IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i11p4301-d184174.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gated Neighborhoods, Privatized Amenities and Fragmented Society: Evidence from Residential Experience and Implications for Urban Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Yu Wang

    (Urban Studies, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8RS, UK)

  • David Shaw

    (Geography and Planning, School of Environmental Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZT, UK)

  • Ke Yuan

    (Institute of Education and Economy Research, The University of International Business and Economics, Beijing 100029, China)

Abstract

Nowadays, urban space has become more fragmented and largely consists of many unconnected enclaves. The significance of neighborhood amenities to resident’s quality of life has been identified in the recent literature. However, studies have inadequately explored the real experience of residents in their use of neighborhood amenities under the gated urban form. Since the 1990s the urban environment of many Chinese cities has been re-shaped by the large creation of gated neighborhoods. Based on a case study in the city of Shenzhen, this paper draws upon evidence of residential satisfaction with local amenities to reveal a significant variation between different neighborhoods. The outcome of the enlarged social differentiation is a result of imbalanced micro-level urban development. The findings also provide new evidence demonstrating the increased fragmentation of society as the consequence of urban privatization. By linking the planning process with the social outcome, this paper reflects on the current strengths and weaknesses of the Chinese urban planning system.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu Wang & David Shaw & Ke Yuan, 2018. "Gated Neighborhoods, Privatized Amenities and Fragmented Society: Evidence from Residential Experience and Implications for Urban Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4301-:d:184174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4301/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4301/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Sirgy & Don Rahtz & Muris Cicic & Robert Underwood, 2000. "A method for assessing residents' satisfaction with community-based services: a quality-of-life perspective," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 279-316, March.
    2. Matthieu Permentier & Gideon Bolt & Maarten van Ham, 2011. "Determinants of Neighbourhood Satisfaction and Perception of Neighbourhood Reputation," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(5), pages 977-996, April.
    3. Michael Cuthill, 2010. "Strengthening the ‘social’ in sustainable development: Developing a conceptual framework for social sustainability in a rapid urban growth region in Australia," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(6), pages 362-373, November/.
    4. Basak Tanulku, 2013. "Gated Communities: Ideal Packages or Processual Spaces of Conflict?," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(7), pages 937-959, October.
    5. Ya Wang & Lei Shao & Alan Murie & Jianhua Cheng, 2012. "The Maturation of the Neo-liberal Housing Market in Urban China," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 343-359.
    6. Timothy J. Bartik, 2008. "Measuring the Benefits of Amenity Improvements in Hedonic Price Models," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Richard E. Just & Darrell L. Hueth & Andrew Schmitz (ed.),Applied Welfare Economics, pages 643-654, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    7. Renaud Le Goix & Elena Vesselinov, 2013. "Gated Communities and House Prices: Suburban Change in Southern California, 1980–2008," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 2129-2151, November.
    8. Terry Besser & Nancy Miller & Roshan Malik, 2012. "Community Amenity Measurement for the Great Fly-Over Zones," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 106(2), pages 393-405, April.
    9. Him Chung, 2010. "Building an image of Villages‐in‐the‐City: A Clarification of China's Distinct Urban Spaces," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 421-437, June.
    10. Andrew Harvey, 1990. "The measurement and analysis of time use," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 303-308, December.
    11. Blomquist, Glenn & Worley, Lawrence, 1981. "Hedonic prices, demands for urban housing amenities, and benefit estimates," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 212-221, March.
    12. Charles Connerly & Robert Marans, 1985. "Comparing two global measures of perceived neighborhood quality," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 29-47, July.
    13. Edwin Chan & Grace Lee, 2008. "Critical factors for improving social sustainability of urban renewal projects," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 85(2), pages 243-256, January.
    14. Earle. Davis & Margret Fine-Davis, 1981. "Predictors of satisfaction with housing and neighbourhood: A nationwide study in the Republic of Ireland," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 477-494, December.
    15. Christien Klaufus & Paul Van Lindert & Femke Van Noorloos & Griet Steel, 2017. "All-Inclusiveness versus Exclusion: Urban Project Development in Latin America and Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-15, November.
    16. Scott Bennet & Nikolaos Yiannakoulias & Allison Williams & Peter Kitchen, 2012. "Playground Accessibility and Neighbourhood Social Interaction Among Parents," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 108(2), pages 199-213, September.
    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. Kai Zhang & Dong Yan, 2023. "Enhancing the Community Environment in Populous Residential Districts: Neighborhood Amenities and Residents’ Daily Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-28, September.

    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. Mariya Letdin & Hyoung S. Shim, 2019. "Location choice, life cycle and amenities," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 567-585, June.
    2. Bergstrom, John C., 1998. "Exploring And Expanding The Landscape Values Terrain," Faculty Series 16653, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    3. John Hipp, 2010. "What is the ‘Neighbourhood’ in Neighbourhood Satisfaction? Comparing the Effects of Structural Characteristics Measured at the Micro-neighbourhood and Tract Levels," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(12), pages 2517-2536, November.
    4. Randall Crane & Amrita Daniere & Stacy Harwood, 1997. "The Contribution of Environmental Amenities to Low-income Housing: A Comparative Study of Bangkok and Jakarta," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 34(9), pages 1495-1512, August.
    5. Wiles, Janine L. & Rolleston, Anna & Pillai, Avinesh & Broad, Joanna & Teh, Ruth & Gott, Merryn & Kerse, Ngaire, 2017. "Attachment to place in advanced age: A study of the LiLACS NZ cohort," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 27-37.
    6. Shinobu Ito, 2017. "Locational choice and the provision of safety services: the case of mega-natural disasters," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 171-189, April.
    7. Muhammad Junaid & Khalid Hussain & Abdul Basit & Fujun Hou, 2020. "Nature of brand love: examining its variable effect on engagement and well-being," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(3), pages 284-299, May.
    8. Carlson, Laura A. & Bitsch, Vera, 2018. "Social sustainability in the ready-made-garment sector in Bangladesh: an institutional approach to supply chains," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(2), March.
    9. M. Sirgy, 2011. "Theoretical Perspectives Guiding QOL Indicator Projects," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 103(1), pages 1-22, August.
    10. M. Sirgy & Robin Widgery & Dong-Jin Lee & Grace Yu, 2010. "Developing a Measure of Community Well-Being Based on Perceptions of Impact in Various Life Domains," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 96(2), pages 295-311, April.
    11. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ieva Ubarte & Arturas Kaklauskas, 2017. "MCDM Assessment of a Healthy and Safe Built Environment According to Sustainable Development Principles: A Practical Neighborhood Approach in Vilnius," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-30, April.
    12. Annelies (E.B.) Zoomers, 2018. "Development at the Crossroads of Capital Flows and Migration: Leaving No One Behind?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-10, December.
    13. Wilson, Christopher & van der Velden, Maja, 2022. "Sustainable AI: An integrated model to guide public sector decision-making," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    14. Agnieszka Wojewódzka-Wiewiórska & Anna Kłoczko-Gajewska & Piotr Sulewski, 2019. "Between the Social and Economic Dimensions of Sustainability in Rural Areas—In Search of Farmers’ Quality of Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, December.
    15. Siu Wai Wong & Bo-sin Tang & Jinlong Liu & Ming Liang & Winky K.O. Ho, 2021. "From “decentralization of governance†to “governance of decentralization†: Reassessing income inequality in periurban China," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(6), pages 1473-1489, September.
    16. Jubril Olakitan Atanda & Ayşe Öztürk, 2020. "Social criteria of sustainable development in relation to green building assessment tools," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 61-87, January.
    17. Olivier, Michelle M. & Howard, Johnathon L. & Wilson, Ben P. & Robinson, Wayne A., 2018. "Correlating Localisation and Sustainability and Exploring the Causality of the Relationship," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 749-765.
    18. Theresa Kotulla & Jon Martin Denstadli & Are Oust & Elisabeth Beusker, 2019. "What Does It Take to Make the Compact City Liveable for Wider Groups? Identifying Key Neighbourhood and Dwelling Features," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, June.
    19. Kawtar Najib, 2018. "Interdependence Evaluation between the Home Neighborhood and the City: How Socio-Spatial Categorization Impacts upon Residential Segregation," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-20, September.
    20. Sylvia Jansen, 2014. "Why is Housing Always Satisfactory? A Study into the Impact of Cognitive Restructuring and Future Perspectives on Housing Appreciation," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 353-371, April.

    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:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4301-:d:184174. 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.