In the context of globalization and urbanization, rural development faces many challenges, such as population loss and uneven distribution of resources. This paper analyzes the similarities and differences in sustainable rural development strategies between China and Europe through a comparative perspective. China has optimized land use by relying on land policy innovations, such as the household contract responsibility system and the “separation of three rights”, as well as the construction of small towns; while Europe focuses on private ownership and market mechanisms, and supports agricultural and rural development through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Using literature review, comparative research and policy analysis, the study shows that the policy innovations in China and Europe, each with its own focus, have been effective in promoting agricultural output and rural social development. Particularly noteworthy is that the “three rights” policy has increased agricultural productivity through the liberalization of management rights, while the European CAP has contributed to the diversification of the rural economy and environmental protection through continuous reforms. This study emphasizes that through policy innovation and international cooperation, combining the strengths of China and Europe, it is possible to provide a new model of sustainable development for the global countryside. Specifically, through the establishment of Sino-European R&D centers for agricultural science and technology, exchange of talents, and cooperation in green infrastructure development, technology transfer and application can be accelerated, cultural exchange and understanding can be promoted, and the sustainable development agenda for global rural areas can be jointly advanced.

COVID-19 and the economic response have amplified and changed the nature of development challenges in fundamental ways. Global development cooperation should adapt accordingly. This paper lays out the urgency for new methods of development cooperation that can deliver resource transfers at scale, oriented to addressing climate change and with transparency and better governance. It looks at what is actually happening to major donor countries’ development cooperation programs and where the principal gaps lie, and offers some thoughts on how to move forward, notwithstanding the clear geopolitical rivalries that are evident.
The most immediate challenge is to provide a level of liquidity support to countries ravaged by the global economic downturn. Many developing countries will see double-digit declines in GDP, with some recording downturns not seen in peacetime. Alongside the short-term challenge of recovery, COVID-19 has laid bare longer-term trends that have pointed for some time to the lack of sustainability—environmental, social, and governance—in the way economic development was occurring in many places, including in advanced economies. This new landscape has significant implications for development cooperation in terms of scale, development/climate co-benefits, and transparency and accountability.

The Guangdong-Macao Intensive Cooperation Zone in Hengqin (Intensive Cooperation Zone) has emerged as a pivotal economic hub, attracting Macao residents and enterprises. However, disparities in contract-related rules between the zone and Macao have led to legal challenges. This article delves into a comparative study of contract laws between the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and Macao. Analyzing key facets such as pacta sunt servanda, freedom of contract, principle of equity, contract form, principles of interpretation, and termination of contract, the study identifies nuanced differences. Recognizing the imperative of aligning contract laws for the Intensive Cooperation Zone’s development, the article advocates for a unified legal environment. To achieve this, the author proposes a model contract law that prioritises the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) as the basis. Notably, Macao’s contract-related rules should govern aspects not covered by the CISG given the policy trend in the Intensive Cooperation Zone. The proposed model law serves as a foundation for legislative reform, aiming to address the existing disparities and promote the Intensive Cooperation Zone’s economic growth.

In the context of ecological and social challenges in global food systems, this study investigates the potential of agri-food districts to foster balanced territorial development. A multi-step approach to developing sustainable agri-food districts is outlined. How these districts, as integrated systems and meso-level organizational forms, can enhance sustainability through governance is then assessed. This research uses a context-driven analysis pathway involving stakeholder participation and needs identification. The theoretical background, the Italian regulatory framework, and a case study from Lombardy are presented. Needs are identified through participatory approaches and actions are prioritized using desk research and a narrative SWOT analysis combined with key stakeholder discussions (focus group). A total of eighteen needs are identified and categorized into 3 dimensions of sustainability: economic, environmental, and socio-institutional. Findings indicate that agri-food district organization has great potential to help achieve local and regional policy goals in line with the shift to sustainable approaches in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The paper proposes actions to strengthen district capacity-building, focusing on internal governance and sustainable production chains. Additionally, initiatives to attract young people to rural areas and agreements for ecosystem services in agri-food districts are suggested. These actions aim to promote sustainability and competitiveness while addressing challenges related to governance, innovation, branding, demographics, and environment. In conclusion, the study prompts critical inquiry into governance models and system dynamics. The innovative aspects of this study lie in its methodological approach, integration of theory and practice, holistic perspective, policy relevance, and critical inquiry, which collectively contribute to advancing knowledge and understanding in the field of sustainable agriculture and territorial development.

This academic paper explores the impact of multi-entity cooperation on the effectiveness of public service provision in China. It examines the social governance pattern proposed by the 19th National Congress of the CCP and the emphasis on co-building, co-governing, and sharing. The paper highlights the need for collaboration among various entities and the transition from sole government provision to improve urban public services. It aims to investigate the moderating effects of institutions, policies, and public participation. The study will involve quantitative and qualitative phases in three cities in Guangdong Province and target governmental departments, commercial organizations, non-profit social organizations, and local residents. The research aims to provide policy recommendations, innovate institutional policies, enhance public engagement, and improve multi-party cooperation and urban public services. It seeks to contribute practical models and measures for effective government public management and service implementation.

Cross-border ecological cooperation is always a challenging issue. Ecological cooperation in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area has its own uniqueness as it is cross-border cooperation under “One Country, Two Systems”, which is different from multinational cooperation or regional collaboration within one country. This paper analyses the cooperation documents of Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macao, official reports and academic literature, and then summarises the unique pattern of ecological cooperation in the Greater Bay Area under “One Country, Two Systems”. It outlines four characteristics: different priorities in ecological management of each side, case by base cooperation, government-dominated cooperation with low public participation, and huge institutional gap between three sides. This article also identifies several problems and causes: lack of common ecological targets for each side and effective cross-border regulative measures, cumbersome coordination in cross-border cooperation. Finally, four feasible recommendations have been put forwarded: creating new institutional arrangements under the context of “One Country, Two Systems”, establishing the efficient decision-making platform for the inter-city cooperation, introducing the market-based resource allocation, and encouraging public participation in ecological monitoring.