IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i8p2931-d164315.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Drives the Rise of Metro Developments in China? Evidence from Nantong

Author

Listed:
  • Shutian Zhou

    () (School of Architecture and Planning, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China)

  • Guofang Zhai

    () (School of Architecture and Planning, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China)

  • Yijun Shi

    () (School of Architecture and Planning, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China)

Abstract

This paper addresses to the rapid rise of metro developments in Chinese cities to reconsider the official justifications of such mega-projects and the underlying driving forces behind proposal and approval processes. Qualitative approaches were undertaken in this in-depth case study of Nantong’s metro project, through insights into planning documents and evidences gathered from interviews, together with relevant socioeconomic data. Our research findings reveal four major motivations to develop metro projects in China: the city’s expected improvements through the metro system, the local economic power as the essential requirement and source of confidence for project development, the inter-city competition as an invisible factor driving project proposals, and the changing domestic political economy as the direct cause of its approval. As a topic that is frequently studied in the relevant literature and often advocated by metro projects promoters, the local expected achievements in terms of modal shift to public transport, transit-oriented development, economic growth, and tax maximisation are highlighted in this case study. Additionally, in China, inter-city competition and economic-political reasons involved in initiating, promoting, and approving urban mega-projects are also vital to the whole process.

Suggested Citation

  • Shutian Zhou & Guofang Zhai & Yijun Shi, 2018. "What Drives the Rise of Metro Developments in China? Evidence from Nantong," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:8:p:2931-:d:164315
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2931/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2931/
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gabriel M. Ahlfeldt & Kristoffer Moeller & Nicolai Wendland, 2015. "Chicken or egg? The PVAR econometrics of transportation," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(6), pages 1169-1193.
    2. Gabriel M Ahlfeldt, 2013. "If We Build it, Will They Pay? Predicting Property Price Effects of Transport Innovations," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(8), pages 1977-1994, August.
    3. Becky Loo & Dennis Li, 2006. "Developing Metro Systems in the People’s Republic of China: Policy and Gaps," Transportation, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 115-132, March.
    4. Ian Gordon, 1999. "Internationalisation and Urban Competition," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 36(5-6), pages 1001-1016, May.
    5. Jingxiang Zhang & Fulong Wu, 2006. "China's changing economic governance: Administrative annexation and the reorganization of local governments in the Yangtze River Delta," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 3-21.
    6. Gibbons, Stephen & Machin, Stephen, 2005. "Valuing rail access using transport innovations," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 148-169, January.
    7. Ivan Turok, 2009. "The distinctive city: pitfalls in the pursuit of differential advantage," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 41(1), pages 13-30, January.
    8. W.F. Lever, 1993. "Competition within the European Urban System," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 30(6), pages 935-948, June.
    9. Allan Cochrane & Kevin Ward, 2012. "Researching the geographies of policy mobility: confronting the methodological challenges," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 44(1), pages 5-12, January.
    10. Oliver Shyr & David Emanuel Andersson & Jamie Wang & Taiwei Huang & Olivia Liu, 2013. "Where Do Home Buyers Pay Most for Relative Transit Accessibility? Hong Kong, Taipei and Kaohsiung Compared," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(12), pages 2553-2568, September.
    11. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2014. "What You Should Know About Megaprojects, and Why: An Overview," Papers 1409.0003, arXiv.org.
    12. Dean H. Gatzlaff & Marc T. Smith, 1993. "The Impact of the Miami Metrorail on the Value of Residences near Station Locations," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 69(1), pages 54-66.
    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. Tong Zhou & Xintao Liu & Zhen Qian & Haoxuan Chen & Fei Tao, 2019. "Dynamic Update and Monitoring of AOI Entrance via Spatiotemporal Clustering of Drop-Off Points," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(23), pages 1-20, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    project motivations; metro project; urban mega-project; qualitative methods; China;

    JEL classification:

    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q3 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:8:p:2931-:d:164315. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (XML Conversion Team). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com/ .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.