IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v55y2018i7p1400-1419.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emerging selective regimes in a fragmented authoritarian environment: The ‘three old redevelopment’ policy in Guangzhou, China from 2009 to 2014

Author

Listed:
  • Bin Li

    (Shenzhen Graduate SchoolPeking University, China)

  • Chaoqun Liu

    (Peking University, China)

Abstract

This paper investigates the urban redevelopment process under the ‘three old redevelopment’ policy in Guangzhou, China from 2009 to 2014. It highlights strongly shared interests between stakeholders’ institutions that match the core mechanism of the urban regime approach. The fragmented authoritarianism model is used to explain the origins of such regimes, using concepts such as institutional obstacles and small opportunities. In addition, comparisons are made between three types of places (the ‘three olds’ of towns, factories and village) that experience specific institutional difficulties. Through the ‘three old redevelopment’ policy, selective regimes are emerging in diverse ways to form new informal coalitions and realise potential land values, depending on the place and context in which it is applied. These selectivities can be explained by the analysis of a bias institutional ensemble which privileges some projects and some actors more than others in the ‘three old redevelopment’.

Suggested Citation

  • Bin Li & Chaoqun Liu, 2018. "Emerging selective regimes in a fragmented authoritarian environment: The ‘three old redevelopment’ policy in Guangzhou, China from 2009 to 2014," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(7), pages 1400-1419, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:55:y:2018:i:7:p:1400-1419
    DOI: 10.1177/0042098017716846
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098017716846
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0042098017716846?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. Bob Jessop, 2001. "Institutional Re(turns) and the Strategic – Relational Approach," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 33(7), pages 1213-1235, July.
    2. Jieming Zhu, 1999. "Local Growth Coalition: The Context and Implications of China’s Gradualist Urban Land Reforms," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 534-548, September.
    3. Jieming Zhu, 2002. "Urban Development under Ambiguous Property Rights: A Case of China’s Transition Economy," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 41-57, March.
    4. Li Tian, 2008. "The Chengzhongcun Land Market in China: Boon or Bane? — A Perspective on Property Rights," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 282-304, June.
    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. Lanchih Po, 2011. "Property Rights Reforms and Changing Grassroots Governance in China’s Urban—Rural Peripheries: The Case of Changping District in Beijing," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(3), pages 509-528, February.
    2. Li Tian, 2014. "Property Rights, Land Values and Urban Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15856.
    3. Youliang Guo & Chengguo Zhang & Ya Ping Wang & Xun Li, 2018. "(De-)Activating the growth machine for redevelopment: The case of Liede urban village in Guangzhou," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(7), pages 1420-1438, May.
    4. Webster, Chris & Wu, Fulong & Zhang, Fangzhu & Sarkar, Chinmoy, 2016. "Informality, property rights, and poverty in China’s “favelas”," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 461-476.
    5. Dinghuan Yuan & Yung Yau & Huiying (Cynthia) Hou & Yongshen Liu, 2021. "Factors Influencing the Project Duration of Urban Village Redevelopment in Contemporary China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.
    6. Sa, Haoxuan, 2020. "Do ambiguous property rights matter? Collective value logic in Lin Village," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    7. Li Tian & Xu Guo & Wei Yin, 2017. "From urban sprawl to land consolidation in suburban Shanghai under the backdrop of increasing versus decreasing balance policy: A perspective of property rights transfer," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(4), pages 878-896, March.
    8. Hoang Linh Nguyen & Jin Duan & Guo Qin Zhang, 2018. "Land Politics under Market Socialism: The State, Land Policies, and Rural–Urban Land Conversion in China and Vietnam," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-17, April.
    9. Jiang Xu & Anthony Yeh, 2009. "Decoding Urban Land Governance: State Reconstruction in Contemporary Chinese Cities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 46(3), pages 559-581, March.
    10. Yuan, Quan & Zhu, Jiren, 2019. "Logistics sprawl in Chinese metropolises: Evidence from Wuhan," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 242-252.
    11. Hyun Bang Shin, 2009. "Residential Redevelopment and the Entrepreneurial Local State: The Implications of Beijing’s Shifting Emphasis on Urban Redevelopment Policies," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 46(13), pages 2815-2839, December.
    12. You-Ren Yang & Chih-hui Chang, 2007. "An Urban Regeneration Regime in China: A Case Study of Urban Redevelopment in Shanghai's Taipingqiao Area," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 44(9), pages 1809-1826, August.
    13. Pu Hao & Pieter Hooimeijer & Richard Sliuzas & Stan Geertman, 2013. "What Drives the Spatial Development of Urban Villages in China?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(16), pages 3394-3411, December.
    14. Yiming Wang & Jie Chen, 2021. "Privatizing the Urban Commons Under Ambiguous Property Rights in China: Is Marketization a Remedy to the Tragedy of the Commons?," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 80(2), pages 503-547, March.
    15. Anna Herzog, 2022. "Imaginaries, directionalities, agency and new path creation [Imaginaries, directionalities, Akteurshandeln und Pfadkreation]," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 42(3), pages 279-307, December.
    16. Jieming Zhu, 2005. "A Transitional Institution for the Emerging Land Market in Urban China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(8), pages 1369-1390, July.
    17. Pan, Wenjian & Du, Juan, 2021. "Towards sustainable urban transition: A critical review of strategies and policies of urban village renewal in Shenzhen, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    18. Tian, Li & Liang, Yinlong & Zhang, Bo, 2017. "Measuring residential and industrial land use mix in the peri-urban areas of China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 427-438.
    19. 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.
    20. Andrew M. Wood, 2004. "Domesticating Urban Theory? US Concepts, British Cities and the Limits of Cross-national Applications," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(11), pages 2103-2118, October.

    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:urbstu:v:55:y:2018:i:7:p:1400-1419. 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: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    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.