IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/bjrecm/v7y2019i1p135-158n9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To Remove Walls or Not: Analysis Into the Dilemma of Chinese “Block System Policy”

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Chaoliang

    (Tianjin University of Science & Technology, Tianjin, China)

  • Arcuri Graig

    (State University of New York at Oswego, Oswego, USA)

Abstract

Property right protection has gradually become a major concern for the emerging and expanding group of homeowners in China, which entails an institutional change regarding community governance. The aim of the paper is to identify the reasons why the Block System Policy initiative in China has caused a social resentment and had to be suspended under considerable social pressure. Employing qualitative grounded theory research method, including an analysis framework of the torque equation from a social physics perspective, as a method of analysis, this study analyses the contrasting arguments around whether or not the community walls should be torn down in China, to expound the tension between the different agents’ preferences on BSP initiative, and to shed light on the inherent logic of the debated policy. The key variables used to predict the trend of BSP have been supposed to be the preference intensity and the effective multitude of the organized stakeholders, whose multiplied products will count for the general balance of the policy direction. Additionally, by reviewing Chinese historical idiosyncrasy for walls, this paper particularly stresses the importance of the homeowners’ intensity of preference to protect their property rights and resources, which substantially shaped the destiny of the policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Chaoliang & Arcuri Graig, 2019. "To Remove Walls or Not: Analysis Into the Dilemma of Chinese “Block System Policy”," Baltic Journal of Real Estate Economics and Construction Management, Sciendo, vol. 7(1), pages 135-158, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:bjrecm:v:7:y:2019:i:1:p:135-158:n:9
    DOI: 10.2478/bjreecm-2019-0009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/bjreecm-2019-0009
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/bjreecm-2019-0009?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
    ---><---

    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:vrs:bjrecm:v:7:y:2019:i:1:p:135-158:n:9. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.