IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v43y2011i5p1135-1153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Privatization, Marketization, and Deprivation: Interpreting the Homeownership Paradox in Postreform Urban China

Author

Listed:
  • Guo Chen

    (Department of Geography and Global Urban Studies Program, Michigan State University, 211 Geography Building, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA)

Abstract

The paper examines the nature of the housing predicaments faced by China's urban poor since the advent of pro-ownership housing marketization in the 1990s. It is argued that housing deprivation in today's urban China is a complex problem which is difficult to disentangle based solely on the material outcomes of housing distribution and housing inequalities. Therefore, an integrative framework is proposed to examine the issue from the perspective of structure–agency interaction. Statistical methods are employed to identify the concrete market and nonmarket factors which constrain the housing decisions of Nanjing's poor families, based on census and household-survey data. Qualitative interviews are then utilized to help reconstruct and interpret different storylines of homeownership transition under the identified constraints. Findings suggest that the ownership-based housing model has been promoted among the poor in exploitative ways, which has resulted in profound deprivation—for both poor owners and nonowners. Alternative, nonownership housing options are urgently needed to address the problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Guo Chen, 2011. "Privatization, Marketization, and Deprivation: Interpreting the Homeownership Paradox in Postreform Urban China," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(5), pages 1135-1153, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:43:y:2011:i:5:p:1135-1153
    DOI: 10.1068/a43444
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a43444
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a43444?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fulong Wu & Shenjing He, 2005. "Changes In Traditional Urban Areas And Impacts Of Urban Redevelopment: A Case Study Of Three Neighbourhoods In Nanjing, China," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 96(1), pages 75-95, February.
    2. Donggen Wang & Si-Ming Li, 2004. "Housing Preferences in a Transitional Housing System: The Case of Beijing, China," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(1), pages 69-87, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Donggen Wang & Jiukun Li & Harry Timmermans, 2004. "Measuring Bifurcation Points in Choice Behavior: Principles and Illustration," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(6), pages 1125-1138, June.
    2. Zheng Wang & Jie Shen & Xiang Luo, 2023. "Can residents regain their community relations after resettlement? Insights from Shanghai," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 60(5), pages 962-980, April.
    3. Shiyao Zhu & Dezhi Li & Haibo Feng & Tiantian Gu & Jiawei Zhu, 2019. "AHP-TOPSIS-Based Evaluation of the Relative Performance of Multiple Neighborhood Renewal Projects: A Case Study in Nanjing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-17, August.
    4. Caplan, Arthur J. & Akhundjanov, Sherzod B. & Toll, Kristopher, 2021. "Measuring heterogeneous preferences for residential amenities," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    5. Hyun Bang Shin, 2008. "Driven to swim with the tide? Urban redevelopment and community participation in China," CASE Papers case130, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    6. Donggen Wang & Fenglong Wang, 2016. "Contributions of the Usage and Affective Experience of the Residential Environment to Residential Satisfaction," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1), pages 42-60, January.
    7. Gao, Jinlong & Chen, Wen & Yuan, Feng, 2017. "Spatial restructuring and the logic of industrial land redevelopment in urban China: I. Theoretical considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 604-613.
    8. Qinran Yang & David Ley, 2019. "Residential relocation and the remaking of socialist workers through state-facilitated urban redevelopment in Chengdu, China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(12), pages 2480-2498, September.
    9. Hong Hu & Stan Geertman & Pieter Hooimeijer, 2014. "The willingness to pay for green apartments: The case of Nanjing, China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(16), pages 3459-3478, December.
    10. Ali Cheshmehzangi, 2018. "The Changing Urban Landscape of Chinese Cities: Positive and Negative Impacts of Urban Design Controls on Contemporary Urban Housing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-21, August.
    11. Si-Ming Li & Yu-Ling Song, 2009. "Redevelopment, Displacement, Housing Conditions, and Residential Satisfaction: A Study of Shanghai," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(5), pages 1090-1108, May.
    12. Cecilia Wong & Wei Zheng & Miao Qiao, 2020. "Urban expansion and neighbourhood commuting patterns in the Beijing metropolitan region: A multilevel analysis," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(13), pages 2773-2793, October.
    13. Musharraf Cyan & Michael Price & Mark Rider, 2017. "Peshawar Uplift: The Effect of Urban Development on Citizens’ Perceptions," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1709, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    14. Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo & Patrizia Riganti, 2006. "Using Surveys to Compare the Public’s and Decisionmakers’ Preferences for Urban Regeneration: The Venice Arsenale," Working Papers 2006.137, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    15. Xiangming Chen & Jiaming Sun, 2007. "Untangling a Global–Local Nexus: Sorting Out Residential Sorting in Shanghai," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(10), pages 2324-2345, October.
    16. Alberini, Anna & Longo, Alberto & Riganti, Patrizia, 2006. "Using Surveys to Compare the Public's and Decision-makers' Preferences for Urban Regeneration: The Venice Arsenale," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12221, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    17. Jinlong Gao & Zhixuan Wu & Jianglong Chen & Wen Chen, 2020. "Beyond the bid‐rent: Two tales of land use transition in contemporary China," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 1336-1356, September.
    18. Maciej A Orzechowski & Theo A Arentze & Aloys W J Borgers & Harry J P Timmermans, 2008. "The Applicability of Bayesian Belief Networks for Measuring User Preferences: Some Numerical Simulations," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 35(3), pages 521-534, June.
    19. Suhong Zhou & Zhidong Wu & Luping Cheng, 2013. "The Impact of Spatial Mismatch on Residents in Low-income Housing Neighbourhoods: A Study of the Guangzhou Metropolis, China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(9), pages 1817-1835, July.
    20. Vincenzo Del Giudice & Pierfrancesco De Paola & Torrieri Francesca & Peter J. Nijkamp & Aviad Shapira, 2019. "Real Estate Investment Choices and Decision Support Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-18, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:envira:v:43:y:2011:i:5:p:1135-1153. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.