IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i4p2280-d502448.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Network Governance and the Evolving Urban Regeneration Policymaking in China: A Case Study of Insurgent Practices in Enninglu Redevelopment Project

Author

Listed:
  • Nannan Zhao

    (Department of Urban and Rural Planning, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China
    Department of Public Policy, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon 999077, Hong Kong)

  • Yuting Liu

    (Department of Urban and Rural Planning, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China)

  • June Wang

    (Department of Public Policy, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon 999077, Hong Kong)

Abstract

The network governance approach has been adopted by many researchers and practitioners with respect to policy analysis and modern state governance. This study utilizes a broadly defined network-based framework to trace the evolution of urban regeneration policymaking in Guangzhou, China. Drawing upon the notions of “network” and previous scholars’ work on participatory planning, this study focuses on the changing relational networks among the various actors that are engaged in the urban regeneration process and the factors motivating these changes. In so doing, this study uses the ongoing Enninglu redevelopment project (2006–) as an illustrative case study. By examining the insurgent practices in the Enninglu redevelopment process, this study argues that urban redevelopment policymaking in China has changed twofold. First, the planning regime has transited from state-dominant practices to one that is primarily driven by the local government, the enhanced role of higher education institutions and experts as a “professional interest group”, and the increased participation of non-state actors in the policymaking process. Second, the decision-making mechanism has transformed from an interventionism-oriented system to a polyarchy-oriented system in which both the advocacy coalition and opposition coalition are embedded in the governance network. Additionally, the emergence of insurgent practices in Enninglu suggests an emerging shift toward substantive participatory governance in the Chinese context. From a network perspective, this study attempts to contribute to the understanding of the evolving urban regeneration policymaking in China and broader governance networks in urban regeneration practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Nannan Zhao & Yuting Liu & June Wang, 2021. "Network Governance and the Evolving Urban Regeneration Policymaking in China: A Case Study of Insurgent Practices in Enninglu Redevelopment Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:2280-:d:502448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2280/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2280/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Li, Xun & Hui, Eddie C.M. & Chen, Tingting & Lang, Wei & Guo, Youliang, 2019. "From Habitat III to the new urbanization agenda in China: Seeing through the practices of the “three old renewals” in Guangzhou," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 513-522.
    2. Erik Swyngedouw, 2009. "The Antinomies of the Postpolitical City: In Search of a Democratic Politics of Environmental Production," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 601-620, September.
    3. John F. Forester, 1999. "The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262561220, April.
    4. Cassidy I-Chih Lan & Li-Pei Peng, 2018. "E-Participation, Rural Regime, and Network Governance: A Case of Balien River Conservation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, October.
    5. Shenjing He, 2012. "Two Waves of Gentrification and Emerging Rights Issues in Guangzhou, China," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(12), pages 2817-2833, December.
    6. Jonathan S Davies, 2012. "Network Governance Theory: A Gramscian Critique," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(11), pages 2687-2704, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tomohiko Ohno & Naoko Hirayama & Keito Mineo & Kengo Iwata & Izumi Inasawa, 2022. "The advocacy coalition framework in Japan: Contributions to policy process studies and the challenges involved," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(1), pages 32-50, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cao, Kexin & Deng, Yu & Wang, Wenxue & Liu, Shenghe, 2023. "The spatial heterogeneity and dynamics of land redevelopment: Evidence from 287 Chinese cities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    2. Jialing Yan & Yan Huang & Shuying Tan & Wei Lang & Tingting Chen, 2023. "Jointly Creating Sustainable Rural Communities through Participatory Planning: A Case Study of Fengqing County, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, January.
    3. Sosa López, Oscar & Montero, Sergio, 2018. "Expert-citizens: Producing and contesting sustainable mobility policy in Mexican cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 137-144.
    4. Jonathan Davies, 2014. "Rethinking urban power and the local state: Hegemony, domination and resistance in neoliberal cities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(15), pages 3215-3232, November.
    5. Erik Swyngedouw & Joseph Williams, 2017. "The pleasures of hydro-controversies: a reply to Leandro del Moral, Julia Martínez and Nuria Hernández-Mora," Water International, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 339-341, April.
    6. Andrew Clarke & Lynda Cheshire, 2018. "The post-political state? The role of administrative reform in managing tensions between urban growth and liveability in Brisbane, Australia," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(16), pages 3545-3562, December.
    7. E. Melanie DuPuis & Brian J. Gareau, 2008. "Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1212-1229, December.
    8. Makena Coffman & Karen Umemoto, 2010. "The triple-bottom-line: framing of trade-offs in sustainability planning practice," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 597-610, October.
    9. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    10. Primmer, Eeva & Kyllonen, Simo, 2006. "Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 838-853, November.
    11. Kleemann, Janina & Struve, Berenike & Spyra, Marcin, 2023. "Conflicts in urban peripheries in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    12. Hillary Angelo & David Wachsmuth, 2015. "Urbanizing Urban Political Ecology: A Critique of Methodological Cityism," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 16-27, January.
    13. Aryana Soliz, 2021. "Creating Sustainable Cities through Cycling Infrastructure? Learning from Insurgent Mobilities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-21, August.
    14. Liz Barry, 2022. "Community science and the design of climate governance," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-17, April.
    15. Davies-Colley, Christian & Smith, Willie, 2012. "Implementing environmental technologies in development situations: The example of ecological toilets," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-8.
    16. Ahmed Z. Khan & Frank Moulaert & Jan Schreurs & Konrad Miciukiewicz, 2014. "Integrative Spatial Quality: A Relational Epistemology of Space and Transdisciplinarity in Urban Design and Planning," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 393-411, August.
    17. Füg, Franz & Ibert, Oliver, 2020. "Assembling social innovations in emergent professional communities. The case of learning region policies in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 28(3), pages 541-562.
    18. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    19. Ross Beveridge & Philippe Koch, 2017. "The post-political trap? Reflections on politics, agency and the city," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(1), pages 31-43, January.
    20. Peter Munthe-Kaas, 2015. "Agonism and co-design of urban spaces," Urban Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 218-237, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:2280-:d:502448. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.