China's first village elections, in 1986-87, attracted much attention in the international media, academic community and groups in the West interested in promoting democracy in China. At that time, leaders like Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang were dedicated to political reform in China.
The democratic direct election of village heads and village committees were in line with the promotion of 'small government, big society' and Chinese leaders appreciated the advantage of transferring the unpopular tasks of tax collection and enforcing birth control to elected representatives of the people. But, from an ideal point of view, supporters of political reform certainly hoped that village elections would lead to town and even county elections.
The Tiananmen incident and the downfall of Hu and Zhao were fatal blows to political reform in China. This decade has seen no significant progress in village elections.
At the end of the 1990s, there were interesting democratic innovations introduced in the elections of town and township heads in Shenzhen, Sichuan and other places. Apparently they were local initiatives, as the central leadership's response was quiet discouragement.
The reform 'bottleneck' was mainly related to the selection of cadres. This excludes village heads and members of village committees, which are grass-roots autonomous bodies. On the other hand, heads of towns and townships are basic-level cadres. If they are directly elected, then the fundamental principle of the Communist Party appointing cadres at all levels may be compromised. This is exactly why, after more than two decades, village elections still cannot lead to town and township elections.
In the beginning of this decade, direct elections were introduced in the urban sector at the level of community residents' committees and owners' committees of housing estates. These innovations attracted the attention of the media and academics inside and outside China, but they have not led to significant breakthroughs. At this stage, Chinese leaders concentrate on administrative reforms and intra-party democratic reforms, with the important objective of ensuring that cadres at all levels are responsive to people's demands so as to maintain social stability and the legitimacy of the party.