Volume27.4December2003912-37International Journal of Urban and Regional Research Self-help in Housing and Chengzhongcun
in China's Urbanization*
L.ZHANG,SIMON X.B.ZHAO and J.P.TIAN
Introduction
China's economic reforms in the last two decades have driven the processes of rural-to-urban migration and urbanization at an extraordinary pace,creating new spatial and social urban landscapes.First,many rural villages have been surrounded by city districts,forming so-called chengzhongcun(literately`villages encircled by the city'). Second,rural migrants,being virtually excluded from the urban housing market,are forced to seek accommodation through a self-help approach,producing various types of ghetto settlements or migrant enclaves which were almost absent in pre-reform China. As a matter of fact,and as demonstrated in this study,the chengzhongcun accommodate,with little in the way of government resources and assistance,millions of rural migrants because of their social accessibility and affordability.Nonetheless, chengzhongcun are generally perceived,from the policy-maker's point of view,as undesirable in terms of urban planning and governance because of their association with unsuitable land use,poor housing construction,severe infrastructure deficiencies, intensified social disorder and deterioration of the urban environment.The emergence of these new spatial and social landscapes in Chinese cities,forming a controversial migrant shelter/community,has given rise to policy concerns as China moves to promote more urbanization,and the leadership must confront challenges of managing the unprecedented presence of rural migrants in cities.
The rapid development of migrant settlements in urban China will certainly have a considerable impact on policy-making.However,it is essential to explore the basic nature and functions of chengzhongcun before formulating any policies.Some scholarly works(such as Xiang,1993;1999;Beja and Bonnin,1995;Piante and Zhu,1995; Wang,1995a;1995b;Su,1996;Chen and Zhao,1998;Ma and Xiang,1998;Smith, 2000;Zhang,2001;Wu,2002)have recently been devoted to the basic understanding of various aspects of migrant settlements.Most of them have focused on the processes of radical social change occurring in such settlements.Xiang(1999)and Zhang(2001) carried out an ethnographic investigation of the creation of social networks based on migrants'region of origin and the formation of non-state spaces produced in the interaction between migrants and government.Fan and Taubmann(2002),as well as Gu and Liu(2002),offer case studies of migrant enclaves in Beijing and Shanghai, focusing on the emerging social inequality and spatial segregation in Chinese cities.In examining the housing and settlement patterns of migrant households,Wu(2002)points out that migrants are excluded from the formal housing distribution system and,as a result,an incipient housing market on the fringes of the city is in the making.All these
*This article is a partial product of the research project`Settling``Rural Villages within Cities''in China: Problems and Planning Strategies',financed by Hong Kong Baptist University(Grant Ref:FRG/97-98/II-51).The authors would like to acknowledge financial support from the Hong Kong Baptist University and the collaboration of the Center for Urban and Regional Studies,Zhongshan University,China.Special gratitude is due to Professor Xu Xueqiang and Professor Yan Xiaopei,who are in charge of the collaboration in China,and due to valuable help from various departments of Guangzhou Municipal Government.
Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization913 researches are no doubt informative and stimulating.From planning and policy perspectives,however,there is little understanding of why chengzhongcun are able to provide low-cost accommodation for those who have to be self-sufficient in cities in the face of many systemic constraints and institutional discrimination,but at the same time who have no resources to self-build housing.While official demolition of chengzhongcun in different cities has been documented in some studies,the social consequences of government action towards chengzhongcun are yet to be appropriately explored,though such an exploration will be helpful for the government to work out politically acceptable and economically feasible policy options.
This research,based on intensive fieldwork as well as scrutiny of related policies, focuses on China's urbanization-related issues,specifically migrant housing and settlements that have only been referred to briefly in the Western literature.In particular,it seeks to explore the rationale for rural migrants'self-help housing in the Chinese context,explain why chengzhongcun are able to accommodate migrants in the absence of government help,and assess government strategy towards migrant self-built settlements in the rural-urban transformation.While not denying their social problems, we argue that chengzhongcun in fact act as an innovative and positive agent to promote urbanization in today's China by sheltering massive numbers of rural migrants and assimilating them into cities.Policy strategy towards the redevelopment of chengzhongcun must acknowledge their credibility on the Chinese road to urbanization and require more thoughtful and prudent consideration of migrants'demands for affordable housing.
Comprehensive surveys on chengzhongcun at the national level are unavailable. Census data provide an unclear picture because of the lack of detailed itemization and there are only pieces of the jigsaw puzzle documented in media reports and research papers(for example,Ma and Xiang,1998;Qiu and Chen,1999,to name but a few).The data in this work are primarily drawn from our own survey,in addition to other published statistics and literature.The survey,jointly conducted by the authors and the Center for Urban and Regional Studies of Zhongshan University in May1999, investigated intensively the economic and housing situations of459migrants in50 randomly selected chengzhongcun in Guangzhou metropolis and Dongguan munici-pality.1Being popular destinations for migrants,these two cities illustrate some salient features of self-help housing practice and are by no means isolated cases.Realizing that the sample size is relatively small for the purpose of statistical analysis,we have acquired supplementary qualitative information from in-depth interviews with key people whose work impacts on migrants,migrant housing and migrant settlements. The article is organized as follows.Following a brief review of the essentials of the self-help housing approach,we first discuss the rationale for rural migrants'self-help housing in the Chinese context.We then explore the characteristics of chengzhongcun and explain how they can house rural migrants in the absence of state help.Next,we look at the government reaction to chengzhongcun and anticipate the impact of this reaction on housing for migrants.In the last part,we summarize the main points arising from the discussion.
The approach of self-help in housing
Urbanization accompanied by massive rural-to-urban migration is universally regarded as an inevitable development process for almost all economies(Lewis,1955;Kuznets, 1966;Chenery and Syrquin,1975;Todaro,2000).Associated with this development is
1Migrants in the survey are defined as those without local legitimate registration according to the current household registration regulations,regardless of the length of time that they have stayed in the investigated place.This definition is to ensure that we are addressing the different treatments of local and non-local people in terms of employment,housing and social benefits.
914L.Zhang,Simon X.B.Zhao and J.P.Tian the high demand for affordable urban housing.However,rural migrants in many third-world cities are not able to afford housing at market prices and governments have failed to provide sufficient low-cost housing.As a result,there has been a rapid growth of squatter settlements and slums in cities of developing countries.As the problems of slums are growing increasingly serious(Berry,1973),housing for rural migrants and the urban poor has become one of the key policy concerns in many third-world nations and has also been of academic interest(Linden,1986;United Nations Center for Human Settlements,1990).
In response to the inability of government to deal effectively with the overwhelming demand for housing in cities,the idea of self-help has been the focus of much attention as a feasible solution to the housing needs of the urban poor(Tait,1997).Though varied in specific ways according to the different political and economic constraints in different countries,the self-help approach to housing refers generally to those practices in which low-income groups solve their housing needs primarily through their own resources(both in terms of labor and finance).Taking a broad view,self-help in housing incorporates informal means of land acquisition and provision of housing,and the physical and social infrastructure required for migrant settlements to function.Two key components of the self-help housing approach are therefore a high degree of self-finance,and informality in the materialization of housing and infrastructure demand for poor urban communities.The role of government in providing accommodation for the urban poor,if any,is mainly subsidiary and collaborative.
Practices of self-help in housing are often associated with the formation of slums and squatter settlements.There have been a significant number of studies on the theoretical debates and government reactions to self-help housing in developing economies(Turner,1968;1976;Ward,1982;Mathey,1992;Aldrich and Sandhu, 1995;Tait,1997).These studies document two basic policy strategies towards slums and squatter settlements:(1)legalizing and upgrading informal communities;or(2) seeking sites and services in order to relocate existing residents and to create new settlements.The former focuses on institutional and infrastructural development and social improvements for existing squatter areas.The latter aims at the relocation of squatter areas under current municipal regulations and planning controls.Interna-tional experience has shown that the first strategy has achieved considerable success and the second has increasingly lost its viability(Payne,1989;Linden,1994;Aldrich and Sandhu,1995).The first strategy is structured within an informal system and effectively enhances people's initiatives and neighborhood spirit.These are perceived as vital in dealing with low-income shelter problems.By contrast,the second strategy entails more inappropriate government intervention in such matters as site selection,land supply,housing standards and community administration.It has also been recognized,through case studies,that non-governmental forces have generally performed better than government organizations in facilitating suitable ways to meet the housing demand of the urban poor(Sen,1992).
The Chinese experience widens the conventional meaning of self-help in housing. From a general perspective,the Chinese situation of self-help in housing for rural migrants is similar to that found in other developing countries,both in the sense that it is largely associated with the low economic status of migrants and that government provides few effective aids to migrants'accommodation.A spatial outcome of self-help in housing is the formation of slum-like settlements in parts of cities,well known as chengzhongcun in the context of China.However,the Chinese case differs from the cases in the West in two principal ways.First,self-help in housing for rural migrants in China is closely related to the rural-urban dichotomy in land policy and housing provision.For China's peasant migrants,not only income,but also state policy are significant barriers to urban housing.Unlike elsewhere in the world where a shortage of affordable housing is the main constraint limiting the options of migrants,exclusionary policies decreed by the Chinese state make urban public housing completely off-limits to peasants(Solinger,1996).In contrast to the legitimate urban residents who are sheltered by the heavily subsidized state housing system,rural migrants must seek ways
Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization915 to bypass their financial constraints as well as the institutional restraints set on urban housing provision.
Second,unlike in many other countries where self-help in housing usually means housing built by migrants themselves,the housing available for migrants in China is mainly constructed by the indigenous peasants living in chengzhongcun who have access to land(Wong and Zhao,1999).Largely financed by land rights and freed by falling outside the scope of the city administration and planning controls,those indigenous residents tacitly build housing with their own resources,as cheaply as possible,and then create a rental market of low-cost and protected accommodation for those excluded by the system of state-provided public housing.A significant consequence of such a practice is the creation of functional rental markets among peasants themselves(both indigenous and migrant peasants)to materialize housing for migrants in the absence of state help.It is a mutually advantageous arrangement of support that through rentals indigenous peasants are making subsidiary income and migrant peasants are enjoying accessible and affordable housing,which is unavailable in the formal housing system in Chinese cities.As we show in detail later,self-finance and self-creation of low-cost rental markets among rural people are key to the self-help approach in the Chinese context.
The rationale for rural migrants'self-help
in housing in urban China
Both affordability and the right of residence in cities are the two key issues for understanding migrants'practice of self-help in housing in urban China.Chinese practices of self-help in housing operate in the context of the dual housing market.Two distinct housing markets existed in China,with different rules of the game in play.The urban housing market,limited only to registered urban residents,was characterized by a very high degree of public provision and management of housing until the end of the 1990s(Wu,1996).Urban residents played little role in their housing.In the rural areas, by contrast,all housing matters were left completely to the peasants own devices,apart from the fact that land for housing was assigned by the rural community to its members at almost no cost.The strict local regulations against unofficially occupying land and building houses made unauthorized construction or land acquisition almost impossible, unless one was an indigenous resident.The two markets were separated by strict restrictions on change in residence registration.Peasants'self-responsibility for housing will not change as long as the residence registration(hukou)in the rural community remains in place,regardless of where one actually works and lives.
The essential background to rural migrants'self-help in housing in Chinese cities is the rapid growth of rural-to-urban migration and the systemic closure of the urban housing market to non-urban people.Economic reforms have released an enormous surplus of rural laborers who need to seek non-agricultural employment and have seriously weakened the state's ability to regulate the inevitable exodus from the countryside.The stock of rural migrants in cities has been estimated,by various sources,to be sizeable,though the absolute figures depend on the definitions used.It should be noted that because of its highly mobile nature,no study has ever been able to effectively count the temporary population in the country.The actual figure is often estimated at over70million(for example,see Ma and Xiang,1998;Wu,1999;Smith, 2000;Wang,2000).Table1,while excluding many living outside the regulations, shows that close to80%of the officially registered temporary population were living in cities in1999.Of the32.1million people temporarily resident in China's cities,the majority migrated for employment.Most rural migrants are clustered in several major manual occupations and only a very small group is in non-manual categories(Solinger, 1999).The major manual trades are construction,manufacturing,domestic services, low-order business services(mainly restaurants,cleaning,craftwork and repairs),
garment processing and scrap collection.Because of their lack of legitimate urban status (a permanent urban hukou )and their employment mostly in low-paid occupations,rural migrants as an urban underprivileged group have been socially excluded from the state-created urban housing system.Despite their phenomenal appearance in the cities for a decade,rural migrants are ironically given little opportunity to access the urban housing market.
To most rural migrants,urban housing in China is unattainable in terms of eligibility and affordability.The state sector monopolized the urban housing market in the pre-reform period after the means of production were nationalized.The housing market was characterized by the dominance of the public sector and the state's obligation to provide housing for the urban residents.Once Chinese society had been organized on the basis of public ownership,housing was not perceived as a simple commodity but as a welfare benefit by the socialist ideology.Whatever the property rights in practice,all urban housing was without exception constructed with government investment and then bureaucratically leased through employment.Residential leases were both locale-based and enterprise-based,linked to the almost complete absence of a private rental sector.One of the crucial criteria of the lease entitlement was one's `membership'which was defined jointly by an official urban hukou and by being a permanent employee of a state enterprise.Persons without the right of abode in cities were excluded.Moreover,the rents for urban housing were heavily subsidized by the state to match its `rational low wage'policy for urban workers,who were paid a wage just sufficient to cater for their basic needs.Since the user charges were only nominal relative to the costs of construction and maintenance,the demand for such de facto free housing rose much more rapidly than the investment could respond to appropriately.From an economic standpoint,the more housing the government provided the greater the financial liability in its budget.Simply stated,the ideological responsibility and expenditure pressure forced the state to close the urban housing market to rural migrants.
The urban housing market has undergone considerable restructuring since 1980as China attempted to move away from the centrally planned economic system.The restructuring is orientated to commodification and marketization,which is intended to change the overwhelming role of the state in housing and to transform urban housing from welfare goods to a commodity in several respects.First,the state has withdrawn its obligation for free housing provision (Lee,2000;Wang,2000).Individual residents are required to repay at least one-third of the dwelling's replacement cost (Li,2000).
Table 1Temporary population in China,by reason for stay,1999(in million)
Reasons for stay
National City County Total temporary population 40.432.18.3Employment in industry 22.518.4 4.1Employment in agriculture
1.560.980.48Employment in commerce and retailing 5.90 4.60 1.30Employment in services 3.70
2.900.80Business trips 1.100.770.34Study or training 0.990.550.44Medical treatments
0.220.130.09Employment in domestic services 0.220.160.06Visits to relatives or friends 1.50 1.100.40Holiday and sightseeing 1.50 1.300.20Unclassifiable
1.40
1.10
0.30
Source:Ministry of Public Security (1999)
916
L.Zhang,Simon X.B.Zhao and J.P.Tian
Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization917 Second,the state has gradually privatized its housing stock by selling them off to the sitting tenants at heavily discounted prices(Ministry of Construction,1999).Third, development of commercial housing,built essentially for profit and entailing construction and transactions that are marketized,is encouraged.2Private or joint-venture developers are allowed to build and sell or lease residential properties for a profit on the open market at market prices(Wang and Murie,1999a).Along with these developments,a new form of public housing,known as the anju project,has been sponsored by the state for urban low-income groups who cannot purchase housing at full market prices.
The current commercialization of urban housing has basically provided no homes for the vast majority of rural migrants who are employed in low-paid positions and are categorized as the urban unofficial poor(Wang,2000).Unlike the pre-reform period when hiring peasant labor was stringently controlled,the employment of rural migrants, especially in jobs that are particularly strenuous,dirty or monotonous,has been given tacit consent in the reform period.Due primarily to their different occupations,studies have estimated that rural migrant laborers,with an annual income of about6,000±7,000 yuan,generally command lower wages than urban workers(Knight et al.,1999).This ranges from74%of average earnings for managerial and technical staff,and85%for production workers to89%for supporting workers,as indicated in Table2.On the other hand,commercialized housing,which is available on the open market at market prices, is very expensive relative to the average salary in China.As the income situation of migrants in Table2and the market housing prices in Table3show,the much-prized commercialized housing,available only to affluent buyers,is unaffordable for the urban poverty groups.It is apparent that high prices and low incomes exclude rural migrant laborers from the newly emerging commercialized housing market in Chinese cities. Apart from the development of commercialized housing,the other restructuring of the urban housing market is also irrelevant to most rural migrants who are consistently denied legitimate urban status,a major precondition for eligibility for state-subsidized urban housing.Despite the less heavily regulated employment practice,the complexity and rigidity of the existing registration and permit system make it difficult for many rural laborers to obtain permanent working and living status in cities(Solinger,1999; Zhang,2000).As they lack the right of residence in cities,rural migrants are not entitled to buy the housing units privatized by the state.For the same reason,they are also disqualified from urban low-cost,state-subsidized or state-sponsored public housing.In view of their low purchasing power and lack of urban citizenship,urban housing is largely beyond the reach of rural migrants.As will be shown in the following discussion,rural migrants have to resolve their housing demand through their own efforts,financially and socially.
Chengzhongcun as migrant settlements
With their specific geographic and social conditions,the chengzhongcun have functioned as a favorable residential concentration of migrants who are low-income and are denied access to low-cost state housing.
The formation of chengzhongcun
The chengzhongcun were transformed from suburban villages when rural land was requisitioned due to city territorial expansion.Rural land according to the Chinese constitution is collectively owned by rural communities(communes before the economic reform and villages since then).All members of the community are entitled to partake in an equal share of the collectively-owned land,acting as de facto land owners.
2For an explanation of the commercialized housing concept,see Wang and Murie(1999a:note1).
Rural land by function can be divided into two main categories:land for farming and land for housing (zhaijidi ).A member of the community will be allocated a plot of communally held land with unrestricted tenure and virtually free for the construction of a home when he or she is in need of housing.3Built-up village areas were developed by amassing individual zhaijidi .If urban development demanded more land,the city government could acquire rural land from villages by paying compensation to the village,in accordance with the size of land requisition,recruiting some working-age farmers to city jobs,and conferring on them urban hukou status.Under customary practice,the city government would requisition farmland rather than built-up village land in order to avoid high compensation and costly relocation of the residents.In the process,considerable stretches of rural areas and their residents in the villages
adjacent
Figure 1The distribution of chengzhongcun (urban village)in Guangzhou
3Due to various levels of land occupancy,the size of land for housing per capita varies considerably
from one community to another.But in general,the size of residential land per capita in rural areas is greater than in cities.
918
L.Zhang,Simon X.B.Zhao and J.P.Tian
Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization919 to the city were spatially encompassed or annexed by urban territory,forming a distinctive landscape within the city's boundariesDchengzhongcun.
Against the background of urban sprawl,chengzhongcun,as a kind of geo-social landscape,commonly appeared in Chinese cities,especially in those experiencing rapid development.In Guangzhou metropolis,for example,agricultural lands on the city outskirts have been converted to urban use on an enormous scale in the past two decades.The metropolitan built-up areas expanded from136square kilometers to287 square kilometers between1980and1999.As a result of territorial growth,Guangzhou now contains277chengzhongcun with approximately one million indigenous villagers (https://www.doczj.com/doc/c88289109.html,,1August2000;see Figure1).Most of these chengzhongcun are now located in the inner city,though some are on the outskirts of the city.
Complicated social format
Categorization of chengzhongcun based on migrants'place of origin and occupations can be complicated.Table4highlights the characteristics of migrants in chengzhong-cun.One message brought out by the Table is that although migrant settlements in Chinese cities are often formed by people originating from the same place and are better known for producing one or two specialized products,not all chengzhongcun are necessarily ethnically-based and employment-specialized.Migrants as a group in specific chengzhongcun were not always homogeneous in terms of social origins and occupations,or even income levels.Tables4and5clearly reflect the heterogeneity in occupational and economic status among migrants living in chengzhongcun.
Table4reveals some basic characteristics of migrants in our surveyed sites.In our case studies,migrants came from many parts of the country.We found that many chengzhongcun,as migrant enclaves,were in fact loosely structured socially,lacking dominant ethnic connections comparable to other native place-based migrant communities such as Zhejiang village or Wenzhou village in Beijing.In many chengzhongcun it is hard to find a predominant portion of migrants who came from the same native township or even the same province.In terms of education,migrants are highly selective:95%of those surveyed received some years of education,with a high
Table2Average earnings and employment by occupation,1995(urban,rural and total workers)
Urban Rural Total Rural Rural
workers workers workers workers workers
(urban(rural
=100plus
urban=
100 Average earnings(yuan/annum)
Managerial&technical staff10,9188,12010,65374.4
Skilled workers9,5697,9528,48983.1
Production workers7,6826,5896,80585.8
Supporting workers6,9886,1926,36788.6
Total8,6796,8777,75279.2 Employment(%)
Managerial&technical staff19.1 1.015.50.1 Skilled workers23.522.523.219.9 Production workers48.168.052.227.0 Supporting workers9.38.59.119.3 Total100.0100.0100.020.7 Source:Song et al.(1999)
Table 5Income of migrants
Monthly income per Before After migration
capita
migration
Income
Monthly Monthly savings
remittance
Respondents:
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
Less than 100yuan 9821.45518.6100±199yuan 18440.010 2.37015.311725.2200±499yuan 20544.710122.118640.623050.2500±1,199yuan 4510.522048.28017.428
6.0
1,200±2,000yuan 15 3.48819.218 4.0More than 2,000yuan 6 1.4388.26
1.3
Average (yuan)
267
1,028
425
347
Source:Authors'survey (1999)
Table 3Commercialized housing prices in Beijing,1995and 1996
Location
Housing type Price
Yuan/m 2US$/unit of 70m 2
Suburban counties Multi-storey,walk up 1,500±3,00012,500±25,000Inner suburbs Multi-storey,walk up 4,000±6,50033,000±54,000Suburbs near to the Multi-storey,walk up 6,500±8,00054,000±66,0002nd and 3rd ring roads
Multi-storey tower block 8,000±13,000
66,000±107,000
with lift
Source:Wang and Murie (1999a:Table 6)
Table 4Characteristics of migrants in chengzhongcun (N =459)
%
Gender Male 67Female 33Marital status Single 48Married 52Education level
Illiterate 5Primary school
14Secondary &high school 71University
10Occupation
Industry 17Self-employed
14Construction &services 38Other
31
Origins Cover many parts of the country Ethnicity Han dominance,but also multi-ethnicity Business
Grocery store,hair salon,household services,vendors,prostitution,etc.
Source:Authors'survey (1999)
920
L.Zhang,Simon X.B.Zhao and J.P.Tian
Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization921 concentration having completed secondary and high school.The occupations of migrant dwellers also covered a wide range of categories from street vendors to security guards, though many of these jobs were dirty,difficult and dangerous(the so-called3-D jobs). It should be noted that the general categorization of occupations in Table4masks job diversity among migrants.Indeed,migrants are engaged in various jobs that are hard to classify or are even unclassifiable.According to our interviews,most migrants are employed in the informal sector on a temporary basis.They take whatever job is available to them.Because many of these jobs of a temporary nature,few migrants stick to only a single job.A handful of self-employed are,in fact,small vendors and craftsmen.The remarkable diversity in personal origin and jobs reflects the complicated patterns of migrant enclaves in today's China.
Table5shows the income situation of migrants.Before migration,the average monthly income of interviewees was267yuan,and the majority(85%)earned less than 500yuan per month.Only a few(5%)had a monthly income over1,200yuan.After migration,the average monthly income of interviewees reached1,028yuan,nearly four times as high as before.The percentage of people with a monthly income(including wages,bonuses and other types of monetary allowance)of over500yuan had increased five times.Twenty-seven percent of migrants were paid over1,200yuan,slightly above the average income of residents in our surveyed cities.Almost all migrants managed to have some savings,about425yuan on average,though the amount of monthly savings varied significantly among them.The migrants surveyed sent,on average,347yuan home each month.This indicates that their income situation has generally improved through migration,even though migrants earned less than local residents and the income distribution among them is highly uneven.
Migrant concentration
From national data as well as our survey on the existing migrants'accommodation in cities,it is evident that rural migrants were mainly accommodated either at their own expense,through kinship and social ties,or through unlawful means(Table6).Our interviews also revealed a similar relocation pattern of migrants.When they first came to the city,migrants usually lodged with relatives or friends who had already settled in the destination place.This reflected the working of social networks in facilitating migration.Unauthorized housing,often visible in places that are only marginally habitable(such as alcoves under bridges or even rubbish dumps),was occasionally resorted to by those who were unemployed,or who experienced extreme hardship,or whose jobs were highly insecure.National statistics show that about30%of migrant workers live in dormitories provided by their employers.Most of these dormitories are located in industrial zones,though some are in chengzhongcun.However,in our survey, we found that a significant number of migrants,about25%,were accommodated in dormitories provided by employers in chengzhongcun.This is because some employers have worksites in chengzhongcun.They built dormitories or rented houses in chengzhongcun,offering bed-sized space free for their employees.They chose lodging provision there for their migrant laborers simply because of the low costs.Nevertheless, it should be noted that the provision of dormitories in chengzhongcun is a special case in our survey.We have not learnt of a similar situation in other cities. Chengzhongcun are also attractive for migrants looking for cheap accommodation. This was consistent both in our surveyed cities and nationwide.As shown in Table6, about41%of rural migrants relied on renting in chengzhongcun,where houses are available and affordable to them.If this was also true for the country as a whole,it could be estimated that the chengzhongcun in fact accommodate millions of rural migrants.Chengzhongcun,therefore,have contributed significantly to Chinese urbanization by offering a feasible solution to the housing problem of rural migrants. Although the chengzhongcun are not the only location receiving rural migrants, migrant options for housing in other parts of the city are significantly limited by the acute housing shortage in many Chinese cities,in addition to the speculative prices in
the commodity housing already mentioned.As of year 2000,per capita living space in urban China is on average about 10.3square meters (Economic Daily ,2January 2002).Many urban families have simply no space for renting out even if they are willing to do so.The provision of urban housing is further constrained by the ambiguous property rights.Under the old welfare housing system,urban housing was primarily allocated either by work units or municipal governments and organized around work-unit compounds (Gaubatz,1995;Zhou and Logan,1996).Although currently many people have bought property rights to the home they acquired (Wu,2002),there are in effect many de facto regulations restricting them from putting their homes on the private housing market (at least for a certain period after buying)for sale or even for lease.As we discovered in the course of our interviews,migrant housing may be scattered but is hard for them to congregate in areas other than chengzhongcun.
Table 7further reveals that chengzhongcun became notable migrant enclaves in the reform period,based on data collected from our survey and other sources.There were limitations in data consistency and comparability across studies as each study had its own method of defining and counting migrants.Despite such limitations,they still make the general point that the number of rural migrants staying in chengzhongcun was quite significant.In several cases,migrant inhabitants substantially outnumbered native residents by a ratio of two or three to one.In the case of Rui Bao Cun the ratio rises to thirty to one (Table 7).Closer to the downtown of Guangzhou metropolis,this village of 2,000indigenous peasants had leased houses to 60,000migrants,sheltering people from Sichuan,Hunan,Guangxi and other provinces.It can be fairly said that chengzhongcun seem to be a preferred site or a residential hot spot for migrants seeking a new livelihood in cities.
Table 6Types of migrant accommodation
Type of accommodation
National statistics Survey data
No.of %No.of %
migrants respondents
(millions)Unauthorized housing 1.54
3.8
15 3.3In open field 30.7In discarded house 5 1.1On boat 10.2In pig pen 6
1.3Self-built shelters 6.5216.1561
2.3On construction site 459.9In roost 11
2.4Rented houses
12.5531.118741.1Privately-owned house 15133.2Business store 12 2.6Temporary house 10.2Collectively-owned house 16
3.5Dormitories provided by employers 11.9529.611525.3Lodge with relatives and friends
4.1310.222 4.8Hostels
3.72
9.2
20.4Houses purchased by migrants 9 2.0Other
48
10.5
Sources:Ministry of Public Security (1999);Authors'survey (1999)
922
L.Zhang,Simon X.B.Zhao and J.P.Tian
Living environment
Chengzhongcun attract migrants through a combination of several advantageous conditions.Proximity to workplaces and shopping areas is one of them.Being a geographical part of the city,chengzhongcun are closely linked to these areas,providing good accessibility.There is a housing rental market there that can provide accommodation at comparatively low rents and,most importantly,meet the financial capacity of migrants.Many migrants have even rented additional workshops for home-based economic activities.Most houses in chengzhongcun are constructed of durable building materials with foundations,doors and windows,and roofing.A substantial number of dwellings have essential facilities like tap water,electricity,private kitchens,flush toilets and sewage drainage that offer better living conditions than many distant and isolated rural areas.In our survey,many migrants found living in chengzhongcun convenient and inexpensive.Table 8summarizes the migrants'evaluation of their current living conditions in chengzhongcun,based on a rating of three sets of factors which were considered the most significant components in determining basic living standards.The responses reflected a considerably high level of housing satisfaction.The responses,however,did not add up to a straightforward pattern showing unambiguous housing satisfaction.Table 8and our field observation also revealed that chengzhongcun are by no means a `garden village'.A high level of satisfaction with basic needs in dwelling might be an operational expression of migrant's low expectations in relation to housing.To some migrants the locational aspect and affordability may be more important than housing conditions.Our respondents in the survey migrated primarily for economic reasons,especially for the purpose of improving their family incomes.However,they face many uncertainties in cities with respect to job security and right of residence.As part of their strategy for tackling these uncertainties,they maximized their savings by minimizing their living costs,of which housing costs form a significant part.They sought cheap but usually substandard housing that was perceived only as a second and temporary home necessary for earning money.Shared housing was also a common practice among migrants,very often leading to a bed-sized living space per dweller.As part of the reality,many chengzhongcun were indeed plagued by aged housing and poorly maintained facilities,
Table 7Ratio of migrants to indigenous residents in selected chengzhongcun
Chengzhongcun
Year
No.of No.of Ratio migrants
indigenous (indigenous residents
residents =100)
Beijing metropolis
Wa bian cun 19972,1622,086104:100917district
199728731890.3:100Guangzhou metropolis
Shi pai cun 200012,0009,234130:100San yuan li 200011,0004,200262:100Tang xi cun 20009,5344,656205:100Rui bao cun
200060,0002,0003,000:100Dongguan municipality
Shang yuan cun 19988,0002,842281:100Yan tian cun
1998
70,000
2,877
2,433:100
Sources:Data on Beijing are from Chen Tian (1998);data on Guangzhou and Dongguan are from the authors'interviews with local cadres of the surveyed sites
Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization
923
very narrow pathways between rows of terraces,intensive use of space without appropriate planning,and a high residential density that was beyond the capacity of the infrastructure services.All of these were developed in an unauthorized fashion,according to individual journalistic reports.Put in this context,it should come as no surprise that there were also such social problems as violence,pornographic activities,burglary and robbery in addition to health problems (Piante and Zhu,1995).It is true,to some extent,that the chengzhongcun resemble some of the worst features of shanty towns in other cities of the world (Figure 2).
Rural status and self-help in housing in chengzhongcun
The emergence of chengzhongcun as a popular residential location for rural migrants cannot be fully understood without reference to the rural status,or at best the not yet urbanized characteristics,of these villages.Their rural status has linked chengzhongcun into the rural administrative system and created the possibilities which have made affordable housing for migrants feasible.First,native villagers,on account of their rural hukou status,have the legal right to free land for housing,which,unavailable to urban residents and migrants,is the most valuable resource to finance housing and to generate alternative incomes.Second,because the governance of chengzhongcun is outside the urban system,there is fluidity in enforcing urban planning and development regulations,making housing construction largely uncontrollable and cost-saving and thus suppressing rent levels.Third,as the housing property in chengzhongcun is
Table 8Evaluation of current living situation by migrants (%)*
Highly Satisfied
Slightly Unsatisfied Highly
satisfied
satisfied
unsatisfied
Housing conditions Dwelling size
3.828.738.425.6 3.5Building structure &floor plan 1.125.638.030.7
4.7Provision of water &electricity 6.248.131.312.2 2.2Ventilation 4.232.73
5.022.7 5.3Building materials
6.543.433.212.0 4.9Overall
4.4
35.7
33.2
20.6
4.1
Living environment in villages Sewerage &drainage 2.434.038.418.7 6.4Street lighting 4.635.834.719.7 5.1Sense of security 5.338.739.112.0 4.9Noise pollution 3.820.932.734.77.8Overall 4.0
32.4
36.2
21.3
6.1
Accessibility To hospital 3.437.437.818.3 3.1To school 3.038.514.014.5 3.0To market 5.450.031.611.2 1.8To transport 5.338.739.112.0 4.9To downtown 3.825.839.523.87.2Overall
4.4
39.0
31.0
16.5
3.7
*The figures in each item do not necessarily round up to 100%as some respondents did not answer all questions Source:Authors'survey (1999)
924
L.Zhang,Simon X.B.Zhao and J.P.Tian
overwhelmingly privately-owned,market forces working on the supply-demand signals have undermined government restrictions on the rental housing market and opened the market to rural migrants.
Housing construction in chengzhongcun should not be seen as independent of the property rights on rural land.The convention of using collectively-owned land for housing is conducive to the construction of low-cost housing in chengzhongcun.Indigenous residents are constituted by village committees and are classified as a rural population by the system of household registration (hukou ),regardless of their occupation.While this population,who live within the city boundary but are administratively included in the category of rural population,receives no financial support from the state for their housing needs,they do enjoy certain benefits of property rights on land denied to the city population.Collective land ownership allows
villagers,
Figure 2Living environment in chengzhongcun,Guangzhou
Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization
925
926L.Zhang,Simon X.B.Zhao and J.P.Tian poor or rich,equal right to the use of land for their https://www.doczj.com/doc/c88289109.html,nd for housing is allocated free(or for a nominal fee introduced very recently)by the village authority, which is a representative body to exercise the collective ownership.An individual's right to use the land on a continuing basis is not deprived from the members of a village as long as his/her membership(defined or indicated by a local hukou)in the village remains in place.Access to free land for housing constitutes an important prerequisite for building houses at lower costs in villages than in cities.
Land is not only a prerequisite for building houses but also a resource to finance housing construction.Most chengzhongcun have economically divested themselves of their agricultural heritage as farmland there was largely requisitioned due to urban development.Chengzhongcun also have many off-farm income opportunities because of their proximity to the city.The compensation for land requisition combined with off-farm incomes guaranteed the indigenous villagers the necessary capital for their own housing construction.Because of a large lump sum of monetary compensation,many indigenous residents in chengzhongcun had the financial capacity to build a big dwelling(or even more than one)with larger living space than their actual needs. Housing can be regarded not only as a socially necessary good that is part of survival demand but also a financial asset that can provide a subsidiary source of income. Indigenous villagers are legally not allowed to alienate the land allocated to other private parties under the regime of collective land ownership.However,they can take advantage of the opportunity presented by the land and housing market by renting out parts of their dwellings for financial return.The sheer numbers of rural migrants and the locational advantage of chengzhongcun produced high demand for low-rent urban housing in chengzhongcun.Because of this lucrative incentive,indigenous villagers speculated by building more floors in their houses for rental.Renting out housing to migrants at affordable rates is quite a common income-generating business for indigenous villagers.By utilizing gratuitous land,indigenous villagers are able to provide housing at rents lower than could be offered by other housing providers.To indigenous villagers,the land-financed houses function to generate rents in the short term and serve as a bargaining tool for higher compensation in case built land is requisitioned in future for urban expansion.
Table9documents our major findingsDthe financial aspects of housing such as the cost of land,housing finance and rental income from several cases in selected chengzhongcun.The Table corroborates some of the points just discussed.First,free land played a crucial role in self-financing of house construction in chengzhongcun.As there is no cost for the land,the construction costs are almost equal to the total cost for housing.It is understandable,from the cost side,why chengzhongcun can provide inexpensive housing which low-income migrants can afford to https://www.doczj.com/doc/c88289109.html,paring rental rates in chengzhongcun(Table9)with those of urban commodity housing(Table3), one can see that the rental level in chengzhongcun is substantially lower than that of urban commodity housing elsewhere.In many cases,the unit rental rates in chengzhongcun are only10%to20%of those of urban commodity housing.Second, houses in chengzhongcun are self-financed.Construction costs are covered mainly by family savings and informal loans from relatives or friends).Third,chengzhongcun are attractive to rural migrants.This is indicated by the renting-out rates,which are from 50%to90%.Not least of all,while the cost and the rent per case varies with chengzhongcun locations and housing structures,it is evident that the cost recovery of housing construction and the financial gain through accommodation rental are promising for the chengzhongcun landlords in all cases.It takes a very short time, even as little as one or two years,for the landlords to recoup their investment. Financially,housing projects in chengzhongcun are favorable to migrants,as well as profitable for landlords.In fact,the housing rental market in chengzhongcun reflects a mutually beneficial support between two groups of peasants(indigenous villagers and rural migrants)during the course of economic transformation.Indigenous villagers mobilized their own resources(land and capital)to create a housing market that is accessible and affordable for rural migrants,and at the same time,to make a subsidiary
Table9Housing construction costs and rental income in selected chengzhongcun*
Case Location Land Land House Construction costs Financial source Renting-out Estimated rental income size cost size Unit Total rate(%)Unit rate Annual
(m2)(m2)price(yuan)(yuan/m2)Income
(yuan/m2)(yuan)
1City proper40Free160650104,000Family savings7010±1216,000
2City proper40Free16037560,000Family savings607±886,400 3City proper20Free6038022,800Family savings903523,000
4Adjacent suburb60Free390620241,800Family savings503628,800
&loan from relatives
5Adjacent suburb39Free252550±650151,200Family savings&
loan from relatives60±706±817,000
6Distant suburb80Free80N/A N/A Family savings10013511,000
7Distant suburb100Free22020044,000Family savings755±614,400
*Interviewees were randomly selected from the roster of indigenous villagers,who built and rent out their housing units.We believe that the selected cases are highly representative Source:Interviews with indigenous villagers in the surveyed sites Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization 927
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research
?Joint Editors and Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2003
928L.Zhang,Simon X.B.Zhao and J.P.Tian income for themselves.Rural migrants,as major tenants of the low end of the housing market,made the housing market in chengzhongcun economically sustainable through their rental.Both indigenous villagers and rural migrants worked together to help themselves in the process of urbanization.
It is precisely this unique characteristic of China's self-help practice that differentiates it from other countries.Table9reveals the unique features of chengzhongcun that are crucial for forming a low-cost housing market in Chinese cities.The rural status of villagers makes them entitled to`free-land'for housing.By utilizing the free land as well as by mobilizing necessary resources(personal savings and private loans),the indigenous villagers have the capacity to finance housing in chengzhongcun.However,the large scale of housing development and housing rental in chengzhongcun are economically sustained by the migrants'high demand for low-cost housing,making chengzhongcun finally become functional migrant settlements.It is villagers and migrants,both originating from`rural'traditions,who work together to initiate and to reinforce the Chinese self-help migrant settlements.
Although chengzhongcun are contained within municipal boundaries,their rural status largely protects the supply and price of the housing rental market there from the intervention of urban planning control by evading stringent planning regulations and technical codes.City planning practice usually requires a lengthy and cumbersome approval process.Under the city administration system,it would take months or even years to get approval for construction plans from the dozens of planning authorities involved.Administrative charges and infrastructure requirements add a significant part to the final cost(Rosen and Ross,2000).Traditionally,Chinese rural settlements developed without formal planning and https://www.doczj.com/doc/c88289109.html,nd and housing development in chengzhongcun was in practice beyond the enforcement power of city planning authorities that are primarily responsible for provision of planning services and controlling development of the city.In many places there was no formal government organization in charge of rural housing development(Wang and Murie,1999b).Under the regime of collective land ownership,the authority of the rural community had direct power over land-use rights and development control even if the municipal government sought some regulation.The village plan was usually approved by the village committee.The chengzhongcun authority often took action in the interests of indigenous people for land use and housing construction that did not conform to the statutory city plan and building codes.There were many cases where new houses were built outside the law and where the city zoning plan failed to be an effective mechanism of development control for chengzhongcun.As a matter of fact,almost all of the land and building developments in chengzhongcun did not apply for and obtain required certificates from the relevant authorities.In search of higher economic returns,more housing spaces were purposely built on speculation by the introduction of higher housing densities and by vertical house extension.Unit costs of construction were lowered by circumventing planning restrictions.In fact,the investment in housing construction was in large part recovered by a substantial reduction in the official minimal requirements concerning plot ratio,density limits,permissible building materials,road widths,and compulsory infrastructure.Though its physical appearance looks disarrayed,chengzhongcun in fact supply affordable housing for those dependent on cheap accommodation by disregarding the rigidity of bureaucratic planning regulations. Government administration with regard to the housing rental of chengzhongcun was less effectively regulated,given the dominance of private-sector accommodation there and the economic incentives of owners and tenants.To meet the needs of public security and social order,the practice of rental housing for migrants was codified in a series of municipal regulations.Under these regulations,both landlords and tenants were required to register with local police and to complete necessary paperwork for housing rental,as part of the urban administrative process.Nonetheless,the enactment of government regulations on housing rental in chengzhongcun was often subverted by the private provision of housing and limited state control over rural areas.At the level of implementation,these requirements were perceived as costly and labyrinthine, regardless of their specific aims.In practice,state control was frequently countered by
Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization929 many factors,such as the owner's incentive to rent out housing as a means to accrue financial return,the tenant's demand for cheap and convenient accommodation,and loopholes in the regulations.Most houses were rented out,not according to municipal regulations,but based mainly on a bilateral agreement(written or often verbal)between landlords and tenants,following the market logic.It is worth noting that undocumented tenants(without registration with local police)were substantial in chengzhongcun, according to our interviews in fieldwork.
Interest conflicts between municipal government
and various parties in chengzhongcun
The function of chengzhongcun as migrant settlements appears to create interest conflicts between municipal governments and the various parties in chengzhongcun.With the decentralization of fiscal responsibility in the reform era,the relationship between the higher and lower levels of administration is changing from one of strict subordination to one of bargaining and negotiation(Zhao and Zhang,1999).Local regulations are now more powerful than laws delivered from the center in deciding the terms and conditions for migrating to a given locality.In today's China the real authority of urban control is not with central policies but with implementation at the local level.In this context,central control over rural±urban migration has been greatly weakened.`Waves of rural labor'are escaping state controls and are flooding into cities.In order to reap migration benefits, rural migrants need accessible and low-cost urban accommodation.The indigenous villagers have seen migrant tenants as a source for broadening their income base.From the perspective of local village administrations,the presence of migrants,who can be easily subjected to various kinds of management fees and therefore financially exploited,has been regarded as a bonanza for expanding local revenue.In order to accrue financial benefits and to attract more migrants,local administrations in chengzhongcun may tacitly allow some illegal activities(carried out by indigenous villagers and migrants through bribery)by not strictly enforcing central laws and municipal regulations.Nonetheless, from an economic standpoint,all parties in chengzhongcun are mutually benefited.So at the very local level,chengzhongcun administrations,indigenous villagers and migrants are equally committed to making chengzhongcun work for their own interests.However,due to their informal and illegitimate characteristics,chengzhongcun development is usually associated with bad images and social`disorder',making`mainstream'urban citizens (those with formal urban hukou)and urban authorities uncomfortable.The dissatisfaction of the`mainstream'citizens has generated strong political pressure on the municipal government,which is very sensitive to the social consequences of urban disorder and the image of its city.Urban policies are therefore often adopted for the sake of political expediency rather than economic rationality.Rural migrants,who are politically and economically powerless,are most likely to suffer whenever confrontation between the municipal government and the various parties in chengzhongcun becomes unavoidable. The perennial failure of migrant settlement clearance in Guangzhou and other cities vividly illustrates the confrontation between city government and migrant communities. Under the slogan of`maintaining social order and cracking down on crime',migrant settlements had gone through rounds of`cleansing',and migrants without proper jobs were forcibly deported,especially in anticipation of big official events such as the conferences of the Communist Party and the People's Congress.But individual movements are nowadays no longer effectively thwarted administratively.Shortly after each deportation,migrants returned in even larger numbers(Cai et al.,2001).The migrant settlements soon resumed.In most cases,the larger the scale of deportation,the greater the number of migrants who came back.The resumption and expansion of migrant settlements represents the power of the alliance among migrants,indigenous villagers and local community administrations,demonstrating the difficulty of effectively implementing municipal policies against local interests.
By explaining why chengzhongcun are attractive to rural migrants,the significant contribution of chengzhongcun to Chinese urbanization becomes obvious.Cheng-
930L.Zhang,Simon X.B.Zhao and J.P.Tian zhongcun provide a substitute for lacking state functions by means of self-help, particularly as regards the housing demands of rural migrants.The exclusion of rural migrants from the urban housing market forces them to resort to the informal private rental sector.The formation of chengzhongcun as nascent migrant communities offers migrants a realistic option for accommodation without being subsidized by the state in the course of urbanization.This means that the state bore much lower costs associated with providing housing for the newcomers than would an equal number of permanent city residents.If the development of township and village enterprises(TVEs)were credited with their positive impact on the growth of non-agricultural employment,the emergence of chengzhongcun would be regarded as a practical response to the housing demand of rural migrants resulting from the process of massive rural-urban migration. While TVEs brought the benefit of triggering a massive reallocation of labor from agriculture to industry for a given level of capital investment,chengzhongcun had the advantage of providing affordable and accessible housing to migrants by mobilizing the self-help capacities of the communities.Though they are often criticized as deficient with regard to abysmal living conditions and social disorder that should not be tolerated by the socialist ideology,chengzhongcun nonetheless accommodated tens of thousands of migrants in the absence of government financial and institutional supports.
Government response and impacts
Chengzhongcun as concentrations of migrant communities have increasingly become a matter of policy concern.Notwithstanding their positive role in housing migrants, chengzhongcun are officially regarded as a problem because of their association with chaotic land use,dilapidated housing construction,severe infrastructure deficiencies, intensified social disorder,and deterioration of city scenery.The government believes that such problems cannot be solved without some sort of state intervention.There has been a strong signal from municipal governments trying to demolish chengzhongcun under urban redevelopment.The strategy of this policy is best represented by the practice in Guangzhou metropolis,which can be called the Guangzhou model. Guangzhou will be at the forefront of chengzhongcun redevelopment.The Guangzhou government has decided to rehabilitate all chengzhongcun in the near future,though without a specific timetable for the time being.According to the metropolitan redevelopment proposal(September2000),the chengzhongcun that are located in the inner city will soon be designated as urban renewal districts and will be gradually rehabilitated through a series of initiatives,including administrative reorganization,land-use regularization and housing upgrading.This will consist,in simplified form,of two phases.The first phase is characterized as institutional transformation of the rural status of chengzhongcun.All collectively-owned land in chengzhongcun will be nationalized.The rural hukou registration of local residents constituted by village committees will be urbanized and this population will be administrated under urban residents'committees.In the second phase,in compliance with metropolitan regulations and city planning,chengzhongcun will be demolished and reconstructed in the form of real estate development.Management of land development will be unified in terms of development applications and land transactions. Construction of private housing needs official permission and will be strictly controlled with respect to building sizes and on-site densities.Illegal dwellings will be eradicated without any compensation.Existing precarious housing will be replaced by purpose-built decent apartments and commercial housing.Some of these apartments will be allocated to the indigenous villagers free as a form of compensation.The others will be sold at market prices.Private and joint-venture developers are being encouraged to invest in the renewal projects.Redevelopment programs should be financed in accordance with the`beneficiary pays'principle.The government will,if necessary, subsidize the provision of urban infrastructure and amenities.According to the
Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization931 government proposal,chengzhongcun will be completely demolished and redeveloped into new commercialized housing districts.Therefore,the policy strategy proposed by the Guangzhou government towards the redevelopment of chengzhongcun can be summarized as a`demolition-redevelopment'model.The key effects of this model are urbanization of indigenous villagers by converting their hukou status,which will deprive them of their rights and capacities as private housing builders,demolition of self-built housing and development of real estate projects,which will eradicate existing migrant communities.While the example of Guangzhou is used here to demonstrate the policy response to chengzhongcun,it should be noted that similar intentions and approaches have recently been expressed by many other cities.
The Guangzhou model can be seen as a new government approach in response to the `problems'(defined and interpreted by government)of migrant settlements in cities. This approach remains problematic but seems more lenient than the current policy commonly practiced in other municipalities,which is simply to cleanse and deport migrants from chengzhongcun while keeping housing there basically unchanged.The `cleansing-deportation'campaigns,though inhumane and even brutal,happened whenever municipal governments perceived such actions necessary.It was reported that,in November1995,there was an armed confrontation between rural migrants and officials of public security in Dahongmen District,the largest migrant settlement consisting of26chengzhongcun and with about one million temporary residents(well-known as Zhejiang Village)in Beijing(Beijing Daily,21November±12December 1995).The bloodshed led to a city-wide forced deportation of temporary migrants.As in other places,however,such cleansing and deportation could not forestall the flow of migration into cities.Soon after the deportations,migrants returned.Some even brought their family members,friends and fellow villagers.The migrant settlement became larger and larger.
With the new proposed policy framework,the government hopes that the future of Chinese cities will be free of shanty towns.To begin with,several chengzhongcun will be selected to pioneer redevelopment projects.The others will follow the successful cases.At this point,the full effect of these endeavors is hard to evaluate intensively because they are still at an initial stage.However,some impacts can be anticipated based on the interviews with indigenous villagers and migrants.
From one point of view,indigenous villagers as inexpensive house providers will be negatively affected in the course of chengzhongcun redevelopment.Albeit that the state will compensate indigenous villagers for their relinquished property and resettle them in suitable new sites,they cannot do business in the same way as before through the production of dwellings for rent.Under the reorganization and regulation already referred to,indigenous villagers will lose part of their land-use freedom,one of few prestige entitlements for a rural citizen.Their development right on land is now restricted because city planning and building regulatory standards would prevent indigenous villagers from creating similar housing to that built previously.As a result, their role as a cheap housing supplier is undercut.Their income generation from housing rental will be reduced by the policy-curbed supply of low-cost housing and the forced relocation of potential tenants.
Accordingly,another big impact of the redevelopment,as currently conceived,is on the affordability of rental housing for migrants.Such redevelopment inevitably means an amelioration of housing quality,a decrease in the availability of cheap housing stock and an increase in rent for low-income families in those renewal sites.As old houses are required to be rehabilitated and new home construction has to meet higher technocratic standards,renewal projects are a costly exercise.New houses produced may not be appropriate for the needs of rural migrants and,unless generously subsidized by government,would be very https://www.doczj.com/doc/c88289109.html,rge infrastructural investment and adminis-trative charges,where available at all,will finally be passed onto housing costs and impose a heavier financial burden on the individuals who need to self-fund their housing needs.Predictably,the low-cost housing stock of the cities would lag further behind the housing needs of the urban poor.Rural migrants,who are seriously