China's rapid urban development has attracted attention worldwide. So far most research has focused on the establishment of land markets and the institutional framework of land development. The complicated land politics behind the development of markets are largely unknown to the outside world. You-tien Hsing, building upon twenty years of experience researching Chinese development, investigates land-centered politics. This book is a remarkable outcome of her painstaking multi-city fieldwork and provides a convincing explanation of the land-driven development machine in China.
The development of market mechanisms is a process of great transformation, triggering a series of social changes. The Great Urban Transformation investigates how the politics of land are played out in the context where markets were absent and have emerged during the reform era. The task of setting up a market is not easy, and the notion of the “establishment of a land market” in the literature is inevitably over-simplified. Hsing shows that the development of the Chinese land market has been orchestrated by the state, capitalized and resisted by different actors in different metropolitan areas.
The three parts of the book examine, respectively, development in the urban core, new towns and new suburban centers within metropolitan regions, and the rural fringe. In the urban core, the battle has been fought between municipal governments and “socialist land masters”—state-owned enterprises or danwei that control large plots of land. Municipal governments eventually consolidated their monopolistic position after August 31, 2004, when any lease without payment to the municipal government was made illegal. Through their centers for land reserves, municipal governments became market actors and controlled the revenue of urban redevelopment. This development, however, has been met with strong grassroots resistance. The households whose homes are being demolished have been mobilizing themselves through various strategies to protect their property rights.
In the metropolitan regions, the land market has transformed the nature of development from “industrialism” to “new urbanism.” After the enthusiasm for industrial development zones in the 1990s, we have seen the politics reoriented towards real estate projects related to “new cities” of the 2000s. Demolition and relocation generated a significant amount of land profit, which led to the development of new urban districts and areas such as “university towns” and spectacular new central business districts (CBDs). Land development not only generates revenue for municipal and district governments but also brings in handsome incomes to villages that are now encircled by metropolitan expansion. Villagers have also tried to benefit from the development of land. Individually, they tried to build as much new housing as possible for rental, and collectively they built upon the legacy of lineage organizations and created new land holding collectives, forming what Hsing calls “village corporatism.” During land acquisition by municipalities, a small proportion of village land, known as “reserved construction land,” is left in the hands of villagers and becomes a collective asset. Because of large-scale urban land acquisition, such collective assets have become quite substantial and generate profits for village share-holding companies. To those insiders who are entitled to the assets, village corporatism plays a role of basic social provision and dividend sharing, while outsiders such as migrants from other rural areas are excluded.
At the rural fringe, however, a different story unfolds. Township governments strive to consolidate village land and rush to build extra-legal housing without formal state land certificates. Large-scale land development by both township and municipal governments has led to relocation and hurt farmers through economic deterioration, social disintegration, and identity rupture. However, some resist, becoming known as “nail households” who try to hold out in their homes.
In the final chapter, Hsing argues that such politics of land and property are leading to “a new territorial order” centered on the struggle for territorially based power. Hsing artfully depicts the state of land development and politics in China, combining analysis with fascinating details and insightful observations. In particular, the sophisticated dynamism of land politics is presented in an accurate and balanced manner.
The book is path-breaking among studies of Chinese cities in the sense that it goes beyond the formal institution of land or “institutionalism” of property rights, and brings the role of social actors into the understanding of power and territorial changes. Even for those who are familiar with Chinese cities, the book still enlightens by connecting land politics in different areas with the dynamics of change. Hsing grounds her explanation on key historical events, government policies, and actual practices. For example, she explains how the “8–31 cutting off” (the date of August 31, 2004, as the deadline for administrative land allocation) has consolidated municipal control over land resources. Similarly, the policy of designating “reserved construction land” has produced collective assets, forming the mechanism of “village corporatism.”
In my view, the book creates a new milestone for urban China research that will stand for many years to come. It should be read by those who are interested in land development and urban politics as well as researchers interested in other aspects of Chinese cities. To understand China's land system and development, the book is an essential and authoritative text. Focusing on the marketization of land and social resistance, the book may help us start an intellectual journey towards understanding China's great transformation.
