Rural Anti-poverty Grassroots Practices And Multiple Dilemmas

At present,with the progress of society,the anti-poverty work in rural areas is more comprehensive and complex.It not only needs to meet the minimum living security of the bottom farmers,but also provides fair conditions and qualifications for the poor farmers to enter the market.The guarantee of anti-poverty and the common prosperity goal have developed in concert.The national anti-poverty funding and poverty alleviation methods have increased year by year,but the efficiency of poverty alleviation still needs to be improved.As the grassroots government in the final practice of anti-poverty in rural areas,it is a decisive factor in the targeting of poor households.It also plays a leading and cohesive role in higher-level governments,markets,and poor households.Based on this,it is particularly important to study the logic of grassroots government action in rural anti-poverty in specific situations.Based on the “strong intervention” poverty alleviation,this article cannot fully explain the difference between the results of the two anti-poverty models,and analyzes the action logic and existing dilemma of the grassroots government through a case analysis of village Y 's anti-poverty practices.In the context of the rapid development of the rural economy,the number of poor people on the bottom line has decreased significantly,the system has gradually been improved,and the problem of targeting deviation has been largely corrected.The minimum living security policy objectives are no longer inconsistent due to intrinsic village factors and political objectives.The rural anti-poverty strategy began to shift towardseconomic development,and industrial poverty alleviation has become a new implementation pressure for the grassroots government.However,due to industrial poverty alleviation,there are still “elite capture” and “weak absorption”.The disadvantages of “large-scale” cannot be solved,the problems of “heads and tails”of poverty alleviation projects,the lack of long-term effectiveness of farmers' upgrade and development,and the uneven distribution of interests of the grassroots government have led to“high input and low output”in industrial poverty alleviation.Negative effects of distrust and disapproval of the image of grassroots government work.In the course of anti-poverty practice,“strong participatory verification”,“joint of interest alliances”and“procedural justice-style self-protection”have led to practical difficulties.The study found that:First,the strong voice of the grassroots government and the implementation of policy objectives and actions affect the verification of the general poor households.Second,the rejection of irrational brokers by the Village Interest Alliance makes it difficult for “good people” to continue.Third,the acquaintance society guided by relational capital restricts the development of foreign technology.Fourth,the indifferent attitude of the general public makes the supervision mechanism ineffective for a long time.Fifth,the political identity of rural cadres is ambiguous.The political constraints of the higher-level government and the cultural constraints of the local acquaintance society are both effective and ineffective.