The Dilemma And Innovation Of Rural Community Governance Subjects From The Perspective Of Collaborative Governance

The governance of rural communities in China is still at an exploratory stage.However,the current background of the rapid transformation of the transition of the economic system and the transformation of the social structure has intensified social conflicts and social conflicts of interest.Each of the main bodies is extremely unbalanced in the importance of community resources.This directly limits the ability of the principal to participate in governance.In a big country with agriculture,in the face of the elites in the country who control economic and power resources,the subjectivity of ordinary farmers' participation in governance is constantly being ignored and even eliminated.These difficulties all indicate that the innovation of rural community governance in the new era is urgently needed to be studied.What is gratifying is that after the Sixth Plenary Session of the 16th CPC Central Committee,a series of policy measures have been introduced around the governance of rural communities.All over the country,in conjunction with the overall deployment requirements of the Central Government,has actively explored the governance of rural communities,especially the research on the governance of rural communities.It is directly related to the progress of rural urbanization.The report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China proposed that "the social management system must continue to adhere to the basic principles of the Party and the government,innovate ways and means of involving the public,and pay attention to the role of social coordination and legal guarantees",Suzhou City,Anhui Province,focused on promoting the governance of rural communities.The preliminary results have been achieved,but grassroots governance is still dominated by good governance theory.This article is based on an on-the-spot survey of rural communities in Suzhou City.The innovation from the perspective of synergy theory provides an in-depth analysis of rural community governance subjects and finds that the current governance of rural communities is different.The problems existing in the subject and some suggestions for the breakthrough dilemma,and the improvement of collaborative governance in the governance practice,have important theoretical and practical significance.For the definition of rural communities,experts and scholars in different fields of research have different perspectives and the opinions presented vary greatly.The governance of rural communities in this article is the governance of social relations groups based on common interests appeals,possession of the same living area,and common values,and it is defined in the interest appeals to define community governance,and to insist on the subject of ordinary farmers status,emphasizing the realization of the interests of governance subjects.This paper selected Suzhou City as the research object,combined with questionnaires and interviews,in order to ensure the reliability,consistency and stability of the research,the reliability of the research,the satisfaction of the rural community governance and the relevance of the participation of the villagers were first studied.Analyze and use SPSS software to analyze the field survey results of governance status in rural communities in Suzhou City using frequency analysis method,focusing on the low efficiency of public services in Suzhou's grass-roots government,weak community team strength,political indifference among residents,and social organizations.There are many bottlenecks in the participation of low enthusiasm,difficulties in fund integration,etc.,and cause analysis.Faced with the many practical problems caused by the government's failure in governance under the pattern of interest diversification,combined with the experience gained in the governance of rural communities in the country,the government was forced to innovate the social governance system,with the formation of a grass-roots government as the leading factor and residents,self-government as the main force,the democratic community negotiation and the mutual co-governance of rural community governance mechanisms with community social organizations as participants and beneficiaries.