Three Questions Regarding Urbanization in China

Hundreds of millions of people are on the move in China. Many are migrant workers with one foot still in the countryside, but millions have found steady employment, purchased homes, and begun establishing themselves as urbanites. In this article for The Journal of Planning Education and Research, Eric Heikkila, director of international initiatives at the USC School of Policy, Planning and Development traces this transformation and explores the factors driving urbanization, the outcomes of urbanization, and the efforts of various levels of China's government to direct urbanization.

The article abstract:

The three questions addressed in this article pertain, respectively, to the contributing factors, outcomes, and policy interventions associated with urbanization in China. Contributing factors include transition to a market-driven economy, political devolution, demographic changes, globalization, and technological change. These are unravelled with care, with a conclusion that embedded markets are the central contributing factor, with globalization and political institutions as important helpmates. Regarding urbanization outcomes, the evidence reviewed supports the convergence hypothesis in broad terms, but with ample evidence of hybridity, resulting in urbanization with Chinese characteristics. The article concludes with a call for a more balanced approach to urban policy interventions in China, whereby existing spatial planning perspectives are complemented by market-based perspectives.

The article begins:

For urbanists, the transformation of contemporary China is one of the most fascinating case studies conceivable. It seems improbable that such an immense entity could launch itself so abruptly in a newly set direction, and with sufficient force to sustain that momentum over decades. The level of urbanization in China was less than 20 percent of the population in 1978, and is now approaching 40 percent, with 50 percent anticipated by the year 2020. It would seem to defy the very laws of nature. Moreover, urbanization is only one aspect, albeit a very crucial one, of a much broader transformation of Chinese society. We have seen China transform itself from a closed society to one that actively seeks a central place in world affairs. Its former command-and-control economic system has devolved steadily toward market norms and institutions.

Concomitantly, the level of economic and social development has leaped forward in dramatic fashion, as measured by any number of standard indicators. For example, although its per capita income at US$1,100 is less than the $1,570 for lower middle income countries as a whole, its annual growth rate of 9.3 percent well exceeds the 5.7 percent of this comparison group. Likewise, its mortality rate of 30 per 1,000 live births compares favorably to 31.39, and life expectancy of 70.8 in China is more favorable than that of lower middle income countries (69.21) and even middle income countries (69.71) as a whole. Although some observers in the West decry a lack of democratization in China, the political transformation within China has also been quite dramatic, from a Maoist, ideologically driven party rule to a decidedly more professionalized state leadership. Indeed, the grooming of state leaders in China is not unlike what one finds in Singapore, with a very thorough personal, political, and professional vetting process at the highest levels.

A similar emphasis on professionalism and international standards is in fact a defining aspect of contemporary China’s transformation. One finds in China today a near obsession with international (often interpreted as American) accounting, construction, academic, and legal standards across the board. Gaining admission to the World Trade Organization and hosting of the 2008 Olympics are grander versions of this same deep-rooted impulse to measure up, as it were.

It is in this broader context that urbanization, too, has proceeded apace. China’s population has flooded into urban areas from its rural regions, steadily transforming China’s character from that of an agrarian society to one that is increasingly urban and urbane. Geographically, the eastern seaboard has been the focus for much of this transformation, where labor from the west conjoins with capital from the West. The result has been a deepening regional inequality between an increasingly urban east and a still largely rural west within China. The chasm is not just quantitative but qualitative as well, delineating an emerging class of modernity dwellers from an as yet vast pool of humanity that still resides in a China that once was.

The complete article is available at Sage Journals online.