This study aims to comprehensively examine the mechanisms and practical pathways through which participatory planning and design can effectively integrate and coordinate the three-dimensional development of community space, society, and economy. It also seeks to establish a sustainable framework for co-creation, co-governance, and shared benefits. Focusing on the transformative case of Dongfeng Village in Shunde District, Foshan City, Guangdong Province, the research specifically addresses two interrelated research questions that bridge critical gaps in current community planning literature and practice. First, it investigates how participatory methodologies can simultaneously deliver multi-dimensional outcomes, including tangible physical environmental improvements, the cultivation of robust social capital and community cohesion, and the stimulation of endogenous economic vitality. Second, it explores the design of iterative institutional mechanisms that facilitate a fundamental transition from initial community awareness and capacity building to a self-sustaining, long-term governance model that embodies the principles of autonomous community-led development. Situated within the national policy context advocating “people’s cities built by and for the people” and addresses the persistent challenge of moving beyond tokenistic public participation to achieve genuine, multi-faceted community regeneration.

This investigation is grounded in a longitudinal, in-depth action research methodology. From 2020 to 2024, the researcher assumed the role of an embedded community planner within Dongfeng Village, enabling direct facilitation and immersive observation of the entire participatory planning process. A robust mixed-methods approach was systematically deployed to gather comprehensive data. This included the design, facilitation, and documentation of 23 structured participatory workshops; the execution of extensive community diagnostic surveys which yielded 367 actionable suggestions from residents; a series of semi-structured in-depth interviews with key informants including village cadres, group leaders, and active residents; and sustained ethnographic-style participatory observation. The study operationalized the “point cultivation−global consensus−network activation” analytical framework, employing specific participatory tools such as co-mapping exercises, design charrettes, and the “importance−feasibility” evaluation matrix to structure the intervention and collect evidence. This methodological design ensured the collection of rich, triangulated data, allowing for a nuanced analysis of the processes, causal mechanisms, and multi-scalar outcomes associated with the participatory intervention.

The implementation of the three-phase participatory framework in Dongfeng Village engendered a profound and systemic socio-spatial-economic transformation. The initial point cultivation phase strategically leveraged a localized crisis—the contentious vacant lot in Shenshui village group—as a catalytic entry point. Through a series of five iterative co-design workshops, public scheme exhibitions, and a final community vote, the participatory redesign process for Shenshui Park not only resolved an immediate spatial grievance but, more significantly, incubated foundational community agency and trust. The demonstrable commitment of residents, evidenced by their self-raised contribution of RMB 144,200 towards the project, marked a pivotal shift from passive complaint to active co-creation, establishing essential social capital. Capitalizing on this nascent momentum, the global consensus phase systematically scaled the participatory approach to the entire village of 16 resident groups. This phase employed a sophisticated “interest-organized” stratified participation strategy to ensure inclusive yet efficient engagement. The systematic application of the “importance−feasibility” assessment model transformed 367 raw community suggestions into a visually clear, collectively prioritized project portfolio. This transparent, evidence-based decision-making process effectively mediated potential inter-group resource conflicts, fostered a stronger village-wide collective identity over parochial group interests, and constructed a legitimate, shared roadmap for future development, thereby solidifying the social and institutional foundation for coordinated action. The culminating network activation phase focused on institutionalizing sustainability through innovative financial and governance architectures. The establishment of the Dongfeng Village Co-construction Fund provided a permanent financial engine for community development. This was synergistically coupled with a matching “community micro-investment” scheme. It catalyzed the formation of multiple “co-construction teams,” leading to a cascade of resident-led projects, including the community kitchen, elderly service center, and various public space enhancements. This created a self-reinforcing, iterative cycle of “design−planning−decision−re-implementation.” The fund’s capital structure exemplified successful multi-stakeholder resource mobilization. Consequently, Dongfeng Village underwent a remarkable metamorphosis from a fragmented, low-trust “lagging village” plagued by governance challenges into a widely recognized district-level model community, achieving synergistic gains in upgraded physical infrastructure, deepened social cohesion, and a vibrant, self-sustaining economic foundation for ongoing development.

The empirical evidence from Dongfeng Village conclusively demonstrates that a meticulously structured, phase-based participatory planning framework—“point cultivation, global consensus, network activation” —offers a viable and effective pathway to transcend superficial consultation and achieve integrated, sustainable community development across spatial, social, and economic dimensions. The case elucidates several critical success factors: the necessity of designing institutionalized participatory feedback loops that continuously translate resident agency into concrete collective action; the strategic deployment of financial instruments like community funds and matching grants to incentivize participation, ensure accountability, and guarantee long-term operational viability; and the indispensable synergy between receptive, adaptive local leadership (“two village committees”) and committed, skilled external professional facilitation. While acknowledging the role of unique contextual elements, such as the village’s specific economic structure that provided a reservoir of mobilizable social capital, the core participatory methodology, governance innovations, and the overarching framework possess significant transferable value. This study provides a detailed, evidence-based model for other communities seeking to transition from disjointed, project-driven interventions to a holistic system of community empowerment and endogenous development. Future research should focus on conducting comparative studies to rigorously test the adaptability and efficacy of this framework across diverse socio-economic, cultural, and institutional contexts. Furthermore, scholarly inquiry should explore the expansion of this integrated model to incorporate additional critical dimensions of sustainable development, thereby contributing to a more robust and comprehensive theoretical and practical understanding of participatory community revitalization in the era of urban-rural integration.