‘For the People’ Without ‘by the People’: People and Plans in Shanghai's Waterfront Development

Abstract

The constant interplay between top‐down authority and bottom‐up agency in the production of urban space has invigorated much scholarly debate in urban studies. China, with its astonishingly rapid urban change, offers a fruitful context for empirical investigations. In this article, we seize the opportunity of Shanghai's recent waterfront development to unpack the process by which the local state in Shanghai planned, designed, delivered and governed the city's much‐storied waterfront. Ostensibly framed as an initiative for the people, the development of Shanghai's waterfront was decidedly not by the people. Powerful state actors and their affiliates in universities and architectural firms collaboratively pursued an urban developmental process that paradoxically enhanced residents’ right to urban space and denied citizens’ right to participation. The local state reconciled this apparent paradox by articulating a ‘quality people’ it sought to serve, fabricating an entire profile of their supposed aesthetic values, leisure habits, spatial preferences and luxurious lifestyles. In its essence, this ‘people’ framing represents an extraordinarily cunning approach to state hegemony, enabling the local state to pursue heavy‐handed interventions while upholding a gentle, humanistic ‘for the people’ discourse.

Shanghai’s Regenerated Industrial Waterfronts: Urban Lab for Sustainability Transitions?

“…They provide an excellent illustration of 'neoliberalism with Chinese characteristics' (Harvey, 2005). Usability for citizens in daily life seems secondary (den Hartog, 2019;Li & Zhong, 2020). Ecological values will be studied further in another article by this author (den Hartog, in press).…”

“…The quantity and quality of their public space and real estate along the waterfront is impressive. Their 'statements about the future' are robust and shared by multiple actors (Schot & Geels, 2008;Van Lente, 2012), although citizens are excluded (den Hartog, 2019;Li & Zhong, 2020). The projects are also practice-based and challenge-led (Sengers et al, 2016) in their approach.…”

“…The projects are also practice-based and challenge-led (Sengers et al, 2016) in their approach. Governance processes in Shanghai involve a complex interplay of multiple groups or departments (Miao & Lang, 2014;Zhou, 2017), and interplay between top-down authority and bottom-up agency (Li & Zhong, 2020), but they operate as one entity that can overrule all non-governmental stakeholders. The local government has absolute ownership and mandate over all urban lands.…”

“…System innovation is a controlled process in Shanghai. This means that social learning factors including feedback from end-users have generally been excluded, although some initial steps have been taken to consider that feedback (Li & Zhong, 2020;Shanghai Planning and Land Resource Administration, 2018a). Urban labs are tools to find new forms of urban governance.…”

“…By reconnecting the city with the Huangpu River, the waterfronts, after losing their former port role, have once again become the main driver for urban development. Approaching this phenomenon through the lens of sustainability transition theories has not been done before in the Chinese context and fills gaps in the still limited research on recent water-front transformations in Shanghai (den Hartog, 2019(den Hartog, , 2020Li & Li, 2016;Li & Zhong, 2020;Yang et al, 2020).…”