China has been a deeply decentralized country since Mao’s era,wrote Susan Shirk.Thus,between 1956 and 1975,it experienced two cycles of decentralization whose objective was the construction of socio-economic development.However,these measures did not bring about significant changes in the political-economic system.In view of this growing inability to meet the challenges of economic development,the political authorities of the time carried out reforms called"reform policies" or"opening up reform",of which intergovernmental decentralization is one of the manifestations.This intergovernmental decentralization was not without political consequences.For it gave rise to a new form of local governance that has contributed considerably to China’s spectacular development.So,in order to understand precisely how this local governance has contributed to China’s economic development,let this thesis be entitled"Governance pattern of China’s local government and its comparison with Niger".This thesis,as its title indicates,has a double objective.Firstly,it consists of identifying,from a political perspective,the factors that have enabled local governments to promote China’s economic development.Secondly,incidentally,the thesis will focus on a comparative analysis of local governance between China and Niger.Thus,to conduct this study,this thesis opted for a qualitative approach consisting of using bibliographical sources,legislative sources,etc.Moreover,this approach is accompanied by the comparative method in order to be able to analyze the differences and/or similarities characterizing the Chinese and Nigerien models of local governance.The use of these methodological approaches has led to the discovery that in China,intergovernmental decentralization has led to a readjustment of central-local relations.This readjustment has resulted in a significant transfer of political functions and a large economic provision to local governments.Hence their erection as"strategic actors" whose primary role is to promote the economy.This strategic capacity has led local governments to set themselves up as developmentalist states that have chosen a path of economic development.Variously referred to as"local state corporatism","capitalism with Chinese characteristics","state entrepreneurship" or"local market socialism",this path of development has required local states to intervene directly in the economic field through entrepreneurial,corporatist,clientelistic and developmental modes.Furthermore,the comparative analysis reveals that China and Niger,located in Asia and Africa respectively,are two developing countries.Even if,in economic terms,China is not comparable to Niger,these two countries have the institutional similarity of being unitary states in the conquest of an economic system capable of promoting development.In this perspective,the two countries embarked,around the 1980s,on institutional reform policies aimed at decentralizing the power on their territories.However,these reforms led to the adoption of two different models of local governance.While China opted for systemic governance,Niger,for its part,applies administrative and democratic local governance imposed by international institutions.This difference lies in the fact that China implements intergovernmental decentralization while Niger has chosen administrative decentralization.Indeed,the choice of this form of decentralization explains and justifies the failure of local authorities to promote economic development in Niger,unlike their Chinese peers who have transformed their country economically,socially and technologically.