IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v99y2020ics0264837719306271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A reflection on coproduction processes in urban collective construction land transformation: A case study of Guangzhou in the Pearl River Delta

Author

Listed:
  • Huang, Huang
  • Akaateba, Millicent Awialie
  • Li, Fengqing

Abstract

The introduction of a national construction land quota in China has made urban collective construction land transformation imperative in urban governance in the Pearl River Delta and beyond. Whilst normative planning approaches have failed to produce desired outcomes, special pilot land use policies applied in this region provided an alternative deliberative space for co-production practices to thrive. Using project level experiences and based on qualitative interviews with villagers, representatives of village collectives, planning professionals and private investors, this paper discusses the relationship between shifting pilot collective construction land use policies and institutionalised co-production practices. We argue based on the empirical findings that although co-production practices offer a great potential for transformative land development, the outcomes of the practices differ depending on the adaptability of land use policies to actor interests. Adaptive collaboration among key stakeholders at an early phase of urban collective land transformation encourages a better engagement of stakeholders, and stimulates promising co-productive initiatives that are critical at resolving the dilemmas involved in land transformation projects. The paper also contributes to the burgeoning discourse on co-production theory by flagging up how two key contradictions: ‘flexibility’ versus ‘regulation’ affect the success of co-production ventures and calls for an experimentation of the oxymoron of ‘flexible regulation’ in co-productive governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Huang, Huang & Akaateba, Millicent Awialie & Li, Fengqing, 2020. "A reflection on coproduction processes in urban collective construction land transformation: A case study of Guangzhou in the Pearl River Delta," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:99:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719306271
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719306271
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105007?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. Fubing Su & Ran Tao & Hui Wang, 2013. "State Fragmentation and Rights Contestation: Rural Land Development Rights in China," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 21(4), pages 36-55, July.
    2. A. J. Bebbington & D. Mitlin & J. Mogaladi & M. Scurrah & C. Bielich, 2010. "Decentring Poverty, Reworking Government: Social Movements and States in the Government of Poverty," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(7), pages 1304-1326.
    3. Liu, Yansui, 2018. "Introduction to land use and rural sustainability in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1-4.
    4. Neil Brenner, 1999. "Globalisation as Reterritorialisation: The Re-scaling of Urban Governance in the European Union," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 36(3), pages 431-451, March.
    5. Akaateba, Millicent Awialie & Huang, Huang & Adumpo, Emile Akangoa, 2018. "Between co-production and institutional hybridity in land delivery: Insights from local planning practice in peri-urban Tamale, Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 215-226.
    6. Ostrom, Elinor, 1996. "Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 1073-1087, June.
    7. Anuradha Joshi & Mick Moore, 2004. "Institutionalised Co-production: Unorthodox Public Service Delivery in Challenging Environments," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 31-49.
    8. Graham Johnson & Yuen‐fong Woon, 1997. "Rural Development Patterns in Post‐Reform China: The Pearl River Delta Region in the 1990s," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 28(4), pages 731-752, October.
    9. Vanessa Watson, 2014. "Co-production and collaboration in planning - The difference," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 62-76, March.
    10. Neil Brenner, 2000. "The Urban Question: Reflections on Henri Lefebvre, Urban Theory and the Politics of scale," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 361-378, June.
    11. Jakub Galuszka, 2019. "Co-Production as a Driver of Urban Governance Transformation? The Case of the Oplan LIKAS Programme in Metro Manila, Philippines," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 395-419, May.
    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. 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).
    2. Mu Lin & Jingxin Gao & Yongjie Du & Pengyu Ren, 2023. "Mismatch in Urban Construction Land Use and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, February.

    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. Akaateba, Millicent Awialie & Huang, Huang & Adumpo, Emile Akangoa, 2018. "Between co-production and institutional hybridity in land delivery: Insights from local planning practice in peri-urban Tamale, Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 215-226.
    2. Pwint Kay Khine & Jianing Mi & Raza Shahid, 2021. "A Comparative Analysis of Co-Production in Public Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, June.
    3. Federica Natalia Rosati & Luisa Moretto & Jacques Teller, 2020. "An incremental approach to service co-production: unfolding the co-evolution of the built environment and water and sanitation infrastructures," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/314020, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Sophie King & Peter Kasaija, 2018. "State-movement partnership in Uganda: Co-producing an enabling environment for urban poverty reduction?," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series esid-098-18, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    5. Tubridy, Fiadh & Lennon, Mick & Scott, Mark, 2022. "Managed retreat and coastal climate change adaptation: The environmental justice implications and value of a coproduction approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    6. Amengual, Matthew, 2010. "Complementary Labor Regulation: The Uncoordinated Combination of State and Private Regulators in the Dominican Republic," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 405-414, March.
    7. Paul Waley, 2007. "Tokyo-as-World-City: Reassessing the Role of Capital and the State in Urban Restructuring," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 44(8), pages 1465-1490, July.
    8. Indranil De & Rooba Hasan & Mubashshir Iqbal, 2022. "Natural Treatment Systems and Importance of Social Cost Benefit Analysis in Developing Countries: A Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, March.
    9. Judith Westerink & Annet Kempenaar & Marjo van Lierop & Stefan Groot & Arnold van der Valk & Adri van den Brink, 2017. "The participating government: Shifting boundaries in collaborative spatial planning of urban regions," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(1), pages 147-168, February.
    10. Mary S. Mangai & Michiel S. Vries, 2019. "You Just Have to Ask Coproduction of Primary Healthcare in Ghana and Nigeria," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 273-291, June.
    11. Holstenkamp, Lars, 2019. "What do we know about cooperative sustainable electrification in the global South? A synthesis of the literature and refined social-ecological systems framework," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 307-320.
    12. Klimczuk, Andrzej & Gawron, Grzegorz & Szweda-Lewandowska, Zofia, 2021. "Starzenie się populacji. Aktywizacja, koprodukcja i integracja społeczna osób starszych [Population Ageing: Activation, Co-Production, and Social Integration of Older People]," MPRA Paper 108238, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Miao, Qing & Schwarz, Susan & Schwarz, Gary, 2021. "Responding to COVID-19: Community volunteerism and coproduction in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    14. N.A. Phelps & N. Parsons, 2003. "Edge Urban Geographies: Notes from the Margins of Europe's Capital Cities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 40(9), pages 1725-1749, August.
    15. Virginie Mamadouh & Olivier Kramsch & Martin Van Der Velde, 2004. "Articulating Local And Global Scales," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 95(5), pages 455-466, December.
    16. Giuseppe Cappiello & Paola Garrone & Paolo Nardi, 2013. "Cooperation in the initial stages of infrastructure projects: a conceptual model and surv ey of Italian utility managers," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(1), pages 41-68.
    17. Francesca Galli & Gianluca Brunori & Francesco Di Iacovo & Silvia Innocenti, 2014. "Co-Producing Sustainability: Involving Parents and Civil Society in the Governance of School Meal Services. A Case Study from Pisa, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-24, March.
    18. García-Mollá, Marta & Ortega-Reig, Mar & Boelens, Rutgerd & Sanchis-Ibor, Carles, 2020. "Hybridizing the commons. Privatizing and outsourcing collective irrigation management after technological change in Spain," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    19. Sanandaji, Tino & Lakomaa, Erik, 2016. "Care, Commons and Entrepreneurship," SSE Working Paper Series in Economic History 2016:2, Stockholm School of Economics.
    20. Goodwin, Geoff, 2019. "The problem and promise of coproduction: Politics, history, and autonomy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 501-513.

    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:99:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719306271. 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.