example- Indicator calculation for dining facilities in three communities:

Community Number of dining facilities within 15 Normalised value (indicator

minute-walk life circle value)
A 7 0.7
B 10 (the maximum as reference value) 1
C 9 0.9

Note 2:

Bus coverage: number of bus stations in a 15 minute-walk radius from the central point
of the community

Subway coverage: classification based on time needed to walk from the central point of
the community to the nearest subway station (less than 5 minutes, 5-10 minutes, 10-15
minutes, more than 15 minutes)

33
 Note 3:

Average commuting distance, average commuting time, and daily-life travel distance:
Location data from residents’ mobile phones need to be collected and processed to
identify “anchor location” of residents’ living, working, leisure and other behaviours.
Location data is one of the common data sources used for big data analysis. Reflecting
temporal-spatial behaviours, location data enable planners to better understand spatial,
temporal, and intergroup heterogeneity. Temporal-spatial behavioural data shed light
on residence-workplace distribution features, behavioural patterns, spatial connection
features and spatial preferences among different groups. With coordinates of longitude
and latitude as two dimensions of the resident’s location data, it is necessary to cluster
these data points to identify “anchor points”, which means to discover the cluster most
frequented at a particular time (e.g. residence at night, and workplace in the daytime
on week days) and identify the centre of the cluster as an anchor point. In this way,
residence, workplace and leisure destinations can be identified and average commuting
distance and time and daily-life travel distance can be calculated.

Calculation of anchor points requires cluster analysis, or clustering, which is the process
of quantitatively grouping a set of data using mathematical tools. Cluster analysis
consists of several modes which are vectors, or points in multidimensional space. In
anchor point calculation, a mode is a two-dimensional space vector with coordinates of
longitude and latitude. The results of clustering is to group these modes in such a way
that objects in the same group (a “cluster”) are more similar to each other than to those in
other groups (clusters). Based on diverse algorithms, cluster analysis can be categorised
into distribution-based clustering, hierarchical clustering, density-based clustering, grid-
based clustering, and model-based clustering.

A comparison of different clustering algorithms from scikit-learn, a python machine

learning module, is given as follows:

Figure 1. Comparison of different scikit-learn46 clustering algorithms

After comparing diverse algorithms, DBSCAN algorithm (the rightmost above) is adopted
46. Available from http://scikit-
for anchor point calculation. DBSCAN (Density-Based Spatial Clustering of Applications
learn.org/stable/modules/ with Noise) is a density-based algorithm with significant advantages over other
clustering.html
algorithms as follow:

34
 1) No need to input the quantity of clusters in advance, and thus suitable for the
anchor point calculation with multiple living or workplace locations

2) Allowing identification of clusters in arbitrary shapes

3) Allowing identification of noise

There are two basic input parameters for DBSCAN:

1) Neighbourhood E:

The area with a given radius of E. In anchor point calculation, location points in
neighbourhood E are considered as one cluster, i.e. an anchor point

2) Core object:

Core object (or threshold value) stands for the lower limit of the number of
occurrence. In anchor point calculation, if the number of days of location points
in a certain cluster exceeds the threshold value, the cluster can be identified as an
anchor point.

It is necessary to impose an additional restrictive condition on DBSCAN, i.e. the

time span of location points must exceed a certain threshold value, to ensure
the behaviours of “living” or “working” is for the long term, instead of short-term
behaviours such as business trips.

Neighbourhood
E

Clusters Anchor points points that

Distance Threshold Value DBSCAN
occur most
Algorithm

Figure 2. Anchor point calculation based on DBSCAN

Note 4:

Education and healthcare facilities: increased weighting of facilities’ quality in addition to

the above calculation, i.e. key primary and middle schools and comprehensive hospitals
are heavily weighted

For example, the indicator calculation of education facilities in three communities, with
key facilities weighting 0.6 and non-key facilities 0.4:

35
 Table 6: Calculation of education facilities indicator

Community Number of education Normalized value Indicator value

facilities in 15 minute-walk (indicator value)
life circle
Key facilities Non-key Key Non-key
facilities facilities facilities
A 1 2 0.5 0.67 0.5×0.6+0.67×0.4=0.568
B 0 3 ( reference 0 1 0×0.6+1×0.4=0.4
value)
C 2 (reference 1 1 0.33 1×0.6+0.33×0.4=0.732
value)

Note 5:

Ambulance response time: time needed to drive from the central point of the community
to the nearest emergency centre during off-peak hours, calculated by Baidu Route
Planning API

AED response time: time needed to walk from the central point of the community to the
nearest Automated External Defibrillators (AED), calculated by Baidu Route Planning API

Public security response time: time needed to drive from central point of the community
to the nearest police station during off-peak hours, calculated by Baidu Route Planning
API

Fire system response time: time needed to drive from the central point of the community
to the nearest fire station during off-peak hours, calculated by Baidu Route Planning API

Accessibility of emergency shelters: time needed to walk from the central point of the
community to the nearest emergency shelter

2.5 Updating and maintenance

Indicators require regular updating and maintenance. It is recommended that the
general information and housing prices of the community should be updated every
month and other indicators every year to keep track of changes of indicators and identify
emerging problems in time.

2.6 Result of indicators for Guiyang

With the available data, the project generated values for 8 indicators in 898 communities.
The results for the 5 communities involved in the indicator generation process are shown
47. Available at http://www. in Table 7 as an example. The full table is available on the UNDP China website47 and will
cn.undp.org/content/china/ be incorporated into the interactive map available in June 2017. All 898 communities are
en/home/library/democratic_
governance/smart-cities-and- included in the maps of visualised data. This table and maps are shown here to highlight
social-governance--guide-for- how top-down and bottom-up approaches can be combined for decision making. No
participatory-indi.html
judgement on the performance of each community on each indicator is made.

36
The measured indicators are as follow (see maps in Appendix 3):

• Indicator 6. Adequate housing – Housing affordability (see Map 2)

• Indicator 8. Adequate housing - Availability of services, materials, facilities and

infrastructure (see Map 3)

• Indicator 13. Adequate transportation - Availability of transport network (see Map 4)

• Indicator 17. Quality primary and secondary education - Accessibility of information,

facilities and services (see Map 5)

• Indicator 19. Adequate healthcare - Availability of services and facilities (see Map 6)

• Indicator 24. Safe habitat - Sound spatial arrangement of police stations, fire fighting
facilities, fire corridors, road lights coverage and brightness (see Map 7)

• Indicator 28. Green and protected environment - Availability of facilities (see Map 8)

• Indicator 31. Green and protected environment - Healthiness of environment (see

Map 9)

Housing affordability can refer to the aggregation of the price of property management,
housing prices, average rental price and the mean value of rental prices. In this case, as
only housing price is available, the value was generated through the following equation:

Housing-income ratio = housing price * 80 m2 / 29502 RMB / 3 persons48

Availability of services, materials, facilities and infrastructure for high habitability is

assessed through geographical data on supermarkets and convenience stores, shopping
malls, food markets, entertainment facilities, sport facilities, financial services, and
daily-life services within a 15-minute walking distance. The accessibility of information,
facilities and services for quality primary and secondary education, and availability of
services and facilities for adequate healthcare was evaluated in the same way. Availability
of adequate transportation networks is only assessed through bus stop coverage.
Sound spatial arrangement of police stations, fire fighting facilities and fire corridors was
assessed through data from the Baidu Route Planning API. Availability of facilities for a
green and protected environment is assessed through the amount of green coverage
within a 15-minute walking distance. Clean air, safe water and soil, efficient waste
management and high satisfaction with a green and protected environment is currently
only assessed through air quality, but will expand to include other points as data
becomes available.

48. Internationally, housing is

considered affordable when the
price ranges from 1/6 to 1/3 of
average household income. 80m2
is adequate for one household.
In 2016, the average disposable
income of a three-person urban
household in Guiyang was RMB
29502.

37
38
Table 7: Data values for 8 indicators for selected communities

Indicator Indicator 17: Indicator

8: Housing: Education: 24: Safety:
Availability Accessibility Indicator 19: Availability
of services, Indicator 13: of Healthcare: of police, Indicator 28:
Average Indicator materials, Availability information, Availability of fire fighting Environment: Indicator 31:
Community Name of housing price 6: Housing facilities and of transport facilities and services and facilities and Availability of Healthiness of
ID community (RMB) Affordability infrastructure networks services facilities road lights facilities environment
494 Songjingge 6515 5.889 0.103 0.357 0.101 0.079 0.938 0.00 0.81
Community
498 Bishuiyuntian 4600 4.158 0.269 0.357 0.139 0.209 0.813 0.00 0.81
Community
523 Zhongtian A 9310 8.415 0.634 0.881 0.457 0.736 0.938 0.00 0.80
Community
833 Jincuiwan 5148 4.653 0.065 0.214 0.077 0.065 0.875 0.00 0.80
Community
840 Meidilincheng 5109 4.618 0.162 0.095 0.147 0.138 0.875 0.00 0.81
Community
Part III: Indicator Development in
Guiyang: Tools and Processes

3.1 Background of the sample communities

Guiyang is the capital of Guizhou province in Southwest China. It is located in the
centre of the province, situated in the east of the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau, and on the
north bank of the Nanming River, a branch of the Wu River. The city has an elevation of
about 1,100 metres (3,600 ft) and an area of 8,034 square kilometres (3,102 sq mi). Its
population was 4,324,561 as of the 2010 census, out of whom 3,037,159 lived in the 6
urban districts – Nanming, Yunyan, Huaxi, Wudang, Baiyun, Guanshanhu and Kaiyang.

When the project started, the project team met with Guanshanhu District Government
to select the sample communities. The Bihai and Huizhan Neighbourhoods ( 街道 ) were
selected for the community deliberation.

Bihai Neighbourhood has 12 community49 residents’ committees（居委会）serving over

20,000 people. Over 30% of the population is above 60 years old and the average age
of permanent residents is 38-42. Within the neighbourhood, two communities are high-
end residential. The average monthly income of the other communities is between RMB
2000-3000. 70% of the retired population are working class retired from the coal mines.

The infrastructure and transport accessibility of Bihai is generally good. The area was
urbanised in the early 2000s. After nearly two decades of development, the services
infrastructure, including post offices, banks and ATMs, supermarkets, restaurants, etc.,
within 15-minute walking distance is advanced. Waste management is in place and
the service is regular. Crime is relatively low, with no murders recorded although theft 49. Community’ is defined as the
is reported on occasion. Within the jurisdiction, there are 4 private kindergartens, two jurisdiction of each residents’
committee, which is assigned by
public primary schools, and one public junior middle school. Public kindergartens neighbourhood service centres.
are under construction to meet soaring demand. Community clinics are open in all

39
 communities. The closest public hospital is within the Bihai Neighbourhood. Guanshanhu
Park is 10 minutes away by car. However, some of the communities have unstable
electricity and water supply due to aging equipment. The neighbourhood service centre
has set up an ‘Office for Complaint’ as the channel to address residents' concerns.

Huizhan Neighbourhood is more recently developed, starting in 2009. It covers 8.14 km2.
The population rapidly grew from 2012. Currently, it has over 31,500 residents registered.
Two thirds of the population are permanent residents.50 Among the registered residents,
people aged above 60 are less than 5%. Residential communities in Huizhan are mostly
commercial developments, and the housing price is relatively high. The average monthly
income of residents is over RMB 5000.

Currently, there are 364 commercial facilities, and 11 kindergartens, 2 public primary
schools and 3 public junior middle schools. 4 kindergartens and 2 public primary schools
are under construction. There are community clinics and the nearest public hospital is
4.5 kilometres away. Guanshanhu Park is in the neighbourhood. The Neighbourhood
Service Centre offers ‘college for the elderly’ (continuing education for seniors), summer
camp for children, and other free activities. Postal service covers the whole jurisdiction.
Parking lots are sufficient for current demand. The crime rate is rather low. Channels for
complaints are available at the community level, neighbourhood level, and city level.
At the city level, 12345 is the mayor’s hotline for city-wide issues. The crucial challenge
in Huizhan is insufficient personnel for neighbourhood service support. The density of
Huizhan is much higher, and the population scale is much larger, compared to Bihai, but
the local government personnel is only half of the latter.

Five communities were further identified within the Bihai and Huizhan Neighborhoods:
Bishuiyuntian, Jincuiwan, and Songjingge in Bihai, and Meidilincheng Shidai and
Huizhan Group A in Huizhan. These five communities all have distinctive features. While
Bishuiyuntian, Jincuiwan and Songjingge are mainly composed of retired and elderly
working class residents, Songjingge has residents with higher incomes. The population
in Meidilincheng Shidai and Huizhan Group A is relatively high income, but is generally
younger than the higher income communities in Bihai.

Box 2. Roles and responsibilities of local urban

government In China

Overview

Since the launch of the “Organisational Act of the Urban Sub-district Office” in
1954, the urban governance mechanism in China is organised as city-district-
street-community.

The city (municipal) government and the district government have different
jurisdictions. Municipal governments usually have jurisdiction over a number of
districts, while district governments have full autonomy in their own areas. The
50. That is, they have been residing
municipal government is the highest administrative organ in the urban area.
in the community for longer than It implements the Municipal People’s Congress and its Standing Committee’s
6 months and are registered to live
resolutions, as well as orders and decisions from the national and provincial
there.
administrative organs. The municipal government leads the work of the

40
district governments. They jointly implement the national economic and social
development plans, budget management, and economic, education, science,
culture, health, sports, environmental protection, urban and rural construction,
finance, public security, ethnic affairs, juridical administration, supervision, and
other administrative work. They are responsible for protecting people’s property
and the personal rights of citizens.51

The street-community is the frontline of urban management. The street office （街道）is the
most basic unit of government, and has a number of community residential committees
（居委会）under its jurisdiction. As the lowest level of administrative power, the street
office not only serves as the representative of the district government, but also has
a number of social functions and thus connects government and society. The street
office has long played an important role in urban governance, community building
and integrated management. With the acceleration of urbanisation, the increasing
responsibility of the street office include livelihoods, economy, management, etc.52

Residential committees are an important vehicle for self-management in

the community linked to concepts of socialism and democracy with Chinese
characteristics. As important bridges and ties between the government and the
people, residential committees serve to publicise laws and regulations, protect
legitimate rights and property, promote education, carry out activities to establish
spiritual civilisation ( 精神文明 ), assist in public affairs and welfare, settle disputes,
maintain public security, as well as act as a channel to reflect opinions, proposals
or requests from the public to the government.53

In 2011, the Ministry of Civil Affairs issued the “Guidance on the Strengthening of
Urban Community Residence Committees”54 which encouraged the enhancement
of the structure of local governance and strengthening of the function of
residents’ committees by 2020. Some municipalities and districts of municipalities
have been experimenting with changes to the street committee structure to
51. Qian, Z. (2008). Chinese
remove one layer of urban management. Guiyang has initiated some of the most Urban Governance System based
thoroughgoing reforms and garnered praise from the Ministry of Civil Affairs. on Sustainable Development:
Theoretical Explanation and Action
Analysis. Urban governance, 15(3):
Practice in Guiyang 150-155. [In Chinese]
52. Rao, C.; Chang, J. (2011).
The municipal government in Guiyang has jurisdiction over six districts and Historical Changes of Sub-district
Office and Perfection of its System.
three counties. The municipal and district governments serve similar roles as Chinese public administration, 2. [In
governments in other Chinese cities. In May, 2012, the Executive Committee Chinese];
53. Yu, J. (2009). Roles of Residential
of the Guiyang Municipal Government issued “Interim Measures of Guiyang Community in Urban Governance.
Municipality for Community Management”. According to the document, all the Journal of the Party School of
Qingdao Municipal Committee, 3:
street offices（ 街 道 办 事 处 ）in Guiyang would be dissolved before May 31st, 33-36. [In Chinese];
2012. New communities would be established and they will provide public services 54. Available at:
http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/
to community residents. The responsibilities of previous street offices would be
zwgk/fvfg/jczqhsqjs/201011/
returned to district governments. The newly established neighbourhood service 20101100113635.shtml
centres ( 社 区 服 务 中 心 ) are directly controlled by district governments. As the 55. Guiyang Municipal Government
(2012). Interim Measures of Guiyang
terminus of urban management, a neighbourhood service centre serves as the Municipality for Community
most important and direct channel for public interest demands. It provides public Management. Available from
http://xxgk.gygov.gov.cn/xxgk/
services, optimizes management, maintains social stability, and provide services jcms_files/jcms1/web1/site/
related to employment, culture, sports, health, etc.55 Urban governance in Guiyang art/2012/5/23/art_88_60080.html

now follows the city-district-neighbourhood model.

41
 3.2 Community mobilisation
3.2.1 What is community mobilisation?
‘Mobilisation’ was initially a military term, which referred to the process of assembling
and preparing resources – troops, equipment and supplies – for war. Community
mobilisation has a similar meaning. It can be defined as a process whereby the numerous
resources of local groups are gathered to be used to achieve a common vision and goal.
Information dissemination is used to motivate the participation of community residents
in the project process. People are mobilised to provide their intellectual inputs, physical
labour, tools, and other resources.

3.2.2 Why is community mobilisation important?

To a great extent, community mobilisation is one of the keys to success for projects such
as the Guiyang smart city and social governance research collaboration which require
mass participation of people and collective action. Mobilisation informs stakeholders
of project goals, approaches, and outcomes. Information dissemination helps the
potentially affected population to understand the significance of the project and the
advantages of participation. Good community mobilisation can ensure that there is not
only a high participation rate to ensure the representativeness and legitimacy of the
outcomes of deliberation, but can also channel high quality intellectual, in-kind and even
financial resources to ensure the effectiveness of a project.

3.2.3 What are the tools for community mobilisation?

All information dissemination tools can be used, such as radio, television, posters,
leaflets, billboards and assemblies for community mobilisation. In the digital era, social
media such as Facebook and chat groups, are available tools. Different tools have
different impacts in terms of breadth and depth. Television often can have the broadest
impact. In developing countries where illiteracy is high, radio has the broadest use and
effect in comparison with other mediums. Leaflets, billboards, posters and assemblies
can be effective, but restricted geographically. Social media is more effective among
younger generations who have the skills and interest in digital tools. The design of
communication materials is important as well. Different language and design can target
different potential audiences and participants.

The selection of tools depends on the project objectives, target group and budget. The
scale of the project- district-wide, city-wide, or nation-wide-determines the choice of
tools used for mobilisation. In most cases, combined methods are most useful.

3.2.4 What is needed for community mobilisation?

Different types of community mobilisation need different support. The main need
is for human resources. Staff from community-based organisations are normally
among the most important links for a community-based project. They are familiar
with their communities and beneficiaries, and know the platforms used most often for
communication within the communities. Community-based organisations also often
have professional social workers who know how to interact and persuade community
people to participate in the project initiatives.

42
Temporarily recruited volunteers can also be a great resource for community
mobilisation, but the disadvantage is that ‘outsider’ volunteers are quite often not known
to the community people. They are seen as ‘strangers’. Behaviour and clothing that is
different from the local community may impact trust. Distrust can significantly affect the
efficiency of community mobilisation, as the information disseminated may be deemed
unreliable or fake, and there is suspicion as to the true motivations of the project. This
may result in lack of interest from community members. However, sometimes external
organisers can have a positive impact if they are seen as neutral parties or as advocates
for international norms around human rights or sustainable development if working in
a community that has internal conflicts or vested interests that are negatively impacting
the community. Training is needed for both professional staff from community-based
organisations and temporary volunteers. The objectives of training should be to
familiarise the volunteers with the purpose of the initiatives, the organisational culture
of the project initiators and other norms and values of the initiators. A combination of
‘outsiders’ and ‘insiders’ can often be the most effective.

3.3.5 Mobilisation for the Smart Cities and Social Governance Research
Project
In the smart cities and social governance index project, community mobilisation
followed four steps:

Step 1. Gain community support

Step 2. Recruit volunteers

Step 3. Train community staff and volunteers

Step 4. Disseminate information

To win support from the communities, the project first reached out to local NGOs,
neighbourhood service centres and residents’ committees. After the agreement
between UNDP and the Guiyang municipal government was signed, the project team
first met with the District government of Guanshanhu where the Bihai and Huizhan
Neighbourhoods are located to introduce the project to them. The District government
helped pave the way for the project team to connect with the neighbourhood service
centres. The project team then met with the service centres also to explain the
project and gain support, and get baseline data (demographics, income etc.) on the
communities. The service centres were also able to explain to the project team what
kinds of services they offered, what kinds of channels were currently available for
community engagement with the government and what kind of data the service centres
currently collected on social governance issues. As well, the service centre suggested
appropriate communities in which to hold deliberations, based on the demographic and
income levels. The centres also suggested the time for deliberations. The original plan to
hold deliberations in each community over two weekends (one day each) was changed
to hold over two days in one weekend. The service centre felt that there would be better
attendance and that people would be better able to remember the discussions from one
day to the next. The service centres then introduced the project team to the residents'
committees.

43
 It should be noted that, as Chinese society is dominated by 'top-down’ culture, the
fastest way to gain trust at the grassroot level is to have support and directives from
higher levels of government. Engaging each level of government in order was necessary
to gain further support from lower levels.

Project team

Guiyang municipal
UNDP
government

Guanshanhu district
government

Jiedao neighborhood Residents'

services centers committees

Figure 3. Flow chart for community mobilisation in Guiyang

In China, residents’ committees are official civil society organisations (CSOs), whose
work is subsidised by the government and supervised by the neighbourhood service
centre. Members of the committee are residents in the community and elected by the
community so usually have a solid network and are trusted in the communities in which
they are based. Gaining support from residents' committees is critical to the success of a
community-based project. However, residents’ committees also tend to be understaffed
with many responsibilities. Therefore, the project team also attempted to connect with
local NGOs who has professional social workers to support community deliberation.
Funding and scheduling issues prevented successful collaboration and instead the team
turned toward local colleges for voluntary support from passionate students.

The team recruited 15 volunteers from the Guizhou Business School in August, after the
project launched at the end of May. The students were to help the project as facilitators
for the community deliberation. As they were inexperienced, training was crucial to
ensure smooth implementation.

Before the community deliberation started, the project team organised training for
the staff of the residents’ committees and the volunteers separately. The training for
the staff of the committee took place for 2 hours at the community service centres.
For the volunteers, the training was all-day. The project staff introduced UNDP and its
mandate, explained the purpose of the project, and the concept of ‘smart cities’ and
social governance, as well as the methodologies to be used during the community
deliberations. The team emphasises the participatory nature of the project, and
discussed the concepts of social governance and smart cities in a Q&A session. This
step prepared the volunteers and neighbourhood committees to disseminate project
information, and explain the project to the people in the community. For the volunteers,

44
the training sessions also gave a chance to rehearse the coming community deliberation,
and practice using all the tools that would be used in the community meetings.

The team set a target for project awareness at 70%. To achieve this, an information
dissemination strategy identified door-to-door information distribution, community
billboards, and a WeChat official account as the main channels for dissemination ‘Door-
to-door’ dissemination was the most reliable method. A well-designed open letter
and project brochure written and designed by the project team were distributed to
community people one by one. Volunteers encountered difficulties talking to community
people due to lack of trust. Therefore, the staff of the residents’ committee were the main
force for information dissemination. The team normally visited every household during
the daytime, and revisited some of the households in the night where the members were
out for work.

For each community, information dissemination took around one week. The open letter
and project brochures were disseminated to all community residents. The team went to
each community one week before the deliberation started. This time scale gave enough
time for the information dissemination team to contact the targeted number of people.
In case people were not home during the first visit – normally in the daytime, the team
would revisit those households at night after dinnertime to ensure the information was
delivered. It was also close enough to the deliberations to generate interest and ensure
people would remember they were taking place. Staff from the residents’ committee
contacted every household again by telephone or text message one day before the
deliberation as a reminder. In most of the communities, the residents’ committee also
called people the morning of deliberation if people had not arrived 10 minutes before
the schedule time to begin. The residents’ committee also made a particular effort to
meet with and invite disabled people to join the deliberation.

Deliberations in Bishuiyuntian community, Bihai neighbourhood

45
 Box 3. International Best Practices: Community
mobilisation

Box 3.1 Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan India

The Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) is a national education programme instituted

by the Indian Government to provide elementary education to all children in the
6 to 14 age group while bridging social, regional and gender gaps.56 Community
mobilisation is a critical feature of the programme to ensure community ownership
and management of the school system which also relies on decentralised decision
making.57 Initiatives have been launched by the government at various times
throughout the programme to engage community-level participation in equity
issues, such as introducing barefoot counsellors to link schools and communities
in ensuring enrolment and regular attendance and training of community leaders
to manage school administration and grants to improve school infrastructure.
The programme also developed indicators for measuring the quality of education
through a multistakeholder process. India has recently adopted the Right to
Education Act which enshrines many of the principles of the SSA programme in
law. Much work still needs to be done on ensuring effective implementation. A
study done by Oxfam cities multiple effective local efforts often implemented
by NGOs that could be drawn on as effective models for national efforts. For
example, the Samajshala Model implemented in an extremely poor tribal area in
56. Ibomcha, Sharma (2013).
Universalization of Elementary Maharashtra State, has strengthened the relationship between 20 government
Education under Sarva
schools and the communities they serve resulting in 100% enrolment of children
Shiksha Abhiyan in Manipur.
Universalization of Elementary (the communities voted to fine any families not sending their children to school)
Education, Voice of Research, 1(4):
and repaired and improved facilities as well as innovative and enjoyable curricula
14-17.
57. See the Ministry of Human relevant to the children’s lives which has contributed to improved school
Resource’s portal website here:
performance.58 What ties all the models together is the importance of community
http://ssa.nic.in/. In addition,
many Indian states host their own engagement in education, not only increasing parents’ voice, but also ensuring
website on the local iteration of the
that training means that local communities have the capacity to contribute to
programme.
58. Kapoor, Richa (2010). effective education reform.
Essential Services: Community-
based Management for
Right to Education. People as Box 3.2 Disaster Recovery Florida Gulf Coast, U.S.A.
Changemakers, Oxfam India
working papers series. The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill was the worst man-made disaster for
59. Lindsey, Angela; Kumaran,
Muthusami (2016). Coastal U.S. Gulf coast communities in memory. Residents and community resource
Community Mobilization in the organisations (CROs) in the Florida Gulf coast responded quickly after the
Aftermath of Man-made Disasters:
a Case Study of Florida Gulf Coast disaster, using existing volunteer programs to address social, economic, and
Community Responses after the BP environmental issues after the disaster.59 Volunteers were trained and then helped
Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in the
USA. World Environment and Island with a range of needs such as information-sharing, informal counselling and
Studies, 1(6): 35-42. beach clean-up. The volunteer organisations also organised surveys to gauge the
60. Morris, Glenn; Grattan, Lynn;
Mayer, Brian; Blackburn, Jason needs of communities. Some of these addressed basic physical requirements,
(2013). Psychological Responses but some CROs in trying to understand what their communities were going
and Resilience of People and
Communities Impacted by The through, extended their work and developed informal research surveys that also
Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. addressed psychological needs in a post-disaster situation.60 Some organisations
Transactions of the American
Clinical and Climatological were already physically present in the community and combined survey work
Association, 124: 191-201. with their other work of information dissemination and beach clean-up. Others

46
 used community events and fairs to deepen communication with community
residents. 61 The information gathered enabled the CROs to develop or tailor
existing programmes more effectively and improve their communication efforts.
Some looked at how to strengthen feedback mechanisms from stakeholders.
More effective communications helped mobilise community members in recovery
efforts and service access and likely supported faster recovery along the Coast.

Box 3.3 Sanitation Infrastructure Maina Village, Kenya

In 1985, the Danida Sewage House Connection Project began a project to set up
a sewer line, plot connections, onsite sanitation, low-cost roads, storm drains and
a community-based solid waste collection system in Maina, Kenya. Previously,
the village had no infrastructure or services.62 However, the project had been
delayed due to disagreements between the project and the municipality about
the plan and because there was no community involvement in project planning
leading to concern and resistance to planned activities. After a midterm review
in 1989, the NGO Kenya Water for Health (KWAHO) was recruited to carry out
community mobilisation activities to help improve implementation. KWAHO
was charged with identifying the role and responsibilities of the community in
project implementation and management, facilitating community mobilisation,
helping with physical implementation and building a community organisation
that would ensure continued use of the infrastructure after the implementing
partners exited the community. KWAHO held meetings with the community
which provided information about the project's goals and the residents' role
in project implementation and liaised between the project team, steering and
site committees and community members. KWAHO built trust through health
and financing activities improving the community’s standard of living.63 It
engaged villagers in village cleaning activities while providing education on the
importance of a clean environment. Progress in project implementation improved
substantially as reflected in a second review in 1991. Community mobilisation,
although not initially planned, played an important role in ensuring successful
implementation of the project and it is standard practice now for village
infrastructure projects to include community mobilisation as part of the project 61. National Research Council of
the National Academies (2011).
plan. Building Community Disaster
Resilience through Private–Public
Collaboration. Washington, D.C.
62. Kariuki, M.; Kinuthia, C.;
Kunguru, J. (1994). Community
Mobilization in Sanitation Projects:
3.3 Community and multi-stakeholder deliberation a Case Study of Maina Village.
Regional Water and Sanitation
Group Eastern and Southern Africa:
3.3.1 What is community and multi-stakeholder deliberation? 46(1).
63. Anschütz, Justine (1996).
Community-based Solid Waste
Community and multi-stakeholder deliberation is based on the concept of deliberative
Management and Water Supply
democracy, in which consensus building is central to decision-making. It is a collective Projects: Problems and Solutions
Compared a Survey of the
and collaborative public effort to examine an issue from different points of view prior
Literature. Urban Waste Expertise
to taking a decision. Deliberative processes strengthen policy design by building Programme, Netherlands.
64. Swanson, Darren (2011). Seven
recognition of common values, shared commitment and emerging issues, and by
Tools for Creating Adaptive Policies.
providing a comprehensive understanding of causal relationships.64 Technological Forecasting and
Social Change 77.6: 924-939.

47
 Deliberative democracy is compatible with both representative democracy and direct
democracy. Some practitioners and theorists use the term to encompass representative
bodies whose members authentically deliberate on legislation without unequal
distributions of power, while others use the term exclusively to refer to decision-making
directly by ordinary citizens, as in direct democracy. Deliberative democracy differs
from traditional democratic theory in that authentic deliberation, not only voting, is the
primary source of legitimacy.

3.3.2 Why is community and multi-stakeholder deliberation important?

The goal of community and multi-stakeholder deliberation is to build consensus within
communities and different interest groups or stakeholders for resource distribution. The
roots of deliberation can be traced back to Aristotle and his notion of politics; however,
Jürgen Habermas’s work on communicative rationality and the public sphere is often
identified as a major work in this area.65

From a practical perspective, deliberation offers legitimacy to policies and paves the
way for policy enforcement. Through consensus building, potential conflicts that might
occur during enforcement are minimised, which ensures smooth implementation. From
a development perspective, community deliberation specifically empowers the people
affected to be involved in decision making. It also builds solidarity among lay people for
further negotiation with powerful groups.

Tools for community deliberation

There are many tools for community deliberation. Here are some of practical tools that
can be adapted and used in many situations that require deliberation.

Appreciative Inquiry is a change method that encourages stakeholders to explore the

best of the past and present in their organisations and communities. It was developed as
a way to counteract the idea of ‘problem-solving’ by focusing on what is positive in any
human system. AI believes that the kinds of questions and conversations people have,
and the kinds of stories people tell, will impact and change social systems.

www.appreciativeinquiry.case.edu

A Charrette is a collaborative design methodology that uses input from all stakeholders
(the developer, relevant government agencies, and the community) to build consensus
usually through intensive multi-day meetings. A “charrette team” of experts uses
stakeholder input in a continual “feedback loop” to prepare and negotiate a plan for
development with the goal of reaching consensus among stakeholders. Charrettes,
which combine modern design studios and town meetings, help to create meaningful
master plans.

www.charretteinstitute.org

65. Habermas, Jurgen; McCarthy,

Consensus Conferences typically involves a group of citizens with varied backgrounds
Thomas (1985). The Theory of who meet to discuss issues of a scientific or technical nature. The conference has two
Communicative Action. Beacon
press.
stages: first a group of ordinary citizens who are demographically representative of the
community at large meet with experts to discuss the issue at hand and build consensus.

48
In the second stage, the citizen panel presents their observations and recommendations
to a larger group of policy-makers, experts, media and the public.

www.ncdd.org/rc/item/1492

Deliberative Polling combines deliberation in small group discussions with scientific

random sampling to provide public consultation for public policy and for electoral issues.
Members of a random sample are polled on a particular issue of public policy to establish
a baseline and then some members are invited to gather at a single place to discuss
the issues after they have examined balanced briefing materials. Trained moderators
facilitate small group discussion where participants develop questions which they then
put to competing experts and political leaders. Finally, they are polled again to see if and
how opinions have changed after they have had a chance to become better informed on
the issue.

http://cdd.stanford.edu

Future Search is a planning method often used by large, diverse groups to address
complex issues, particularly ones where conflict or uncertainty is high. It takes place over
a 3 day period. On the first day, people create timelines and mind maps and share stories
in small groups to examine past events and current trends. The second day involves
presentations from small groups on how they are dealing with current trends and what
they wish for the future, then developing ideal future scenarios and finding common
ground. The final day involves confirming common ground and developing action plans.

www.futuresearch.net

Intergroup Dialogues are face-to-face meetings of people from at least two different
social identity groups. They are designed to create an open and inclusive space where
participants can develop a deeper understanding of diversity and justice issues through
participation in experiential activities, individual and small group storytelling, and
dialogues.

www.igr.umich.edu

Open Space Technology is a meeting or event format that allows for self-organising
and emerging themes. The agenda of the meeting is set by the participants at the
beginning of the meeting, which is held in a circle. As discussion proceeds, participants
can post issues on a bulletin board, which then become topics for breakout sessions.
The approach is designed to create whole systems change and inspire creativity and
leadership among participants.

www.openspaceworld.org

Study Circles bring people together in multiple meetings to discuss issues, build
understanding and explore solutions. Multiple methods may be used for study circles,
although generally they do involve background reading and a member of the group
acting as facilitator to keep discussion moving. They aim for social, political, and policy
change.

www.everyday-democracy.org

49
 Sustained Dialogue is a process that focuses on exploring relationships in the belief
that these are essential to democratic political and economic practice. It facilitates long-
term dialogue through a series of meetings to build relationships among members of
groups to effectively deal with practical problems. It involves 5 stages: identifying who
participates, mapping and naming challenging relationships, exploring systems and
dynamics of those relationships, building scenarios, and identifying actions.

www.sustaineddialogue.org

3.3.3 What is needed for community deliberation?

The goal of community deliberation is to build consensus within communities. It requires
information symmetry, diversity of participants, and productive and efficient discussion.
Different forms of community deliberation require different tools. In general, the
representativeness of participants, amicable venues, and good timing are universal.

Representativeness: it may not be necessary to have all community members involved

in deliberation, especially when the population is large. However, the representativeness
of participation is crucial. There should be diversity with regards to age, gender, ethnicity,
class, religion and physical ability.

Venue (weather, atmosphere, etc.): To ensure people’s participation, particularly ones

that involve all-day discussions, environment is crucial. It can attract people, and also
push people away. Environmental factors include out-door or indoor space, weather,
etc. Outdoor space is often more inviting and encouraging than indoor space. It is more
visible and accessible. Outdoor discussions can attract more and a wider variety of
people. However, outdoor space is subject to weather, which can be discouraging. In
winter it might be too cold, in summer it might be too hot. A canopy can be practical for
outdoor discussion. Appropriate seating and availability of washrooms, water, food etc.
are also considerations.

Timing: Timing is another crucial element for attracting people to participate. There are
two dimensions for timing, namely weather and availability. Weather matters especially
when deliberation is taking place outdoors. It is preferable to have discussion during
mild weather, such as spring, or autumn, which depend on the geographical context in
different locations. In terms of availability, working hours and holidays need to be taken
into consideration. Groups may consider separating discussions into several Saturdays or
several Sundays, when more people can come.

3.3.4 Community deliberation for the Smart Cities and Social

Governance Research Collaboration

Community deliberation
The smart cities and social governance index research collaboration carried out
community deliberation on the weekends of September and October, 2016, when
the weather was mild enough in Guiyang to hold outdoor meetings. The approach
used for the deliberations combined Appreciative Inquiry and Study Circles, as these
methodologies encourage mutual learning for policy change.

50
Efforts were made to ensure that all community people received information about the
deliberation sessions and were all welcomed to participate. Disabled people and young
people who were usually inactive in community activities were targeted invitees to
ensure representativeness.

A project brochure was designed to appeal to young people. It utilised cartoon figures,
and informal language. The residents’ committees made sure to contact young residents
and disabled residents in the targeted calls they made one day before the deliberations.
On the day of deliberation, staff helped disabled residents to come to the site. Digital
tools were also used as a way to involve more young people 66 and people who were
unable to attend the deliberations.

Figure 4. Page from brochure

The project opened online platforms including Yi Broadcasting, Weibo and Wechat
official accounts. Volunteers took videos and photographs of the deliberations. Yi
Broadcasting broadcasted the whole process online, allowing people to learn how and
what their fellow residents discussed. The Weibo account was linked with Yi Broadcasting.
It automatically uploaded videos of the live discussion without editing. The Wechat
official account posted discussion outcomes and allowed people to comment and give
additional thoughts around the issues discussed. Yi Broadcasting requires people to 66. According to CNNIC’s report on
the Behaviour of Chinese Social
register an account to join the live broadcasting. Quick registration through a Weibo Media Application Users (2015),
account is available. For Weibo recordings, people can view the proceedings without 82.5% social media users are below
40 years old.
registration.67 67. According to CNNIC’s report on
the Behaviour of Chinese Social
The first three deliberations were held outdoors. The last two were moved indoor due to Media Application Users (2015),
43.5% of social media users are
rain and falling temperatures. The deliberations had around 60-80 participants from each
Weibo users.
community. To produce inclusive and high quality outcomes, people were divided into
several groups, with 8 to 10 people in each.

51
 To foster the deliberation, four deliberation tools were adopted. These are the ‘river of
life’, access mapping, brainstorming for opportunities and problems, and brainstorming
for solutions.68 As the purpose of the project is basically to develop a ‘strategic plan69 for
the communities, it is important to start with a good understanding of the history and
current status of the everyday lives of the members of those communities. River of life
and access mapping are tools that can provide that insight. The analysis of opportunities
and problems, and a collective approach to developing solutions, can help the
communities consider many options, understand the relationship between a variety of
issues and form a well-considered plan that takes into account many perspectives.

The four tools have different roles and are aligned as four steps.

Tool: River of Life

The river of life, also called ‘map the journey’, is the first step in the deliberations. This
activity maps out a narrative of the community visually. It aims to bring the participants'
memories of their community together to build a comprehensive picture of the history
of their own community and city. It helps community people to understand how the
development of their area evolved and build rapport with other participants and
facilitators. The exercise requires community people to mark down on a large sheet of
paper major events that have occurred in their communities, pleasant or not. The events
may include when buildings were built, when bus service started, theft, fire, community
celebrations, etc. During the community deliberations, the project team leader explained
the exercise. Subsequently, a volunteer was assigned to each group who also helped
with questions. Each group chose a member to write down the timeline. In some cases,
if no-one in the group was willing to be responsible for writing down the timeline (e.g.
in groups with mostly elderly people who were not confident of their literacy skills), the
volunteer would assist. After each group was finished, they shared the results with the
larger group and created a common timeline.

68. In cases of deliberation for other

objectives, the listed tools in the
section above could be referenced
and adopted for specific contexts.
69. A strategic plan is a plan that
sets out visions for the development
of a city, guiding development
actions.
Deliberations in Jincuiwan Community, Bihai Neighbourhood - River of Life

52
Tool: Access Mapping
Access mapping was used as the second step in the deliberations. It aims to help
community people learn about each other’s lives, and understand their common
needs through visualising their everyday activities. In this exercise, each group is given
a prepared map of Guiyang City and a blank A1 paper. Pens of different colours and
sizes were distributed to different groups. Different colours symbolise different means
of transport. The size indicates frequency of the specific activities. Community people
first locate their communities on the city map, as well as their workplace, shopping
destinations, etc. Pens of different colours and size connect the dots they marked on
the map. Blank paper were prepared for people to map out their activities near their
communities, which are then mapped out on a small scale map. The maps prepared by
the smaller groups are then shared with the larger group and posted on a wall for the
members to review. This also helps the project team get a better idea of the patterns of
life in the community.

Deliberations in Jincuiwan Community, Bihai Neighbourhood – Access Mapping

Deliberations in Songjingge Community, Bihai Nieghbourhood - Access Mapping

53
 Tool: Brainstorming for Opportunities and Problems
Brainstorming for opportunities and problems is the third step. After mapping
community histories and everyday activities, community residents as well as the project
team, volunteers and the neighbourhood committees all had a good understanding of
the community and its neighbours.

Rapport had been built and issues in the community and city could then be discussed.
Positive events flagged by community members could also become opportunities for
improvement. This exercise helps people to extract common concerns, such as health
care packages, transportation efficiency (congestion, pedestrian safety), schooling
for children under 12, and the convenience of accessing everyday goods. Issues were
mapped onto the city using different colours.

Deliberations in Meidilincheng Community, Huizhan Nieghbourhood – Brainstorming for

Opportunities (in red) and Problems (in blue)

Tool: Brainstorming for Solutions

Brainstorming for solutions is the fourth step. In a radiating style, solutions often could
be added as another layer extended from the opportunities and problems.

The purpose was to help community people develop a path forward which empowers
them to negotiate with other development stakeholders. It also offers a chance for
people to learn more about decision-making processes. It helps community members
understand better the challenges to meeting everyone's needs, the negotiations and
trade-offs that need to occur and the impacts that decision’s in one area may have on
others, requiring the need to look at the community in a holistic way, and effectively
70. Seymoar, Nola-Kate; Anderson, adopt a systems approach to deliberation.70
Samantha (2009). Next-generation
Communities. Available from http://
sustainablecities.net/wp-content/
uploads/2015/10/next-generation-
communities.pdf

54
 Deliberations in Huizhancheng A, Huizhan Neighbourhood -- Brainstorming for Solutions

Multi-stakeholder deliberation
After all community deliberations took place, the project held a roundtable in December,
that brought together community representatives, different governmental departments,
academics, private companies, etc. The Guiyang Municipal Government coordinated
the participation of different government departments including bureaus of education,
environment, food and drug safety, urban planning, transportation, healthcare, etc.
Each department dispatched one high-level official to participate in the discussion. 30
participants from different sectors joined the deliberation.

Intergroup Dialogue was the tool used for the multi-stakeholder deliberation, in
which people from different sectors were purposefully mixed. All participants were
separated into five groups sitting around five tables. There are several objectives for this
measure. The first is to encourage full discussion with inputs from different sectors. The
second is to break down the hierarchical culture, and ensure that representatives from
communities, academia and the private sector could directly talk to the governmental
representatives, and eventually build consensus and develop an indicator system with
cross-sector support. For example, community representatives sat next to a director
of the bureau of urban planning, and an academic. Company managers could freely
exchange ideas with government officials next to them. The outcomes of the community
deliberation were presented to the roundtable for discussion. The River of Life Maps, the
Access Maps, and brainstorming session notes were posted on the walls of the room
where the roundtable was taking place.

The purpose of the Roundtable was a) to create a dialogue opportunity between the
communities and other development stakeholders; and, b) to bridge the gap between
community concerns, governmental administrative restrictions, and existing data
capacity. Expert input is also important because it brings important indicators for social
governance which might be missing from everyday needs-based indicators. For example,
those indicators suggested by the Roundtable include pollution in water, air, soil, etc., the
responsiveness of the food safety monitoring system, the role of NGOs and the media,

55
 etc. The Roundtable is also important in gaining government support so that the project
will be sustainable after the project team exits the communities.

Multi-stakeholder roundtable discussion

Box 4. International Best Practices: Community and

multi-stakeholder deliberation

Box 4.1 Dialogue with the City Perth, Australia

Facing unsustainable growth and urban sprawl, the Ministry for Planning and
Infrastructure of Western Australia, decided to launch a process, Dialogue with
the City, for its capital, Perth in 2003. Building on 2 years of work on making Perth
more sustainable, the Dialogue was intended to engage the residents of Perth in
creating a plan to make Perth the world’s most liveable city by 2030. At the time,
Dialogue with the City became the largest deliberative forum in the southern
hemisphere and a case study in deliberative democracy. The process began
with information dissemination through a survey mailed to 8,000 households, a
television programme, a website, newspaper and radio, stories and on air through
radio, student contests, and connecting with a wide range of interest groups. This
culminated in a large deliberative forum with 1100 participants to determine the
agenda for the deliberation, and then a series of smaller meetings over the next
eight months with stakeholders from community, industry and government, that
created the community planning strategy.71

Informed dialogue was a feature of the deliberation. Nine issues papers prepared
by experts engaged by the WA Planning Commission were disseminated via
the internet, through feature articles in newspapers, and through background
briefing packs sent to all participants prior to the forum. Community feedback
was also solicited prior to the forum. A television programme that presented
71. Available at http://participedia.
net/en/cases/dialogue-city various scenarios for Perth’s future welcomed on-line feedback from viewers prior
to the forum. A survey was mailed to 8,000 households.

56
The forum started with speeches on successful sustainability plans elsewhere
in the world highlighting the choices that needed to be made for a sustainable
city. Participants then engaged in small-group dialogue with a trained facilitator
and scribe to fairly record the in-depth discussion. Both consensus views and
strongly-held minority views were recorded. Groups were deliberately mixed to
ensure that a wide variety of views could be heard. Over 250 volunteers from
the private sector, public sector and non-government organisations supported
the deliberation. Dialogue with the City is considered a good case study of
deliberative democracy as it adhered to the principles of inclusion, deliberation
and influence and provided legitimacy and public support for the government
to move forward with sustainability planning in spite of opposition from vested
interests. It created a sense of ‘ownership’ of the strategy and a platform for active
engagement in ‘citizenship’ of Perth.72

Box 4.2 National Issues Forums U.S.A.

The Kettering Foundation in Dayton, Ohio, created the National Issues Forums (NIF)
in 1981 to engage people in public decision making through deliberative forums.
The NIF now has a presence in over 40 states in the United States usually based
in a higher education institution or non-profit organisation. Forums are held on
controversial topics so that citizens can become more informed, contribute to the
discussion and look for solutions. Forums are sponsored by a wide range of groups
such as high schools, universities, public libraries, and community organisations.
On-line discussions are held as well.

To support the Forums, the NIF and its network produce discussion guides/issue
books that provide a description of a particular public issue and three or four
possible approaches for addressing that issue.73 Over seventy-five issue books
have been produced. Recent guides include, for example, public safety, end of
life, and obesity.74 Issue books have been used in universities and high schools for
course materials and to spur discussion.

Participants are expected to read the discussion guide prior to the Forum. During
the Forum, each individual is given an opportunity to express an opinion and to
hear the opinions of others. A trained moderator facilitates discussion so that the
72. Hartz-Karp, Janette (2005).
group can arrive at consensus for action even if participants do not necessarily A Case Study in Deliberative
Democracy: Dialogue with the City.
agree with each other on all points. Critical to the Forum approach is that people
Journal of Public Deliberation: 1.
work through differences and come to understand each other’s perspectives and 73. Daugherty, Renée A.; Williams,
Sue E. (2007). Applications of Public
values.
Deliberation: Themes Emerging
from Twelve Personal Experiences
Emanating from National Issues
Box 4.3 Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy Victoria, Australia
Forums Training. Journal of Public
Deliberation: 3(1).
The Office of Water of the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) of 74. Available from https://www.nifi.
the Victoria State Government in Australia launched a community engagement org/
75. Beckingsale, David; Hind, Julie
and consultation process to assist in developing the Northern Region Sustainable (2010). Towards Deliberation
Water Strategy (NR SWS) in 2008-975 A key aspect of the process was to improve and Dialectic: The Community
Engagement Process for the
people’s understanding of water issues, long-term impacts and how to address Northern Region Sustainable
them. The NR SWS used representative working groups and local forums to Water Strategy. Northern Region
Sustainable Water Strategy.
engage key stakeholders and seek input throughout the process. Diverse opinions

57
 were actively sought in a variety of ways. The Consultative Committee and the
working groups were drawn from a broad range of stakeholder groups. These
groups identified issues, explored scenarios and solutions and helped develop
aspects of the strategy.

Box 4.4 Great Lakes Canada and U.S.A.

Within the Great Lakes region of the United States and Canada, public
deliberation across national borders has been in place for more than two decades
through numerous forums. A transnational network and multilevel participatory
governance system has been developed based upon the policy frameworks
provided by the Boundary Waters Treaty, the Water Quality Agreement and
the Air Quality Agreement. The parties have agreed to refer in their common
environmental policymaking to democratic principles such as cooperation,
publicity, public participation, transparency, accountability, and dialogic conflict
resolution with regard to the Great Lakes and other trans-boundary water bodies.
Three main types of public participation in the Great Lakes region have been
identified in the academic literature: declamatory, discursive and consultative-
intermediatory procedures.76 Discursive procedures are identified as problem-
oriented meetings, workshops, roundtables, focus groups, and consultations
on specific issues that involve affected and interested citizens, stakeholders and
external experts. These procedures are characterised by dialogue and debate,
and include both technical analysis of the issues and consideration of public
acceptability of solutions. Consultative-intermediatory procedures refer to the
establishment of permanent public advisory bodies which include environmental,
tribal, industrial, business, health, and academic stakeholders on specific “Areas
of Concern” (e.g. invasive species in the Great Lakes, water pollution, cross-border
trade, etc.) Deliberative governance is particularly present in environmental
policymaking as a way of addressing complex issues which require considerable
knowledge of the multiple systems, environmental, economic, political and social
which impact environmental policy-making in the region.

3.4 Feedback to communities

3.4.1 What is feedback to communities?

Feedback is the return of information. It can be about previous requests, consultations,
results of activities, etc. Feedback to communities is the responsibility of the project team
to ensure that communities receive information on the progress or results of decisions
that have been taken in response to community residents’ contributions, proposals or
requests.
76. Carr, Gemma (2015).
Stakeholder and Public
Participation in River Basin
Management, an Introduction.
3.4.2 Why is feedback to communities important?
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews:
Water: 2(4): 393-405. Feedback to communities is a crucial step in a process that uses community participation.
If community mobilisation builds trust between communities and practitioners,
feedback to communities builds trust and faith between participants and the method,

58
and public participation as a concept itself. People are encouraged to further participate
in public affairs if their participation and contribution is valued. Failure to give feedback
discourages people from future participation, and destroy the trust between them and
similar activities as well as between them and the organisations that mobilised their
initial participation.

The purpose of community participation is to empower community people to have more

voice in the policy decisions that affect their lives and balance power relations. Building
up confidence in public participation is especially crucial in societies where public
participation and deliberation is still not fully accepted. Only when people believe that
participation is worth their time and effort will broader and deeper participation occur.

3.4.3 What are the tools for feedback?

Feedback is in essence a process of communication. Therefore, the tools for feedback can
be any means for communication. They can be the same as the tools used for information
dissemination during community mobilisation. But certain differences are worth noting.

As information dissemination has raised awareness of the project among the residents,
it is not necessary to give door-to-door feedback which would be time consuming and
costly. Billboards, text messages or digital tools such as project WeChat official accounts
in the Chinese context could be good channels. For the results of community meetings/
deliberation/etc., the results need to be published in a timely manner residents have
time to receive the information and give further feedback. In this case, radio or TV may
not be a good option, unless the feedback is broadcasted repeatedly over a certain
time period. In some cases, another round of community meetings are necessary for full
communication with the people involved.

3.4.4 Feedback to communities in the Smart Cities and Social

Governance Research Collaboration
The project feedback to communities consists of two outcomes. The first is the indicator
system, and the second is the values of measurable indicators.

Indicator system
The final indicator system together with the community deliberation outcomes is being
disseminated through the residents’ committee in the form of printed letters and posters,
as well as through the WeChat official account. The purpose of putting the two tables
together is to help the community understand the evolution of the indicator system,
which is set up to measure actions taken to address community concerns. As well, as
a quick and easy way to solicit opinions from the communities, the project team has
opened a mobile hotline to answer inquiries and gather suggestions.

Values of measurable indicators

The indicator system itself, at the current stage of smart city infrastructure development
in China, plays a bigger role as a vision rather than a practical tool, especially in less
developed areas where data collection infrastructure is still rather weak. However,
some of the indicators are able to be measured by the available technology. Therefore,
the feedback also includes reports to communities on the performance of measurable

59
 indicators. On the one hand, it helps the communities to understand the use of the
indicator system and see its value; on the other, it helps increase transparency for
residents on the development (for good or bad) in their neighbourhoods. Transparency
not only holds government accountable, but also demonstrates to communities where
they also may take responsibility for action for change.

Box 5. International Best Practices: Feedback from

communities

Box 5.1 Maternal, Newborn and Child Healthcare Programme Myanmar

As the largest country in mainland south-east Asia, Myanmar is one of the

most disaster prone countries in the Asia Pacific region.77 To help address this
situation the Myanmar Red Cross Society (MRCS) has been supporting a five-
year community-based health development programme, ‘Maternal, Newborn
and Child Healthcare’ (MNCH), financially and technically since 2013. The MNCH
programme as a whole has a feedback and complaints mechanism in place,
allowing community members and other stakeholders to provide feedback to
MRCS via two channels:78

I. Face-to-face from community volunteers and village committees to the

Community Mobilisers (CMs): CMs train community volunteers and village
committees in the importance of actively soliciting feedback. CMs systematically
gather feedback from the village committees every time they are in each village
and document it in their monthly report to the central programme office for
their respective areas. The village committees actively seek feedback in monthly
community meetings and pass this on to the CM.

II. Suggestion boxes: These are already in place in every village and are checked
by CMs monthly. CMs ask village committees to encourage the community to
use them. The programme informs the community of their right to complain and
77. Lebel, Louis; Hoanh, Chu Thai; provide feedback, and how the feedback will be dealt with through volunteers
Krittasudthacheewa, Chayanis;
Rajesh, Daniel (2014). Climate when they are conducting other activities at community meetings and from
Risks, Regional Integration, and posters and flyers distributed to the community. Feedback is also solicited
Sustainability in the Mekong
Region. Strategic Information and through a mid-term review.
Research Development Centre,
Malaysia.
78. Myanmar Red Cross Society Box 5.2 Parramore Kids Zone USA
(2016). Integrating Community
Engagement and Accountability Parramore is a low-income neighbourhood with significant social issues in
into Disaster Risk Reduction
Activities of the Maternal, Newborn
Orlando, Florida. In 2003, the City of Orlando began allocating significant
and Child Healthcare Programme resources to address housing, public safety, quality-of-life and business-
in Rural Myanmar.
79. The Bridgespan Group. Needle-
development issues. One of the successful programmes to come out of this
moving Community Collaborative, effort was the Parramore Kids Zone (PKZ), a neighbourhood-based education
Case study: Parramore. Available
from https://www.bridgespan.
collaborative model. PKZ uses community feedback and survey results to design
org/bridgespan/Images/articles/ programming.79 The collaborative constantly holds neighborhood meetings to
needle-moving-community-
collaboratives/profiles/community-
gather feedback on its services and marketing strategies, disseminate information,
collaboratives-case-study- and plan activities. PKZ provides free child care, transportation and food to
parramore.pdf
attract participants and minimise barriers for participation. The programme also

60
 enhances its impact through door-to-door and street outreach. Engagement
of community members means that there is widespread awareness about the
services offered and that the community feels ‘ownership’ of the programme’. PKZ
also uses culturally relevant marketing techniques such as “wrapping” PKZ vans in
designs created by the neighborhood youth, collaborating with youth to organise
neighborhood events; and distributing PKZ T-shirts and other giveaways.

3.5 Learning — successes and lessons

Successes
The Guiyang Smart Cities and Social Governance Research Collaboration has resulted
in effective discussion outcomes that have strengthened awareness and understanding
of community needs and priorities improving communication and social governance
within communities and local government. Its success is largely attributed to successful
project mobilisation, the efforts to engage people in discussion, and the training of field
volunteers.

Setting the stage: Government support. Setting the stage for project implementation
was approached with a clear understanding of China’s cultural and political context
and the need to begin with a top-down approach, engaging government in
mobilising resources and support. Trust is easier to build if information is initially
disseminated through government. Gaining government support paved way for project
implementation. Under the coordination of the Guiyang Municipal Government,
information was passed through the district government to the neighbourhood service
centres and eventually to the resident committees. As well, the support of the municipal
government also helped to quickly mobilise and coordinate different governmental
departments in the project’s multi-stakeholder deliberations. The project team, however,
did not solely rely on top-level government support, but also invested time and effort
in explaining the purpose of the project to all levels of municipal government and
communities involved in the project.

Community mobilisation: Everyday relevance. After government support was gained

for the project, the next stage was to connect the project to people’s everyday lives.
To ensure a high levels of engagement, projects that require community participation
need strong relevance to people’s everyday lives. In the mobilisation materials such as
the project open letter and brochures, the background of the project and the benefits
to people in the community were clearly outlined. The project emphasised the ‘smart
application’80 which will use the indicators developed through community consultations
to benefit the community. People were attracted by the understanding that participation
could directly impact their everyday lives.

Incentives: Time, gifts and food. Pragmatic tools also played significant roles in 80. Smart application refers to ICT
infrastructure, such as sensors for
involving people. Deliberation lasted for two days in most of the communities. Keeping
data collection, electronic device-
participants engaged from the beginning to the end was a challenge. After the first based digital tools for services
(e.g. an appointment system for
half day of discussions, the meeting schedule was revised based on feedback from the
hospitals) or community services
community to shorten the deliberations. The consensus on the new time schedule such as road lights maintenance,
etc.
helped increase the percentage of re-participation. As well, the project introduced
an incentive plan. Participants who completed the whole deliberation were given a

61
 small gift at the end of the deliberation, as well as invited to the free lunch offered by
the project. It was made clear in the beginning that only participants who had fully
participated in all the sessions would be rewarded. This tool in fact had a very significant
impact on the whole process.

Training: Volunteer support. The training of volunteers was critical to the project
success. After training, college students with no community service experience were able
to talk to community people with diverse backgrounds and age ranges. The volunteers
practiced using clear language to explain the project background and purpose and to
treat community members with respect. They were prepared to guide the discussion and
keep it on track. In the beginning of the deliberations, it was common for community
people to misunderstand the objective of each steps of the discussion, but want to
immediately air complaints. The trained volunteers were able to skilfully keep the
deliberations on the right track and ensure effective outcomes for each stage by the end
of the scheduled time. Sharing the results of each stage of discussions also helped clarify
to the community participants the value of the whole process.

Intergroup roundtable: Mutual understanding. The multi-stakeholder roundtable

which adopted an intergroup discussion methodology was a remarkable success. During
the discussion, representatives from government, private companies specialising in
smart cities development, communities and academia, as well as data experts expressed
opinions from very different perspectives. The community representatives’ focus is
still on everyday needs. Government representatives are concerned about whether
the measurements are practical to address within the current administrative system.
Academic researchers are interested in the methodology and concept behind the
development of the indicators, in particular the concept of ‘social governance’. Data
experts have specific concerns over the methods for calculation and the availability and
sources of data. The private sector is largely concerned with the enabling environment
for the data industry and commercial service support. The roundtable mixed
representatives from different sectors. Every participant was exposed to the different
perspectives through intensive discussion. At the end of the discussion, consensus was
reached on two points: a) the indicator system should take ‘communities’81 as the basic
unit for measurement; b) social services should be the core of the evaluation.

Feedback: Confidence in future participation. Good feedback to communities

is helping to ensure the confidence of communities in future participation. As the
community members also witnessed the birth of the indicator system, from raw
discussion outcomes to a refined indicator system with the source of each indicator
identified, the participants felt that this was part of their own achievements. Some of
the participants came to the project team to express their excitement after deliberation.
Some participants also continue to call the project team or write letters to give opinions.
This project appears to have encouraged community people to further participate in
public activities, and has also encouraged the residents’ committees and service centres
to cultivate a bottom-up participatory culture in their communities and the city.
81. ‘Community’ is defined by
the jurisdiction of each residents’ Lessons learned
committee, which is assigned by the
neighbourhood service centres. However, there were also challenges that the project was less successful in overcoming.

Representativeness. One of the significant challenges was the question of

representativeness of participation, which is crucial for participatory deliberation.

62
Although the project attempted to target young people for information dissemination,
participation by young people was low compared to people aged 50 or over. The reasons
for lack of participation that were reported to the project team included scheduling
conflicts and hectic lives (being either too busy or too tired to participate due to work
or other obligations), and low interest in community activities and public affairs. The
exception was Meidilincheng Shidai where the number of people under 40 surged,
because children’s primary education schooling was a major concern for the community,
attracting the participation of young parents. This also reflects the impact of the
relevance of the discussion to people’s everyday life on participation.

Time management. Though the project had prepared the volunteers for facilitating
the discussion to keep it on the right track, there were several incidents that delayed
the scheduled deliberation plan. In Meidilincheng Shidai, strong resentment about
children’s schooling meant that participants were largely focused on airing these
grievances to the residents’ committee. The deliberation was delayed and it was difficult
to redirect attention to the deliberation agenda. In Bishuiyuntian, an unplanned division
of the group moved part of the discussion into a kindergarten and kept another half
in the outdoor space. The team had to shuttle between the two spaces to facilitate the
deliberation which negatively impacted the efficiency and strained the capacity of the
project team.

Unexpected situations are common in community meetings, and need to be

accommodated in the project plan. It is important to incorporate contingency planning
in the timeline expectation in project design. If the deliberation is for a complex and large
development or policy plan, the project designer needs to prepare for the unexpected
in terms of time and budget, in order to ensure quality deliberation outcomes. Pre-
meeting research on community conflicts may also help to give insight into what a
reasonable timeline might be. The second is the importance of deliberation facilitators. A
good facilitator must have a strong understanding of the vision for the deliberation and
the tools to be used in the deliberation, be a good time manager, good at managing
emotions, and also be able to manage crises, which is possibly the most challenging role,
but also one of the keys to the success of the deliberation.

Digital tools to broaden participation. The project attempted to use digital tools to
broaden participation. The tools used include a WeChat official account, Yi Broadcasting
and Weibo video recordings. It was expected that the digital tools could include
people that were unable to be physically present to give their voice by participating
online. The digital tools also targeted the participation of young people. By the end of
the deliberations in five communities, the WeChat official account had 101 followers.
Yi Broadcasting and Weibo had less than 10 followers. Although the project team
disseminated the information through the community deliberation sessions and gave
detailed information on registration, the results was still not desirable. This may have
been due to the intensity of promotion and the efficiency of the digital tools themselves.
More attractive and efficient tools may lead to better effects. This field needs more
extensive exploration. Broadening participation remains a challenge.

Indicator development. There are also challenges with the development of the
indicators. There were many issues raised by the communities and the original listing of
items that could potentially be tracked as indicators in the end numbered over 150. The

63
 practicalities of tracking this many items meant that a balance had to be found between
responsiveness to the communities, and the capacity of the project to collect data. This
issue was also raised in roundtable deliberation where the government representatives
were involved. As well, how the indicators could be ‘smart’—reflecting the features of big
data -- and measurable, was questioned during the multi-stakeholder roundtable.

To scale down the indicators, the project team categorised and merged the long-list
indicators. To reflect the ‘smartness’ of indicators, the project team asked the data experts
and government representatives to list existing data platforms and data types during
the roundtable. For instance, data available through an existing environment monitoring
system and a food security monitoring platform were incorporated into the design of the
social governance indicator system. Taking into consideration that the majority of the
community concerns are still not measurable, the project preserved the dimensions and
set up an ideal and comprehensive matrix, with the expectation that the development of
data infrastructure would be guided and developed accordingly.

Conclusion
The importance of community participation in urban governance is widely recognised
globally and in China in high-level policy documents such as in Habitat III’s New Urban
Agenda and China’s New-type Urbanisation Plan (2014-2020). The challenge is to activate
those policy documents into real-world practice. This Guide outlines tools and lessons for
implementing community participation and using community-based monitoring of local
government performance as a way to improve transparency and accountability, inform
decision-making and measure progress towards goals.

UNDP China in the Smart Cities and Social Governance Research Collaboration made
three ground-breaking contributions in Guiyang. The first was to introduce participatory
approaches into policy making through developing an indicator system which has
traditionally been an elite-led process. The second was an attempt to overcome the
weakness of traditional participatory approaches with the use of digital tools. The third
was to cultivate a culture of public participation among urban residents in Guiyang. For
the first contribution, the project demonstrated the feasibility of combining bottom-up
and top-down approaches for policy making. It was unquestionable a success overall,
although there is still room for improvement and flaws to be addressed. For the second
contribution, support is still needed. Though the experiment of broadening participation
through available digital tools did not generate strong outcomes, the direction is
promising. Inter-disciplinary or inter-sector collaboration and more practical efforts will
hopefully achieve better effects in the future. For the third contribution, positive signs
have emerged during the development of the indicator system. However, a mature
culture in which citizens embrace and value participation in public life, long-term and
continuous efforts are needed.

64
References
Anschütz, Justine (1996). Community-based Solid Waste Management and Water Supply Projects: Problems
and Solutions Compared a Survey of the Literature. Urban Waste Expertise Programme, Netherlands.

Arnstein, Sherry R. (1969). A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Planning Association,
35: 4, 216-224

Beckingsale, David; Hind, Julie (2010). Towards Deliberation and Dialectic: The Community Engagement
Process for the Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy. Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy.

Carr, Gemma (2015). Stakeholder and Public Participation in River Basin Management, an Introduction. Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water: 2(4): 393-405.

Daugherty, Renée A.; Williams, Sue E. (2007). Applications of Public Deliberation: Themes Emerging from
Twelve Personal Experiences Emanating from National Issues Forums Training. Journal of Public Deliberation:
3(1).

Dusenbury, Patricia J.; Liner, Blaine; Vinson, Elisa (2000). States, Citizens, and Local Performance Management.
Urban Institute.

Ferguson, S.; Low, C. (2005). A Handbook for Public Participation in Local Governance.

Guiyang Municipal Government (2012). Interim Measures of Guiyang Municipality for Community
Management. Available from http://xxgk.gygov.gov.cn/xxgk/jcms_files/jcms1/web1/site/art/2012/5/23/
art_88_60080.html

Habermas, Jurgen; McCarthy, Thomas (1985). The Theory of Communicative Action. Beacon Press.

Harrison, Colin; Donnelly, Ian Abbott (2012). A Theory of Smart Cities. Available from http://www.
interindustria.hu/ekonyvtar/en/Smart%20cities%20and%20communities/Publications/A%20theory%20
of%20smart%20cities.pdf

Hartz-Karp, Janette (2005). A Case Study in Deliberative Democracy: Dialogue with the City. Journal of Public
Deliberation: 1.

He, B.; Warren, M. (2011). Authoritarian Deliberation: The Deliberative Turn in Chinese Political Development.
Perspectives on Politics, 9(2), p. 269.

Hozapfel, Sarah (2014). The Role of Indicators in Development Cooperation Chapter 8. Available from http://
www.oecd.org/dac/peer-reviews/The-role-of-indicators-in-development-cooperation.pdf

IBM Corporation (2008). A Smarter Planet: the Next Leadership Agenda. Turkey. Available from https://www.
ibm.com/ibm/cioleadershipexchange/us/en/pdfs/SJP_Smarter_Planet.pdf

Ibomcha, Sharma (2013). Universalization of Elementary Education under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan in Manipur.
Universalization of Elementary Education, Voice of Research, 1(4): 14-17.

Kapoor, Richa (2010). Essential Services: Community based Management for Right to Education. People as
Changemakers, Oxfam India working papers series.

Kariuki, M.; Kinuthia, C.; Kunguru, J. (1994). Community Mobilization in Sanitation Projects: a Case Study of
Maina Village. Regional Water and Sanitation Group Eastern and Southern Africa: 46(1).

Lebel, Louis; Hoanh, Chu Thai; Krittasudthacheewa, Chayanis; Rajesh, Daniel (2014). Climate Risks, Regional
Integration, and Sustainability in the Mekong Region. Strategic Information and Research Development
Centre, Malaysia.

65
 Leng, Lim Teng (2014). Research Report: Overview of Social Governance in China. Available from https://
www.cscollege.gov.sg/Knowledge/Pages/Overview-of-Social-Governance-in-China.aspx

Li, Yongling; Lin, Yanliu; Geertman, Stan (2015). The Development of Smart Cities in China. Available from
http://web.mit.edu/cron/project/CUPUM2015/proceedings/Content/pss/291_li_h.pdf

Lindsey, Angela; Kumaran, Muthusami (2016). Coastal Community Mobilization in the Aftermath of Man-
made Disasters: a Case Study of Florida Gulf Coast Community Responses after the BP Deepwater Horizon
Oil Spill in the USA. World Environment and Island Studies, 1(6): 35-42.

Massy, Erica (2011). Whistler, Canada: Indicators of Sustainable Community Development. Red River
College. Available from http://ericamassey.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/2/5/13250356/whistlers_sustainable_
community_assessment_measuring_progress_in_the_21st_century.pdf

Matland (2005). Synthesizing the Implementation Literature: The Ambiguity-Conflict Model of Policy
Implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 5, pp. 145-174.

Morris, Glenn; Grattan, Lynn; Mayer, Brian; Blackburn, Jason (2013). Psychological Responses and Resilience
of People and Communities Impacted by The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. Transactions of the American
Clinical and Climatological Association, 124: 191-201.

Myanmar Red Cross Society (2016). Integrating Community Engagement and Accountability into Disaster
Risk Reduction Activities of the Maternal, Newborn and Child Healthcare Programme in Rural Myanmar.

National Development and Reform Commission (2014). The Guidance on Promoting Healthy Smart City
Development. Beijing. Available from http://www.sdpc.gov.cn/gzdt/201408/W020140829409970397055.pdf

National Research Council of the National Academies (2011). Building Community Disaster Resilience
Through Private–Public Collaboration. Washington, D.C.

Nuestra Cordoba (2015). Available from http://www.nuestracordoba.org.ar/

OECD (2016). OECD Territorial Reviews: Cordoba, Argentina.

Petermann, T.; Troell, J. (2007). African Regional Workshop on Public Participation in International Waters
Management.

Qian, Z. (2008). Chinese Urban Governance System Based on Sustainable Development: Theoretical
Explanation and Action Analysis. Urban governance, 15(3): 150-155. [In Chinese]

Rao, C.; Chang, J. (2011). Historical Changes of Sub-district Office and Perfection of its System. Chinese public
administration, 2. [In Chinese];

Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA.

Resort Municipality of Whistler (2014). Whistler2020: Moving toward a Sustainable Future. Available from
http://www.whistlercentre.ca/sumiredesign/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Whistler2020-Vision.pdf

Resort Municipality of Whistler (2016). Whistler2020. Available from https://www.whistler.ca/municipal-

government/strategies-and-plans/whistler2020

SASS, UNDP (forthcoming). 2016 Sichuan Sustainable Cities Development Report.

Seymoar, Nola-Kate; Anderson, Samantha (2009). Next-generation Communities. Available from http://
sustainablecities.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/next-generation-communities.pdf

Smith, B.L. (2003). Public Policy and Public Participation: Engaging Citizens and Community in the
Development of Public Policy. Health Canada, Atlanta.

66
State Council of the People’s Republic of China (2014). National New-type Urbanisation Plan (2014-2020).
Beijing. Available from http://www.51baogao.cn/uploads/xinxingchengzhenhua(2014-2020).pdf [in
Chinese].

Sun, J.; Pei, L.; Zhou, Z.; Qiu, P. (2016) Multi-interpretation and Qualitative Analysis of Smart City Policy Goals
in China. Library and Information 6: 25-32. [In Chinese]

Swanson, Darren (2011). Seven Tools for Creating Adaptive Policies. Technological Forecasting and Social
Change 77.6: 924-939.

The Bridgespan Group. Needle-moving Community Collaborative, Case study: Parramore. Available from
https://www.bridgespan.org/bridgespan/Images/articles/needle-moving-community-collaboratives/
profiles/community-collaboratives-case-study-parramore.pdf

The Natural Step (2008). A Natural Step Case Study: The Whistler Case Study. Available from http://c.ymcdn.
com/sites/www.gmicglobal.org/resource/resmgr/Docs/Whistler_NS_casestudy.pdf

UN Habitat (2009). International Guidelines on Decentralization and Access to Basic Services for all. Available
from https://unhabitat.org/books/international-guidelines-on-decentralization-and-access-to-basic-
services-for-all/

UNDP (2011). Governance Assessment Project Fast Facts. Available from http://www.undp.org/content/dam/
undp/library/Democratic%20Governance/DG%20Fast%20Facts/Fast_Facts_Governance%20Assessments_
Draft%203-BDP-SB.pdf

UNDP (2015). Rethinking Smart Cities: ICT for New-type Urbanization and Public Participation at the City and
Community Level in China. Beijing. Available from http://www.cn.undp.org/content/china/en/home/library/
democratic_governance/Rethinking-Smart-Cities_ICT-for-New-type-Urbanization-and-Public-Participation-
at-the-City-and-Community-Level-in-China.html

UNDP (2016). Framework for Local Governance and Local Development. Available from http://www.undp.
org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/democratic-governance/local_governance/integrated-framework-
to-support-local-governance-and-local-devel.html

UNDP Oslo Local Governance Centre (2016). A User’s Guide to Measuring Local Governance.

Wang, Xixin (2008). Public Participation, Professional Knowledge and Government Performance Assessment
Model - Exploring an Analysis Framework for Government Performance Assessment Model. Rule of Law and
Social Development: 14.

Xiao, L. (2015). Development Trends for China’s Information Market. Market Observer: 51-53.

Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Yu, J. (2009). Roles of Residential Community in Urban Governance. Journal of the Party School of Qingdao
Municipal Committee, 3: 33-36. [In Chinese];

Yu, Keping (2012). China Social Governance Assessment Index System. China Governance Review.

67
 List of Tables
Table 1. Bottom-up and top-down approaches to policy development....................................................................... 10
Table 2. Guiyang social governance indicators....................................................................................................................... 18
Table 3. Data sources for indicators............................................................................................................................................. 26
Table 4. Types of facilities................................................................................................................................................................ 33
Table 5. Example- Indicator calculation for dining facilities in three communities................................................... 33
Table 6. Calculation of education facilities indicator............................................................................................................. 36
Table 7. Data values for 8 indicators for selected communities........................................................................................ 38

List of Figures
Figure 1. Comparison of different scikit-learn clustering algorithms.............................................................................. 34
Figure 2. Anchor point calculation based on DBSCAN......................................................................................................... 35
Figure 3. Flow chart for community mobilisation in Guiyang........................................................................................... 44
Figure 4. Page from brochure........................................................................................................................................................ 51

List of Boxes
Box 1. International Best Practices: Community indicators................................................................................................ 15
Box 1.1 Municipal-led, community-engaged: Whistler’s community indicators system............................ 15
Box 1.2 Community-driven: Cordoba’s indicator system....................................................................................... 15
Box 2. Roles and responsibilities of local urban government in China........................................................................... 40
Box 3. International Best Practices: Community mobilisation........................................................................................... 46
Box 3.1 Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan India............................................................................................................................. 46
Box 3.2 Disaster Recovery Florida Gulf Coast, U.S.A................................................................................................. 46
Box 3.3 Sanitation Infrastructure Maina Village, Kenya.......................................................................................... 47
Box 4. International Best Practices: Community and multi-stakeholder deliberation.............................................. 56
Box 4.1 Dialogue with the City Perth, Australia......................................................................................................... 56
Box 4.2 National Issues Forums U.S.A............................................................................................................................ 57
Box 4.3 Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy Victoria, Australia......................................................... 57
Box 4.4 Great Lakes Canada and U.S.A.......................................................................................................................... 58
Box 5. International Best Practices: Feedback from communities.................................................................................... 60
Box 5.1 Maternal, Newborn and Child Healthcare Programme Myanmar....................................................... 60
Box 5.2 Parramore Kids Zone USA.................................................................................................................................. 60

68
Appendix 1: Results of the brainstorming sessions
Note: issues were common to all communities unless specified

Topic Problem Plan

Safety Economic crime, pyramid sales and fraud Population management.
The number of pyramid sales is high while Pyramid salespeople should be blacklisted
crackdown is not enough (sometimes the so the criminals could no longer rent houses
pyramid sales take place at night after the The entrance security system should be
authorities have searched in the daytime). upgraded to a face recognition system.
Theft, robbery Monitoring systems should be improved.
Among the outsiders, the bad became mixed
with the good.
Housing Rental system is badly management and the Rental management system
staff are too crowded.
The maintenance of water and electricity The management capacity of the housing
supply is far from satisfactory services should be enhanced.
Food Walking distance Food should be booked online and
delivered to the house.
Food prices are increasing including meat and
vegetable
Community canteen Community canteens should be built.
Transportation There is no bus running from Bihai Community The bus coverage should be enhanced.
to Guiyang North station or trade and business
centre.
The number of No. 29, 47, 48 buses is limited The intervals of buses should be lowered
and passengers are crowded. Traffic congestion and the number of buses should increase.
is frequent. The waiting time for buses
sometimes is over half an hour.
Bus card discounts should be enhanced. Policies should be adjusted by governments
and bus enterprises.
There is serious traffic congestion in the school Special streets for buses should be built.
area near Bihai Community.
There are not enough information display Monitoring platforms should be built on
screens. WeChat.
More information display screens should be
built.

69
 There is no crossing or crossovers at the Crossing and crossovers should be built.
intersection near Bihai Community.
Tunnels or crossovers should be built near
Bapima area.
Motorbikes and electric bikes are driven on the
sidewalk and threaten the safety of pedestrians.
Both sides of Bihai South Road have vehicles Parking management system
parked and the bike lanes are occupied.
One side of the street is occupied with cars,
which leads to traffic congestion.
There are too many taxis with no licenses.
There is no crossovers and it is not safe to go
across the street.
Education There are no public kindergartens. Public kindergartens should be built.
Tuition fee of existing private kindergartens is
high.
There is no high schools near Bihai Community. Ordinary middle schools should be built and
the education resources should be shared
via internet.
School charges are not reasonable (e.g. Governments should regulate.
materials fee)
The education quality of middle schools near The number of teachers should increase and
the community is low and they are badly the management should be strengthened.
managed.
There is no ordinary middle school there. The Governments should promote the building
threshold of key schools is too high. of ordinary middle schools.
The number of books in the library is too low
to meet people’s need.
Environment Trees are pulled down due to commercial
interests.
There is serious noise in the community. Noise management
Sometimes people drive late at night and
disturb the residents.
Kindergartens are located in the housing
estates and the environment is noisy.
Loudspeakers of the shops disturb the
residents.
There is serious noise due to the dancing in the
square.

70
 The corridor cleaning is not enough especially The quality of cleaning services should be
on the weekend. enhanced and the environment should be
The septic tanks are not cleaned up on time checked on a regular basis
and the residents on the first floor are badly
impacted.
Corridors in the housing estate is poorly
cleaned. Usually the garbage is collected less
than once a week.
Dog faeces are not cleaned and the noise
disturbs residents. Sometimes the safety of
residents is threatened by big dogs.
The number of restaurants in the lower floors
of the housing estates is high and there is too
much smoke and lampblack.
Health The fees for medical care is high and insurance Relevant policies on transferable insurance
cannot be used in other places.
The distance to hospitals is far.
It is not convenient to go to the hospital
and the number of hospitals with socialized
medical care is limited.
Hospitals are usually crowded and the queues Medical services should be booked via
are long. online terminals.
It is too difficult to see the doctor due to the Smart doctors
lack of infrastructure.
The community hospitals play little role. More medical facilities should be built and
They have poor medical equipment and the the number of doctors should increase.
information is not shared.
Gyms & The gym & exercise facilities are not enough. The exercise facilities of should be
Entertainment (Existing facilities are broken or not maintained) maintained on time.
Indoor area Activity area should be built.
There is no indoor entertainment area for
elders.
Outdoor area
Community Community committee cannot understand
services and solve problems on time.
The elders are not sufficiently taken care of and The elders should be visited frequently.
relevant facilities are not enough.
There is no public nursing home and the fee Different kinds of nursing homes should be
for private homes is high. built.
The university for the seniors is good
The frequency of activities
Activities are usually held.

71
 Public The number of street lights is limited in the The light should be adjusted with the help
infrastructure housing estate. The light is not enough and of automatic sensing systems.
lighting hours are limited.
The cover of drainage systems is in good
management.
The auxiliary facilities for the disabled is not More auxiliary facilities should be built.
enough.
The activity centre in the housing estate was Residents could appeal to the law.
sold with no agreement with residents.
Living It is convenient to shop online but the logistical The number of logistical sites (to collect
problems are serious. packages) should be increased.

72
Appendix 2: Invitation letter to community
deliberations

73
 Appendix 3: Data visualisation maps for selected
communities

Map 1 Housing-income ratio

74
Map 2 Adequate housing-Affordability of housing (Indicator 6)

75
 Map 3 Adequate housing-Availability of services, materials, facilities and infrastructure (Indicator 8)

76
Map 4 Adequate transportation-Availability of transport network (Indicator 13)

77
 Map 5 Quality primary and secondary education-Accessibility of information, facilities and services
(Indicator 17)

78
Map 6 Adequate healthcare-Availability of services and facilities (Indicator 19)

79
 Map 7 Safe habitat-Availability of police, fire fighting facilitiess, road lights (Indicator 24)

80
Map 8 Green and protected environment-Availability of facilities (Indicator 28)

81
 Map 9 Green and protected environment-Healthiness of environment (Indicator 31)

82