Guiding Smart City Construction with the People’s City Concept

The 2025 Central Urban Work Conference required the implementation of the people’s city concept and made “striving to build convenient and efficient smart cities” one of its key tasks, providing direction and a fundamental guideline for smart city construction in the current and future periods. Therefore, based on the current state of smart city construction, it is of great significance to analyze the difficulties faced in the construction and development of smart cities and to explore their development pathways.

2025年中央城市工作会议要求践行人民城市理念，并把“着力建设便捷高效的智慧城市”作为重点任务之一，为当前和今后一个时期的智慧城市建设指引方向、提供根本遵循。因此，立足当前智慧城市建设的现状，分析智慧城市建设、发展面临的困境，并探索其发展路径具有重要意义。

Smart City Construction and the Modernization of Governance Capacity

智慧城市建设与治理能力现代化

Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core has explored smart city construction, successively issuing multiple documents to make top-level designs for the goals, institutional mechanisms, and key tasks of smart city construction, and conducting practical explorations in multiple cities. It has applied advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence to various aspects of urban governance, including spatial planning, public security, public transport facilities, and grassroots governance, thereby promoting the modernization of the urban governance system and governance capacity to a certain extent.

党的十八大以来，以习近平同志为核心的党中央就智慧城市建设展开探索，先后出台多份文件对智慧城市建设的目标、制度机制、重点任务作出顶层设计，并在多个城市进行实践探索，将人工智能等先进技术运用于空间规划、社会治安、公共交通设施、基层治理等城市治理的多个方面，一定程度上推动了城市治理体系和治理能力现代化。

From the perspective of policy guidance, in 2024 the National Development and Reform Commission, the National Data Administration, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Natural Resources jointly issued the “Guiding Opinions on Deepening Smart City Development and Promoting the Comprehensive Digital Transformation of Cities,” which set forth requirements for promoting the digital transformation of cities across all fields, all aspects, and the entire process, and stipulated construction targets to be achieved by 2027 and 2030 respectively, pointing the way for future smart city development. From the perspective of coverage, according to the “Relying on Smart Services to Create a New Type of Smart City – 2022 Smart City White Paper,” over 500 cities have launched pilot projects related to smart cities, information-based public services, and information consumption. Most prefecture-level cities and nearly half of county-level cities have already initiated smart city construction, and smart city clusters (belts) such as the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta have taken initial shape. From the perspective of smart hardware, the digital transformation of urban infrastructure such as transportation, water, energy, sanitation, and landscaping has been deepened, and a system of terminal networking, ubiquitous sensing, and intelligent dispatch has been initially established. From the perspective of governance effectiveness, urban governance has truly formed a “city-wide, round-the-clock, intelligent, multi-channel” full-lifecycle governance mechanism integrating prevention and response. Overall, smart city construction has achieved certain results in terms of institutional mechanisms, coverage, technological innovation, and governance effectiveness.

从政策指导来看，2024年国家发展改革委、国家数据局、财政部、自然资源部联合发布的《关于深化智慧城市发展推进城市全域数字化转型的指导意见》作出全领域、全方位、全过程推进城市数字化转型的相关要求，并规定了2027年、2030年分别需要达到的建设目标，为未来智慧城市发展指明了方向。从覆盖范围来看，根据《依托智慧服务共创新型智慧城市——2022智慧城市白皮书》，超500座城市展开智慧城市、信息惠民、信息消费等相关试点工作，多数地级市及近半数县级市已开展智慧城市建设，并初步形成了长三角、珠三角等智慧城市群（带）。从智能硬件来看，城市交通、水、能源、环卫、园林绿化等基础设施数字化改造的深入推进，终端联网、泛在感知、智能调度体系初步建成。从治理效能上看，城市治理真正形成了防治一体的“全市域、全天候、智能化、多渠道”的全生命周期治理机制。总体来说，智慧城市建设在制度机制、覆盖范围、技术革新、治理效能等方面已经取得了一定成果。

Smart City Construction Requires Systematic Linkage

智慧城市建设需要系统联动

The central government has repeatedly issued policy documents and provided financial support to explicitly encourage cities to explore and innovate smart governance models that serve the people. However, in practice, there is no shortage of cases where grassroots smart governance practices have failed. For example, some projects’ preliminary research is divorced from the actual lives of the masses. When higher-level governments transmit macro-level construction targets down to grassroots implementing units, grassroots departments must undertake multiple core tasks such as surveying residents’ needs, implementing projects, and operating systems, thereby laying the foundation for building smart communities suited to the city’s characteristics. Yet, during the preliminary phase of soliciting residents’ opinions, problems exist such as unscientific questionnaire design and inadequate publicity and explanation, making it difficult for residents to understand the core value and expected outcomes of smart community construction, and also preventing them from accurately expressing their own objective needs and opinions. During the operational period, data is not updated in a timely manner and smart systems are not effectively maintained. This not only prevents governance information from being fed back to residents in a timely manner but also substantially hinders the effectiveness of collaborative governance between different community units.

中央政府多次通过下发政策文件和提供财政资金支持的方式，明确鼓励各城市探索创新为民服务的智慧治理模式，但在实践过程中却不乏基层智慧治理实践失效的案例。比如，有些项目前期调研脱离群众生活实际。当上级政府将宏观建设目标下达至基层执行单位时，基层部门需承担居民需求调研、项目实施及系统运营等多项核心工作，以此为建设契合城市特色的智慧社区打下基础。然而，在前期居民意见征询阶段，存在问卷设计缺乏科学性和宣传解释不充分不到位的问题，导致居民既难以理解智慧社区建设的核心价值与预期成效，也无法准确表达自身客观需求和意见。运营期间未能及时更新数据、有效维护智慧系统。这不仅造成治理信息无法及时向居民反馈，更实质性地阻碍了不同社区单元间的协同治理效能。

The tiao-kuai relationship model constrains the improvement of governance effectiveness. As the basic model of inter-departmental relations within Chinese government at all levels, the tiao-kuai relationship has a profound impact on the advancement of the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity. The prominent characteristic of “tiao-kuai fragmentation” in the traditional administrative management model is in sharp conflict with the systematic governance concept pursued by smart cities. On the one hand, there is a gap between the technical governance goals set by central and local governments and the actual operational capacity of grassroots implementing units. As the ultimate point of implementation for smart governance, grassroots departments bear the full-chain responsibility for surveying residents’ needs, implementing projects, and operating and maintaining systems. However, grassroots implementing entities lack the authority to independently select technology partners and are highly dependent on fiscal funds to sustain project operations. Therefore, in practice, efficiency in construction and the long-term operation of projects are often hindered by limited power and funding. On the other hand, there are significant data silos and a division of responsibilities among government departments. Smart city governance requires the comprehensive sharing of data and the deep integration of systems. If departments, bounded by their statutory responsibilities, build their own data silos, smart governance will find it difficult to collaborate across departments and levels, thereby reducing work efficiency. Traditional urban governance, affected by administrative barriers and departmental boundaries, results in a fragmented governance structure, which is an institutional obstacle to building a “city-wide collaborative” governance paradigm for smart cities.

条块关系模式制约治理效能提升。条块关系作为中国各地政府部门间关系的基本模式，对国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的推进具有深远影响。传统行政管理模式中显著的“条块分割”特性，与智慧城市追求的系统治理理念形成了鲜明冲突。一方面，中央与地方政府制定的技术治理目标，与基层执行单元的实际运作能力之间存在落差。基层部门作为智慧治理的最终落脚点，承担着居民需求调研、项目实施和系统运维的全链条责任。但基层执行主体既缺乏自主选择技术合作方的权限，又高度依赖财政资金维持项目运转。因此，在实际操作中常常因权力和资金受限而阻碍建设效率和项目的长效化运营。另一方面，政府各部门之间存在显著的数据壁垒和职责分割现象。智慧城市治理要求实现数据的全面共享和系统的深度集成，如果各部门以法定职责为界限，构建起自己的数据孤岛，会使智慧治理因难以跨部门、跨层级协作，从而降低工作效率。传统城市治理受到行政壁垒、部门边界的影响，使治理结构分散化，这是构建智慧城市“全域协同”治理范式的制度障碍。

Development Pathways for Smart City Construction

智慧城市建设的发展路径

First, implement the people’s city concept. To resolve the structural deviation between smart city construction and the people’s needs, governments at all levels and grassroots governance entities must deeply implement the people’s city concept, embedding the human-centered logic throughout the entire cycle and all fields of governance. The people’s city concept is a valuable experience summarized by the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, adhering to the theoretical guidance of Marxism and the purpose of serving the people wholeheartedly, through long-term urban work. The core connotation of this concept is “the people’s city is built by the people, and the people’s city serves the people.” It emphasizes both the people’s principal role in urban construction and governance and that the people are the value orientation of urban work. Smart cities need to rely on the people to create material civilization, cultural-ethical progress, and institutional civilization. Cities exist because of people, and the ultimate goal of their development should serve the comprehensive development of people. The reason why phenomena such as failing to seriously investigate residents’ genuine opinions and feelings in smart city governance, and failing to establish an operational mechanism that conveniently and efficiently absorbs public opinion, pools public wisdom, and allows the people to share in development achievements, have persisted for a long time lies not only in institutional mechanisms and public participation awareness but also in the lack of guidance from scientific governance concepts. The lack of guidance from scientific governance concepts can cause smart city governance to unilaterally take objective data reflecting urban development, such as GDP, as the standard for evaluating effectiveness, ultimately neglecting the value orientation that technology serves people and urban development serves people. In the future, the theoretical origins and practical value of the people’s city concept can be deeply explored, using new governance concepts to guide smart city construction.

第一，践行人民城市理念。为解决智慧城市建设与人民需求的结构性偏差，各级政府及基层治理主体须深度践行人民城市理念，将人本逻辑贯穿治理全周期、全领域。人民城市理念是党的十八大以来以习近平同志为核心的党中央坚持马克思主义的理论指导和全心全意为人民服务的宗旨，在长期城市工作中总结出的宝贵经验。该理念的核心内涵是“人民城市人民建，人民城市为人民”，既强调人民在城市建设和治理中的主体地位，又强调人民是城市工作的价值旨归。智慧城市需要依靠人民创造物质文明、精神文明、制度文明。城市因人而存在，其发展的最终目的应服务于人的全面发展。智慧城市治理中不认真调研居民的真实意见和感受，未能建立便捷高效地吸纳民意、集中民智和发展成果由人民共享的运行机制的现象之所以长期存在，其原因不仅在于制度机制、公众参与意识，也和缺乏科学治理理念指导有关。缺乏科学治理理念的指引会使智慧城市治理单一地以GDP等反映城市发展的客观数据为成效评价标准，最终忽略技术服务于人、城市发展服务于人的价值取向。未来，可以深入挖掘人民城市理念的理论渊源及现实价值，以新的治理理念指引智慧城市建设。

Second, build a diversified collaborative governance mechanism. To break the institutional obstacles posed by “tiao-kuai fragmentation” to systematic governance, a combination strategy of vertical power and responsibility restructuring, horizontal data connectivity, and empowerment of social entities is needed to achieve a paradigm shift from traditional administrative dominance to pluralistic co-governance. First, build a unified and efficient institutional system. Vertically, a management structure linking upper and lower levels can be clarified, strengthening the coordinating role of local governments in urban governance, supporting grassroots units in exploring governance models based on local conditions, and ensuring residents’ right to participate in urban governance. Second, provide the necessary funding and talent support for grassroots exploration of smart governance and long-term operation and maintenance. Horizontally, reform of inter-departmental collaboration mechanisms should be deepened. The focus should be on breaking down data silos between departments and establishing a basic data sharing list system. Addressing the difficulties in the full-cycle governance of urban planning, construction, and management, departmental collaboration norms should be revised to clarify the attribution of powers and responsibilities. Third, improve the system for the whole-process participation of the public. Through smart platforms, build two-way empowerment channels to ensure residents’ right to participate in setting governance goals, supervising the entire governance process, and evaluating governance outcomes, thereby promoting the transformation of governance objects into governance subjects.

第二，构建多元协同治理机制。为破解“条块分割”对系统治理的制度性阻碍，需要通过纵向权责重构、横向数据贯通、社会主体赋能的组合策略，实现从传统的行政主导向多元共治的范式转型。第一，构建统一高效的制度体系。从纵向上看，可明确上下联动的管理结构，强化地方政府在城市治理中的统筹协调作用、支持基层结合实际探索治理模式、保障居民参与城市治理的权力。第二，给予基层探索智慧治理和长期运维的必要资金、人才支持。从横向上看，要深化政府部门协作机制改革。重点破除部门间数据壁垒，建立基础数据共享清单制度。针对城市规划、建设、管理的全周期治理难点，修订部门协作规范，明确权责归属。第三，健全公众全过程参与制度。通过智慧平台搭建双向赋权渠道，确保居民在治理目标设定、治理全过程监督、治理效果评估中的参与权，推动真正实现治理对象向治理主体转变。

(The author is Vice Dean and Associate Professor of the School of Marxism at Northwest University)

（作者系西北大学马克思主义学院副院长、副教授）

Online Editor: Huihui

网络编辑：慧慧