The Work-Unit Compound (WUC) is a common neighborhood type that became prevalent during China’s socialist era, typically offering communal spaces that serve as vital spatial carriers for communal life. Following the shift in public housing provision from the work-unit (state-owned enterprise) through the social welfare system to a market-oriented system, the decline of work-unit systems and the privatization of housing led to the distribution of responsibility for communal spaces in WUC neighborhoods becoming more intricate. Issues related to these spaces, such as underutilization and poor management, were exacerbated as the built environment deteriorated. By the 2010s, these challenges had become central targets of various participatory regeneration initiatives. However, current discourse on participatory regeneration predominantly focuses on social outcomes, paying limited attention to post-regeneration governance modes. In response, this study develops a framework to examine the continuity and heterogeneity of communal space governance during and after regeneration projects in WUC neighborhoods. It offers a nuanced investigation of context-specific facilitating mechanisms, with the goal of supporting more effective and sustainable communal space governance in the future. Using a case study approach, the research draws on in-depth interviews that were systematically analyzed. The findings indicate that daily communal space governance in the sampled projects continues to rely on internal problem-solving methods inherited from the work-unit system (e.g., the collective sense of honor and a persistent reliance on state actors). Additionally, governance is driven by economic initiatives repurposing underutilized spaces—for instance, vegetable cultivation in enclosed areas is employed for self-sufficiency (Case A), and small-scale business that benefits the neighborhood is performed (Case B). This study also identifies a blend of formal and informal institutional arrangements linked to participatory regeneration, including the coproduction of space management between residents and grassroots government (Case A), and the government-funded purchase of community services (Case B). Moreover, extra-local networks—such as gaining mutual support from Community Garden Networks (Case A) and Community Economic Cooperatives (Case B)—play a significant role. In conclusion, this study highlights the role of facilitating mechanisms associated with participatory regeneration in shaping daily communal space governance and explores the potential of participatory strategies within contemporary neighborhood governance, particularly under recent Chinese policies targeting dilapidated urban neighborhoods. Practically, this study offers recommendations for planners and practitioners regarding incorporating facilitating mechanisms into participatory regeneration to enhance community engagement in communal space governance, especially in other post-socialist cities experiencing similar challenges.
Xu et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: