The Hybrid Spatialities of Post-Industrial Beijing: Communism, Neoliberalism, and Brownfield Redevelopment

Abstract

While the redevelopment of urban brownfield sites in China has received much attention, the role of political ideology in this process is usually downplayed or sidelined to a set of stylized assumptions. This paper invites giving a greater analytical focus to the evolving and nonorthodox nature of China’s politico-ideological model as a factor shaping urban change and redevelopment. The paper provides an analytical framework integrating multi-level and evolutionary perspectives while exploring the experiences of the formation and post-industrial redevelopment of brownfield sites in Beijing. The analysis demonstrates that neoliberal economic policies and the communist political doctrine are co-constitutive in the production of China’s post-industrial urban space. This produces a sense of spatial hybridity that combines and co-embeds what may be assumed to be mutually exclusive.

Community Landscape Preferences for Reuse of Soviet‐Era Post‐Agricultural Brownfields—What's the Difference?*

“…There are many possible reuses for brownfields (De Sousa and Spiess 2018; Lin et al 2019; Mathey et al 2015; Wang et al 2020; Zhang and Klenosky 2016) as well as post‐agricultural brownfields (Lord 2015; Schröder et al 2018). It has previously been shown that the preferences for reuses of urban brownfield are site‐specific (Loures 2015; Loures et al 2016).…”

The Impact of Brownfields on Residential Property Values in Post-Industrial Communities: A Study from the Eastern Part of the Czech Republic

“…On the other hand, it may be assumed that brownfields intended for regeneration will be a driver for an increase in the neighbouring property value [8]. At the same time, even though the property may be located in the proximity to a brownfield, the crucial influence on its price lies in its central or peripheral location within communities or regions [9]. Provided that this influence is negative, it presents a negative externality for the owners of neighbouring properties, and consequently, the owner tends to reduce or remove such an externality [10].…”