Information production affects governance effectiveness. Multi-departmental coordination and the provision of management and services are inseparable from information sharing and analysis. Photo: TUCHONG

With the enhancement of national information capacity brought about by the digital technology revolution, Chinese academia has undertaken theoretical construction around the important issue of “national information capacity.” National information capacity may be summarized as the state’s ability to gather, process, and deploy information. Information gathering primarily concerns information interactions between the state and society, whereas information processing and deployment mainly involve information interactions between central and local governments within the state. Existing theories affirm the practical value of building national information capacity for national governance. Yet, when viewed in light of real-world practice, advancing national information capacity toward its ideal form also requires recognizing the unique value of local knowledge in governance and emphasizing its incorporation into governance processes, thereby achieving a balance between strengthening national information capacity and integrating locally grounded knowledge.

Limits of information capacity in national governance

A re-examination of current theories on national information capacity begins with information flows both within the state and between state and society. In practice, limitations emerge across three dimensions: information gathering, processing, and deployment.

Temporal lag in information gathering: Although the technological revolution has facilitated highly efficient and high-quality information gathering, in some sectors information collection still cannot unfold in real time, resulting in temporal gaps between successive rounds of information acquisition. This temporal lag imparts a time-bound character to information and produces a certain degree of delay relative to fast-changing governance realities. Even rich and high-quality information—intended to serve as a basis for policymaking and governance actions—may not objectively and clearly reflect the dynamic and complex realities of national governance. If the timeliness of national information gathering cannot be ensured, and frontline personnel are unable to promptly report the knowledge embedded in complex local situations, then governance objectives cannot be synchronized with the actual, continuously changing conditions of governance targets as they evolve.

Complexity in information processing: Algorithms have improved the efficiency of processing vast quantities of information, yet human involvement remains indispensable, and the actual performance of information processing systems often falls short of expectations. The analytical and evaluative phase of information processing is still accompanied by knowledge disparities across different levels of government: Central or provincial governments and primary-level governments differ in the specific knowledge that supports information analysis and judgment—a practical reality that current technological capabilities are unable to effectively resolve.

One-dimensionality in information deployment: Each unit of standardized, one-dimensional information is underpinned by knowledge inherently shaped by distinct local characteristics. When presented solely in a flattened, single dimension, the locality and systemic qualities embedded in its original context may be lost. However, adaptive local governance cannot proceed independently of the local- and systemic-specific knowledge. To realize “place-based” governance, information with local characteristics must be grasped dynamically and multidimensionally. Enhancing national information capacity enables central or provincial governments to observe governance processes with greater accuracy and clarity. The challenge is how to incorporate the rich, high-quality knowledge generated at the local level so that governance carries both more precision and more warmth.

Fully leveraging local knowledge

The temporal lag in information gathering, the complexity of information processing, and the one-dimensionality of information deployment mean that current national governance has yet to fully and dynamically grasp the rich details of local natural and social realities and often neglects specific local social contexts. In other words, a tension exists between information capacities that prioritize standardization and diverse local realities. Meanwhile, information processing demands substantial labor on the part of frontline technical personnel. As such, in the ongoing effort to enhance national information capacity through technological empowerment, governance must also re-center attention on local knowledge. As used in this article, “local knowledge” refers specifically to tacit knowledge derived from local governance practice that cannot be encoded; such knowledge is widely but unevenly distributed among local—particularly primary-level—governance actors.

Research has noted that frontline public officials develop personally held local knowledge through their interpretation of the situations in which they work and rely on it to craft targeted strategies for addressing everyday difficulties and challenges. Given the complexities associated with local governance functions, scale, aims, and responsibilities, localities must be afforded space in designing governance plans so that local knowledge can be continuously mobilized and brought into interaction with broader governance networks, thereby better addressing the challenges posed by governance complexity. For example, in climate change governance, allowing diverse stakeholders to participate enables the incorporation of multiple forms of local knowledge, fostering consensus on adaptation strategies. In the environmental governance field, the contextual character of local knowledge has already influenced local legitimacy; collaborative governance likewise provides a channel through which local actors continually integrate local knowledge into state governance knowledge.

Compared with standardized information processed and deployed in national governance, local knowledge is distinctively dynamic, place-based, and context-specific, and offers stronger guidance for setting and implementing objectives, rules, and public services. In China’s governance practice, local knowledge is widely dispersed yet unevenly distributed among frontline governance actors. Owing to the presence of local knowledge, the everyday dialogues connected with primary-level governance are rich with implicit knowledge cues, which cannot be understood by actors unfamiliar with them. The dynamic quality of local knowledge means that the knowledge itself is continuously updated and accounts for possible changes in local realities between information-gathering intervals. The place-based quality of local knowledge means that it contains clear and specific factual details, and its provision supports more efficient information processing. Its contextual quality refers specifically to the degree of fit between knowledge and particular governance scenarios and contexts; local knowledge suited to a specific context renders deployed information more multidimensional and thereby effectively addresses the one-dimensional limits of information deployment.

Coordinating national information capacity building and absorption of local knowledge

Unlike standardized, codable information that can be gathered, processed, and deployed, un-codable local knowledge has unique value in complex governance arenas and is compatible with diverse governance contexts. In modernizing China’s capacity for governance, bridging the tension between standardized national information capacities and diverse local governance realities means that, while leveraging technology in the digital era to continuously optimize and iterate national information capacity, governance practice must also emphasize the absorption of local knowledge. This article outlines three pathways for coordinating national information capacity building with the integration of local knowledge: Constructing knowledge feedback channels, building mechanisms for local participation in information collection, and enhancing tolerance for local autonomous action.

Constructing bottom-up knowledge feedback channels: Unlike normative reporting platforms within bureaucratic systems, building channels for local knowledge feedback can provide frontline personnel with a platform to transmit dynamic local governance knowledge upward. This can effectively alleviate the limits of information deployment in national governance by adding additional layers of annotation to standardized information. Through such bottom-up feedback channels, the rich local knowledge embedded behind one-dimensional information can also receive greater attention.

Establishing mechanisms for local participation in information collection: Involving local actors in information collection increases the likelihood of obtaining rich, local governance knowledge, particularly from those closer to the primary level. Behind each piece of normative information—clearly categorized and standardized—lies the need for multidimensional local knowledge to support its analysis and evaluation. Constructing mechanisms for local participation in information collection requires central or provincial governments to develop institutional arrangements capable of effectively incorporating local knowledge relevant to governance. It also requires building platforms within specific governance domains to receive feedback on local knowledge from the primary level. Primary-level personnel can, in turn, supplement standardized information with relevant local knowledge. When the state’s “gaze” becomes more multidimensional, the dimensions through which information is interpreted and deployed likewise diversify, and the limits of information processing and deployment can be partly overcome.

Enhancing tolerance for local autonomous action: Any representation of basic natural and social facts from a specific perspective inevitably loses grasp of the complex details of governance processes, and temporal lag in information gathering further reduces insights into dynamic changes in reality. Although improved information capacity can clarify the selection of governance goals, the formation of governance plans remains dependent on considerations of timing and context. Enhancing tolerance for local autonomous action allows localities to undertake governance actions at appropriate times according to specific circumstances, enabling residents at certain moments to experience a sense of warmth in governance. Increasing tolerance for such autonomy requires both providing localities more discretionary space in governance action and establishing cross-level governance consultation mechanisms within specific domains. This simultaneously encourages local governance innovation and creates space for more humane local governance.

Information constitutes the premise and foundation of state action, and its production affects governance effectiveness. Multi-departmental coordination and the provision of management and services are inseparable from information sharing and analysis. In modernizing China’s capacity for governance, fully leveraging local knowledge requires attending to both national information capacity building and the absorption of local knowledge. Whether through constructing feedback channels for local knowledge or increasing tolerance for local autonomous action, these approaches offer pathways for coordinating national information capacity with the integration of local knowledge, and align with contemporary efforts to modernize China’s capacity for governance and develop the whole-process people’s democracy.

Liu Wei (professor) and Li Haolin are from the School of Political Science and Public Administration at Wuhan University. This article has been edited and excerpted from Exploration and Free Views, Issue 7, 2025.