What is a smart community? Which is better?

The so-called grid is to divide the urban area into "grids" administratively, and let these grids become the units for the government to manage the grassroots society. The community also adopts the grid management mode to realize the grid management of the smart community. According to the characteristics of community and grid, Jin Peng Information describes the grid management concept of affordable community in detail.

There is a famous "two, three and four" in community management and community construction, namely "two-level government, three-level management and four-level model". The formulation of "two-level government" is to establish the position of district-level organs as the competent government, emphasizing the two-level government, that is, emphasizing the independent position of district-level government in the management area, which means that specific management affairs, management authority and financial resources flow from the municipal government to the district-level government. "Three-level management" emphasizes the important position of street party and government organs in managing local affairs. Although the sub-district office does not have the status of the first-level government in law, emphasizing the management function and status of the sub-district organs means that the sub-district undertakes more clear coordination and management functions, including enhancing the influence of the sub-district government on the administrative institutions in this district through the "countersigning right". "Four-level network" emphasizes the basic unit position of residential areas in social management, and establishes a network system to maintain social management and stability through various organizations in residential areas. The essence of "two, three, four" model embodies the essence of Shanghai model, that is, it emphasizes the top-down administrative regulation of the government, and the three-level organizational system of district, street and residence becomes the organizational structure to ensure social management. In the general development direction, it emphasizes that the focus of social management moves down.

Facing the rapidly changing urban society, the "two, three, four" model follows the traditional administrative control strategy, that is, trying to integrate and standardize urban society with administrative power. With the deepening of market-oriented reform, this model of administrative leadership and control is facing more and more problems. These problems are manifested in some of the most intuitive phenomena. For example, under the "234" system, streets are the focus of three-level management, and social management is carried out within the jurisdiction through the mechanism of administrative integration. This logic of administrative strengthening can be established in theory, but there is a problem in practice, that is, the governance resources that streets can master are far from meeting the needs. On the one hand, streets lack an effective restriction mechanism for all kinds of line departments. Although the street is nominally the coordinating leading body at this level, it can't really dominate the administrative behavior of the administrative department. In terms of job evaluation, it is the district administrative department that evaluates the streets. Therefore, the implementation of many specific tasks and difficult affairs finally fell on the streets. For example, the comprehensive management of streets is undertaken by the street comprehensive management office, involving multiple superior departments. Any district-level department can arrange work tasks to the street comprehensive management office at any time. Various tasks are constantly issued, but personnel, funds and policies are not matched accordingly. In addition, the administrative control means used by the street administrative department can not integrate the social forces and market forces within the jurisdiction, such as various social organizations, units, enterprises and other resources for their use. Streets have no power, no resources, and dominate the sky, which affects the actual performance of street management.

Due to the overburdened streets and lack of resources, quite a lot of administrative work will naturally be transferred to neighborhood committees. Residential areas bear too much administrative burden, from anti-terrorism to family planning, from United front to public security, everything enters the community. The personnel quality, organization setting and working mechanism of neighborhood committees and party branches in residential areas can't adapt to the work of thousands of lines. Secondly, the affairs of residential areas are relatively single, and the scope of governance is limited, which can not fulfill the important tasks of urban social management. Finally, because the neighborhood committee belongs to the mass autonomous organization in law and has undertaken so many administrative functions, it is bound to be criticized. Neighborhood committees bear too many state-controlled costs, which affects residents' sense of identity with neighborhood committees, and even some local owners do not welcome neighborhood committees to be located in their own communities.

There are great problems in urban social management under the mode of "two, three and four". The administrative resources at the street level are limited, so it is impossible to implement effective social management inside the street. On the other hand, at the level of residential areas, too many administrative functions are inherited from above, and the alienation of the status of mass autonomous organizations has caused the poor operation and identity crisis of neighborhood committees. In this case, the "grid" of community management tries to find a new unit between the street and the house. The most common practice is to artificially draw a number of grids between streets and residential areas and inject administrative resources divided by lines into these small units. In addition, the designers of the reform hope to integrate various governance resources outside the administrative system, such as social and market resources of units, enterprises and individuals, through various means in the management grid. In the logic of this reform, the resources inside the administrative system within the grid have been reasonably integrated (contradictions have been solved), the social and market resources outside the system have also been effectively utilized, and various management information has been exchanged, which are helpful to solve the problems faced by the current street management system. Of course, although it is logical, once it is put into practice, it will encounter many practical problems.

Jin Peng Information wireless city Solution