The Process and Mechanisms of Rural Governance Network Transformation: A Case Study of Tianlong Tunpu in Anshun City, China

Abstract

Effective rural governance is essential for fully advancing rural revitalization and achieving sustainable development in rural areas. The construction and operation of rural governance networks are intrinsically tied to governance effectiveness. Focusing on the Tianlong Tunpu community in Guizhou Province, China, this research applies Actor–Network Theory (ANT) to analyze the transformation of rural governance networks. It introduces the “administrative–social–market” threefold empowerment mechanism to explain the underlying mechanism of this process. The findings indicate that the successful construction and operation of a stable rural governance network hinge on the ability of key actors to continuously mobilize administrative, social, and market resources during translation processes, thereby achieving stable “administrative–social–economic” threefold empowerment. This mechanism is dynamic, adapting through reallocation and adjustment to meet the changing realities of rural development. The study also highlights the combined influence of human and non-human actors in the rural governance network. Among non-human factors, Tunpu culture stands out for its cultural and economic value, serving as a shared foundation for collaboration between local governments, rural elites, villagers, and businesses. This cultural element acts as a cornerstone, ensuring the network’s stability and adaptability over time.

1. Introduction

Rural governance has emerged as a vital strategy for addressing the persistent global challenge of urban–rural development imbalances. Its effectiveness is pivotal to achieving rural revitalization and the broader goals of sustainable development. Across the globe, disparities between urban and rural areas have long posed significant barriers to socioeconomic progress [1]. Many nations have historically faced or are currently grappling with issues such as population decline, resource depletion, and the erosion of social cohesion. In response to these multifaceted challenges, countries have engaged in extensive explorations of rural governance, tailoring their approaches to align with unique sociopolitical systems, specific cultural traditions, and resource endowments [2].

Since the 1990s, rural governance study in foreign countries has become increasingly comprehensive. In developed nations such as Australia and Japan, scholars and policymakers have gradually recognized the limitations of a purely top-down, government-led governance model in addressing rural development challenges [3,4]. As a result, rural governance has shifted toward more open and participatory governance approaches [5]. This shift is marked by the inclusion of diverse actors and the networked governance structures [6,7]. During this transition, numerous countries have undertaken innovative practices. Examples include the European Union’s LEADER initiative [8], South Korea’s New Village Movement [9], and Japan’s “One Village, One Product” movement [10]. These practices underscore the redistribution of governance power from governments to the public [11], and reflect a trend in rural governance driven by multi-actor collaboration to advance rural development. While differing in implementation pathways and governance structures, they share common foundations: prioritizing local participation, integrating resources, and engaging diverse actors. Governance strategies are crafted to suit local conditions, ensuring adaptability and effectiveness.

In China, as seen in many countries, the actors involved in rural governance have become increasingly diverse, giving rise to various governance networks [12,13,14]. However, China’s distinctive social development trajectory and institutional framework result in rural governance networks that differ significantly from those of other nations. While rural governance in many countries often relies on bottom-up mechanisms, China prioritizes a dynamic interplay between top-down directives and bottom-up initiatives, with the government playing a leading role [15,16]. These two forces are continuously adapted to meet developmental needs, resulting in the formation of two primary governance network types: top-down and bottom-up.

The top-down rural governance network is primarily employed in less developed central and western regions (such as Guizhou and Gansu). It is characterized by strong policy coordination and the efficient integration of resources [17,18]. In contrast, the bottom-up rural governance network is more common in the economically advanced coastal regions of eastern China (such as Zhejiang and Guangdong), where it excels in fostering villager participation and cultivating endogenous development capabilities [19,20]. Each network type has unique strengths, and there is no clear consensus on which is more effective for rural development in China. These governance networks are shaped by the socio-economic conditions, resource availability, and developmental stages of specific rural areas, resulting in governance models with distinct Chinese characteristics [21], such as the involvement of new local elites [17] and the participation of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) [22].

The shared transformation of rural governance worldwide shows that as rural areas develop, the traditional single-actor governance model has given way to a more diverse and interconnected system. This shift has led to the creation of complex governance networks through ongoing collaboration among various actors [23,24]. In fact, scholars have long recognized the importance of networks in understanding and practicing modern governance [25], emphasizing the interdependence and collective efforts involved [26,27]. Similarly, networks are now a hallmark of contemporary rural governance. In rural areas, the governance network can be conceptualized as regionally embedded clusters of interconnected institutions and individuals [28]. The actions of these actors are deeply influenced by their relationships and positions within the network structures [29,30].

The establishment of rural governance networks depends on the participation of diverse actors from both within and beyond rural areas [31]. Studies on the roles of various actors in rural governance networks adopt multiple perspectives [32,33]. Some highlight the importance of rural elites and organizations in driving industrial growth and fostering local autonomy. Others emphasize the leadership of governments, asserting that sustained administrative support provides stronger assurances for rural development [34,35]. Additionally, some scholars advocate for integrating external actors such as businesses to leverage market mechanisms, thereby narrowing urban–rural disparities and improving governance networks [36,37]. Meanwhile, some scholars note that actors who urgently address rural development needs and wield significant influence are often key to shaping these networks [38]. Their roles are closely tied to the direction of rural transformation and governance processes [39].

Beyond the contributions of actors, other studies explore the role of factors like policy frameworks, resource endowments, and socio-economic structures in shaping rural governance. Scholars propose that effective governance requires combining formal institutions with cultural capital, while fully leveraging rural ethics, traditions, and local administrative resources [40]. At the same time, promoting interactions between rural and external cultures can boost adaptability and dynamism, accelerating rural transformation [41]. A notable trend in governance prioritizes safeguarding and utilizing rural resources and culture, while incorporating local institutional, social, and cultural context to ensure sustainable development [42].

Existing studies on rural governance have provided a strong foundation for study, but much of it focuses on the structure of governance networks and the actors that constitute them. Rural revitalization requires achieving sustainable development in rural areas, which necessitates the involvement of more diverse actors in rural governance networks and timely transformations to align with evolving needs [43,44]. This highlights the need for deeper exploration of the internal mechanisms that drive the construction, operation, disintegration, and transformation of rural governance networks, as well as the roles, functions, and interactions of human and non-human actors. This study examines the Tianlong Tunpu community in Guizhou Province, China—a representative rural community that has undergone significant temporal transformations in its governance networks. Adopting Actor–Network Theory (ANT), which highlights the interactions and linkages among diverse human and non-human actors, the study provides a micro-level analysis of the transformation process of rural governance networks. This analysis, in turn, enables an investigation at the micro level into how rural governance networks evolve, clarifying the roles and relationships of various actors, including their specific functions and interconnections. Furthermore, drawing on existing governance theories, this study develops a “threefold empowerment mechanism”—administrative, social, and economic—tailored to the Chinese governance context. It explores how governance networks adapt and transform through the combined influence of these three empowerment dimensions, uncovering the intrinsic mechanisms of this process. Through empirical insights from China, this research aims to advance current research on the transformation mechanisms of rural governance networks, aiming to deepen the understanding of the roles and functions of various actors, particularly non-human actors. It also seeks to enrich global rural governance studies by offering a Chinese perspective, providing practical insights for improving governance effectiveness and promoting sustainable development in rural areas worldwide.

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. Actor–Network Theory (ANT)

Actor–Network Theory (ANT), developed in the 1980s by Michel Callon, Bruno Latour, and John Law, is a sociological framework often used as a theoretical tool in academic studies [45]. It focuses on mapping the network of elements involved in a given context to analyze interactions among various actors [46]. The theory is built upon three key concepts: actors, translation, and networks [47]. In ANT, “actors” refer to all factors involved in scientific practice, including both human and non-human actors [48]. Actors are further categorized into key actors and other actors based on their agency and capacity to integrate resources within the network. “Translation” lies at the core of ANT, representing the process that drives the construction, operation, disintegration, and transformation of actor–networks. This process includes five stages: problematization, interessement, enrolment, mobilization, and dissidence [49]. Key actors play a crucial role during translation by aligning the interests and demands of other actors across these stages. Through the obligatory passage point (OPP), they aggregate and link actors, forming a cohesive network. The concept of “network” itself refers to a coalition of heterogeneous actors bound by shared interests [50].

Overall, ANT provides a valuable framework for analyzing and explaining the relationships and interactions among diverse actors. Its relational approach and conceptual tools are particularly well-suited for studying rural governance, enabling dynamic and effective analysis of the processes involved in rural governance transformation and development.

2.2. Threefold Empowerment in Rural Governance

In the field of governance theory, an influential line of study led by scholars such as James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock adopts the assumption of the “rational economic man” as a foundation for analyzing public governance issues. This perspective places particular emphasis on the actions of key governance actors—namely, the government, society, and market [51]. Other scholars have examined the core of modern state governance systems, arguing that government governance, social governance, and market governance constitute the three primary subsystems of contemporary state governance [52]. Building on this theoretical framework, scholars have begun to incorporate the practical realities of rural governance in China. They view rural governance as a process in which the government, society, and market define their respective roles and engage in dynamic interactions [53]. In this context, rural governance resources are categorized into three domains: government, society, and market [54]. Furthermore, some studies emphasize that effective rural governance depends on collaboration among all three dimensions [55]. It is widely acknowledged in both international and domestic research that the government, society, and market serve as three key pillars in the governance of rural areas.

However, the government, society, and market exhibit significant differences in their functions, resources, and objectives. ANT emphasizes that key actors, as the core entities linking, coordinating, and integrating diverse stakeholders and resources, are crucial for bridging these differences and fostering collaboration [38,56]. Therefore, this study argues that modern rural governance is a process in which the government, society, and market empower key actors. Through this threefold empowerment, diverse actors can interact, collaborate, and integrate resources under the guidance of key actors, ultimately achieving shared goals. Referencing the existing governance literature [56,57], “empowerment” here refers to the process by which the government, society, and market provide key actors with the authority, resources, and capabilities essential for development. The threefold empowerment mechanism endows key actors with the organizational and mobilization capacities needed to lead rural development effectively.

Drawing on existing governance theories, this study categorizes empowerment in rural governance into three folds: administrative empowerment, social empowerment, and economic empowerment (hereafter referred to as “threefold empowerment”). First, administrative empowerment refers to the process by which public sectors, including governments at various levels, allocate resources and implement policy adjustments to deliver substantial public goods and construction projects to rural areas [58]. These actors also mobilize the village committees to assist in executing various governance tasks [59], thereby empowering and enabling key actors. Second, social empowerment refers to key actors receiving support from rural social actors (such as village organizations, villagers, and clans) [19], which stimulates their agency and participation. This, in turn, enhances their capacity to mobilize social resources and promote endogenous development. Finally, economic empowerment refers to the introduction of market entities and market-oriented operational models [60] by key actors to optimize the allocation of rural resources and meet the core demands of rural economic development. Threefold empowerment works collaboratively in rural governance, undergoing continuous adjustment to maintain a dynamic balance, ensuring the stability and efficiency of the governance network.

2.3. The Threefold Empowerment Mechanism of Rural Governance Networks

As previously discussed, ANT conceptualizes governance networks as heterogeneous systems composed of both human and non-human actors. The construction of governance networks is a process of “translation”, wherein key actors integrate diverse actors and incorporate them into the network. This theoretical perspective aligns intrinsically with the “administrative–social–market” threefold empowerment proposed in this study. Therefore, adopting ANT as the analytical perspective, this study examines the transformation of the rural governance network in the Tianlong Tunpu community. It analyzes the participants, translation processes, and governance networks across two phases while integrating the threefold empowerment framework to further elucidate the intrinsic mechanisms driving governance network transformation. The threefold empowerment mechanism aligns with the consensus in governance studies that emphasizes the collaborative roles of the government, society, and market. It also reveals the driving forces behind governance network transformation. At different stages of development, rural governance requires adjustments in how the government, society, and market empower key actors. These adjustments enable key actors to mobilize diverse stakeholders and facilitate their effective participation in governance. As developmental conditions change, maintaining a dynamic balance among these three forces becomes essential. This mechanism underscores the adaptability and resilience of governance systems, capturing the complexity and dynamic nature of rural governance processes.

A brief explanation of the threefold empowerment mechanism is as follows (Figure 1):

• Actor classification: Rural governance networks are characterized by diversity and heterogeneity. Building on the distinction between human and non-human actors, human actors can be grouped into three categories—government, social, and market—based on their roles, resources, and objectives. Each category contributes distinctively to rural governance.
• Achieving threefold empowerment during the translation process: In the process of translation, key actors in rural governance networks identify and address the needs and interests of various stakeholders during the stages of problematization and interessement. By fulfilling these needs, they enroll relevant actors to actively engage in the governance network. This process relies on key actors leveraging their resources and capabilities to achieve administrative, social, and economic empowerment, which is essential for the successful establishment and stable operation of the governance network.
• Governance network: The rural governance network results from key actors engaging in a process of translation to achieve a dynamic balance among administrative, social, and economic empowerment. These three dimensions of empowerment work in tandem, mutually reinforcing one another to sustain the network’s efficiency. When insoluble dissidence emerges, preventing actors from sustaining this balance, their roles and interactions become disordered, ultimately leading to the network’s disintegration. At this point, governance structures, roles, and relationships are reorganized to adapt to new circumstances, and the translation process is repeated to re-establish threefold empowerment, reconstructing the governance network.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Study Area

Tianlong Tunpu, located in Tianlong Village, Anshun City, Guizhou Province, China (Figure 2), is a rural community centered on rural tourism. Rooted in a unique historical context that shaped its distinctive Tunpu culture (Figure 3), Tianlong Village is recognized as one of the villages listed in China’s Traditional Villages Directory and boasts a history of over 600 years. Since the launch of rural tourism in 2001, Tianlong Tunpu has undergone a complex and challenging development process. Its rural governance network has also experienced a significant transformation, shifting from a bottom-up model to a top-down model. This process ultimately enabled the community to achieve its goal of driving rural development through tourism. By 2024, Tianlong Tunpu was recognized as a National 4A Scenic Spot and a National Rural Tourism Demonstration Site. These achievements underscore its status as a successful example of how rural tourism can drive rural revitalization and achieve sustainable development. Its success offers a valuable model with far-reaching implications.

This study selects Tianlong Tunpu as a case study for three main reasons: first, despite its relatively weak economic foundation, Tianlong Tunpu was one of the first rural communities in Guizhou Province, and even in China, to develop rural tourism with support from rural elites and local governments. It became an early pioneer in exploring the transfer of community management rights and stands as a successful example of using rural tourism to drive rural revitalization and achieve sustainable development. Its governance and development practices offer valuable lessons for other remote rural communities in China. Second, the governance network of Tianlong Tunpu has undergone a complete cycle of construction, operation, disintegration, and reconstruction. Throughout this transformative process, administrative, social, and market forces have all participated, continuously adapting their roles to align with developmental realities and advancing the transformation of the governance network. Currently, as China’s rural areas undergo a transitional phase of development, characterized by complexity and rapid change, there is a pressing need to optimize and reconfigure governance networks [43,61]. Therefore, analyzing the mechanisms and dynamics of this transformation provides valuable insights and practical references for guiding governance network transitions in other rural communities. Third, during its development, Tunpu culture has served as the core resource for rural tourism development and as a crucial medium for promoting multi-actor collaboration, consistently functioning as an important non-human actor within the governance network. This unique characteristic helps shed light on the significant role of non-human actors in rural governance.

3.2. Methods

This study employed a combination of literature review, interviews, and field observations to collect research data. By drawing on multiple data sources and engaging with a diverse range of interviewees, triangulation was achieved, enhancing both the reliability and validity of the findings. Additionally, the data analysis was primarily guided by the coding and analysis method proposed by Gioia, facilitating a comprehensive understanding of the case and laying a solid foundation for the study.

The authors began reviewing the relevant literature in October 2023 and conducted three field investigations in Tianlong Tunpu in December 2023, August 2024, and June 2025. These investigations involved gathering data on key aspects of Tianlong Tunpu’s development, including demographic trends, rural governance practices, and the management of its tourism industry. Building on concepts from ANT, such as problematization, interessement, enrolment, mobilization, and dissidence, the authors developed a semi-structured interview guide and selected various actors involved in rural governance for in-depth interviews. To ensure the representativeness of the interviewees, the selection deliberately included all major identity groups involved in rural governance. Interviewees were chosen based on their ability to provide rich and relevant information, ensuring that the validity of the research was maintained even with a relatively small sample size. Following these principles, a total of 18 interviewees were selected (

Table 1. Personal information of interviewees.

Interview Coding	Identity Information	Total Number of Interviewing	Interview Date
TM1	Tianlong Town government official	1	14 June 2025
TW2	Tianlong Town government official	1	14 June 2025
TM3	Director of the village committee	2	15 December 2023 25 August 2024
TW4	Member of the village committee	1	15 December 2023
TW5	Employee of the scenic area (SOE)	1	15 December 2023
TM6	Employee of the scenic area (SOE)	1	15 December 2023
TW7	Employee of the business	1	25 August 2024
TW8	Employee of the business	1	25 August 2024
TM9	Merchant (Local)	1	15 December 2023
TW0	Merchant (Local)	2	15 December 2023 25 August 2024
TW11	Merchant (External)	1	15 December 2023
TM12	Merchant (External)	1	15 December 2023
TM13	Representative of the performance team in the scenic area	1	15 December 2023
TM14	Representative of the performance team in the scenic area	1	15 December 2023
TM15	The inheritor of Tunpu culture	2	15 December 2023 25 August 2024
TW16	Villager	1	25 August 2024
TW17	Villager	2	15 December 2023 25 August 2024
TM18	Villager	1	25 August 2024

Notes: Code T represents Tianlong Tunpu; code W/M represents female/male, and the code number represents the serial number of the interviewee. Total Number of Interviewing represents the number of interviews of each interviewee.

), including local government officials, directors and members of village committees, employees from SOE, employees from businesses, merchants, rural elites, and villagers.

4. Phase 1 (2001–2011): Bottom-Up Governance Network Centered on Rural Elites

4.1. Composition of Governance Actors

As rural tourism transitions from concept to reality, a diverse range of actors has become involved in rural governance. Human actors include rural elites, local governments, village committees, villagers, and businesses or merchants. Non-human actors consist of elements like Tunpu culture, architecture, land, and landscapes.

Table 2. Classification of actors in the governance network in the first phase.

First Level	Second Level	Third Level
Human actors	Government	Local government
		The village committees
	Society	Villagers
	Market	Rural elites
		Businesses/Merchants
Non-human actors	-	Tunpu Culture
		Land, architecture, etc.

provides a detailed classification of these actors.

Among the human actors, rural elites, represented by figures like Chen Y, serve as the key actors in the governance network. They were the first to propose the idea of tourism development and provided the necessary funding and market channels to turn this vision into reality. Drawing on the foundation of the local close-knit community, they mobilized villagers on a large scale and collaborated with local governments and the village committees to ensure policy support and project implementation, thereby driving the construction of the governance network. Local governments and the village committees, as the main entities responsible for policy formulation and implementation, played a crucial role in supporting rural tourism development by drafting relevant plans, improving infrastructure, and managing community security. On this foundation, villagers demonstrated remarkable collective action, actively participating in all aspects of the rural tourism industry. They transformed themselves and their living environment into iconic tourism products with distinctive Tunpu cultural characteristics. Meanwhile, businesses and merchants contributed through professional operations, helping Tianlong Tunpu expand its market and diversify its tourism offerings.

In the realm of non-human actors, Tunpu culture serves as an indispensable component of the governance network. On the one hand, it acts as the core value throughout the entire tourism development process, shaping landscape design, product development, and event planning. This cultural essence endows Tianlong Tunpu with recognition and competitiveness as a rural tourism destination. On the other hand, the latent value of Tunpu culture attracts human actors to join the governance network, enabling them to pursue their respective interests through rural tourism development. The inheritor of Tunpu culture (TM15) said the following:

“From the beginning, Tunpu culture was the focal point of our tourism development. At that time, we carried out extensive promotion and publicity efforts about it. We consistently emphasized our identity as a Tunpu village to the outside world, as it was the key selling point of our tourism.”

Moreover, architecture, land, and landscapes serve as both carriers of cultural memory and the spatial and operational foundation for tourism development. Through various forms of transformation, these elements not only highlight Tunpu culture but also enhance resource value, becoming a critical foundation for the sustainable development of rural tourism.

4.2. Translation of the Governance Network

4.2.1. Problematization

In the translation process, it is essential to first establish a specific starting point that can initiate shared discussions and foster communication, known as the “obligatory passage point” (OPP). This serves as the foundation for constructing an actor–network.

Prior to translation, each participant faces their own set of challenges and goals, resulting in differing interests. Rural elites, for instance, aim to secure administrative support and development platforms, using rural tourism as a means to generate economic benefits. Local governments, on the other hand, seek to drive rural development through tourism and stimulate broader economic growth in the region. Tianlong Tunpu has long experienced slow progress, hindered by a lack of resources such as market-oriented management, human capital, and funding. Consequently, the village committees urgently need external support for development. Villagers, struggling with low incomes and poor living conditions, hope to improve their livelihoods and increase earnings. For businesses and investors, rural tourism presents a new and lucrative opportunity to expand profits. Meanwhile, non-human actors, such as Tunpu culture itself, gain value through preservation and transmission, ensuring its continuity and relevance. Tangible assets like land and architecture also achieve enhanced value through strategic planning, optimized use, and renovation.

During the problematization stage, rural elites were thus identified as key actors. By addressing the challenges and aligning the interests of various stakeholders, they established “developing rural tourism based on Tunpu culture” as the OPP of the governance network (Figure 4). This OPP is not only the shared objective of all actors but also a pathway for fulfilling the interests of various governance entities in the process of rural development. It serves as the foundation for interactions and connections between rural elites and other governance entities, enabling the empowerment of key actors.

4.2.2. Interessement

Through the OPP, the social, economic, and cultural aspects of Tianlong Tunpu can all achieve growth. In other words, various actors can attain their anticipated benefits in the process of tourism development, achieving interessement within the translation process. This serves as the foundation for rural elites to achieve threefold empowerment through enrolment and mobilization.

4.2.3. Enrolment and Mobilization

Grounded in problematization and interessement, rural elites emerge as key actors by enrolling and mobilizing other actors (Figure 5), assigning them tasks they find acceptable. Through this process, they integrate and control diverse resources, achieving “administrative–social–economic” threefold empowerment. The key aspects are as follows:

First, rural elites use their extensive social influence to enroll villagers at low transaction costs. They further incentivize participation by offering subsidies, jobs, and free skills training, activating local resources and fostering an endogenous governance dynamic, achieving social empowerment. Consequently, the villagers have developed a relatively clear understanding of their role as “actors” in rural development. A villager (TW17) who once participated in the tourism reception activities outlined the following:

“At that time, we [villagers] all hoped to contribute our part to making tourism better and better. I personally often dressed in traditional Tunpu costumes to welcome tourists, and most of this reception work was voluntary and unpaid.”

At the same time, rural elites leverage their social empowerment to build active communication channels with local governments and the village committees. By emphasizing the potential of rural tourism to drive local economic growth and improve public infrastructure, they successfully enroll these administrative actors. During this process, rural elites secure substantial policy support and financial assistance from local government. Additionally, by obtaining management rights for scenic areas and joining the village committees, they gain both institutional recognition and legitimacy for their tourism initiatives, thereby achieving administrative empowerment. Economically, rural elites and their tourism enterprise, as market actors, already possess a certain degree of economic empowerment. Moreover, during the course of tourism development, they implemented profit-sharing schemes and preferential policies to enroll enterprises and merchants aligned with the tourism model. By leveraging the social capital and technical expertise brought in by these partners, rural tourism evolves in a more market-oriented and professional direction, further consolidating economic empowerment.

Notably, elements such as Tunpu culture, housing, and land, while non-human actors, must identify human representatives based on their ownership or the entity to which they belong in order to be enrolled and mobilized. Since their carriers or property rights are held collectively by villagers or village collectives, these resources are jointly enrolled during the process in which rural elites mobilize villagers and the village committees. This joint enrolment serves as a powerful manifestation of how rural elites gain both administrative and social empowerment. Tunpu culture serves as a cornerstone of rural tourism, crafted into its central attraction. Iconic elements such as Tunpu Dixi opera, traditional architecture, and costumes have been transformed into tourism products, drawing visitors through sightseeing, performances, festivals, and handicraft sales. Meanwhile, architecture and land are transformed into economically valuable facilities such as shops, hotels, and scenic nodes. These changes enhance the utilization of resources, increase the appeal of the tourism site, and improve its service quality.

Through the process of translation, a governance network led by rural elites was successfully established, with all actors working together to drive rural development through tourism. In 2005, tourism in Tianlong Tunpu had matured, attracting around 320,000 visitors and generating approximately RMB 23 million in revenue. This development directly or indirectly created over 800 local jobs. Tourism became the primary economic sector alongside agriculture, shifting villagers’ employment from 90% in agriculture and 10% in tourism in 2000 to 58% and 42%, respectively. Per capita income rose to RMB 2980, representing a 38% increase from pre-tourism levels in 2000, and 63% higher than the rural average in Anshun City (in 2005). Village collective income grew to RMB 690,000 in 2005, a 76% rise compared to pre-tourism levels in 2000, marking significant progress in rural development.

4.3. Dissidence: Leading to the Disintegration of the Governance Network

The tourism industry in Tianlong Tunpu experienced rapid growth and reached its peak in 2007, bringing substantial economic, ecological, and social benefits to the community. During the five years that followed (2008–2012), ongoing dissidence disrupted the development of rural tourism and hindered the efficient operation of the governance network. The dissidence primarily involved rural elites, villagers, and local governments. Seeking to maximize profits, rural elites increasingly dominated decision-making, leaving villagers marginalized in benefit distribution and unable to advocate for their interests. Meanwhile, local governments, lacking effective regulatory mechanisms, gradually lost overarching control of tourism development. These tensions over unequal benefit distribution led to repeated bargaining and recurring conflicts among the actors.

The failure to address dissidence led to the collapse of social empowerment within the governance network. Villagers gradually withdrew from tourism development, expressing dissatisfaction and resistance through actions such as refusing to participate in Dixi performances and damaging traditional residential aesthetics. These actions caused the degradation of Tunpu culture, the core attraction of the tourism industry, rendering it unable to function properly. Consequently, the core product of rural tourism disappeared, leading to a significant drop in visitor numbers. Simultaneously, intense competition in the tourism market, inadequate supporting infrastructure, and other issues further squeezed tourism profits, making operations increasingly difficult for tourism companies. As the tourism economy declined, rural elites gradually lost their economic empowerment. The steady decline in tourism revenue and recurring conflicts between tourism companies and villagers increasingly diverged from the development goals set by the local government and the village committees. Director of the village committees (TM3) noted the following:

“As the tourism company’s operations gradually matured, its connections with the government became increasingly infrequent. By 2008, the number of tourists visiting the scenic area had dropped significantly, and conflicts between villagers and the company continued to escalate. The tourism company was already operating at a loss, and the government ceased investing in or providing support to the company.”

Consequently, the enthusiasm of these authorities for providing policy and financial support has waned, effectively ending administrative empowerment. The collapse of the threefold empowerment mechanism caused rural elites to lose their role as core governance agents capable of coordinating resources. The collapse of the threefold empowerment mechanism led to rural elites gradually losing their ability to coordinate resources as key actors. Consequently, the OPP, which served as a critical link between governing actors, broke down, causing their cooperative relationships to disintegrate. This ultimately led to the collapse of the governance network and the rapid decline of both Tianlong Tunpu’s tourism industry and its overall development. In 2011, tourist arrivals in Tianlong Tunpu had dropped to 160,000, a 60% decline from the peak in 2007. Tourism revenue also fell sharply to RMB 7.36 million, a 75% decrease from its highest point in 2007. This downturn led to a reduction in the village’s collective income. Around 70% of villagers, unable to sustain their businesses or find local employment, chose to migrate for work. While per capita income remained stable, it shifted from being significantly higher than the rural average in Anshun City to merely matching it. A local government official (TM1) who is well-acquainted with the historical development of Tianlong Tunpu said the following:

“Since 2008, the number of tourists visiting Tianlong Tunpu had been continuously declining, and the income of related practitioners had dropped significantly. Tourism development was no longer thriving. By 2011, many shops in the scenic area had closed down, numerous employees of tourism companies had resigned, and many villagers had started seeking work outside again. In other words, not only the tourism industry but also the overall development of the village had been in decline.”

5. Phase 2 (2012–Present): Top-Down Governance Network Dominated by Local Government

5.1. Composition of Governance Actors

In 2012, to implement the regional development strategy of building Guizhou into a cultural and tourism innovation zone, the local government sought to create exemplary cases to stimulate regional tourism. After evaluations, Tianlong Tunpu, once a leading model for cultural tourism in Guizhou but now struggling, was identified as a priority for redevelopment. Under the local government’s leadership, rural tourism development was relaunched, resulting in a restructured governance network. The human actors in this network included the local government (encompassing the governments of Anshun City, Pingba District, and Tianlong Town), state-owned enterprise (SOE), the village committees, villagers, and businesses or merchants, while the non-human actors remained consistent with the previous phase.

Table 3. The classification of actors in the governance network in the second phase.

First Level	Second Level	Third Level
Human actors	Government	Local government
		The village committees
	Society	Villagers
	Market	State-owned enterprise (SOE)
		Businesses/Merchants
Non-human actors	-	Tunpu Culture
		Land, architecture, etc.

provides a detailed classification of these actors.

The local government shifted its role from a supportive actor in the previous phase to a leading force. During this phase, the local government, in alignment with regional development strategies, designated Tianlong Tunpu as a priority for focused development. It played a central role in rural tourism and broader development efforts, establishing its position as the key actor in the governance network. SOE, introduced by the government to accelerate policy implementation and rural development, emerged as a new actor. This market-oriented entity, with stronger financial capabilities, replaced rural elites in managing, operating, and developing rural tourism. Acting as tools for introducing market capital and realizing policy goals, SOE maintained close coordination with the government, often acting as extensions of its intentions. Other human actors, such as those in the village committees, villagers, and businesses/merchants, maintained similar roles to the previous phase. However, under the unified leadership of the local government, their participation became more consistent, and their actions more organized. A member of village committees (TM4) noted the following:

“Now that the local government and state-owned enterprises are coordinating together, we feel that our actions are more focused. For things like organizing large-scale events or building smart tourism facilities, the government takes charge of overall coordination, SOE provides technical and financial support, while we mainly organize villagers to cooperate and participate, as well as play a role in supervision and communication. Everyone has a clear division of labor, everything is orderly, and the efficiency is much higher than before.”

During this phase, non-human actors, especially Tunpu culture, played an increasingly prominent role in the governance network. Recognizing the unique value of Tunpu culture as the core tourism attraction, the local government and SOE prioritized its protection and promotion as a central strategy for tourism development. Efforts were focused on enhancing its visibility and appeal. In addition, architecture, spatial design, and landscapes were identified as key components for upgrading the tourist area. Substantial investments in funding and labor were directed toward restoring architecture, optimizing spaces, and improving landscape quality.

5.2. Translation of the Governance Network

5.2.1. Problematization

As the key actor in the governance network during this phase, the local government aimed to resolve the stagnation in tourism development at Tianlong Tunpu, aspiring to use its success to drive regional tourism growth. Meanwhile, SOE sought to leverage premium tourism resources to establish Tianlong Tunpu as a model for rural tourism development, thereby reinforcing their leadership status in Guizhou’s tourism industry. For the village committees and villagers, their objectives remained consistent with those of the previous phase. They focused on striving for the renewed and sustainable development of the village after a period of stagnation, safeguarding and enhancing local cultural heritage, and increasing both collective and personal incomes. With rural tourism showing positive growth trends, businesses and merchants became more proactive participants in the governance network, aiming to achieve higher economic returns and social benefits. The interests of non-human actors remained unchanged from the prior phase and are not elaborated on further here.

After identifying the challenges and objectives of all actors, the local government took on a leadership role, facilitating collaboration. It introduced SOE with dual policy-driven and market-oriented capabilities to manage rural tourism projects. These projects were positioned as the network’s OPP (Figure 6), aligning the diverse interests and goals of all participants to create a cohesive strategy.

5.2.2. Interessement

After introducing state-owned enterprises to manage rural tourism projects, the local government capitalized on its resource advantages and its capacity to reform rural society. By intervening in the rural community, it successfully revitalized the tourism development of Tianlong Tunpu. This shift broke through the stagnation in rural development, allowing various actors to achieve their respective anticipated benefits. As a result, this phase established the foundation for the local government to achieve threefold empowerment.

5.2.3. Enrolment and Mobilization

In this phase, similar to the previous one, the local government, as the key actor, sought to achieve threefold empowerment through processes of enrolment and mobilization. Supported by institutional policies and backed by a substantial inflow of resources upon entering the Tianlong Tunpu, the local government was able to mobilize other human and non-human actors more swiftly and over a wider scale (Figure 7). This enabled it to secure a more stable and enduring foundation for achieving threefold empowerment.

Specifically, during this period, the local government played the role of a key actor within the governance network. Firstly, guided by policies and plans uniformly designed by the central or higher-level governments, it implemented a top-down approach, mobilizing various levels of local government organizations and the village committees to act in accordance with its policy intentions. In this phase, the alignment of policies, the capacity for execution, and efficiency in resource allocation were significantly enhanced, resulting in more sustained and consolidated administrative empowerment. Secondly, by leveraging institutional support and the influx of resources, the local government adopted practical measures, such as establishing effective communication mechanisms and actively participating in rural public welfare initiatives. These efforts enabled the local government to engage and mobilize local villagers, thereby securing their support for tourism projects, achieving social empowerment. A 65-year-old villager (TW15) said the following:

“When I heard that the local government is taking over tourism development, we were quite supportive of it. On one hand, everyone believes that the government’s initiatives aim to improve the village; on the other hand, since the government and SOE are involved, we can feel that the community has undergone significant changes, which certainly strengthens our support for the government’s actions.”

Moreover, the local government adopted a strategy of moderate decentralization, providing stable policy support and project funding to enroll SOE to manage tourism operations. At the same time, it encouraged diverse market actors to utilize tourism resources to develop industries such as handicrafts and food processing, fostering innovative business models and solidifying economic empowerment. As SOE combined market and administrative roles, its actions were monitored and regulated by government authorities, preventing imbalances caused by excessive profit-seeking. Supported by consistent policies, it established stable frameworks, providing lasting economic benefits to villagers and strengthening economic empowerment.

Notably, the enrolment of non-human actors followed a similar approach to the previous phase. However, local governments and state-owned enterprises further highlighted the value of core elements of Tunpu culture, resulting in more systematic preservation and wider integration into tourism. Traditional buildings were restored and repurposed as scenic attractions with cafés and workshops, while Tunpu Dixi opera and traditional costumes were incorporated into cultural activities and experiential spaces, offering visitors diverse and immersive experiences.

With significant investment and professional management from local governments and state-owned enterprises, Tianlong Tunpu has seen marked improvements in its physical environment. These efforts have created new opportunities for tourism and restored stability to rural development. In the first quarter of 2024, Tianlong Tunpu received about 100,000 visitors, generating RMB 10 million in tourism revenue and creating over 500 jobs for villagers. Rural tourism spurred the exploration of a “agriculture + tourism” model, promoting the integration of primary, secondary, and tertiary industries and optimizing the local economy. Villagers’ employment across these sectors was distributed as follows: 33% in agriculture, 21% in secondary industries, and 46% in tourism. With steady development, the villagers’ per capita income reached RMB 16,800 in 2024, exceeding the city’s rural average by 5%. Meanwhile, the village’s collective income increased to RMB 1.3 million.

5.2.4. Dissidence: Facilitating the Stable Operation of the Governance Network

In this governance network, dissidence also emerges as a risk factor for its sustained operation and, to some extent, hinders the prospects for sustainable rural development. Dissidence is primarily found between villagers and the local government, as well as between villagers and SOE.

Firstly, dissidence between villagers and the government is particularly notable. The local government implements a “projects-to-the-countryside” strategy, introducing external market actors and injecting large amounts of resources into rural areas. While this accelerated development, it also fostered a “dependency mindset” among villagers, weakening their sense of agency and making them feel like spectators in the process. As a result, the government could only organize villagers to cooperate under its and SOE leadership, falling short of enabling sustainable, self-driven rural development. A villager working in the scenic area (TM16) noted the following:

“After the SOE arrived, apart from the villagers who work in shops or jobs within the scenic area, the other villagers, even those living within the area, do not actively inquire about the progress of tourism development. Everything related to tourism has been handed over to the SOE, and they just need to cooperate.”

Moreover, the dissidence between villagers and SOE reflects a noticeable lack of trust, which subtly but significantly increases social transaction costs. This issue stemmed from the “outsider” status of SOE, which, as an external actor, lacked long-term ties with the rural community and struggled to integrate into its social network. As a result, villagers developed a natural defensiveness, making trust difficult to build. This trust gap weakened community cohesion and cooperation during tourism development, reinforcing the tendency of villagers to act as “spectators”. Specific incidents shared by villager (TM 18) further illustrate this dissidence:

“When they (the state-owned enterprises) first came in to prepare for the Tourism Development Conference (an official large-scale conference), they renovated some newly built houses by cladding the exterior walls with wooden panels. This approach didn’t quite align with our traditional style, but since they were already responsible for tourism development and their work didn’t touch on fundamental principles, we felt it was necessary to cooperate and didn’t raise any objections.”

To resolve conflicts and opposition, the government mobilized the village committees to act as both village-level manager and representative for villagers. They maintained communication with SOE and government authorities to advocate for villagers’ rights and handle cultural preservation, while also mobilizing villagers to support tourism development. Moreover, guided by the government, SOE contributed to public welfare projects, helped villagers gain benefits from tourism, and engaged respected elders, cultural leaders, and youth to strengthen ties with the community. These efforts strengthened villagers’ sense of agency, and helped them re-establish their identity as actors in tourism and rural development. With dissidence effectively mitigated, social empowerment was steadily strengthened, preserving the dynamic balance of threefold empowerment. As a result, the governance network has remained relatively stable and sustainable to this day.

6. The Threefold Empowerment Mechanism of the Rural Governance Network

6.1. Joint Participation of Human and Non-Human Actors

The transformation of the rural governance network in Tianlong Tunpu relies on the participation of diverse actors, which forms the foundation of the actor–network. These actors include human actors and non-human actors. Human actors differ in their interests, resource access, and roles. For example, rural elites lead the initial phase by drawing on their social influence and resource coordination skills to connect other participants and promote network development. In the subsequent phase, local governments become the central actors, providing policy guidance, resource integration, and leadership to ensure the network’s stability and sustainability. The diversity of human actors ensures effective governance by leveraging their administrative, social, and economic strengths and integrating resources.

Non-human actors are also pivotal, serving as essential resources and carriers for governance and development. Tunpu culture, in particular, plays a critical role in driving the transformation of rural governance networks in all phases. Its deep historical roots and cultural significance make it the core attraction of rural tourism, offering significant economic value. This value fosters ongoing collaboration among various actors, positioning Tunpu culture as a crucial factor driving the construction and sustainable operation of governance networks. On the contrary, if governance practices damage Tunpu culture, rural tourism loses its core attraction, preventing the realization of its economic value. This lack of momentum weakens governance networks, obstructs resource integration, and hinders multi-actor cooperation. Ultimately, this diminishes the capacity for rural governance and sustainable development, potentially leading to the disintegration of governance network and stagnation in rural development.

6.2. Achieving Threefold Empowerment Through Translation

Key actors gradually achieve threefold empowerment, through the translation stages of problematization, interessement, enrolment, and mobilization, with adjustments made during periods of dissidence. In the process of transforming rural governance networks, key actor gradually achieve threefold empowerment through the translation stages of problematization, interessement, enrolment, and mobilization, with adjustments made during stages of dissidence. Due to differences in the characteristics of various actors, their ability to allocate resources, and the organizational mechanisms of rural governance, the balance of the threefold empowerment mechanism varies. This creates complex and dynamic interactions that shape the unique nature of rural governance networks. It is worth noting that non-human actors are also regarded as resources and are frequently enrolled together with their associated human actors, such as property owners or carriers. Their enrolment and mobilization, therefore, constitute an integral part of the process of achieving threefold empowerment.

For Tianlong Tunpu, an area rich in cultural resources yet economically underdeveloped, utilizing its cultural resources to promote rural tourism has become a key strategy for addressing developmental challenges and achieving effective governance. During the first phase of development, rural elites emerged as the key actors, proposing this strategy as a viable opportunity and establishing it as the OPP. Building upon the initial achievement of social empowerment, rural elites enrolled multiple actors into the governance network and completed threefold empowerment. Administrative empowerment, in particular, brought in substantial funding and resources, which further strengthened social and economic empowerment. This mutual reinforcement, reflecting the dynamic balance of the threefold empowerment mechanism, facilitated the construction of the governance network.

After 2007, as the tourism industry matured, unresolved dissidence within the governance network began to destabilize its operations. The collapse of social empowerment, driven by dissidence between rural elites and villagers, disrupted the balance of threefold empowerment and subsequently led to the gradual breakdown of both economic and administrative empowerment. This caused the complete disintegration of the governance network. In 2012, the local government stepped in to replace the rural elites as the key actor in the second phase of governance. After addressing the issues of the previous phase, the local government redefined the OPP, adjusted the governance framework, and re-enrolled actors into the network. A notable shift during this phase was the introduction of state-owned enterprises as new market actors, improved communication with villagers, and enhanced efforts to preserve Tunpu culture. These adjustments aimed to restore the threefold empowerment mechanism and rebuild the governance network.

During the second phase, the interactions among the threefold empowerment mechanism differed significantly from the first phase. With the local government as the key actor, administrative empowerment became more consistent and stable, serving as the primary driving force of the governance network. Under this framework, state-owned enterprises, as politically linked market participants, joined the network, enabling the local government to achieve economic empowerment. This, in turn, supported the achievement of social empowerment. However, the dominance of administrative and economic empowerment limited the participation of villagers, restricting the depth of social empowerment. This limitation created dissidence within the governance network, posing potential risks to its long-term stability. Thus, under the organization of the local government, various actors collaboratively resolved dissidence, thereby making social empowerment more stable and promoting a steady dynamic balance in the realization of threefold empowerment.

6.3. Transforming Rural Governance Network Through Adaptive Threefold Empowerment

Threefold empowerment is fundamentally intertwined with the translation process of governance networks, functioning both as its objective and outcome. It permeates the entire translation process within rural governance networks, determining the success of their construction and operation. It serves as the internal mechanism driving the transformation of rural governance networks, forming the foundation for their construction and operation. Moreover, it represents the core reason enabling governance networks to dynamically adjust in response to shifts in the context of rural development. The composition, roles, and functions of actors, along with the relationships and changes in the threefold empowerment mechanism during the translation process, illustrate the governance network’s adaptive responses to evolving developmental context, ultimately culminating in its transformation.

Over the course of more than twenty years of development in Tianlong Tunpu, economic development has consistently been a central aspiration. Consequently, in both stages of the governance network, market actors were introduced to develop tourism centered on Tunpu culture, underscoring the significance of economic empowerment. During the first phase, rural community exhibited strong social cohesion and well-established self-organizational mechanisms. Accordingly, local rural elites assumed the role of key actors, with the governance network relying heavily on social empowerment to leverage the community’s internal self-governance potential while obtaining administrative and economic empowerment to achieve developmental goals. However, due to the weak foundation of rural social development and the limited capacity of rural elites as key actors, the administrative, economic, and social empowerment in this phase were inherently limited and unstable. These limitations, reflected in recurring dissidence, eventually disrupted the dynamic balance of the threefold empowerment mechanism, resulting in the disintegration of the governance network.

In the second phase, the governance network was reconstructed within the context of a specific regional development strategy, addressing the stagnation of rural development. To respond to these conditions, the governance network initially prioritized administrative and economic empowerment to coordinate policies, actors, and investments in infrastructure. As development stabilized, efforts were focused on strengthening social empowerment to more effectively mobilize rural resources. This approach strengthens the dynamic balance among the threefold empowerment mechanism, ensuring the stable operation of the rural governance network.

In conclusion, the transformation of the Tianlong Tunpu’s governance network was not a simple linear substitution. Rather, it was the outcome of key actors integrating diverse and heterogeneous actors (both human and non-human) via the translation process that re-established the three empowerment and achieved a new dynamic balance. Throughout this process, the governance network adapted by recalibrating the composition and roles of participants and restructuring empowerment relationships, enabling it to dynamically respond to changes in rural development conditions.

7. Discussion and Conclusions

7.1. Discussion

In rural governance research, there is a general consensus on the involvement of diverse actors, with significant focus on the roles of enterprises, rural elites, and governments [62,63]. Additionally, non-human factors such as culture [64] and ecology [65] are increasingly recognized as foundational elements shaping rural governance and have been incorporated into studies for achieving localized and harmonious rural development. However, the specific roles of non-human factors and their interactions with human actors remain underexplored. Actor–Network Theory (ANT), grounded in the principle of generalized symmetry, provides a systematic framework to analyze the dynamic interactions between human and non-human actors in governance networks. Through the concept of translation, ANT highlights the processes of interaction and dynamic balance among heterogeneous actors and has been applied in some micro- and meso-level rural governance studies [43,66].

However, its application has largely focused on describing actor actions and network construction phenomena [67], while offering limited exploration of the internal mechanisms underlying governance networks. Therefore, this study adopts ANT as its theoretical foundation and introduces the “administrative–social–economic” threefold empowerment mechanism. By applying this framework to a case study, the study extends the use of ANT in rural governance and offers a new perspective for analyzing the construction, operation, disintegration, and reconstruction of rural governance networks. In practice, policymakers may draw upon the threefold empowerment mechanism outlined in this study to analyze and interpret governance networks that have failed in implementation. By tailoring strategies to local contexts, this framework enables the exploration of pathways for reconstructing governance networks, thereby offering valuable guidance for decision-making aimed at advancing sustainable rural development.

In analyzing the governance network actors of Tianlong Tunpu, we found that Tunpu culture is not only a central resource for rural tourism development but also holds significant economic potential and cultural value, acting as a factor connecting diverse actors. This suggests that non-human elements like culture can drive governance networks and play an important role in fostering sustainable rural development. However, the use of cultural elements, whether in tourism or other rural development paths, must prioritize respecting their subjectivity and authenticity. A balance must be struck between cultural preservation and economic benefits to ensure long-term sustainability. Therefore, rural areas should identify and leverage valuable cultural or natural resources based on their unique characteristics, integrating them into governance frameworks for effective coordination and management [30]. For instance, governments can implement policies and regulations to protect and utilize resources sustainably [68], turning them into vital factors for improving governance efficiency and promoting sustainable rural development.

By comparing the governance networks of the case study area with those in other rural regions, both domestically and internationally, it becomes clear that governance actors and their operational logic vary across different regions and developmental contexts [69]. While rural governance generally involves diverse actors, private sectors often play a leading role in rural tourism and governance in other regions, particularly in developed countries [70]. In contrast, in Tianlong Tunpu, the local government plays a particularly dominant role. This reflects China’s governance context, where local governments leverage strong institutional advantages and resource mobilization capabilities to occupy a central role [71]. In underdeveloped China rural areas like the case site, where endogenous development capacity is weak, local governments can integrate resources and institutional frameworks to compensate for these deficiencies and accelerate development. That said, over-reliance on government leadership poses risks, including a lack of internal motivation, limited innovation, and the potential for a “dependency-based” governance model. To address this, future efforts should balance the strengths of government leadership with the enhancement of internal motivation and the accumulation of social capital within rural communities [53]. Promoting multi-actor collaboration would ensure governance that is more scientific, institutionalized, and sustainable.

Moreover, this study further reveals that the effectiveness of rural governance networks depends on their ability to adapt to the evolving developmental context at different stages. When a network fails to meet development goals, it disintegrates and is restructured to align with new development demands. This underscores the importance of transforming rural governance networks to enhance governance efficiency and promote sustainable rural development [72]. In practice, rural governance should analyze the specific context of each rural area [73], including institutional systems, resource strengths, and industrial structures. Based on this foundation, it is crucial to integrate diverse human and non-human actors and dynamically adjust governance networks to align with the evolving developmental context, thereby fostering sustainable rural development.

This study has limitations. The development of rural governance networks is significantly shaped by regional economic conditions, policy environments, and social contexts. Tianlong Tunpu, the focus of this research, is an underdeveloped rural community in southwest China, where tourism drives development. Consequently, rural tourism and economic development have consistently been key factors shaping its governance network. However, in other regions, varying development conditions lead to differences in the factors and their significance in constructing governance networks. Therefore, future studies should expand to a broader range of regions to analyze the construction paths and influencing factors of governance networks under diverse developmental contexts.

7.2. Conclusions

This study employs Actor–Network Theory (ANT) as its theoretical framework and, guided by existing research on governance theory, introduces threefold empowerment encompassing administrative, social, and economic dimensions to explore the internal mechanisms that drive the construction, operation, disintegration, and transformation of rural governance networks, as well as the roles, functions, and interactions of human and non-human actors. This framework is utilized to examine the process and mechanism of transforming the governance network within the Tianlong Tunpu community. The key findings of this study are as follows:

• The transformation of the Tianlong Tunpu governance network is a dynamic process shaped by both human actors, such as the government, rural elites, village committees, villagers, and enterprises, and non-human factors, including Tunpu culture, houses, and land. Initially, a bottom-up governance network led by rural elites was established. As rural development conditions evolved, this network disintegrated and was restructured into a top-down model led by the local government. In just over two decades, Tianlong Tunpu’s governance network underwent construction, disintegration, and reconstruction, achieving significant rural development success. This highlights the network’s ability to adapt to changing conditions, enhancing governance efficiency and advancing sustainable development.
• This study finds that non-human elements can play a significant role in the transformation of rural governance networks, further validating the emphasis of ANT on both human and non-human actors. In Tianlong Tunpu, Tunpu culture has consistently been an important actor in the rural governance networks. Its unique historical depth and cultural richness not only serve as the core attraction for rural tourism development but also provide a shared vision that aligns the efforts of diverse actors. As an indispensable component of the OPP, Tunpu culture fosters cooperation among various actors. Moreover, it can leverage its intrinsic value and economic potential to provide sustained momentum for rural development, strengthening the stability and long-term sustainability of its governance network.
• In the transformation of the governance network of Tianlong Tunpu, the success of its construction and operation depends on whether key actors can consistently mobilize and allocate administrative, social, and market resources. This capacity, referred to as achieving stable “administrative–social–economic” threefold empowerment, is critical. Threefold empowerment evolves dynamically with changes in development stages and external conditions. It adjusts to shifts in the composition, roles, and interactions of human and non-human actors, achieving a dynamic balance and shaping the governance network. Rather than being a static structure, this mechanism continuously adapts through reallocation and adjustment to align with the evolving realities of rural development. It highlights the interconnected and participatory nature of rural governance, while also reflecting the governance network’s adaptability to changing rural development contexts.