Governing urbanization and the New Urbanization Plan in China

Abstract

This paper explains the reasons behind the growing social tension and increased number of conflicts in China after a good performance in meeting the Millennium Development Goals. In this paper, we map out the issues with old urbanization (1978–2014) and the problems unsolved by past policy, and analyse whether the new policy changes introduced by the New Urbanization Plan (2014–2020) may help to deal with those problems. We argue that the tensions that evolve into conflicts are often a result of unaddressed social anxiety. Using money to purchase social stability can only be part of the solution. There need to be more serious attempts to improve governance, which involve: improving multi-level governance and inter-regional coordination, enhancing policy transparency and rule by law, adjusting the level of redistribution, and integrating rural and urban community governance structures.

The New Urbanisation Plan and permanent urban settlement of migrants in Chongqing, China

“…The policy transition towards the New Urbanisation Plan was announced in order to relax the differentiation of migrants based on their hukou identity. Although regulations vary across cities, for voluntary migrants, the common application criteria for the local non‐agricultural hukou require evidence that they have had a formal stable residence (rent or own), a stable employment contract (at least 1 year), and social security payments (at least 1 year; Kim, ; B. Li et al, ). In practice, with the improvement of the labour market, the last two requirements have been easier to fulfil than the first one.…”

“…In principle, migrants could use their public rental housing occupancy as a proof of a formal stable residency to apply for permanent urban settlement. This can reduce the hukou and economic barriers that prevent migrants from obtaining permanent urban settlement (Kim, ; B. Li et al, ). Thus, the extent to which migrants can apply for permanent urban settlement has depended on the stock of public rental housing and the openness of local public rental housing policy.…”

“…However, very few scholars have addressed issues regarding permanent urban settlement, as it has been referred to as the most unattainable right for migrants since 1958 (Cao, Li, Ma, & Tao, ; Hao & Tang, ; Liu, Wang, & Chen, ). In response to widespread criticism, from 2008 onwards, the Chinese state gradually established a New Urbanisation Plan (hereafter also referred to as, the Plan), which announced the expansion of welfare benefits for migrants and the aim to grant permanent urban settlement to 100 million migrants by 2020 (Kim, ; B. Li, Chen, & Hu, ). The Plan aims to transform the Chinese economy from the current infrastructure investment‐based model into a consumption‐based model.…”

“…To further promote the Plan and especially to increase confidence among migrants to try to gain permanent urban settlement, the state has sought to extend basic urban public services, particularly public rental housing. The planned coverage of public housing is set at 23% of the whole urban residents by 2020, a doubling of the proportion in 2012 (Kim, ; B. Li et al, ). Although reforms have begun, knowledge of whether and to what extent equity and inclusivity have been achieved (and accepted by migrants) is lacking (X. Huang, Dijst, van Weesep, Jiao, & Sun, ).…”

A Framework for Spatiotemporal Analysis of Regional Economic Agglomeration Patterns

“…Issued by The New Urbanization Plan (NUP, 2014-2020) strategy introduced in March 2014, China emphasizes economy development is an essential prerequisite of regional sustainable development [11]. Many studies have been conducted to test the impact of agglomeration on urban and regional economics and show that the existence of an inverted-U relationship between agglomeration and economic [8,[12][13][14].…”