IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v54y2017i15p3403-3422.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The hegemony of the real estate industry: Redevelopment of ‘Government/Institution or Community’ (G/IC) land in Hong Kong

Author

Listed:
  • Joanna Wai Ying Lee

    (The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong)

  • Wing-Shing Tang

    (Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong)

Abstract

The high property price syndrome in Hong Kong has led to heightened concern about the role of landed capital in property development. Recently, the hegemony of the real estate industry has become a buzzword in local literature, but unfortunately there is neither adequate theoretical articulation nor informed understanding of the concept of hegemony. There is widespread misunderstanding of hegemony, equating it to domination by property tycoons. The local literature has overlooked the government-business collusion in constructing the common sense of society so as to dominate others. Through an empirical investigation of the redevelopment of ‘Government/Institution or Community’ (G/IC) land in Hong Kong, this article attempts to offer an alternative explanation to the land question of G/IC redevelopment by highlighting that the everyday life of the silent majority and of professionals has in fact perpetuated the hegemony of the real estate industry in Hong Kong. It is argued that the government, property developers, professionals, charitable organisations and the general public have altogether participated, in different ways and to different extents, in the capital accumulation projects of leading developer conglomerates in Hong Kong. A land (re)development regime has thus contributed to the property boom in Hong Kong.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanna Wai Ying Lee & Wing-Shing Tang, 2017. "The hegemony of the real estate industry: Redevelopment of ‘Government/Institution or Community’ (G/IC) land in Hong Kong," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(15), pages 3403-3422, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:54:y:2017:i:15:p:3403-3422
    DOI: 10.1177/0042098016679607
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098016679607
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0042098016679607?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2013. "How Planners Deal with Uncomfortable Knowledge: The Dubious Ethics of the American Planning Association," Papers 1303.7405, arXiv.org.
    2. Loretta Lees & David Ley, 2008. "Introduction to Special Issue on Gentrification and Public Policy," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 45(12), pages 2379-2384, November.
    3. Rose Neng Lai & Ko Wang, 1999. "Land-Supply Restrictions, Developer Strategies and Housing Policies: The Case in Hong Kong," International Real Estate Review, Global Social Science Institute, vol. 2(1), pages 143-159.
    4. Alan Smart & James Lee, 2003. "Financialization and the Role of Real Estate in Hong Kong’s Regime of Accumulation," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 79(2), pages 153-171, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Han, Wenjing & Zhang, Xiaoling & Zheng, Xian, 2020. "Land use regulation and urban land value: Evidence from China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    2. Antoine Paccoud, 2017. "Buy-to-let gentrification: Extending social change through tenure shifts," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(4), pages 839-856, April.
    3. Nagao, Kenkichi & Edgington, David W., 2023. "Local industrial displacement, zoning conflicts and monozukuri planning in Higashi Osaka, Japan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    4. Szymon Marcinczak & Iwona Sagan, 2011. "The Socio-Spatial Restructuring of Lódz, Poland," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(9), pages 1789-1809, July.
    5. Jihwan Kim, 2018. "Dissonance between formal and informal housing capital: The case of Korea," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 50(6), pages 1171-1188, September.
    6. Edward C. H. Tang, 2021. "Speculate a lot," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 91-109, February.
    7. Jose Torres-Pruñonosa & Pablo García-Estévez & Josep Maria Raya & Camilo Prado-Román, 2022. "How on Earth Did Spanish Banking Sell the Housing Stock?," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    8. Chien-An Wang & Chin-Oh Chang, 2008. "Is It a Heavy Log that Broke the Camel’s Back? Evidence of the Credit Channel in Taiwan’s Construction Industry," International Real Estate Review, Global Social Science Institute, vol. 11(1), pages 38-64.
    9. Su H. Chan & Mark H. Stohs & Ko Wang, 2001. "Are Real Estate IPOs a Different Species? Evidence from Hong Kong IPOs," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 21(3), pages 337-356.
    10. Natacha Aveline-Dubach & Guillaume Blandeau, 2019. "The political economy of transit value capture: The changing business model of the MTRC in Hong Kong," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(16), pages 3415-3431, December.
    11. Jessica S Pineda-Zumaran, 2018. "Exploring practitioners’ perception of ethical issues in planning: The Peruvian case," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(6), pages 1109-1132, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Joseph T. L. Ooi & Thao T. T. Le, 2012. "New Supply and Price Dynamics in the Singapore Housing Market," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(7), pages 1435-1451, May.
    14. Xiaolong Liu & Weidong Qu, 2015. "Winner's Curse or Signaling? Bidding Outcomes in the Chinese Land Market," International Real Estate Review, Global Social Science Institute, vol. 18(1), pages 113-129.
    15. Natacha Aveline-Dubach & Guillaume Blandeau, 2019. "The political economy of transit value capture: The changing business model of the MTRC in Hong Kong [L'économie politique de la captation de valeur foncière (Land value capture): le nouveau modèle," Post-Print halshs-02100616, HAL.
    16. LAI, Ping-fu (Brian) & CHAN, Ho Sum, 2014. "The Imminent Housing Collapse - Will History Repeat Itself?," Studii Financiare (Financial Studies), Centre of Financial and Monetary Research "Victor Slavescu", vol. 18(4), pages 63-104.
    17. Charles Ka Yui Leung, 2015. "Availability, Affordability and Volatility: The Case of the Hong Kong Housing Market," International Real Estate Review, Global Social Science Institute, vol. 18(3), pages 383-428.
    18. Klaas Kresse & Erwin van der Krabben, 2021. "Housing Supply Limitations, Land Readjustment and the Ecological Performance of the Urban Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-24, August.
    19. Baudot, Lisa & Cooper, David J., 2022. "Regulatory mandates and responses to uncomfortable knowledge: The case of country-by-country reporting in the extractive sector," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    20. Matthias Bernt, 2012. "The ‘Double Movements’ of Neighbourhood Change: Gentrification and Public Policy in Harlem and Prenzlauer Berg," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(14), pages 3045-3062, November.

    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:sae:urbstu:v:54:y:2017:i:15:p:3403-3422. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    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.