Author
Listed:
- Shengxi Xin
(College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
Shanghai Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute, Shanghai 200092, China
Key Laboratory of Intelligent Spatial Planning Technology, Ministry of Natural Resources, Shanghai 200092, China
The Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, London WC1H 0NN, UK)
- Hui Qian
(Shanghai Tongji Urban Planning and Design Institute, Shanghai 200092, China
Key Laboratory of Intelligent Spatial Planning Technology, Ministry of Natural Resources, Shanghai 200092, China)
Abstract
This paper critically examines the persistent limitations of spatial planning reforms in China in addressing urban–rural integration, despite significant and successive legislative and planning reforms. Through a historically grounded and institutionally informed analysis, the study traces the evolution of China’s planning regimes across three key phases—urban planning, urban–rural planning, and territorial spatial planning (TSP)—highlighting shifting policy logics and the enduring structural challenges that shape rural marginalization. Drawing on national planning documents and authors’ empirical insights from planning practice, the paper identifies four interrelated and persistent constraints: (1) cross-scalar and interdepartmental fragmentation in governance, (2) contradictions in the land system that restrict rural development rights, (3) fiscal dependence on land conversion that distorts planning priorities, and (4) technical and conceptual gaps that reduce rural planning to physicalist and exogenous interventions. The paper contributes by offering a periodized account of China’s rural planning reforms, situating these within global debates on rural marginalization, and evaluating the transformative potential of the TSP framework. It argues that achieving meaningful urban–rural integration requires a fundamental rethinking of planning as a developmental, rather than solely regulatory, practice—one that is territorially embedded, socially responsive, and functionally aligned with endogenous rural revitalization.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
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:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:8:p:1520-:d:1708612. 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: 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.