Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles emphasizes the transformation of rural asset management in Xunyang City, focusing on the informatization, dataization, and refinement of the management of collective assets, funds, and resources [1][2][3] - In 2024, all 305 village collectives in Xunyang City are expected to have annual incomes exceeding 100,000 yuan, with 33 villages surpassing 500,000 yuan and one community exceeding 3 million yuan [1] - The establishment of a dual responsibility system for asset management at the town and village levels has been implemented to enhance transparency and accountability in the management of collective resources [1][2] Group 2 - A comprehensive audit of collective assets has revealed a total of 46.841 million yuan in village-level collective assets across 12 villages, contributing to a clearer understanding of the financial status of these collectives [2] - The introduction of a big data information technology platform allows villagers to monitor the financial expenditures of their collectives in real-time, enhancing financial transparency [2] - Xunyang City is promoting the development of unique ecological industrial chains across 21 towns, which is expected to increase farmers' incomes and improve the overall economic strength of village collectives [3]

Core Viewpoint - The development of a new type of rural collective economy is a crucial aspect of deepening rural reform in China, aimed at promoting comprehensive rural revitalization and increasing farmers' income [1][2]. Policy Background and Implementation - The growth of rural collective economy is seen as a vital pathway to achieve common prosperity for farmers, addressing issues such as unclear ownership of collective assets and unequal distribution of benefits [2]. - Since 2015, pilot reforms have been initiated in 29 counties to enhance farmers' rights to collective assets, leading to the formal introduction of the "new type of collective economy" concept in 2016 [2][3]. - By the end of 2020, 53.1 million administrative villages had completed reforms, representing 94.9% of the total villages in the country [3]. Financial Support and Development Trends - From 2018 to 2022, approximately 100,000 administrative villages received financial support from the central government to develop collective economies [4]. - The number of villages without operating income decreased from 195,000 in 2018 to 113,000 in 2023, while the proportion of villages with income below 100,000 yuan dropped from 43.1% to 32.9% during the same period [4]. Organizational Structure and Management - The establishment of rural collective economic organizations is essential for the development of the new type of rural collective economy, with a focus on standardizing their operations [5]. - By the end of 2023, 99.1% of villages had implemented financial transparency, and 98% had established democratic financial management groups [5]. Asset Management and Oversight - As of 2023, the total assets of rural collective economic organizations reached 9.61 trillion yuan, with total revenue of 715.73 billion yuan [6]. - The government has emphasized the need for a robust supervision and management system to prevent the loss of collective assets and ensure proper governance [6][7]. Reform Challenges and Future Directions - The rural collective property rights reform is crucial for revitalizing rural collective assets, but challenges remain, such as unclear asset ownership and a lack of market recognition for collective economic organizations [11]. - Future efforts should focus on enhancing the legal framework for collective asset rights and improving the management capabilities of rural collective economic organizations [12][13]. Diverse Development Models - Various regions have adopted different models for developing the new type of rural collective economy, including resource development, industry-driven approaches, service-oriented income generation, and asset management [14][15][16][18]. - For instance, in Fujian Province, a village developed a scenic area through collective investment, while in Guangdong, collective assets were quantified into shares to enhance value [15][18].