IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v81y2019icp472-482.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Neighborhood governance in post-reform Urban China: Place attachment impact on civic engagement in Guangzhou

Author

Listed:
  • Wu, Rong
  • Li, Zhigang
  • Liu, Ye
  • Huang, Xu
  • Liu, Yuqi

Abstract

China has experienced an unprecedented surge in rural-urban migration since the mid-1980s, leading to rapid growth in urban populations, especially in large cities. These floating populations pose a challenge to local authorities with respect to neighborhood governance. In particular, those lacking official registration status (hukou) are reported to possess lower place attachment to the destination neighborhood and seem to lack aspiration to participate in civic engagement. Against this background, the paper’s first objective is to explore the determinants of residents’ aspiration to participate in civic engagement, emphasizing the effects of their place attachment and experience of participation. Its second objective is to discuss the heterogeneity of residents’ civic engagement rooted in the difference in their residential registration status. To this end, a group of hukou holders (native residents and migrants who transferred hukou) are contrasted with a group of non-hukou migrants with respect to the aspiration to participate and related mechanisms. Using evidence from a 2015 survey of 1273 residents in Guangzhou, a stepwise approach of linear probability models reveals two main empirical findings. First, residents’ place attachment has a direct positive impact on their aspiration to participate in civic engagement, mediated by residents’ experience of participation behavior. Second, compared to the native residents group, migrants possess lower place attachment and participate less in civic engagement (both actual behavior and future aspiration), and the mediation effect of migrants’ participation experience is much weaker. This implies that, without hukou status, migrants lack positive feedback from their participation experience and so are less eager to participate in civic engagement. Based on these findings, the paper outlines the heterogeneity in residents’ place attachment and the institutional barriers to civic engagement. The hukou system still restricts migrants’ participation, so neighborhood governance policy-makers should seek to address this hukou constraint in urban China.

Suggested Citation

  • Wu, Rong & Li, Zhigang & Liu, Ye & Huang, Xu & Liu, Yuqi, 2019. "Neighborhood governance in post-reform Urban China: Place attachment impact on civic engagement in Guangzhou," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 472-482.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:81:y:2019:i:c:p:472-482
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.11.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718309712
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.11.019?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xu Huang & Martin Dijst & Jan Van Weesep, 2017. "Social networks of rural–urban migrants after residential relocation: evidence from Yangzhou, a medium-sized Chinese city," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(6), pages 816-840, August.
    2. Francesco Sarracino & Małgorzata Mikucka, 2017. "Social Capital in Europe from 1990 to 2012: Trends and Convergence," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 407-432, March.
    3. Gu, Hongyan, 2016. "NIMBYism in China: Issues and prospects of public participation in facility siting," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 527-534.
    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. De Tong & Yaying Wu & Ian MacLachlan & Jieming Zhu, 2021. "The role of social capital in the collective-led development of urbanising villages in China: The case of Shenzhen," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(16), pages 3335-3353, December.
    2. Gang Xu & Yuxin Liao & Yixin Jiang & Peiyao Xu & Lilin Yang & Wenhua Huang & Manru Zhang & Rong Wu, 2022. "The Impacts of Urban Environments on Community Trust of the Low-Income Group: A Case Study for the Pearl River Delta Region," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Yamei Chen & Lu Jiang, 2022. "Influencing Factors of Direct Carbon Emissions of Households in Urban Villages in Guangzhou, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-14, December.
    4. Lin Zhang & Yanliu Lin & Pieter Hooimeijer & Stan Geertman, 2020. "Heterogeneity of public participation in urban redevelopment in Chinese cities: Beijing versus Guangzhou," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(9), pages 1903-1919, July.

    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. Georg Kanitsar, 2022. "The Inequality-Trust Nexus Revisited: At What Level of Aggregation Does Income Inequality Matter for Social Trust?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 171-195, August.
    2. Katalin Füzér & Bence Völgyi & Dávid Erát & László Szerb, 2023. "Global Digital Peripheries: The Social Capital Profile of Low‐Adopter Countries," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(3), pages 225-238.
    3. Philipp Poppitz, 2019. "Multidimensional Inequality and Divergence: The Eurozone Crisis in Retrospect," Working Papers V-420-19, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Feb 2019.
    4. František Murgaš & František Petrovič & Anna Tirpáková, 2022. "Social Capital as a Predictor of Quality of Life: The Czech Experience," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-17, May.
    5. Norbert Laurisz, 2019. "The Role of Stakeholders in Development of Social Economy Organizations in Poland: An Integrative Approach," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Wei Yu & Xiao Lu & Enru Wang, 2020. "Rural land reforms and villagers' preferences for urban settlement: A case study of Shandong Province, China," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 1259-1276, September.
    7. Sarracino, Francesco & Greyling, Talita & O'Connor, Kelsey J. & Peroni, Chiara & Rossouw, Stephanié, 2022. "Trust Predicts Compliance with COVID-19 Containment Policies: Evidence from Ten Countries Using Big Data," IZA Discussion Papers 15171, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Kotus Jacek & Sowada Tomasz & Rzeszewski Michał & Mańkowska Patrycja, 2019. "Anatomy of Place-Making in the Context of the Communication Processes: A Story of One Community and One Square in a Post-Socialist City," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 38(2), pages 51-66, June.
    9. Qing Yang & Yanxia Zhu & Xingxing Liu & Lingmei Fu & Qianqian Guo, 2019. "Bayesian-Based NIMBY Crisis Transformation Path Discovery for Municipal Solid Waste Incineration in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-21, April.
    10. Urszula Markowska-Przybyła, 2020. "Does Social Capital Matter for Total Factor Productivity? Exploratory Evidence from Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-25, November.
    11. Mateusz Borkowski, 2023. "Social Capital and Economic Development: PLS-SEM Model," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 2, pages 11-27.
    12. Francesco Sarracino & Marcin Piekałkiewicz, 2021. "The Role of Income and Social Capital for Europeans’ Well-Being During the 2008 Economic Crisis," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1583-1610, April.
    13. Sarracino, Francesco & Slater, Giulia, 2024. "The trust paradox," MPRA Paper 120053, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Habibov, Nazim & Cheung, Alex & Auchynnikava, Alena, 2017. "Does social trust increase willingness to pay taxes to improve public healthcare? Cross-sectional cross-country instrumental variable analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 25-34.
    15. Diana Escandon-Barbosa & David Urbano-Pulido & Andrea Hurtado-Ayala, 2019. "Exploring the Relationship between Formal and Informal Institutions, Social Capital, and Entrepreneurial Activity in Developing and Developed Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, January.
    16. Jinfeng Zhang, 2019. "How Community Participation Promotes the Relocation Adjustment of Older Women: A Moderated Mediation Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 637-655, June.
    17. Francesco Sarracino & Talita Greyling & Kelsey J. O'Connor & Chiara Peroni & Stephanie Rossouw, 2021. "Trust predicts compliance to Covid-19 containment policies: evidence from ten countries using big data," Department of Economics University of Siena 858, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    18. Qinran Yang & David Ley, 2019. "Residential relocation and the remaking of socialist workers through state-facilitated urban redevelopment in Chengdu, China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(12), pages 2480-2498, September.
    19. Zoltán Lakner & Anna Kiss & Ivan Merlet & Judit Oláh & Domicián Máté & Janusz Grabara & József Popp, 2018. "Building Coalitions for a Diversified and Sustainable Tourism: Two Case Studies from Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, April.
    20. Inbar Weiss & Pamela Paxton & Kristopher Velasco & Robert W. Ressler, 2019. "Revisiting Declines in Social Capital: Evidence from a New Measure," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 1015-1029, 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:eee:lauspo:v:81:y:2019:i:c:p:472-482. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.