Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examines village-scale coordination in rural revitalization, suggesting improved governance solutions.
This study addresses two persistent challenges in China’s rural revitalization: difficulty in reading village development dynamics and reliance on homogeneous governance toolkits. We propose a New Endogenous–Coupling diagnostic lens translating neo-endogenous development into village-scale measurement tools, conceptualizing development as interaction between exogenous enabling conditions and endogenous capacities. A village-scale diagnostic framework combines AHP weighting, subsystem efficacy scoring, and a coupling–coordination index across a holistic–dynamic–elemental logic. Applied to 22 villages in Changtai District, Fujian Province using multi-source planning, administrative, spatial data and field verification. Exogenous conditions exceed endogenous capacity in 12/22 villages; exogenous systems are production-oriented, while endogenous strengths concentrate in industry/resource activation, with weaker organizational and cultural capacities. Most villages are transitional-to-coordinated; however, balanced subsystem scores do not guarantee high coordination when both are constrained. Four governance types emerge: exogenous-led, endogenous-led, synchronous, and low-coordination villages. Policy toolbox supports capability conversion, targeted enabling, bottleneck adjustment, and triage, improving goal–instrument fit and reducing homogenized interventions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xiao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: