Information Note

Role of local organizations in

Research Office
district administration in Japan
Legislative Council Secretariat and Singapore

IN06/2023

1. Introduction

1.1 In many advanced places, local organizations are making an increasing

contribution to district administration amid the global trend of power devolution
from central governments to lower-tier governments. 1 Not only can local
organizations act as bridges between the residents, local authorities and local
assemblies, they can also deliver support services in the neighbourhood.2

1.2 In Hong Kong, major local organizations such as Area Committees and
District Fight Crime Committees are still performing advisory functions for the
Government at the district level, even after dissolution of the Mutual Aid
Committees (“MAC”) at end-2022.3 These local organizations (a) help promote
neighbourliness; (b) improve the living environment; and (c) act as a
communication channel between the Government and residents. After the
social unrest in 2019 and following a massive number of resignations from
elected members and invalid oaths in the current-term District Councils (“DC”)
in 2021, about three-fifths of seats in DCs are vacant. The Government has been
conducting a “comprehensive review on district administration” to enhance
“governance efficacy at the district level” since the second half of 2022. 4

1
Local organizations refer to those voluntary organizations set up in the districts aiming at
improving the quality of life in the neighbourhood. They may be named differently across
societies (e.g. resident or grassroots organizations, community-based organizations or
neighbourhood organizations). These terms will be used interchangeably in this Note.
2
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2001), Read (2009),
Tanwattana (2012) and Shannon and O’Leary (2020).
3
This Note focuses on those local organizations performing regular advisory functions for
the Government in districts, such as (a) Area Committees; (b) District Fight Crime
Committees; (c) District Fire Safety Committees; (d) the now-defunct MACs; and (e) the new
District Services and Community Care Teams being set up in the near term. This study does
not include other voluntary grassroot bodies without such formal advisory status
(e.g. Kaifong Association and owners’ corporations). See Central Policy Unit (2004).
4
By end-2022, over 300 of the 479 seats in DCs were vacant. The Government reiterates
that it has no plan to arrange by-elections for these vacant seats before the expiry of the
DC’s current term by end-2023 and before the completion of the review on district
administration.
1.3 According to the Government, district organizations (including DCs)
are an integral part of this comprehensive review, with a view to ensuring that
they are “advisory bodies and not organs of political power” for enhanced local
administration in the future. Most recently in 2023, the Government
kick-started a new initiative of setting up the District Services and Community
Care Teams (“Care Teams”) in Tsuen Wan and Southern districts in January and
extended it to the other 16 districts in March. These Care Teams will be set up
in 452 sub-districts and tasked with strengthening the community network and
caring for the needy in the neighbourhood, especially at times of emergencies.
For policy reference, there are suggestions in Hong Kong to study the role and
practice of local organizations in other places.

1.4 At the request of Hon YANG Wing-kit, the Research Office has
selected the Neighbourhood Associations (“NHA”) 5 in Japan and the Residents’
Committees (“RC”) 6 in Singapore for in-depth study. Not only do local bodies
in these two Asian countries have a rather long history of over four decades, they
are also widely acclaimed as “stabilizers in society” and effective bridges
between major stakeholders in local community. 7 This Information Note
begins with a quick overview of the roles played by local organizations in
lower-tier governance across the globe, followed by a brief discussion of recent
policy developments and major issues of concerns surrounding local
organizations in Hong Kong. It will then switch separately to NHAs in Japan
and RCs in Singapore, along with a concise table for easy reference (Appendix).

2. Recent global developments

2.1 Since the late 1980s, there has been a noticeable trend of
decentralization of resources and devolution of authority from central
governments to lower-tier governments in many advanced places (e.g. the
United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Finland and South Korea).8 To a
certain extent, this devolution is based on a belief that local authorities should
have more “informational advantages” in terms of the sort of public services
required by local residents. This apart, greater participation of local citizens in
policy-making at the district level can enhance policy accountability and cement

5
There are 290 000 NHAs (町 內 會 ) in Japan funded mostly by residents. They provide
basic services, improve the living environment and organize community activities.
6
There are 920 RCs funded mostly by the Singaporean government. Each RC serves
several high-rise housing blocks, providing community services and gauging public views.
7
高 泉 益 (1999), Pekkanen et al. (2014), Vasoo (2001) and Thang et al. (2015).
8
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2001), Read (2009),
Tanwattana (2012), Korea Institute of Public Administration (2017), Department of Rural
and Community Development (2018) and 特 別 區 長 會 調 査 研 究 機 構 (2021).

2
community cohesion.9 As a result of this devolution trend, local governments
need to work with local organizations in communicating with residents for
policy consultations and decisions, particularly in areas of urban planning,
public services delivery, community support and budgeting.10

2.2 Bearing in mind that local organizations can vary widely across places
due to their unique historical and socio-economic developments, their roles in
community governance worldwide are briefly summarized. First on functions,
local organizations are usually tasked with conveying residents’ views to local
governments and organizing recreational and festive activities for residents.
In some places, these bodies are also empowered to nominate representatives to
local governments and to build/operate community facilities to serve local
residents. Secondly on funding, these bodies mostly rely on public subsidies
and residents’ fees. Thirdly on leadership, core leaders of local organizations
are either elected by their members or appointed by governments, although most
of them are unpaid volunteers. Fourthly on their relationship with local
governments, while many local organizations are self-governing bodies with a
high degree of autonomy in their collaboration with local governments (e.g. Japan
and Ireland), some act more like implementation agencies of local authorities
(e.g. Singapore). Fifthly on their relationship with elected members of local
assemblies, it is quite common for local organizations to have close contacts with
political parties to advocate for district issues and interests. While some
members of local organizations may support the politicians they work with in
electoral campaigns, few even become political candidates themselves
subsequently. 11

2.3 More specifically in the Mainland, local organizations like

Community Residents Committees (“CRC”) are noted to have taken up
more quasi-governmental duties since the 2000s, assisting the Street Offices
(“SO”) which are the lowest-tier government agencies in sub-districts in

9
Ramesh (2017) and Rohdewohld (2023).
10
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2001), Korea Institute of
Public Administration (2017) and Shannon and O’Leary (2020).
11
Read (2009), Tanwattana (2012), Department of Rural and Community Development
(2018) and 特 別 區 長 會 調 査 研 究 機 構 (2021).

3
daily administration. 12 As a brief historical background, most of the workers
in the Mainland used to work for state-owned or collectively-owned enterprises
(“SCOE”) before 1978. Under the unique workplace system, SCOEs as
work-units (單 位 ) also held management power over their employees and their
families from cradle to grave. For non-SCOE workers and the economically
inactive population, SOs and Residents Committees (“RC”, the predecessor of
CRCs) took up the respective supervisory and administrative functions.
Therefore, it should be reiterated that SO has been an integral part of the
lower-tier governments in the Mainland, thus not directly comparable with local
organizations in advanced places as discussed in this Note.

2.4 After the economic reforms in 1978, private enterprises proliferated in

the Mainland, with the share of urban residents employed by SCOEs plummeting
from 99% in 1980 to just 13% in 2021. 13 For this reason, coupled with the
robust pace of urbanization and the influx of rural migrants into cities, SCOEs
could not perform their urban management functions anymore. Likewise, SOs
and RCs were challenged by the upsurge of urban population in the districts due
to limited resources allocated to these organizations. Reportedly, there were just
about 20 staff in each SO usually governing some 100 000 inhabitants. 14 As a
policy response, the Central Government reinvigorated the “residential
community” (社 區 ) as the new basic unit of urban governance to strengthen
control in the neighbourhood as from the late 1990s. They included initiatives
to expand the role of SO in 1997 and to merge several RCs into a larger CRC
vested with more supervisory duties in 2000. 15 At present, CRCs are mainly
responsible for (a) handling public affairs, security and welfare services for
residents; (b) mediating disputes; (c) conveying residents’ opinions to SOs; and
(d) assisting in work apportioned by local governments. 16 In other words,

12
SO (街 道 辦 ) is a government agency at the district level in the Mainland, whereas CRCs
(社 區 居 民 委 員 會 ) evolved from Residents Committees (“RC”) first set up in 1954.
At the start, RCs were residence-based bodies in the 1950s, with supplementary functions
to (a) supervise the few urban residents who did not work for state-owned or collectively
owned enterprises and provide services to them; and (b) assist in political mobilizations
with SOs. However, RCs were restructured into CRCs in 2000, taking over more
administrative and supervisory duties from SOs upon the retreat of the workplace system.
See Read (2012) and Wu et al. (2018).
13
國 家 統 計 局 (2022).
14
Arcuri and Jing (2019) and 香 港 01(2022b).
15
Between 1996 and 2021, the number of CRCs soared nine-fold to 117 000, concurrent with
a 60% increase in SOs to 8 900. See Wu et al. (2018) and 大 公 報 (2013).
16
Each CRC usually serves an area with up to 5 000 inhabitants, and comprises 10-13 core
members who are elected volunteers in the community. For areas with larger population,
CRCs may further form sub-groups to serve smaller areas and assign a leader in each
housing block for liaison. See Wang and Li (2023).

4
CRCs in the Mainland are positioned as more than “grassroot self-governing
organizations” as defined in law, and take active part in district
administration through working under SOs.17

2.5 Yet there are still severe resource constraints faced by both SOs and
CRCs in meeting the ever-increasing demands from urban residents after more
than two decades of operation. Moreover, CRCs are alleged to have been
overwhelmed by the administrative tasks assigned by SOs, at the expense of their
original duties of monitoring residents’ opinions and pre-empting disputes in the
neighbourhood. Since 2010, the State Council has issued at least four national
guidelines on enhancing community governance and grassroot organizations,
exploring how to help CRCs focus more on core community issues. 18 At this
juncture, the Central Government is still asking local governments to experiment
various initiatives to enhance and rationalize functions of SOs and CRCs based
on their unique local circumstances.

3. Review of district organizations by the Hong Kong Government

3.1 Local organizations appeared to have met the policy objectives of

the Government on district administration for some five decades before
2019. By end-2018, in addition to 18 DCs, there were altogether 63 Area
Committees, 18 District Fight Crime Committees, 18 District Fire Safety
Committees and over 1 600 MACs.19 Relying mainly on recurrent funding from
the Government and DCs, these bodies organized community and volunteering
activities in the neighbourhood and put government-sponsored initiatives into
practice. While both DCs and the aforementioned organizations are recognized
advisory bodies at the district level, the latter are more “activity-oriented” and

17
Reportedly, SOs often require CRCs to undertake various tasks well beyond their legal
responsibilities. These averaged at 200 tasks annually ranging from family planning to
social security, with some experts estimated that such tasks take up three-fifths of work
capacity of a CRC. Also, SOs have absolute influence on personnel selection of CRCs.
See Wu et al. (2018).
18
Measures include (a) clarifying duties between CRCs and SOs; (b) establishing community
services stations and grid governance teams to share CRCs’ burden in providing social
services and mediating daily disputes in neighbourhoods; and (c) offering further resources
and staff. See 國 務 院 (2010, 2015, 2017, 2021), Wu et al. (2018) and Tang (2020).
19
These Committees were mostly formed in the 1970s, comprising over
2 500 government-appointed members who are community leaders. Unlike District
Councillors, they are volunteers without community offices for reaching out the public.

5
play a largely supplementary role to the former. 20 In response to continued
advocacy in society for more decentralization after dissolution of two Municipal
Councils in 1999, the Government delegated more authority to DCs to “further
the development of district administration” after 2008, including granting power
to DCs for subsequent allocation of additional resource to local organizations.21

3.2 After the social unrest in 2019, coupled with a wave of resignations
and invalid oaths in late 2021, the Home and Youth Affairs Bureau and the
Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau are now reviewing the entire
system of district administration ahead of the expiry of the DCs’ current
term by end-2023.22 The Government highlighted three major objectives of
this review, namely that future district organizations in whatever form (a) should
comply with Article 97 of the Basic Law and the principle of “patriots
administering Hong Kong”; (b) are broadly representative and well-acquainted
with district affairs; and (c) can be consulted by the Government on district affairs
for enhanced governance efficacy. As three-fifths of seats in DCs were left
vacant, the Government suspended the authority of DCs in endorsing minor
works projects and fund allocation to local organizations in October 2021. At
end-2022, all of 1 600 MACs were dissolved because of their “diminishing” role
in the neighbourhood, as manifested in the halving of their number in just
15 years.23 Meanwhile, the Government has strengthened the ties with existing
district committees (i.e. Area Committees, District Fight Crime Committees and
District Fire Safety Committees) whose members are all appointed by the
Government. 24

20
DCs were mainly tasked with (a) reflecting public opinion; (b) promoting community
building; (c) monitoring of public services delivery; and (d) scrutinizing funding of
community activities and district minor works. See Home Affairs Bureau (2005) and
GovHK (2022b).
21
In January 2008, the Government enhanced the roles of DCs in management of designated
district facilities (e.g. libraries and community halls), along with allocation of additional
resources to carry out more community activities and minor works projects. In 2013,
a one-off grant of HK$100 million was allocated to each DC under the Signature Project
Scheme for implementation of up to two larger projects addressing “local needs” with
visible impact. See Home Affairs Department (2023b).
22
South China Morning Post (2021a), Policy Address (2022) and Home and Youth Affairs
Bureau (2022a).
23
In parallel with the downtrend in MACs over the past 15 years, there is an increase in the
intermediary functions played by owners’ corporations and property management
companies, especially in private housing. See GovHK (2022a).
24
The Government has increased the number of Area Committees from 63 in 2019 to 71 in
March 2023. See Home Affairs Bureau (2021), GovHK (2022a) and Home Affairs
Department (2023a).

6
3.3 The above developments coincided with the outbreak of the fifth wave
of COVID-19 during the first half of 2022, which led to over a million infections
and 7 000 deaths within just three months. While there were many
contributory factors to this public health crisis, “weak mobilization ability
in neighbourhoods” to fight the epidemic was widely cited as one of them. 25
In response to mounting concerns in the community over a lack of crisis
management capacity at the district level, the Government began setting up
452 Care Teams throughout 18 districts in the first quarter of 2023. In short, the
Care Teams aim at (a) engaging local organizations in offering caring activities
and handling emergencies as directed by the District Officers; (b) consolidating
resources in community building; and (c) facilitating communications between
the Government and the public. All 18 districts will be delineated into
452 subdistricts, each handled by a Care Team of 8-12 members to serve around
16 200 residents on average. 26 The budget of a Care Team will be up to
HK$1.2 million for two years of operation.

3.4 At this juncture, while it is still not clear the forms and functions of
future local organization before completion of the review, some stakeholders
have put forward an array of preliminary issues of concerns. First, many
districts have been facing a vacuum of local organizations for more than one year,
which was alleged to be one of the factors leading to weak mobilization power in
the districts during the fifth wave of COVID-19 epidemic. There are thus calls
in the community for early completion of the review. 27 Secondly, there is very
little publicly available information on the kind of future local organizations
under consideration in the review. There are suggestions of releasing more
details on the review process. 28 Thirdly, there are questions about the
feasibility and practicability of the Care Teams. More specifically, some critics
point out that the planned staffing of a team with a maximum budget of
HK$1.2 million for two years is apparently inadequate to serve a sub-district with
16 200 residents. In addition, some are concerned that the selection criteria of
these teams are too stringent (e.g. with prior experience of organizing at least two
designated government-sponsored activities over the past five years and

25
The alleged contributory factors included (a) incapability of the Government to plan ahead;
(b) weak coordination amongst civil servants; (c) inadequacy in information dissemination;
(d) lacking of isolation facilities; and (e) vacuum of local organizations assisting in
distribution of medical and daily supplies in the neighbourhood. See South China
Morning Post (2022a, 2022c).
26
The estimated figure is derived from dividing the current population in Hong Kong by
452 Care Teams. See Policy Address (2022), Home and Youth Affairs Bureau (2022b),
am730 (2022) and GovHK (2023).
27
South China Morning Post (2022b) and 香 港 01(2022a).
28
東 周 刊 (2022).

7
no criminal record of their members), thereby excluding many enthusiastic
volunteers at the district level.29

4. Neighbourhood Associations in Japan

4.1 Local administration in Japan is two-tiered, comprising 47 prefectures

and 1 741 municipalities. Each local government has an executive branch for
policy implementation and an elected local assembly for enacting local laws,
supported by a large number of voluntary NHAs acting as communication bridges
between local authorities and residents. 30 There are 290 000 NHAs across
Japan, with membership formed entirely by residents, and they all register
themselves as self-governing bodies in sub-districts. On average, there are
170 NHAs in each municipality, with each NHA serving around 230 households,
but larger NHAs in major cities (e.g. Tokyo) can serve over 2 000 households.
Owing to its long history of over a century and in spite of voluntary membership,
the overall participation rate of local households in NHAs is noticeable at around
72% in 2021. Major responsibilities of NHAs include sanitation matters in the
neighbourhood, disaster preparation and bridging between residents and
government amongst others. Individual NHAs may join hands to form larger
NHA federations for advocating local interests in a wider area to governments at
higher level. 31 NHAs are thus hailed as the “foundation of local communities”
and “wellspring of social capital” in Japan.

4.2 The Japanese government has been strengthening the role played
by NHAs in local administration over the past three decades. Owing to
continued rural-urban migration and change of social networking mode in Japan
after the 1960s, the overall participation rate in NHAs had fallen discernibly from
a peak of 89% in 1968 (Figure 1). 32 In response, the Japanese government
amended the Local Autonomy Law in 1991 to grant legal status to NHAs, and
enacted the Package Promoting Decentralization Act in 2000 to strengthen the
role of NHAs for “revitalizing local governance”. 33 More recently in the 2010s,
NHAs were empowered with enhanced resources to provide timely support on

29
Panel on Home Affairs, Culture and Sports (2022), 明 報 (2022) and 施 麗 珊 (2022).
30
There are various Japanese names for NHAs, such as jichikai (自 治 會 ), chonaikai
(町 內 會 ) and chokai (町 會 ). As self-governing “territorial groups”, NHAs have
legal status to own property and operate business exclusively for the betterment of
neighbourhoods.
31
Pekkanen et al. (2014), 特 別 區 長 會 調 査 研 究 機 構 (2021) and 總 務 省 (2022a).
32
Pekkanen (2009), Tiefenbach and Holdgrün (2014) and 特 別 區 長 會 調 査 研 究 機 構
(2021).
33
Pekkanen et al. (2014) and 日 高 昭 夫 (2023).

8
emerging community issues (e.g. child abuse and solitary deaths), in the light of
its strong grassroots network.34

Figure 1 – Total number and residents’ participation rate of NHAs in Japan

Number Percentage
300 000 100%
88.7%
81.7% 79.6% 78.0% 76.5%
71.8% 80%

200 000
60%
296 770 294 359 298 700 296 800 290 054
40%
100 000

20%

1968 2002 2008 2013 2018 2021

No. of NHAs Residents' participation rate

Note: Total number of NHAs in 1968 is not available.

Sources: 總 務 省 and 日 高 昭 夫 .

4.3 Major features of NHAs in Japan are summarized as follows:

(a) Major functions: NHAs are mainly responsible for (i) community
services such as cleaning and beautification; (ii) construction and
management of community facilities like meeting halls and garbage
disposal points; (iii) public safety including security patrols and
disaster prevention drills; (iv) welfare services like visiting the
elderly and supporting child-rearing; (v) recreational activities such
as festivals and sports events; (vi) circulation of administrative
bulletins and local assembly news; and (vii) other duties
commissioned by local authorities; 35

(b) Funding: According to a survey in 2014, monthly membership fee

was the largest financial source of NHAs in Japan, accounting for
two thirds of their income. Usually, each family in larger cities
needed to pay about ¥300-¥500 (HK$18-HK$30) as monthly

34
Between 2011 and 2019, child abuse cases in Japan doubled to 194 000, concurrent with a
50% increase of solitary deaths of the elderly to 3 936 in Tokyo. See 總 務 省 (2022a).
35
Pekkanen et al. (2014) and 全 國 市 議 會 議 長 會 (2021).

9
 membership fee. The situation seemed to be broadly the same in
2019, with membership fees representing at least three-fifths of the
total income of most NHAs in Tokyo. In utilizing such revenue,
over half of them (55%) had an annual budget of at least ¥3 million
(HK$177,000) for organizing community activities. 36

Government subsidies and commission fees were the second largest

source of annual income of NHAs, with a share of 10% in 2014.
Local governments paid these funds to NHAs for administrative
duties, building facilities (e.g. meeting halls and security cameras)
and organizing community activities, either on a regular or project
basis. 37 NHAs might also receive business income (e.g. recycling
and parking fee) and donations, which together took up around 20%
of total income;

(c) Leadership: Chairpersons and core members of NHAs are

primarily elderly residents in the neighbourhood, having lived there
for several decades. On selection, 43% of the NHA leaders are
elected by residents, but 35% are through mutual voting or
nomination amongst the seniors, along with 15% on a rotation
basis. On the term of office, more than three-fourths (77%) of
NHA chairpersons had served for no more than five years and just
9% exceeded 10 years.38

On staffing, major daily tasks (e.g. safety and sanitation) are led by
core voluntary members in dedicated committees or subunits
formed within NHAs. Taking the average figure in Tokyo as an
indication, there were over 30 core members in an NHA serving up
to 2 500 households in 2020. Also, NHA federations may hire
full-time staff to handle paperwork and liaison with local
governments;39

(d) Relationship with local governments: As mentioned above, local

governments pay commission fees to NHAs for assistance in
23 kinds of daily duties, averaging at ¥226,000 (HK$13,334) per
NHA leader annually. 40 Common tasks include (i) circulating
36
Pekkanen et al. (2014) and 特 別 區 長 會 調 査 研 究 機 構 (2021).
37
Taking Tokyo as an example, annual government subsidies range between
¥0.2 million-¥10 million (HK$12,000-HK$600,000) per NHA, subject to the type of
business proposed (e.g. community activities or building meeting halls).
38
In Tokyo, 40% of NHA chairpersons had served for up to five years, while the proportion
of those served for over a decade was 26%, higher than the aforesaid national average.
39
Pekkanen et al. (2014), 高 泉 益 (1999) and 特 別 區 長 會 調 査 研 究 機 構 (2021).
40
日 高 昭 夫 (2015) and 總 務 省 (2022b).

10
 publicity materials; (ii) administrative services for residents like
issuing certificates and distributing tax notices; (iii) collecting
donations; (iv) promoting public schemes; (v) attending public
hearings; (vi) managing poll stations; and (vii) nominating
membership in various committees on education, crime prevention
and disaster prevention. At present, each NHA chairperson in
Tokyo hold five committee posts concurrently on average. Local
governments may hold ad-hoc meetings with NHAs to discuss local
projects and measures;41 and

(e) Relationship with local assemblies: Not only do NHAs relay

residents’ requests and petitions to local governments, they also
engage in lobbying politicians in local assemblies on district issues.
The other way round, politicians also meet NHAs frequently to
reach out voters in their constituency. Thus, it is quite common
for NHAs to engage in electioneering for candidates. For
instance, 38% of the surveyed NHAs conducted electoral
campaigns in 2014. 42 That said, some NHAs and NHA
federations require their members to be either politically neutral or
to support political candidates on a personal basis only.

4.4 The role of NHAs in stabilizing the Japanese neighbourhoods is still

widely acclaimed, as evidenced in their excellent coordination work and
continuedly efficient mobilization. For instance, its strong neighbourhood
support in the Hanshin-Awaji earthquake in 1995, the East Japan earthquake in
2011, the Kumamoto earthquake in 2016 and the COVID-19 pandemic had won
recognition globally and domestically. 43 Yet NHAs continued to face
challenges of dampened enthusiasm of residents in the past decade or so.
Between 2008 and 2021, the participation rate in NHAs fell further by
7.8 percentage points in 13 years to 71.8% in 2021, against the backdrop of
continued rural-urban migration, sluggish performance of Japanese economy and
weakening community ties. 44 Based on dedicated studies of the Japanese
government, the contributory factors are (a) ageing NHA leadership; 45
(b) increased administrative burden prompting withdrawal of members thereby

41
水 津 陽 子 (2021), 全 國 市 議 會 議 長 會 (2021) and 特 別 區 長 會 調 査 研 究 機 構
(2021).
42
Pekkanen et al. (2014) and 高 泉 益 (1999).
43
Tanwattana (2012) and 讀 賣 新 聞 (2018).
44
Cai et al. (2021), 讀 賣 新 聞 (2018) and 總 務 省 (2022b).
45
For example, over fourth-fifths of NHA chairpersons in Tokyo aged 70 and above in 2020.
See 特 別 區 長 會 調 査 研 究 機 構 (2021).

11
exacerbating manpower shortage; (c) allegations of lack of transparency in the
work of NHAs by some residents; and (d) less interest in forming or awareness
of joining NHAs in new residential areas.46

4.5 In response, the Japanese government introduced additional

measures to revitalize NHAs as from the mid-2010s. As an illustration, some
local governments (a) began to reduce administrative duties of NHAs (e.g. open
recruitment of committee members and digitalizing publicity circulation);
(b) require real estate companies to provide more details of NHA to new residents
moving in the neighbourhood; (c) offer more subsidies to NHAs to address
specific issues in the neighbourhood (e.g. elderly care and disaster prevention);
and (d) deploy dedicated staff to assist liaisons of NHAs and provide clerical
support. Reportedly, these measures help improve participation rates of NHAs
to a certain degree.47 Yet whether the latest round of reform can reinvigorate
participation interest remains to be seen.

5. Residents’ Committees in Singapore

5.1 Singapore is a small city-state and does not have a central-local

government structure. However, there are over 1 800 local or grassroots
organizations in a three-tier hierarchy of district administration, all
appointed by the Singaporean government as a nation-building tool to unite
its culturally divided society.48 Of the three levels, the middle-tier namely the
Citizens’ Consultative Committees (“CCC”) has the longest history, being first
set up in 1966 to engage residents after racial riots in the mid-1960s. The
lowest-tier namely Residents’ Committees (“RC”) were set up in all public
housing estates in 1978 upon proliferation of public housing in new town
developments subsequently. 49 For the top-tier namely the Community
Development Councils (“CDC”), they were formed in 1997 to coordinate the
work between CCCs and RCs in disbursement of social assistance to the needy
(Figure 2).50

46
水 津 陽 子 (2021) and 特 別 區 長 會 調 査 研 究 機 構 (2021).
47
澤 田 道 夫 (2018), 全 國 市 議 會 議 長 會 (2021) and 總 務 省 (2022a).
48
Three major races in Singapore include Chinese (75%), Malay (13%) and Indian (9%).
49
In private estates, Neighbourhood Committees were also formed in May 1998, but they are
loosely linked to other local organizations of the People’s Association. This section thus
focuses on RCs in public housing, home of some fourth-fifths of Singaporean population.
50
Vasoo (2001), Lim (2007) and Ooi (2009).

12
Figure 2 – Structure of local organizations in Singapore

People’s Association

Community Development
Councils (CDC)

Citizens’ Consultative
Committees (CCC)

Residents’ Committees/ Community Centres/

Neighbourhood Committees Club Management Other local organizations
(RC/NC) Committees

Community Centres/Clubs

Source: Ooi.

5.2 Furthermore, the statutory People’s Association (“PA”) established by

the Singaporean government in 1960 and chaired by the Prime Minister is tasked
to oversee all the organizations mentioned in paragraph 5.1 above. Division of
labour in the three-tiered local organizations is detailed below:

(a) Cross-constituency: There are altogether five CDCs, with each

handling 4-6 electoral constituencies. CDCs are responsible for
implementing flagship community and welfare programmes of the
government (e.g. consumption vouchers and financial assistance)
for lower-income families, on top of organizing events meeting the
needs of residents. More specifically, CDCs can instruct CCCs
and RCs to identify the needy and bring participants to their
initiatives;51

(b) Individual constituency: CCC is set up in each of the 92 electoral

constituencies/wards. CCCs are tasked to (i) oversee subsidiary
local organizations like RCs; (ii) administer welfare schemes,
national campaigns and community activities of the government
51
Each CDC is led by a government-appointed mayor and managed by up to 80 PA-appointed
members. CDCs are funded by the annual grant from the government and donations.
See Thang et al. (2015).

13
 and CDCs; and (iii) relay feedback of residents and make policy
recommendations on local issues like urban planning;52 and

(c) Neighbourhood level: There are 920 RCs and Neighbourhood

Committees (“NC”) in Singapore, which are the “backbone” of the
grassroots network closest to residents in Singapore and the focus
of this section. Each RC handles 5-10 high-rise housing blocks
comprising around 1 500 households. Their primary duties
include execution of welfare programmes and community activities
assigned by CDC and CCC. RCs also work and collaborate with
other organizations in society.

5.3 The salient features of the neighbourhood organizations in Singapore

are briefly summarized as below:

(a) Functions: In short, RCs and NCs are tasked with (i) mobilizing
residents to participate in initiatives of the CDC/CCC and the
Singaporean government; (ii) referring needy residents to apply for
relevant welfare schemes and disburse instant assistance like food
rations and petty cash; (iii) discussing district issues and making
recommendations to CCCs and government on public services and
improvement of living environment; (iv) organizing
resident-initiated activities like block parties and tuition classes;
(v) mediating complaints in the neighbourhood; and
(vi) conducting regular block visits together with members of
parliament, CCCs and other departments to inspect general status
of households living in the zone;53

(b) Funding: Local organizations in Singapore are heavily reliant on

government subsidies, with PA subsidizing 80% of construction
cost and 50% of general operating expense of most organizations.
Modest monthly income can also be derived from recreational
course fees, recycling activities and public donations; 54

52
CCCs also form sub-groups (e.g. welfare, racial harmony, emergency preparedness and
transport) to address specific local issues. See Prime Minister’s Office (2015), Ministry
of Culture, Community and Youth (2019), 王 新 松 (2015) and 王 其 源 及 孫 莉 莉
(2019).
53
Lim (2007) and Ooi (2009).
54
Lim (2007) and 王 其 源 及 孫 莉 莉 (2019).

14
 (c) Leadership: Each RC consists of 10-30 voluntary members who
are residents in the zone (mostly retirees and housewives), with
leaders appointed by PA. RC usually meets once a month to
discuss local issues, along with representatives from CCC,
departments and estate management agencies; 55

(d) Relationship with government: As mentioned above, RCs are

“action-oriented agencies” in response to the mobilization calls of
the Singaporean government, PA, CDCs and CCCs. Not only
does PA provide funding and premise for RC, it also offers liaison,
clerical and training support to them via constituency secretariats
staffed by a team of full-time officers; 56 and

(e) Relationship with the parliament: RCs have maintained a staple

role in facilitating electoral campaigns allegedly in favour of the
ruling party. As RC leaders are familiar with local issues, they
may campaign for their preferred candidates in election and may
become candidates eventually. For instance, almost half of the
27 new candidates nominated by the ruling party for the General
Election in 2020 were leaders of local organizations, with many
having kick-started their volunteering work in RCs. 57

5.4 RCs are the most visible organizations across all neighbourhoods
in Singapore, effectively articulating social capital and local networks for the
government and promoting social cohesion. Indicative of this contribution,
the number of volunteers working for RCs and NCs surged by 117% to 24 000
between 1997 and 2021. That said, there are concerns over challenges faced by
RCs more recently. These include (a) heavier administrative burden
apportioned by PA; (b) reduced interest of residents particularly young people to
join their activities; and (c) allegation of low transparency of the work of RCs.
In particular, critics point out that long-standing community issues are not fully
reflected under the existing top-down command chain of local organizations,
resulting in falling support rate to the ruling party in the General Election from
75% to 61% between 2001 and 2020. The Singaporean government responded
in late 2022 by allocating additional funding to CCCs and RCs for organizing
more innovative “resident-led causes” in their areas, and enhancing manpower to
support them. 58

55
Lim (2007), Ooi (2009) and 王 新 松 (2015).
56
Each secretariat serves around 12 RCs. See Ooi (2009).
57
王 其 源 及 孫 莉 莉 (2019).
58
Lim (2007), Today (2022) and 王 新 松 (2015).

15
6. Observations

6.1 In Hong Kong, the Government is conducting a comprehensive review

on the entire district administration system (including local organizations) to
enhance “governance efficacy”. While 452 Care Teams are being set up in all
18 districts, there are concerns in the community over the transparency and
practicability of the imminent revamp of local organizations currently under
consideration.

6.2 NHAs in Japan and RCs in Singapore are combination of spontaneous

actions of residents and policy initiatives of the governments, but NHAs
seemingly have greater autonomy in funding (i.e. membership fees) and
leadership selection (i.e. election), together with wider participation from
residents and breadth of activities in the neighbourhood. Local organizations in
both selected places (a) receive government funding; (b) work closely with the
local authorities in execution of their policy agenda; (c) act as a bridge between
residents and local governments; and (d) engage in similar daily welfare and
support services for local residents. By virtue of their familiarity with local
issues, some members of NHAs and RCs could have close working relationship
with elected politicians and even become candidates themselves in elections.
Nonetheless, both NHAs and RCs are facing challenges of diminishing interests
of residents, especially young people, in recent years.

Prepared by LEUNG Chi-kit

Research Office
Research and Information Division
Legislative Council Secretariat
3 April 2023
Tel: 3919 3181

Information Notes are compiled for Members and Committees of the Legislative Council. They are not legal or other
professional advice and shall not be relied on as such. Information Notes are subject to copyright owned by
The Legislative Council Commission (The Commission). The Commission permits accurate reproduction of
Information Notes for non-commercial use in a manner not adversely affecting the Legislative Council. Please refer to
the Disclaimer and Copyright Notice on the Legislative Council website at www.legco.gov.hk for details. The paper
number of this issue of Information Note is IN06/2023.

16
 Appendix
Local organizations in selected places

Hong Kong Japan Singapore

Area
1. Name of key local organizations Committees & NHAs RCs
Care Teams etc.

2. Number of local organizations 559(1) 290 000 920

3. Average number of households/residents 16 200 900 1 500

each local organization serving residents(2) households(3) households

4. The earliest year of formation 1971 The 1900s 1978

Advisory & Self-governing Subsidiary

5. Nature of local organizations statutory “territorial organizations
bodies(1) groups” of PA

Election or
Government- Government-
Selection method nomination of
appointed appointed
leaders
6. Leadership Number of core members 8-12(2) 30(3) 10-30

Confined to residents of the area

  
served
Government Membership Government
7. Major funding source funding fee funding

NHA
8. Full-time staffing support Government
federations
Government

9. Functions
(a) Disseminating government information   

(b) Providing social services and welfare  (4) (4)

(c) Organizing community bonding activities  (4) (4)

(d) Nominating members of local

  
governmental bodies

(e) Emergency support   

(f) Facilities management   (5)

Notes: (1) Referring to 71 Area Committees, 18 District Fight Crime Committees, 18 District Fire Safety Committees
and 452 Care Teams coming to operation in 2023.
(2) Referring to Care Teams only.
(3) Referring to NHAs in Tokyo. The national figures averaged at 230 households and up to 20 core members.
(4) In Japan, NHAs have larger autonomy to initiate more resident-led services and activities. In Singapore,
RCs mostly implemented community activities and social assistance schemes managed by CDC and CCC.
(5) Except RC centres, all local facilities are managed and coordinated by CCC in respective areas.

17
References^

Hong Kong

1. GovHK. (2022a) LCQ10: District Administration, 26 January.

Available from: https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202201/26/P202201260
0206.htm

2. GovHK. (2022b) LCQ6: Support for Community Organisations and Groups,

26 October. Available from: https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202210/26/
P2022102600460.htm

3. GovHK. (2023) District Services and Community Care Teams in 16 Districts

Open for Applications, 13 March. Available from: https://www.info.gov.hk/
gia/general/202303/13/P2023031300311.htm

4. Policy Address. (2022) A Caring and Inclusive Hong Kong. Available from:
https://www.policyaddress.gov.hk/2022/en/p93.html

5. Central Policy Unit. (2004) The Study of the Third Sector Landscape in
Hong Kong - Chapter 3: District and Community-based organisations.
Available from: https://www.cepu.gov.hk/doc/en/research_reports/3rd_ch0
3.pdf

6. Home Affairs Bureau. (2005) Review of Advisory and Statutory Bodies: Interim
Report No. 14 - Review of the Classification System of Advisory and Statutory
Bodies in the Public Sector, LC Paper No. CB(2)2176/04-05(04). Available
from: https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr04-05/english/panels/ha/papers/ha0708cb2-
2176-4e.pdf

7. Home Affairs Bureau. (2021) Revising the Arrangements for Implementing

Community Involvement Programme and District Minor Works Programme,
LC Paper No. CB(4)1655/20-21(01). Available from: https://www.legco.gov.h
k/yr20-21/english/panels/ha/papers/ha20211020cb4-1655-1-e.pdf

8. Home Affairs Department. (2023a) Area Committees. Available from:

https://www.had.gov.hk/en/public_services/district_administration/area.htm

9. Home Affairs Department. (2023b) Further Development of District

Administration. Available from: https://www.had.gov.hk/en/public_services/
district_administration/strengthen_society.htm

18
10. Home and Youth Affairs Bureau. (2022a) 2022 Policy Address - Policy
Initiatives of Home and Youth Affairs Bureau, LC Paper No.
CB(2)882/2022(03). Available from: https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr2022/engl
ish/panels/ha/papers/ha20221114cb2-882-3-e.pdf

11. Home and Youth Affairs Bureau. (2022b) District Services and Community
Care Teams, LC Paper No. CB(2)1004/2022(01). Available from:
https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr2022/english/panels/ha/papers/ha20221212cb2
-1004-1-e.pdf

12. Legislative Council. (2016) Official Records of Proceedings,

24 November. Available from: https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr16-
17/english/counmtg/hansard/cm20161124-translate-e.pdf#nameddest=mbm02

13. Panel on Home Affairs, Culture and Sports. (2022) Minutes of Meeting,
12 December, LC Paper No. CB(2)1080/2022. Available from:
https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr2022/english/panels/ha/minutes/ha20221212.pdf

14. South China Morning Post. (2021a) Hong Kong’s District Councils: with
Opposition Members Resigning in Droves as Oath Looms, What Happens
Next to These Local Bodies? 16 July. Available from:
https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3141388/why-are-
hong-kongs-district-councillors-resigning-droves

15. South China Morning Post. (2021b) Goodbye District Councils?

Hong Kong’s Area Committees Set to Replace Local Bodies Reeling from
Wave of Resignations, 21 July. Available from: https://www.scmp.com/new
s/hong-kong/politics/article/3141554/goodbye-district-councils-hong-kongs-
area-committees-set

16. South China Morning Post. (2022a) Coronavirus: Hong Kong Put the Brakes
on Mass Testing. What Caused the Policy U-Turn? 21 March. Available from:
https://www.scmp.com/news/hong%2Dkong/health%2Denvironment/article/3
171311/coronavirus-hong-kong-put-brakes-mass-testing

17. South China Morning Post. (2022b) Weak Community Links? Hong Kong
Pays the Price for Wrecking District-Level Bodies, Putting Politics First in
Coronavirus Battle, Observers Say, 27 March. Available from:
https://www.scmp.com/coronavirus/article/3171970/weak-community-links-
hong-kong-pays-price-wrecking-district-level

19
18. South China Morning Post. (2022c) Coronavirus: How Raging Fifth Wave
Exposed Hong Kong Government’s ‘Poor Leadership’ and ‘Inability to
Deliver’, 28 March. Available from: https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-
kong/politics/article/3172064/coronavirus-how-raging-fifth-wave-exposed-
hong-kong

19. a m7 3 0 ( 2 0 2 2 ) ： 《 1 8 區 關 愛 隊 ｜ 荃 灣 區 南 區 今 起 接 受 報 名
團 體 須 確 認 不 違 〈 國 安 法 〉 》 ， 12月 21日 ， 網 址 ： https://www.a
m730.com.hk/本地/18區關愛隊-荃灣區南區今起接受報名-團體須確認不
違-國安法-/353892?utm_source=am730webshare&utm_medium=copy_link

20. 文 匯 報 (2022) ： 《 政 界 倡 改 革 區 會 增 動 員 力 籌 建 專 職
防 災 委 會 形 成 小 區 網 絡 化 服 務 市 民 模 式 》 ， 3 月 29 日 ，
網 址 ： https://www.wenweipo.com/epaper/view/newsDetail/15084980209
44187392.html

21. 明 報 (2022) ： 《 關 愛 隊 員 禁 有 案 底 較 選 立 會 難 宋 恩 榮 ：
一 刀 切 不 明 智 民 署 ： 公 帑 服 務 監 管 更 嚴 》 ， 12 月 22 日 ，
網 址 ： http://www.mingpaocanada.com/van/htm/News/20221222/HK-
gaa1_r.htm

22. 東 周 刊 (2022)： 《 區 議 會 改 革 未 定 案 地 區 組 織 議 論 紛 紛 》 ，
11月 4日 ， 網 址 ： https://eastweek.my-magazine.me/main/115468

23. 施 麗 珊 ( 2 0 2 2 ) ： 《 關 愛 隊 應 多 點 關 愛 》 ， 明 報 新 聞 網 ，
12月 30日 ， 網 址 ： https://news.mingpao.com/pns/觀點/article/20221230/s
00012/1672334909769/施麗珊-關愛隊應多點關愛

24. 香 港 01(2022a) ： 《 社 區 治 理 ｜ 香 港 社 區 組 織 能 力 不 弱 政 府
統 領 起 來 才 能 推 動 百 花 齊 放 》 ， 7 月 24 日 ， 網 址 ：
https://www.hk01.com/article/786220?utm_source=01articlecopy&utm_me
dium=referral

Japan

25. Cai, Q. et al. (2021) Civil Society Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic:
A Comparative Study of China, Japan, and South Korea, The China Review,
vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 107-137.

20
26. Pekkanen, R. (2009) Japanʼs Neighborhood Associations: Membership without
Advocacy, In: Read, B.L. and Pekkanen, R. (eds) Local Organizations and
Urban Governance in East and Southeast Asia, Oxon, Routledge.

27. Pekkanen, R. et al. (2014) Neighborhood Associations and Local

Governance in Japan, New York, Routledge.

28. Tanwattana, P. (2012) Significance of Institutionalization and Changes of

Chonaikai (Neighborhood Association) in Japanese Society, 政 策 科 學 ,
vol. 19, no. 2. Available from: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/60538152.pdf

29. Tiefenbach, T. and Holdgrün, P. (2014) Happiness, Civil Society

Participation and Voluntariness: Analyzing the Case of Neighborhood
Associations in Japan. Available from: https://www.dijtokyo.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/09/WP1401_Tiefenbach_Holdgruen.pdf

30. 水 津 陽 子 (2021)： 《 持 続 可 能 性 の 高 い 自 治 会 ： 自 治 体 の 果 た
す 役 割 と 施 策 》 ， 網 址 ： https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/000
777271.pdf

31. 日 高 昭 夫 ( 2 0 1 5 ) ： 《 「 行 政 協 力 制 度 」 に 関 す る 実 証 研 究 ：
基礎的自治体と町内会自治会との「協働」関係》，
法 學 論 集 ， 第 76號 ， 第 1-64頁 。 網 址 ： https://core.ac.uk/download
/228505244.pdf

32. 日 高 昭 夫 (2022)： 《 都 市 自治 体と町 内 会 自治 会との 関 係 にどの

よ う な 変 化 が 生 じ て い る か ： 2008年 自 治 体 調 査 と 2020年 都 市
調 査 の 比 較 分 析 》 ， 法 學 論 集 ， 第 88・ 89號 ， 第 89-153頁 。
網 址 ： https://ygu.repo.nii.ac.jp/?action=repository_action_common_dow
nload&item_id=3921&item_no=1&attribute_id=22&file_no=1

33. 日 高 昭 夫 (2023) ： 《 町 内 会 自 治 会 を め ぐ る 国 の 政 策 関 与 の
歴 史 的 展 開 》 ， 法 學 論 集 ， 第 91 號 ， 第 133-198 頁 ， 網 址 ：
https://ygu.repo.nii.ac.jp/?action=repository_action_common_download&it
em_id=4046&item_no=1&attribute_id=22&file_no=1

34. 全 國 市 議 會 議 長 會 (2021)： 《 「 都 市 に お け る 自 治 会 ・ 町 内 会
等 に 関 す る 調 査 」 結 果 概 要 》 ， 網 址 ： https://www.si-
gichokai.jp/news/info/r2/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2021/02/08/20210205_kekkag
aiyou.pdf

21
35. 高 泉 益 (1999)： 《 安 定 日 本 社 會 的 力 量 ： 社 區 組 織 町 內 會 》 ，
臺灣商務印書館。

36. 特 別 區 長 會 調 査 研 究 機 構 (2021)： 《 地 域 コ ミ ュ ニ テ ィ 活 性 化
の た め に と り う る 方 策 》 ， 網 址 ： https://www.tokyo23-kuchokai-
kiko.jp/report/docs/dad5ffb1a5bd0ddc5982a57fa4fdf90b42eb2326.pdf

37. 澤 田 道 夫 (2018)： 《 「 地 縁 組 織 の 加 入 率 と 活 性 化 に 関 す る 一
考 察 ： 町 内 会 ・ 自 治 会 制 度 を め ぐ る 基 礎 理 論 的 研 究 (2)》 ，
ア ド ミ ニ ス ト レ ー シ ョ ン ， 第 24卷 ， 第 2號 ， 網 址 ： http://rp-ku
makendai.pu-kumamoto.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/123456789/1432/1/240203_
sawada_3_20.pdf

38. 總 務 省 ( 2 0 2 2 a ) ： 《 地 域 コ ミ ュ ニ テ ィ に 関 す る 研 究 会
報 告 書 》 ， 網 址 ： https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/000819371.pdf

39. 總 務 省 (2022b)： 《 自 治 会 等 に 関 す る 市 区 町 村 の 取 組 に つ い
て の ア ン ケ ー ト と り ま と め 結 果 》 。 網 址 ： https://www.soumu.
go.jp/main_content/000808317.pdf

40. 讀 賣 新 聞 (2018)： 《 加 入 率 減 少 、 不 要 論 も …「 町 内 会 」 は 変
わ れ る か 》 ， 11月 4日 ， 網 址 ： https://www.yomiuri.co.jp/fukayomi/2
0181031-OYT8T50051/

Singapore

41. Lim, B.F. (2007) Shifting Strategies of Political Dominance in Singapore:

Pastoral Welfarism, Grassroots Management and the Emergence of the Low
Wage Worker. Available from: https://core.ac.uk/reader/48624290

42. Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth. (2019) Supporting Community

Bonding Programmes and Welfare Assistance for Needy Residents.
Available from: https://www.mccy.gov.sg/about-us/news-and-
resources/parliamentary-matters/2019/nov/community-bonding-programmes-
welfare-assistance-needy-residents

43. Prime Minister’s Office. (2015) PM Lee Hsien Loong at The Citizens’
Consultative Committee 50th Anniversary & Grassroots 50 Celebration
Dinner on 29 October 2015. Available from: https://www.pmo.gov.sg/News
room/pm-lee-hsien-loong-citizens-consultative-committee-50th-anniversary-
grassroots-50

22
44. Ooi, G.L. (2009) State Shaping of Community-level Politics: Residents’
Committees in Singapore, In: Read, B.L. and Pekkanen, R. (eds) Local
Organizations and Urban Governance in East and Southeast Asia, Oxon,
Routledge.

45. Thang, L. et al. (2015) Community Bonding and Community Well-Being:

Perspectives from a Community Development Council in Singapore,
In: Lee, S. et al. (eds) Community Well-Being and Community Development,
SpringerBriefs in Well-Being and Quality of Life Research.

46. Today. (2022) PA Launches S$1,000 Grant for Cause-based Volunteers as

Part of New Efforts to Spur Civic Participation. Available from:
https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/pa-launches-s1000-grant-cause-
based-volunteers-part-new-efforts-spur-civic-participation-2031821

47. Vasoo, S. (2001) Community Development in Singapore: New Directions

and Challenges, Asian Journal of Political Science, vol. 9, issue. 1, pp. 4-17,
June.

48. 王 其 源 及 孫 莉 莉 (2019)： 《 新 加 坡 基 層 社 會 組 織 的 生 成 機 制 及
其 啟 示 》 ， 重 慶 工 商 大 學 學 報 ( 社 會 科 學 版 ) ， 第 36 卷 ，
第 2期 ， 第 89-94頁 。

49. 王 新 松 (2015)： 《 國 家 法 團 主 義 ： 新 加 坡 基 層 組 織 與 社 區 治 理
的 理 論 啟 示 》 ， 清 華 大 學 學 報 ( 哲 學 社 會 科 學 版 ) ， 第 30 卷 ，
第 2期 ， ， 第 48-188頁 。

Others

50. Arcuri, G. and Jing, C. (2019) The Paradigm Shifts of Community Governance
in China, Baltic Journal of Real Estate Economics and Construction
Management, vol. 7, pp. 30-59. Available from: https://sciendo.com/pdf/10.
2478/bjreecm-2019-0003

51. Department of Rural and Community Development. (2018) Community

Development. Available from: https://www.gov.ie/en/policy/d5adb8-
community-supports/

52. Korea Institute of Public Administration. (2017) Transforming Seoul:

Rethinking Neighborhood. Available from: https://www.kipa.re.kr/common
/board/Download.do?bcIdx=1867&cbIdx=311&streFileNm=f1ec4ef7-
57d2-45a1-b274-539032f1cd93.pdf

23
53. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2001)
Local Partnerships for Better Governance. Available from:
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/urban-rural-and-regional-development/local-
partnerships%2Dfor%2Dbetter%2Dgovernance_9789264189461%2Den;jses
sionid=eNWc6SylGdHixwFiCzOP1se5C55fZx63rSH8aSao.ip-10-240-5-14

54. Ramesh, M. (2017) Decentralization in Asia: Survey, Policy and Society,

vol. 32, issue 1. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1
016/j.polsoc.2013.02.004

55. Read, B.L. (2009) Introduction: State-linked Associational Life – Illuminating

Blind Spots of Existing Paradigms, In: Read, B.L. and Pekkanen, R. (eds)
Local Organizations and Urban Governance in East and Southeast Asia,
Oxon, Routledge.

56. Read, B.L. (2012) Roots of the State: Neighborhood Organization and Social
Network in Beijing and Taipei, California, Stanford University Press.

57. Rohdewohld, R. (2023) Political and Administrative Decentralization in

Asia and the Pacific, In: Carrasco, B. (eds) Decentralization,
Local Governance, and Localizing the Sustainable Development Goals in
Asia and the Pacific. Asian Development Bank. Available from:
https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/840296/decentralization-
governance-localizing-sdgs-asia-pacific.pdf

58. Shannon, L. and O’Leary, F. (2020) Local Government: Engaging and

Empowering Local Communities. Available from: https://www.ipa.ie/_file
Upload/Documents/LocalGov_EngagingandEmpoweringLocalComm.pdf

59. Tang, B. (2020) Grid Governance in China’s Urban Middle-class

Neighbourhoods, The China Quarterly, vol. 241, pp. 43-61.

60. Wang, D. and Li, S. (2023) Innovation of Contemporary Chinese Urban

Community Governance under the Perspective of Social Capital: Participation
of Multiple Subjects Based on Community Proposals, Sustainability,
vol. 15, issue 1. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/93

61. Wu, X.L. et al. (2018) How are New Community Governance Structures Formed
in Urban China? Asian Survey, vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 942-965.

62. 大 公 報 ( 2 0 1 3 ) ： 《 內 地 街 道 辦 改 革 困 境 ： 社 區 或 成 為 第 二 個
街 道 辦 》 ， 5月 31日 ， 網 址 ： http://news.takungpao.com/mainland/fo
cus/2013-05/1658034.html

24
63. 香 港 01(2022b) ： 《 居 委 會 、 街 道 辦 是 國 家 政 權 末 梢 神 經 ？
關 係 中 國 國 運 的 「 基 層 治 理 」 》 ， 11 月 10 日 ， 網 址 ：
https://www.hk01.com/article/834517?utm_source=01articlecopy&utm_me
dium=referral

64. 國 家 統 計 局 (2022) ： 《 中 國 統 計 年 鑒 2022 》 ， 網 址 ：

http://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/ndsj/2022/indexch.htm

65. 國 務 院 ( 2 0 1 0 ) ： 《 關 於 加 強 和 改 進 城 市 社 區 居 民 委 員 會
建 設 的 意 見 》 ， 網 址 ： http://www.gov.cn/jrzg/2010-11/09/content_17
41643.htm

66. 國 務 院 (2015) ： 《 關 於 加 強 城 鄉 社 區 協 商 的 意 見 》 ， 網 址 ：
http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2015-07/22/content_2900883.htm

67. 國 務 院 (2017) ： 《 關 於 加 強 和 完 善 城 鄉 社 區 治 理 的 意 見 》 ，
網 址 ： http://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2017/content_5204888.htm

68. 國 務 院 ( 2 0 2 1 ) ： 《 關 於 加 強 基 層 治 理 體 系 和 治 理 能 力 現 代 化
建 設 的 意 見 》 ， 網 址 ： http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2021-07/11/conten
t_5624201.htm

Note: ^ Internet resources listed in this section were accessed in April 2023.

25