Conference Agenda

In many public institutions, especially in under-resourced and rural contexts, governance systems continue to reflect rigid, hierarchical, and compliance-driven models that are increasingly misaligned with the complexities of the modern public environment. This results in limited responsiveness, citizen disengagement, and stifled innovation. The core of the challenge lies not only in institutional systems and procedures, but also in deeply ingrained mindsets that resist change, collaboration, and human-centric service delivery. There is a growing call for a new paradigm in governance – one that centres people, fosters empathy, and promotes co-creation as foundational principles of public administration. This paper explores a human-centred approach (HCA) to governance transformation, advocating for a mindset shift that places the lived experiences of citizens at the heart of institutional design and leadership behaviour.

The research adopts a qualitative methodology grounded in human-centred design (HCD) and participatory action research. Data collection was conducted across three municipalities within the Eastern Cape province of South Africa, involving diverse stakeholders such as municipal officials, community leaders, and youth representatives. Empathy interviews, journey mapping, and co-creation workshops were used to surface insights into institutional behaviour, community experiences, and system blockages. A thematic analysis was applied to identify dominant narratives, gaps, and opportunities for transformation.

Findings from the study revealed five interconnected themes. Firstly, governance systems remain overly centralised, with top-down decision-making limiting agility and contextual responsiveness. Secondly, frontline officials often feel disempowered and disconnected from decision centres, affecting morale and service quality. Thirdly, community members express feelings of alienation, apathy, and mistrust towards local institutions. Fourthly, institutional environments are risk-averse, with limited space for experimentation, reflection, or innovation. Lastly, the introduction of human-centred design practices led to notable mindset shifts among participants—officials began to exhibit empathy, curiosity, and collaborative intent, while communities demonstrated renewed confidence in engaging government.

Based on these insights, the paper proposes a governance transformation framework anchored in four strategic pillars: (1) empathy-driven leadership development, (2) institutionalisation of design thinking practices in policy and service design, (3) participatory systems thinking for integrated planning, and (4) real-time feedback and learning loops. The framework argues for embedding design capabilities within governance institutions and aligning training, incentives, and leadership development efforts accordingly. This approach challenges the traditional notion of public service as a one-way provision mechanism, repositioning it instead as a shared journey between institutions and the people they serve.

The study concludes that shaping the future of governance requires more than structural reforms. It calls for a deliberate shift in mindsets, relationships, and design processes that place human experience at the core of governance innovation. By equipping institutions with human-centred tools and leadership behaviours, it is possible to foster inclusive, responsive, and resilient governance systems that are fit for the challenges of the 21st century, there of.

References:

• Brown, T. (2009). Change by Design. Harvard Business Press.

• Mulgan, G. (2014). Design in Public and Social Innovation. Nesta.

• Kimbell, L. (2011). Rethinking Design Thinking. Design and Culture, 3(3).

• Bason, C. (2018). Leading Public Sector Innovation. Policy Press.

1.Problem Statement and Purpose

Contemporary society is marked by the restructuring and emergence of spatial structures, which exacerbate existing imbalances in justice.Yunnan, with its diverse ethnic groups, serves as a case study. The region's challenges, including contradictions in its spatial layout, power structures, resource allocation, and lack of spatial rights, are interconnected.This study aims to explore methods to achieve spatial justice through the establishment of an integrated governance community, emphasizing interethnic cooperation and cultural harmony.The formation of this community can be viewed as a top-down phenomenon driven by state policy and cultural or political elites in China, particularly in the context of poverty alleviation and rural revitalization.However, ethnic minority regions in Yunnan and other border areas have also initiated bottom-up initiatives to establish governance communities, often through grassroots movements.Top-down and bottom-up approaches complement one another, contributing to the construction of integrated governance communities that reinforce justice, cooperation, shared benefits, and communal beauty.

2.Methodology

This study uses a theoretical reflection and empirical exploration approach, focusing on the poverty alleviation process in Jinping Miao, Yao, and Dai Autonomous County in Yunnan Province. Through interviews, field survey data, and document collection, the study explores how justice is reproduced in the construction of a multi-ethnic governance community in a border region.

3.Findings

The study posits that the establishment of a dual governance structure, integrating both top-down and bottom-up approaches, while encompassing all ethnic groups in the decision-making process, holds the potential for achieving high-quality integrated development of urban and rural regions. This approach, the study suggests, can facilitate the realization of spatial justice.

4.Proposal

Spatial production is important to social production and reproduction. By building a multi-ethnic, interwoven governance community and participating in the reproduction of material, spiritual, and social spaces, we can narrow the gap between rich and poor at the material level and achieve integration and development at the spiritual level. This will enable central and marginalised groups to achieve spatial justice as their needs for survival, livelihood, and development continue to rise and converge.

Public infrastructure projects in developing countries are often marred by cost overruns, delays, weak administrative capacity, and corruption, which severely limit their transformative potential despite heavy financial investments. Scholars like Dennis A. Rondinelli (1976) argued that many developing nations “lack adequate institutional capacity or trained personnel to plan and implement projects effectively,” highlighting the gap between ambition and implementation. Likewise, Bent Flyvbjerg (2013) identified strategic misrepresentation and optimism bias as key reasons megaprojects often fail—especially in politically driven environments with weak accountability. Ika and Hodgson (2014) further emphasized that development projects succeed not merely on time‑cost metrics but through managerial adaptability, stakeholder engagement, and contextual relevance.

Independent evaluations by bodies such as the World Bank and IMF show that more than 40 percent of infrastructure projects in developing countries experience cost overruns, while over 75 percent face significant delays. These inefficiencies stem from rigid bureaucratic practices, fragmented governance, and the absence of empowered delivery mechanisms. Yet when public‑interest infrastructure is managed with transparency, professionalism, and participatory decision‑making, it can produce meaningful and measurable improvements in quality of life.

Built to bring water to one of Madhya Pradesh’s driest regions—once on the brink of desertification and distress—the Mohanpura‑Kundalia Irrigation Project now delivers water to 1,300 villages, benefits more than 500,000 farmers, and irrigates over 290,000 hectares, making it perhaps the world’s largest pressurized‑piped irrigation system. Conceptualized as a large‑scale irrigation and livelihood programme, the project was executed through a dedicated Project Management Unit (PMU) that operated with professional autonomy, ethical leadership, and an outcome‑based governance approach. Most notably, it increased irrigation efficiency from 38 percent to over 80 percent, boosted rural incomes, and reduced migration from this drought‑prone region. Unlike many traditional infrastructure programmes that struggle with top‑down inefficiencies, Mohanpura‑Kundalia succeeded by embedding transformational leadership, participatory planning, transparency, and accountability into every level of management.

This paper positions the project as a counter‑narrative to the oft‑cited failures in public‑infrastructure execution. By analysing the management structures, team dynamics, and governance innovations behind the project, it argues that effective public administration—when aligned with skilled leadership and institutional reform—can deliver high‑impact outcomes, even in complex and resource‑constrained settings. The Mohanpura‑Kundalia model thus offers a replicable governance framework for developing nations seeking to translate infrastructure investments into long‑term, sustainable development gains.

1. Problem Statement and Purpose

In the era of digital technological revolution intertwined with global governance transformation, artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping the landscape of local government public services and social governance. Currently, local governments worldwide are actively promoting the application of AI technologies. However, in the process of technological empowerment, global governance dilemmas such as conflicts over data sovereignty and unregulated algorithmic governance have become prominent, urgently requiring theoretical breakthroughs and practical innovations.

Based on global governance theory and digital governance frameworks, this paper delves into the current state and developmental logic of AI applications in local governments, analyzes its value and potential risks in enhancing governance efficacy, and aims to provide theoretical and practical guidance for building an intelligent and inclusive local governance system.

2. Methodology

The research primarily collects actual cases of AI use by local governments domestically and internationally, analyzing in detail how AI functions in these cases, the outcomes achieved, and the challenges encountered. Simultaneously, extensive literature—including books, academic papers, and reports on AI and government governance—is reviewed to synthesize relevant theories and research findings, thereby summarizing the universal patterns and characteristics of AI applications in local governance.

3. Findings

The study finds that AI significantly improves local governance efficacy by optimizing service processes through intelligent government platforms, enhancing risk prevention and control with predictive models, and building trustworthy ecosystems with blockchain technology. However, during its application, issues such as the lack of transnational data regulation and opaque algorithmic decision-making are prominent. Moreover, the absence of unified global standards for AI service governance laws exacerbates governance risks.

4. Proposal

To address these challenges, it is recommended to construct a "technology-institution-ethics" collaborative governance framework, promote mutual recognition of global AI governance rules, improve cross-border data regulatory systems, and accelerate the development of legal standards. Additionally, local governments should strengthen their technical application capabilities, cultivate interdisciplinary governance talent, and foster deeper integration of AI with local governance.