The Construction And Restriction Of Urban Community Publicness During Transformation Period

Since the policy of reform and opening up, with an ever upgrading level of marketization and urbanization, the world we live in is changing from an acquaintance society or a semi-acquaintance society to that of strangers. Estrangement among people is easily visible in urban communities. The fast process of modernization and the stagnation in the area of social public life have combined to bring us the urgency of rebuilding urban community publicness. The author holds that we urgently need to build up an urban community publicness which is fit to our modern world. This publicness, in its spiritual level, is the residents'sense of approval and belonging to their community, and in its practical level, the residents'active participation into public affairs of the community.Adopting the method of case study, this paper takes Community H of Nanshan district in Shenzhen city as its object and proceeds the research diachronically and synchronically. First, observe diachronically the practices for the construction of Community H. Trace any important events in history and analyse their impact, with consideration for the interaction between administrative and social forces and of the forces'impact on the community in different periods. At the same time, adopt a method that combines questionnaires with key interviews to investigate the status quo of Community H, to find out residents'understanding of the community and their participation into the public affairs of it, and to attain a general picture of the practices by community and social organizations and their respective impact.Through diachronic investigation of Community H construction, the author finds out that urban communities are the joint of government administrative and social autonomous forces, with properties of both an administrative space and a social one. On the one hand, communities are units through which the government manages the grassroots society. Whenever it is, communities have always shouldered the responsibility of administrative management, with the property of an administrative peripheral. On the other hand, as a life sphere of urban residents, it is also a living community. In the process of the construction of Community H, another force—social force, is also on the rise.In the investigation on the status quo of publicness, the author finds out, that most residents lack a thorough understanding about such mass organizations as resident committees, community workstations and communities. They contact less with them than with property companies. Most residents are willing to participate into public affairs, yet few of them ever turned their willingness into actions. They are unsatisfied with the services provided at resident committees and workstations. On the contrary, some social and professional organizations have received welcome and recognition from residents.Through the investigation and analysis as above, the author has given thought to the following aspects.First, urban communities are limited and therefore social publicness is also limited. This is reflected in the specificity of community service objects, the specific population who live in the community or get support from it. As limited as it is, this publicness is also authentic, which focuses community work on the specific population as communities are of huge significance to them. Communities should function on the basis of limited motives and capacities to create proper space and conditions. In this way, residents can choose the way they participate into community affairs, thus realizing their own values and helping to build their shared home.Secondly, in the process of publicness construction, the government is always a forcible motivator and such social forces as NGO,NPO and mass organizations are the major bearers. We should never reject government forces, which are a reliable support for us. However, at the same time, we should hold that the major bearers should be those nongovernmental forces.Thirdly, we are witnessing a new kind of publicness as represented by those social forces from organizations that are autonomous, nongovernmental, nonprofitable, voluntary and professional. A new kind of publicness which is different from taking"officials"as"publicness"as in the past is quietly taking shape. Through practices in Nanshan district, we find that the emergence of professional social workers has re-injected vigor to urban community publicness. The social workers can satisfy various needs of the residents and organize them into public affairs through personalized services. On the basis of a full respect to individual needs, a restoration of intimate neighborhood and a re-building of mutual help relations have brought about new features to publicness construction.Fourthly, the social tradition of a strong government and the features of an immigrant culture in Shenzhen have filled the construction process with complexity. Since"unit society", the country controls social service through administrative means. The role of publicness is played by no one else except the government. The tradition of"a strong government"is easily felt in community publicness construction. Therefore we can see that the new"bottom-up"style of publicness and the traditional"top-down"one will go through a long time of coexistence. Furthermore, features of"an immigrant culture"have to some degree made the process even more difficult. Shenzhen, as a young immigrant city, has a high degree of population mobility, an open society and a coexistance of multiple cultures. Up till now, there is no dominant culture formed in the region that can integrate all others into a universal whole and the high degree of mobility further deepens a rootless mentality held by its people. Therefore, for those residents without a Shenzhen household registration, which account for over 80% of its population, it is difficult to develop a sense of community approval and belonging, thus unable to participate into community construction with the mentality of a host.Although publicness construction in urban communities is still faced with restrictions and challenges, we will not falter in determination. We believe that through efforts from various parts of society and through the passing of time, a new type of community publicness will eventually emerge.