China’s Future Countryside Model Construction and Development Level Evaluation

Communities and villages are holistic organisms, representing a complete system formed by natural space and human activities. Since the concept of “future community” was put forward by the Drucker Foundation in the United States at the end of the 20th century, “future community” has expanded from the city to the countryside. Governments and scholars of various countries have started the practical and theoretical research into “future community”. Based on the theory of “village organism”, this paper constructs the structural model of the future countryside, and then constructs the health evaluation index system of the future countryside. This effectively makes up for the shortcomings of previous studies, and provides a new perspective and systematic analysis method for the study of community and village issues. Using entropy weight method and TOPSIS method, Jindong District was used as a case to conduct the quantitative evaluation of the development level of 46 administrative villages in the region. The results showed that: (1) the development level of the villages in the region was not high, and far from the requirements of future countryside, indicating that countryside revitalization has a long way to go; (2) within the region, competitive convergence occurs in the development process of all villages; (3) of the two major countryside systems in the future, the health level of the physical space system is higher than that of the social system, indicating that the local government pays more attention to the construction of the “external” image of the countryside and ignores the improvement of the “internal” function of the countryside society; (4) in the prospective construction of nine scenes of future countryside, an observable trend towards “grouping” differentiation emerges. This phenomenon underscores existing deficiencies in countryside construction, indicating that countryside areas still fail to realize the function of being “self-hematopoietic”. The determination and selection of sample indicators exhibit regional cultural disparities, permitting various regions to customize indicators with their specific contextual circumstances. Nevertheless, the universal approach of treating countryside areas as holistic entities remains essential in scholarly inquiry.