As key subjects of grassroots governance, the construction of residents’responsibility is a core issue in building a grassroots governance community characterized by“responsibility for all, fulfillment by all, and enjoyment by all,”and the element of residents’“responsibility”can be refined into the concept of “residential community responsibility.”From the perspective of area studies, and drawing on secondary-source analysis, policy-text analysis, and field research, an investigation of Australia reveals that limited government and the principle of subsidiarity, fiscal contractual relationships and taxpayer awareness, as well as the tradition of mateship and multiculturalism, serve as the theoretical pillars for this construction in the country, while its grassroots practice unfolds along three dimensions: residents’legal duties, residents’public moral obligations, and residents’private moral obligations. The Australian experience suggests that residential community responsibility does not rely solely on moral initiatives or organizational mobilization, but results from its deep  embedding within institutional operations; its stable functioning depends on clear boundaries of rights and responsibilities, perceptible cost-sharing mechanisms, and institutionalized participation procedures. Its implications for China lie in promoting the reciprocity of rights and responsibilities, establishing benefit-linked mechanisms of participation, and fostering autonomous social organizations.

residential community responsibility, Australia, residents’legal duties, residents’public moral obligations, residents’private moral obligations