Analysis on Hot Spots and Trends of New Rural Sages Participating in Rural Governance Based on CiteSpace

Tao Liping, Ge Jiahui
(School of Management, Wuhan Polytechnic University, Wuhan 430048, China)

Abstract:
[Purpose/Significance] With the rapid development of urban-rural integration, improving and standardizing the institutional frameworks and pathways for new rural sages to participate in rural governance is crucial for modernizing rural public governance systems and implementing the rural revitalization strategy. By mapping knowledge graphs, this study reveals the evolutionary trajectory, hot topics, and development trends of research on new rural sages' participation in rural governance, providing valuable references for future studies. [Method/Process] This study utilized 596 relevant research articles from China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) published between 2015 and 2021 as data sources, employing the visualization analysis software CiteSpace for data mining and inductive analysis. [Result/Conclusion] Research on new rural sages' participation in rural governance exhibits strong policy orientation, with publication volumes remaining high and stable in recent years. However, collaboration among authors and institutions is weak. Research hotspots concentrate on three dimensions: the value and functions, practical dilemmas, and optimization pathways of new rural sages' participation. Future research should broaden perspectives, deepen content, and diversify methodologies.

Keywords: New rural sages; Rural governance; Knowledge graph analysis; CiteSpace

Introduction

In traditional Chinese society, which operated under a "dual-track political system" characterized by "imperial power stopping at the county level, with autonomy below," rural sages—as capable and virtuous members of rural communities—served as the primary governance actors at the grassroots level. As President Xi Jinping has noted, "To govern China today effectively requires a deep understanding of our history and traditional culture, as well as active summarization of ancient explorations and wisdom in state governance" [1]. Currently, facing numerous rural governance challenges such as village "hollowing-out," population aging, cultural "desertification," and administrative "suspension," society has increasingly focused attention on the new rural sage cohort. The central government's No. 1 Document in 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 explicitly mentioned new rural sages and sage culture, emphasizing their positive role in rural construction [2].

New rural sages represent the inheritance and development of traditional rural sages in the new era. Like their traditional counterparts, new rural sages are socially prominent individuals with moral integrity, wealth, cultural knowledge, and prestige. Most are local elites born and raised in their communities who actively engage in village public affairs. By leveraging their resources in politics, economy, and culture, they participate in rural governance and play important roles in advancing the "three-governance integration" (autonomy, rule of law, and rule of virtue) and achieving good governance in rural areas. However, new rural sages tend to be more civilian-oriented, with broader personnel composition and more diverse participation methods. Encouraging, supporting, and guiding new rural sages to return to rural governance and fully utilize their individual value not only responds positively to rural governance needs but also strengthens the endogenous subject foundation, innovates modern rural governance systems, and facilitates the implementation of rural revitalization strategies.

Since 2015, scholars have gradually begun researching new rural sages' participation in rural governance from perspectives of management, sociology, political science, ethnology, and other disciplines, yielding increasingly rich research outcomes, including review articles. However, most review papers rely on subjective qualitative analysis, with few retrospective summaries and prospects based on bibliometric methods. Applying bibliometric methods for visualized quantitative analysis of this field can more clearly and objectively reveal literature distribution characteristics, quantitative relationships, and evolutionary patterns through charts and data, providing a more comprehensive presentation of research progress and trends. This study therefore employs CiteSpace visualization software to analyze authors, institutions, and keywords in research on new rural sages' participation in rural governance, mapping relevant knowledge graphs to visually demonstrate the development history, thematic status, and hot topics in this field, and to comprehensively analyze its development trends, thereby providing theoretical references for subsequent research.

1.1 Research Data

This study used CNKI as the data source, conducting an advanced search with the theme "new rural sages participating in rural governance" for the period 2015–2021, including all journal categories. The search was conducted on May 27, 2022, yielding 631 journal articles. After manually removing invalid data such as literature reviews, conference summaries, journal catalogs, and articles without authors, 596 valid articles were obtained as the final research sample.

1.2 Research Methods

This study employed bibliometric methods, using CiteSpace software for visualized analysis of the selected literature data. Information from the 596 articles was imported into CiteSpace, and functions including author collaboration analysis, institutional collaboration analysis, keyword co-occurrence, clustering, and burst analysis were utilized to reveal the evolutionary trajectory of research on new rural sages' participation in rural governance and identify its hotspots and frontier trends.

2.1 Annual Publication Trends

The number of publications in different periods can intuitively reflect the development speed of a research field. Generally, more publications indicate higher research热度. Figure 1 [FIGURE:1] shows the annual publication volume of research on new rural sages' participation in rural governance from 2015 to 2021. Overall, publications show a逐年上升 trend, with research热度 gradually increasing. Based on publication volume, the development can be divided into three stages: The first stage is the slow development period (2015–2017), characterized by a weak research team and low overall publication volume, with only 49 articles published (8.22% of the total sample), including just 3 articles in 2015. The second stage is the rapid growth period (2018–2019), during which an increasing number of scholars focused on this field, with significantly higher publication volume and substantial annual variation, producing 250 relevant research成果 (41.95% of the total sample). The third stage is the stable development period (2020–2021), during which publication volume stabilized at approximately 150 articles annually, with 297 journal articles published (49.83% of the total sample), including 156 articles in 2021—the highest annual total.

2.2 Author Publication Analysis

Using CiteSpace software for co-occurrence analysis of authors in this research field generated an author collaboration network图谱 (Figure 2 [FIGURE:2]). In Figure 2, font size represents author centrality, while circle size represents publication volume. Larger fonts and circles indicate stronger centrality and more publications. Connecting lines represent collaboration, with thicker lines indicating closer cooperation. Some authors show collaborative relationships, but overall collaboration is low, with scarce cross-institutional and cross-disciplinary research, and no obvious cooperation network has formed.

To clarify core authors in this field, statistics were compiled for authors with 3 or more publications (Table 1 [TABLE:1]). Overall, there are few highly productive authors, with most researchers publishing only 1 or 2 articles, indicating that few scholars focus specifically on this field, and comprehensive in-depth research is lacking. The most prolific author, Zhang Xingyu, published 6 articles, but 5 were co-authored with Ji Zhongyang (ranked second), and both are from the same institution—Nanjing Agricultural University, showing very high overlap. Other authors are from different institutions with no interconnections, demonstrating that no core author group has formed in this research field.

2.3 Institutional Publication Analysis

Co-occurrence analysis of relevant research institutions generated an institutional collaboration network图谱 (Figure 3 [FIGURE:3]), showing very few connecting lines between nodes, with most institutions distributed independently, indicating weak overall collaboration intensity.

According to Price's Law, the minimum publication volume for core institutions can be calculated to identify key institutions in a field. The formula is N ≈ 0.749 × Nmax, where N represents the minimum number of publications for core institutions and Nmax represents the maximum number of publications by any institution during the统计 period [3]. Based on the statistics, Nmax is 9, so N ≈ 2.2, rounded to 3, meaning institutions with 3 or more publications are considered core institutions, totaling 15 (Table 2 [TABLE:2]). All 15 core institutions are universities, but their combined publications total only 65 articles, representing just 10.9% of all 596 articles,充分说明 that while universities are important research forces in this field, they have not achieved obvious dominance.

3 Main Research Content

The 596 articles were imported into CiteSpace with time slicing set to 2015–2021, years per slice set to 1, node types set to Keyword, and threshold set to Top 50 (representing the network generated by the top 50 high-frequency keywords in each time slice). Running CiteSpace produced keyword co-occurrence图谱, keyword clustering图谱, keyword timezone图谱, and keyword burst图谱 for literature on new rural sages' participation in rural governance.

3.1 Research Hotspots: Keyword Co-occurrence and Clustering Analysis

Keyword co-occurrence analysis of this research field yielded the keyword co-occurrence图谱 shown in Figure 4 [FIGURE:4]. Each circular node represents a keyword; larger circles indicate greater attention and represent research hotspots. Circle colors gradually shift from cool to warm tones from center to edge, indicating publication timelines from early to recent periods [4]. Connecting lines between nodes represent keyword co-occurrence, with line thickness indicating co-occurrence frequency—thicker lines show stronger keyword connections. Additionally, keyword frequency and centrality can indicate whether a keyword is a research hotspot. Centrality represents a keyword's中介能力 in the co-occurrence network; generally, centrality greater than 0.1 indicates a high中介 centrality keyword and a research hotspot [5]. Table 3 [TABLE:3] lists the top 15 keywords by frequency and their centrality within the research timeframe.

Based on analysis of Figure 4 and Table 3, the main research hotspots are fourfold: "new rural sages," "rural governance," "rural revitalization," and "sage culture." These keywords emerged in the early research stage with high frequency and centrality, constituting the basic elements of research on new rural sages' participation in rural governance, indicating that the field remains in a foundational research stage. Keywords such as "rural sages," "grassroots governance," "rule of virtue," "dilemma," and "good rural governance" have lower centrality but high frequency, representing important research themes.

To further analyze themes and hotspots, keyword clustering analysis was conducted based on co-occurrence, yielding a keyword clustering knowledge图谱 (Figure 5 [FIGURE:5]). The Modularity value (Q value) measures图谱 network modularity; higher Q values indicate better clustering effects. When Q > 0.3, the network structure is significant. The Silhouette value measures clustering homogeneity; higher values indicate greater intra-cluster similarity. Generally, Silhouette > 0.5 indicates reasonable clustering, while > 0.7 indicates high-quality clustering [6]. The calculated results show Q = 0.4382 and Silhouette = 0.7429, indicating significant and high-quality keyword clustering for research on new rural sages' participation in rural governance. The clustering produced 10 cluster labels: "rural governance," "rule of virtue," "new rural sages," "sage culture," "good rural governance," "rural elites," "rural areas," "dilemma," "rural society," and "Party building guidance," with main content shown in Table 4 [TABLE:4].

Based on keyword co-occurrence and clustering analysis, combined with relevant literature, current research on new rural sages' participation in rural governance focuses on three main aspects:

First, the value and functions of new rural sages' participation in rural governance. The Rural Revitalization Strategic Plan (2018–2022), in its section on "enhancing rural rule of virtue," proposes to "actively leverage the role of new rural sages." Scholars have discussed the value and manifestations of new rural sages' participation from multiple perspectives. As shown in Table 4, cluster identifiers for value/function research include: cultural governance, rural autonomy, rule of law, rule of virtue, talent revitalization, rural elites, rural civilization, and good rural governance.

Regarding rural autonomy, rule of law, and rule of virtue, Zhang Xingyu and Ji Zhongyang, based on the context of "negative village affairs," argue that new rural sages play a moral cultivation role in organizing village governance activities, formulating village regulations, and cultural propaganda [7]. Additionally, these scholars analyzed the collaborative logic between rural grid management and new rural sages' "rule of virtue" by exploring the cultural logic of "ritual-custom interaction" in乡土 society [8]. Xia Hongli believes that new rural sages' active participation is needed to健全 the "three-governance combination" rural governance system and achieve good rural governance, elaborating on new rural sages' functional roles from three levels: rural autonomy, rule of law, and rule of virtue [9]. In terms of rural culture, Qiu Bin explored the impact of sage village governance on villagers' autonomy, proposing that under sage governance, villagers' autonomy will develop through economic and moral-cultural progress [10]. Li Jinzhe affirmed the cultural functions of new rural sages, noting that they possess both traditional and modern cultural attributes—on one hand, they can use traditional culture to participate in rural governance and lead civilized rural customs; on the other hand, their unique sage culture promotes rural cultural modernization [11]. Regarding talent revitalization, academia generally agrees that new rural sages, as capable individuals born and raised locally, represent typical rural elites. Some scholars, from a talent revitalization perspective, identify new rural sages as important forces for rural talent revitalization. Qian Zaijian et al., through investigation of G District in Jiangsu Province, discussed talent inflow mechanisms for new rural sages under the rural revitalization background and proposed solutions to talent inflow challenges [12]. Wu Chensheng et al., from a social capital theory perspective, noted that new rural sages can provide strong impetus for rural talent revitalization across normative, network, and trust dimensions [13].

Second, practical dilemmas of new rural sages' participation in rural governance. As an important bridge for facilitating the flow of intelligence, technology, and management to rural areas, new rural sages' participation aligns with the trend of diversified rural governance subjects. However, nationwide practice shows that pathways, carriers, safeguards, and effectiveness of participation need improvement, with numerous factors hindering their return. Scholars have explored these issues. According to Table 4, cluster identifiers for dilemma research include: dilemma, cultural services, villagers' autonomy, rural governance, and motivation.

Yang Jun was among the earliest scholars to analyze problems in new rural sages' participation, noting that institutional deficiencies in new rural sage organizations, lack of实事求是 in rural governance, and inadequate emergency response capabilities of grassroots Party organizations and leaders prevent new rural sages from effectively fulfilling their roles [14]. Wu Rong et al. pointed out that cultural services provided by new rural sages face issues such as single supply channels, weak service platforms, and lack of supportive policies [15]. Li Min et al. proposed that under the rural revitalization background, new rural sage culture development faces challenges including severe sage outflow,淡化 of sage culture atmosphere, unclear exemplary roles of new rural sages, and weak sage organizations [16]. Some scholars elaborated on governance dilemmas from the perspective of villagers' autonomy. Chen Hanfei et al., based on relationships between new rural sages and village committees, noted that sage organizations and village committees can easily become confrontational, with new rural sages potentially "overstepping" their authority and undermining villagers' autonomy [17]. Sun Lizhen also suggested that in practice, new rural sages' participation may negatively impact grassroots rural governance [18]. Additionally, some scholars attribute dilemmas to new rural sages' internal factors, particularly insufficient motivation. Fu Cuilian et al., from a policy mobilization perspective, identified insufficient endogenous motivation as one of the dilemmas facing new rural sages' participation in rural revitalization [19]. Zhao Yanan categorized main dilemmas into internal and external aspects, with internal dilemmas referring to insufficient return motivation and inadequate knowledge and capabilities [20].

Third, optimization pathways for new rural sages' participation in rural governance. Based on identified dilemmas and challenges, scholars have conducted corresponding pathway research. Related cluster identifiers include: implementation pathways, governance pathways, sage culture, Party building guidance, and grassroots Party organizations.

Zhang Xingyu and Ji Zhongyang, from a social network perspective, explored pathways and practical methods for new rural sages' participation in rural community governance through cooperative co-governance, capital accumulation, and relationship building [21]. Fu Cuilian, starting from the evolution of rural governance models, argued that reshaping the new rural sage governance model currently requires vigorously promoting sage culture and consolidating sage strength [22]. Many scholars have studied how to inherit and promote sage culture. Xia Hongli proposed building sage culture squares, establishing sage councils, and creating incentive mechanisms for new rural sages [23]. Bai Xianjun noted that promoting sage culture inheritance and innovation requires fully挖掘 and整理 sage culture resources,赋予 them contemporary connotations, while strengthening publicity and improving political participation mechanisms for new rural sages [24]. Peng Liang argued that new rural sage culture is essential for cultivating more new rural sages, proposing to focus on cultural construction among migrant workers, college graduate village officials, and rural migrants to broaden the vision of sage culture construction [25]. President Xi Jinping emphasized that consolidating rural governance foundations requires strengthening the leadership role of rural grassroots Party organizations [26]. Some scholars have studied countermeasures from the Party building guidance perspective. Yang Jun, from a collaborative governance perspective, argued that new rural sages' role in advancing rural grassroots Party building should be leveraged to build a combat-effective grassroots Party member队伍 [27]. Qiu Bin, through analysis of Fengyuan Village in Fengqiao Town, concluded that the role of governance-oriented sages cannot be separated from unified Party organization leadership, which must be organically combined with governance-oriented sage leadership [28]. Xia Ting et al., using Shaoxing's experience as an example, explored the "Party building + new rural sages" rural governance model and summarized its implications for empowering rural revitalization [29].

3.2 Research Trends: Keyword Timeline and Burst Analysis

Based on keyword co-occurrence, keyword timeline (Figure 6 [FIGURE:6]) and burst analysis (Figure 7 [FIGURE:7]) were conducted to further understand research trends.

The keyword timeline clearly reflects the temporal correspondence of research hotspots, emphasizing changes in research priorities over time. Burst keywords are those whose frequency suddenly increases during a specific period; higher burst intensity indicates greater attention. Combined analysis of Figures 6 and 7 suggests three developmental stages:

First, the initial exploration stage (2015). The 2015 Central No. 1 Document, Opinions on Strengthening Reform and Innovation to Accelerate Agricultural Modernization, proposed in its "strengthening rural ideological and moral construction" section to "innovate sage culture, promote good deeds and righteous actions, use hometown sentiment and nostalgia as bonds to attract and凝聚 people from all sectors to support hometown construction, and inherit rural civilization" [30]. This marked the first appearance of sages in national policy documents. Subsequently, keywords such as "new rural sages," "sage culture," and "rural governance" emerged in research. During this period, few scholars focused on this field, and research成果 were scarce.

Second, the rapid development stage (2016–2019). From 2015 to 2018, the Central No. 1 Document consistently proposed building beautiful villages, incorporating sage culture into rural moral civilization construction, and emphasizing the need to "actively leverage the role of new rural sages" [2]. In 2017, the 19th Party Congress explicitly proposed vigorously implementing the rural revitalization strategy, "improving the rural governance system that combines autonomy, rule of law, and rule of virtue, and cultivating a 'three rural' workforce that understands agriculture, loves rural areas, and loves farmers," and "promoting the shift of social governance重心 to the grassroots level, leveraging the role of social organizations, and achieving positive interaction between government governance and social self-regulation and residents' autonomy" [31]. Since then, the rural governance model of sage village governance has attracted widespread academic attention, demonstrating the field's strong policy orientation.

According to the annual distribution图, keyword timeline图, and burst analysis图, this stage saw a surge in publications and a significant increase in keywords, mainly including "rural sages," "rural revitalization," "grassroots governance," "autonomy," "rule of law," "rule of virtue," "dilemma," and "implementation pathways," with burst words including "villagers' autonomy," "cultural governance," "grassroots governance," "rural rule of law," and "contemporary value," focusing primarily on the value, dilemmas, and implementation pathways of new rural sages' participation.

Third, the stable development stage (2020–2021). During this period, theoretical and practical成果 in this field became increasingly rich, and research entered a stable development stage. Figure 6 shows relatively fewer emerging keywords, with "cultivation pathways," "talent revitalization," "pluralistic co-governance," and "effective governance" gradually becoming prominent.

4.1 Research Conclusions

This study systematically analyzed the current status, hotspots, and trends of research on new rural sages' participation in rural governance using CiteSpace visualization tools, drawing on relevant literature from CNKI published between 2015 and 2021. The conclusions are as follows:

First, publication volume has grown rapidly and stabilized at a high level. However, authors are relatively dispersed, with collaboration mostly limited to internal teams within the same institution or field.

Second, research themes are relatively concentrated but hotspots are broad. Current research in China on new rural sages' participation in rural governance has four main themes: new rural sages, rural governance, rural revitalization, and sage culture. Research primarily focuses on three levels: value and functions, practical dilemmas, and optimization pathways, addressing hotspots such as "rural governance," "rule of virtue," "sage culture," "good rural governance," "rural elites," "rural areas," "dilemma," and "Party building guidance." Early research emphasized the value of participation, while later research has increasingly focused on pathways for sages' return to rural governance.

Third, developmental stages are distinct and policy-oriented. Keyword timeline and burst analysis clearly reflect three developmental stages, with each stage's research priorities related to relevant policy documents, demonstrating obvious policy orientation. During the initial exploration stage (2015), the Central No. 1 Document's mention of sage-related content attracted academic attention, leading to research on "new rural sages," "sage culture," "rural governance," and "rural elites." During the rapid development stage (2016–2018), three consecutive Central No. 1 Documents emphasized actively leveraging new rural sages' role [2], and research deepened with "grassroots governance," "cultural governance," "rural revitalization," and "villagers' autonomy" becoming hot topics. During the stable development stage (2020), the 14th Five-Year Plan proposed "promoting rural talent revitalization" in its "implementing rural construction actions" section, focusing research on "cultivation pathways," "talent revitalization," "pluralistic co-governance," and "effective governance."

4.2 Future Outlook

Attracting new rural sages to participate in rural governance, leveraging their resource advantages, strengthening endogenous authoritative forces in rural areas, and transitioning from single government governance to multi-subject collaborative governance represent beneficial explorations for innovating rural governance systems and accelerating rural revitalization. Future research should continue efforts in the following areas:

First, broaden research perspectives. As research deepens, scholars have provided in-depth explanations from management, political science, ethnology, sociology, and other disciplinary dimensions. This demonstrates both the maturity and effectiveness of current research and reveals that perspectives remain insufficiently broad. Research breadth and depth should continue expanding to promote interdisciplinary studies and enrich the knowledge system on new rural sages' participation in rural governance.

Second, deepen research content. Overall, most existing research concentrates on functional value, practical dilemmas, and optimization pathways, showing obvious homogenization and limitations. Scholars should expand research extensions and deepen content based on their knowledge backgrounds and interests, pushing research forward in depth.

Third, enrich research methods. Most existing research uses qualitative methods with strong subjective coloring. Although many scholars use case studies to accurately grasp the status quo in specific regions and propose targeted countermeasures, conclusions are not generalizable due to single or limited samples. Future research should employ in-depth interviews, fieldwork, grounded theory, and quantitative methods to advance research depth.

References

[1] Xinhua News Agency. Xi Jinping Presides over the 18th Collective Study Session of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee [EB/OL]. (2014-10-13) [2023-2-14]. http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2014-10/13/content_2764226.htm.

[2] Huang Aijiao. New Rural Sages Boosting Rural Revitalization: Policy Space, Obstructive Factors, and Countermeasures [J]. Theory Monthly, 2019, 41(1): 82.

[3] Liu Congde, Tan Chunxia. Quantitative Research on Ideological and Political Education Literature in the Big Data Era—Bibliometric Visualization Analysis Based on CiteSpace [J]. School Party Building and Ideological Education, 2019, 37(4): 51.

[4] Gu Liping, Fan Haichao. The Academic Field of Ten Years of Online Privacy Research—Visualization Scientific Knowledge Graph Analysis Based on CiteSpace (2008–2017) [J]. Journalism & Communication Research, 2018, 25(12): 62.

[5] Hao Yaming, Qin Yuying. Hotspot Analysis and Path Evolution of Research on Chinese National Community Consciousness—Knowledge Graph Analysis Based on CiteSpace [J]. Journal of South-Central Minzu University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 2021, 41(2): 23.

[6] Li Xianyue. Research Progress and Trends of the Integration of China's Cultural Industry and Tourism Industry—Bibliometric Analysis Based on CiteSpace [J]. Economic Geography, 2019, 39(12): 215-216.

[7] Zhang Xingyu, Ji Zhongyang. The Logic, Methods, and Significance of New Rural Sages' Participation in Village Governance Under the Background of "Negative Village Affairs" [J]. Zhejiang Social Sciences, 2020, 36(2): 74-82, 157.

[8] Zhang Xingyu, Ji Zhongyang. Ritual-Custom Interaction: The Collaborative Logic Between Rural Grid Management and New Rural Sages' "Rule of Virtue" [J]. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition), 2020, 20(1): 79-89.

[9] Xia Hongli. "New Rural Sages" and Improving the Rural Governance System Combining Autonomy, Rule of Law, and Rule of Virtue [J]. Journal of Hunan Institute of Socialism, 2018, 19(3): 64-67.

[10] Qiu Bin. "Sage Village Governance" and the Development Trend of Villagers' Autonomy [J]. Gansu Social Sciences, 2016, 38(2): 163-167.

[11] Li Jinzhe. Dilemmas and Pathways: Promoting Contemporary Rural Governance Through New Rural Sages [J]. Seeking Truth, 2017, 59(6): 87-96.

[12] Qian Zaijian, Wang Jiayan. "Talent Going to the Countryside": Research on Talent Inflow Mechanisms for New Rural Sages Assisting Rural Revitalization—Based on Investigation and Analysis of G District in L City, Jiangsu Province [J]. Chinese Public Administration, 2019, 35(2): 92-97.

[13] Wu Chensheng, Zhang Zhisheng. Dynamic System Analysis of New Rural Sages Boosting Rural Talent Revitalization—Based on Social Capital Theory Perspective [J]. Journal of Beijing University of Chemical Technology (Social Sciences Edition), 2020, 36(1): 17-22, 34.

[14] Yang Jun. Research on Sage Culture and Rural Governance [J]. Future and Development, 2015, 39(3): 98-103.

[15] Wu Rong, Shi Guoqing, Jiang Tianhe. Realistic Dilemmas and Relief Strategies of "New Rural Sages" Governance Under Rural Revitalization Strategy [J]. Ningxia Social Sciences, 2019, 38(3): 130-138.

[16] Li Min, Yang Shuai, Liu Shulan. Opportunities, Challenges, and Countermeasures for New Rural Sage Culture Development Under Rural Revitalization Background [J]. Journal of Huaihua University, 2021, 40(4): 18-22.

[17] Chen Hanfei, Gao Qicai. Analysis of the Role and Regulation Guidance of New Rural Sages' Participation in Rural Governance [J]. Tsinghua Law Review, 2020, 14(4): 5-17.

[18] Sun Lizhen. Analysis of New Rural Sages' Participation in Rural Governance—Taking Zhejiang Province as an Example [J]. Jiangxi Social Sciences, 2019, 39(8): 225-233.

[19] Fu Cuilian, Zhang Hui. "Mobilization-Spontaneity" Logic Transformation: The Internal Mechanism and Path of New Rural Sages Boosting Rural Revitalization [J]. Administrative Tribune, 2021, 28(1): 53-58.

[20] Zhao Yanan. Review of Research on New Rural Sages' Participation in Rural Grassroots Governance Under Rural Revitalization Background [J]. Journal of Henan Institute of Science and Technology, 2019, 39(7): 8-14.

[21] Zhang Xingyu, Ji Zhongyang. Pathways and Practical Methods of New Rural Sages' Participation in Rural Community Governance—Based on Social Relationship Network Perspective [J]. Nanjing Social Sciences, 2020, 31(8): 82-87.

[22] Fu Cuilian. The Evolution, Dilemmas, and New Rural Sage Governance with Endogenous Authority Embedded in China's Rural Governance Models [J]. Local Governance Research, 2016, 18(1): 67-73.

[23] Xia Hongli. Enhancing Rural Rule of Virtue and Improving Rural Governance System [J]. Journal of the Party School of CPC Qingdao Municipal Committee. Qingdao Administrative College Journal, 2018, 40(4): 96-99.

[24] Bai Xianjun. Inheritance and Innovation of Sage Culture Under Rural Revitalization Strategy [J]. Beijing Social Sciences, 2021, 36(12): 91-99.

[25] Peng Liang. Research on the Generation Mechanism and Cultivation Countermeasures of New Rural Sages Under Rural Revitalization Strategy Background [J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 48(22): 269-271.

[26] Xinhua News Agency. Land with Great Potential, Fields Full of Hope—General Secretary Xi Jinping's Important Speech at Henan Delegation Review Generates Enthusiastic Response [EB/OL]. (2019-3-9) [2023-2-14]. http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2019-03/09/content_537225.htm?allcontent.

[27] Yang Jun. Research on New Rural Sages' Participation in Rural Collaborative Governance [J]. Journal of Shanxi Normal University (Social Sciences Edition), 2016, 43(2): 48-52.

[28] Qiu Bin. The Expansion and Innovation of "Three-Governance Integration" Under Governance-Oriented Sage Leadership—Based on Exploration of Fengyuan Village in Fengqiao Town [J]. Gansu Social Sciences, 2019, 41(4): 162-168.

[29] Xia Ting, Yuan Haiping. Research on "Party Building + New Rural Sages" Leading Rural Revitalization—Shaoxing's Experience and Implications [J]. Rural Economy and Science-Technology, 2021, 32(24): 253-255.

[30] CPC Central Committee and State Council Issue "Opinions on Strengthening Reform and Innovation to Accelerate Agricultural Modernization" [N]. People's Daily, 2015-2-2(1).

[31] Xi Jinping. Secure a Decisive Victory in Building a Moderately Prosperous Society in All Respects and Strive for the Great Victory of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era—Report at the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China [EB/OL]. (2017-10-18) [2023-2-14]. http://www.gov.cn/zhuanti/2017-10/27/content_5234876.htm.