Along with the rapid development of cities and continuous improvement to housing environment in urban China, many pressing issues have emerged out of the process of developing old residential communities. A particular issue is that some governing subjects such as social organizations, residents, and volunteers do not participate sufficiently in community governance. Comprehensive governance of old residential communities, therefore, has become a key challenge in urban governance. This case is derived from Yitian Compound of Shenzhen City in Guangdong Province. Established in 1996, it has become one of Shenzhen’s largest compounds that provide welfare-oriented public housing and economically affordable housing. The Compound has become an exemplar of incorporating social forces into community governance by establishing its “Dangqunfuwuzhongxin” – meaning “community service center co-run by the Party and the general public”.

On the one hand, the center motivates residents to join Yitian Compound’s volunteer team to provide services to their own community. For example, the center has established a “Bank of Time” in which residents can deposit their community service time and convert such time into points. Then they can withdraw from the bank the services they need or exchange their points for gifts. On the other hand, the center organizes a variety of public benefit activities. For instance, it offers residents classes on subjects such as recitation, pottery, and calligraphy. It also organizes some after-school activities for primary school students and high school students who live at the Compound. These classes particularly address the challenge of after-school care faced by dual-income families. In addition, the center carries out a large-scale story-telling project through which people share their lived experiences of contributing to public benefit. In so doing, more residents have been motivated to engage actively in community services and community building.

Four lessons about effective governance of old residential communities can be learned from this case. First, guiding and encouraging residents to engage in volunteer services can activate their motivation to participate in community governance. Second, community governance can be improved by introducing public benefit resources from the society and the market to old residential communities. Third, a mode of community governance needs to be systematized so that community services can be provided in a sustainable manner. Fourth, community activities and services should be tailored to the needs of specific communities, which necessitates hearing from residents of their needs first.