Abstract：There are two interpretations of the grassroots units in the governance of Singapore. One interprets those as the residential communities， the other the constituencies. This paper examines and differentiates these two interpretations， arguing that the core issue underlying the divergent definitions of “grassroots” units in Singapore's governance lies in the failure to strictly distinguish between communities and constituencies in Singapore from the differing perspectives of politics and governance. The key to identifying the differences and subsequently defining the grassroots units of Singapore's national governance lies in three distinctions： those between state politics and party politics， between national governance and electoral politics， and between residential autonomous governance and representative politics. Based on that and an analysis and categorization of Singapore's political system and mechanisms， it is clear that communities and constituencies are quite different in nature， operational methods， governance objectives， and legal logic. Communities are the basic form of Singapore's social governance while also connecting with state power-based governance， functioning as the grassroots units of national governance. Constituencies， as political units for the operation of party politics， electoral politics and representative politics， are essentially not the basis of national governance. The authors conclude that the grassroots units of Singapore's national governance should be its communities. Constituencies can be understood as the grassroots units of party politics， electoral politics， and representative politics， but not the grassroots units of national governance.
2025, Vol. 64 
