نقل مکان مسکونی تحت توسعه مجدد بازارمحور: فرایند و نتایج در مناطق روستایی چین

Residential displacement by urban regeneration in western economies and forced relocation in the Third World countries are contentious issues. This paper, based on a household survey in Shanghai, examines the process and outcomes of residential relocation under market-oriented urban redevelopment in China. The results show that commodification of the socialist tenancy right helped to initiate large-scale urban redevelopment. First, there has been a complicated process of negotiation during residential relocation, involving residents, development companies, and government agencies. The de facto right of public housing tenants is considered by a pragmatic attitude in urban redevelopment in the early years. Second, residential relocation is accompanied by the changes in housing tenure, housing conditions, and the improved built form of planned residential districts. Nevertheless, the social conflict has become intensified recently because the deepening of commodification began to favour property developers by constraining the compensation standard for relocated households.

After two decades of economic reform, the Chinese society has seen an unprecedented mobility, not only in the sphere of economic production but also in people's everyday life. Accompanied by large-scale urban redevelopment is the move of households from their previous place of residence inside either the workplace compound or municipal housing estates to commodity housing in planned residential districts. Nowhere can we observe dynamic residential relocation better than the city of Shanghai, where the remaking of a global city is creating an instant new city of Pudong, east of the Huangpu River, while skyscrapers are mushrooming in the old downtown (Wu, 2000). Urban redevelopment has been accelerating in Shanghai since 1990. Inevitably this means that a significant number of households have been relocated. In 1991, a survey organized by the municipal government announced that in total Shanghai had 3.65 million m2 dilapidated houses scattered in the old city proper (Gu and Liu, 1997; Wu and Li, 2002). The government set up a target to demolish these dilapidated houses. In 2002, Social Development Bluebook of Shanghai reported that the city had successfully accomplished the task ( Yi and Lu, 2002). From 1991 to 2000, Shanghai demolished 26 million m2 old houses and relocated the 0.66 million households ( Yao and Jiang, 2002, p. 95). Table 1 shows the amount of residential relocation and housing demolished since 1991.Then, how could Shanghai achieve such a scale of urban redevelopment through residential relocation? The issue of residential displacement becomes contentious in the Western countries which are undergoing the change from Fordist to post-Fordist transition and globalization (Marcuse and Van Kempen, 2000; Smith, 1996). In the developing countries slum clearance through forced eviction (Gugler, 1997) become a potential source of social uneasy. Like other rapidly developing cities, Shanghai has witnessed residential displacement of inner city residents. However, fewer residents had been relocated with enforcement or eviction so far, although housing demolition and residential relocation has become contentious recently. Discontented residents often appeal to the government or resist the decision of relocation. But organized social movement is still in its embryonic stage. The swift relocation of residents cannot be explained by the “authoritarian” state as the state itself is under transformation and has seen significant decentralization. Economic decentralization has led to the decreasing capacity of the state and the emergence of developmental interest (Lin, 1999; Logan, 2002; Wu, 2000). Market-oriented land development represents a profound change in the organization of urban construction and housing provision (Yeh and Wu, 1996; Zhou and Logan, 1996; Li, 2000). The changes brought by market-oriented redevelopment have made it possible to “commodify” de facto rights of pubic housing tenants, which in turn relocate them into a new place. Therefore, a large proportion of relocations (about two thirds from this sample) can be classified as “passive” relocation because the decision to move is not initiated by households themselves. So far there have been little studies on this issue of residential relocation. While the literature has begun to appear on residential mobility, housing tenure choice, and housing consumption and their spatial implications in China (e.g. Huang and Clark, 2002; Li, 2000; Li and Siu, 2001a and Li and Siu, 2001b; Li and Wu, in press; Logan et al., 1999; Wang and Murie, 2000; Yeh et al., 1995; Zhou and Ma, 2000; Wu, 2002), most studies tend to study residential mobility as an issue of housing consumption rather than linking residential relocation explicitly to urban redevelopment. In a previous paper, attention has been given to the `mode' of relocation and the effect of `stratification' from residential mobility perspective (Wu, in press). The study on the process and outcomes of residential relocation from the perspective of urban redevelopment is inadequate. This paper is intended to complement previous studies and focus on these two issues. In particular, I will examine the actors involved in residential relocation process and their responses to maximize their benefits and the outcomes with respect to satisfaction, the changes in housing tenure, building forms and housing condition.

The literature of residential mobility is well established in the mature Western market economies. Residential relocation in the market system mainly is a response to the changing life course and thus housing needs. Thus, the majority of residential relocation can be modelled through households' housing choice (Clark and Dieleman, 1996). However, even in the context of western economies, residential mobility is constrained by external factors, in particular household's position in the structure of housing provision. Disadvantaged or marginal households are either entrapped in the place of concentrated poverty in the United Kingdom (Burrows, 1999; Hamnett, 1991 and Hamnett, 1999) or displaced by the need for making a competitive global city (Hansen et al., 2001; Kesteloot, 2000; Smith, 1996). The change in macroeconomic situation can also affect the nature of relocation. For example, the falling of affordability in the 1990s in Sydney, Australia, has driven more young home purchasers to relocate in suburbia (Burnley and Murphy, 1995; Burnley et al., 1997). The context of `more market-oriented urban redevelopment' means at least two implications. First, in terms of the process, inherited from the socialist legacy, there is stronger constraint on residential relocation, which in turn triggers complicated interactions between developers, households and the local government. Second, in terms of outcomes, marketization provides the new opportunity as well as imperative of relocating changing residents, which is not necessarily linked to households' life course but rather to the pace of real estate development. In this study residential relocation is examined as the process of commodifying socialist tenancy, which involves the triangular interaction among the state, market and society. The state on the one hand is obligated to redevelop dilapidated areas so as to improve living conditions. On the other hand, it has its own agenda and strives to make space available for creating a competitive city. Market-oriented urban redevelopment provides such a chance. The increasing land rent gradient has made the change of land uses viable (Dowall, 1994). In the 1990s, the reviving of the real estate market in China allowed the state to overcome its capital constraint and to initiate large-scale urban redevelopment. The concern for social stability means in practice the strong tenancy right of relocated residents was recognized. Rather than abolish the right, the state strives to solicit the cooperation of residents by offering home ownership and much improved housing conditions (such as moving into planned residential districts) made available under housing commodification. The market actively responds to the state's development policy and begins to relocate households at a premium location into cheaper resettlement sites. However, developers have to carry out relocation within the limit set by the state, i.e. not to generate homeless people. The coalition with entrepreneurial local governments provides necessary institutional support to perform this difficult task. In order to maximize the profit return, the developers always attempt to relocate residents permanently and resist residents' demand for returning to their original location. Whenever possible, developers require raising the plot ratio and changing the land from residential to commercial use. Developers prefer monetary compensation, as this is the swiftest way to purchase the tenancy right. In the late 1990s, the gap between compensation and the price of redeveloped property emerged. In these sites, original residents are relocated without exception. While organized resistance from residents is rare, residents have resorted to various tactics to maximize their tenancy rights, such as registering relatives in the household registration of the family. In some areas, this even causes the escalating of resettlement costs, which in turn creates an obstacle for the redevelopment of the places of high population density or at poorer locations. But tenants' bargaining power has been decreasing along with further regulatory changes since the promulgation of the new regulation of resettlement, which no longer computes compensation based on the number of family members. On the other hand, the new regulation, effective from in 2001, requires that the developers should obtain permission before carry out demolition. This ensures that those who undertake demolition have proper resources such as capital and the existing stock of resettlement housing to complete the work. The capital allocated for demolition compensation is also monitored to ensure its proper use. The outcomes of residential relocation are the changes in housing tenure, housing conditions, and the built forms. The survey suggests that there is an increase in owner occupation. The rental from workplace housing and from municipal housing decreased significantly. In terms of built forms, old alleyway housing is disappearing and new residential estates are built into planned communities. Some large communities such as Shan Lin Yuan in Pudong have been developed mainly for resettlement of relocated households. Similar to other cities that are experiencing large-scale urban redevelopment (Moulaert et al., 2001), the displacement of lower-income housing to cheaper areas is seen in Shanghai. However, because resettled households are given improved housing conditions through urban redevelopment, the relocation is generally carried out without severe conflicts. The conflict in residential relocation has become intensified recently because the new regulation constrains the claim for compensation. While residents suffer from the increase in commuting time and decreased accessibility of the city centre, our sample shows that large-scale long-distance dispersal into suburbs did not occur. The result suggests that the majority of relocated households are satisfied or neutral about the outcome of residential relocation, although it is observed that unsatisfied households concentrated in particular types of relocation such as infrastructure and real estate redevelopment. The survey also shows that relocated households suffered from lengthy stay in temporary accommodation and that the overall rate of permanent resettlement is lower than what is required by the government. Market-oriented redevelopment generates uneven impacts on those who actively relocate themselves by purchasing housing and those who are passively relocated through infrastructure development. The benefits gained from relocation are distributed unevenly. Residents with higher education levels can resort to the market to choose their place of residence and receive a larger increase in housing space. Even in passive relocation, they are more likely to be entitled to workplace housing allocation, which is more favourable than resettlement housing. In a sense, residential relocation increases socio-spatial stratification, through which better-off residents slice a larger proportion of benefits and continue to be better positioned in the system of housing provision. It still waits to be seen whether such a trend of differentiation would eventually lead to social-spatial fragmentation of the Chinese cities.