IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v57y2020i3p655-671.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Local stakeholders’ narratives about large-scale urban development: The Zhejiang Hangzhou Future Sci-Tech City

Author

Listed:
  • Valentina Anzoise

    (European Centre for Living Technology, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Italy)

  • Debora Slanzi

    (Department of Management and European Centre for Living Technology, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Italy)

  • Irene Poli

    (European Centre for Living Technology, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Italy)

Abstract

The development of high-tech industrial parks has transformed the urban landscape in China. However, little is known of the perception of these changes by those affected by their planning and implementation. In order to shed light on this issue, we conducted a study of the Zhejiang Hangzhou Future Sci-Tech City, informed by field research on the environmental and socioeconomic status of the area and semi-structured interviews with stakeholders (residents, workers and government representatives). The data was collected and analysed using a grounded theory approach and modelled via a structural topic model (STM) to identify the most significant issues that people raised in relation to the development of the high-tech industrial park. The main finding of the study is the clear and shared perception of growing prosperity, associated with the improvements to both economic and social infrastructure and the attendant employment and business opportunities. Stakeholders also highlighted improvements to the area’s landscape quality. Nonetheless, stakeholders also identified a set of concerns centred on the threat to cultural identity, the reduction of agricultural land and the diminishing of diversity and flexibility of pathways to urban development. It is these concerns that, in their view, should serve to frame future phases of the Future Sci-Tech City construction.

Suggested Citation

  • Valentina Anzoise & Debora Slanzi & Irene Poli, 2020. "Local stakeholders’ narratives about large-scale urban development: The Zhejiang Hangzhou Future Sci-Tech City," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(3), pages 655-671, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:57:y:2020:i:3:p:655-671
    DOI: 10.1177/0042098019828997
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098019828997
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0042098019828997?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. 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.
    2. Brian Doucet & Ronald Van Kempen & Jan Van Weesep, 2011. "Resident Perceptions Of Flagship Waterfront Regeneration: The Case Of The Kop Van Zuid In Rotterdam," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 102(2), pages 125-145, April.
    3. Taozhi Zhuang & Queena K. Qian & Henk J. Visscher & Marja G. Elsinga, 2017. "Stakeholders’ Expectations in Urban Renewal Projects in China: A Key Step towards Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-21, September.
    4. Margaret E. Roberts & Brandon M. Stewart & Edoardo M. Airoldi, 2016. "A Model of Text for Experimentation in the Social Sciences," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(515), pages 988-1003, July.
    5. Margaret E. Roberts & Brandon M. Stewart & Dustin Tingley & Christopher Lucas & Jetson Leder‐Luis & Shana Kushner Gadarian & Bethany Albertson & David G. Rand, 2014. "Structural Topic Models for Open‐Ended Survey Responses," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(4), pages 1064-1082, October.
    6. Gregory C. Chow, 2004. "Economic Reform and Growth in China," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 5(1), pages 127-152, 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. Andrew EG Jonas, 2020. "China’s urban development in context: Variegated geographies of city-regionalism and managing the territorial politics of urban development," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(3), pages 701-708, February.
    2. Marcus Hübscher, 2022. "Planning behind Closed Doors: Unlocking Large-Scale Urban Development Projects Using the Stakeholder Approach on Tenerife, Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-25, March.
    3. Dell’Anna, Federico & Dell’Ovo, Marta, 2022. "A stakeholder-based approach managing conflictual values in urban design processes. The case of an open prison in Barcelona," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    4. Fulong Wu, 2020. "Adding new narratives to the urban imagination: An introduction to ‘New directions of urban studies in China’," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(3), pages 459-472, 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. Marcel Fratzscher & Tobias Heidland & Lukas Menkhoff & Lucio Sarno & Maik Schmeling, 2023. "Foreign Exchange Intervention: A New Database," IMF Economic Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Monetary Fund, vol. 71(4), pages 852-884, December.
    2. Li Tang & Jennifer Kuzma & Xi Zhang & Xinyu Song & Yin Li & Hongxu Liu & Guangyuan Hu, 2023. "Synthetic biology and governance research in China: a 40-year evolution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5293-5310, September.
    3. Camilla Salvatore & Silvia Biffignandi & Annamaria Bianchi, 2022. "Corporate Social Responsibility Activities Through Twitter: From Topic Model Analysis to Indexes Measuring Communication Characteristics," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1217-1248, December.
    4. Andreas Rehs, 2020. "A structural topic model approach to scientific reorientation of economics and chemistry after German reunification," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1229-1251, November.
    5. Dehler-Holland, Joris & Okoh, Marvin & Keles, Dogan, 2022. "Assessing technology legitimacy with topic models and sentiment analysis – The case of wind power in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    6. Szymon Sacher & Laura Battaglia & Stephen Hansen, 2021. "Hamiltonian Monte Carlo for Regression with High-Dimensional Categorical Data," Papers 2107.08112, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    7. Peter Grajzl & Cindy Irby, 2019. "Reflections on study abroad: a computational linguistics approach," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 151-181, July.
    8. Xieling Chen & Juan Chen & Gary Cheng & Tao Gong, 2020. "Topics and trends in artificial intelligence assisted human brain research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, April.
    9. Eunhye (Olivia) Park & Bongsug (Kevin) Chae & Junehee Kwon & Woo-Hyuk Kim, 2020. "The Effects of Green Restaurant Attributes on Customer Satisfaction Using the Structural Topic Model on Online Customer Reviews," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, April.
    10. Grajzl, Peter & Murrell, Peter, 2019. "Toward understanding 17th century English culture: A structural topic model of Francis Bacon's ideas," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 111-135.
    11. Goodell, John W. & Kumar, Satish & Li, Xiao & Pattnaik, Debidutta & Sharma, Anuj, 2022. "Foundations and research clusters in investor attention: Evidence from bibliometric and topic modelling analysis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 511-529.
    12. Mourtgos, Scott M. & Adams, Ian T., 2019. "The rhetoric of de-policing: Evaluating open-ended survey responses from police officers with machine learning-based structural topic modeling," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Nils Augustin & Andreas Eckhardt & Alexander Willem Jong, 2023. "Understanding decentralized autonomous organizations from the inside," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-14, December.
    14. Jovana Karanović & Hans Berends & Yuval Engel, 2021. "Regulated Dependence: Platform Workers’ Responses to New Forms of Organizing," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 1070-1106, June.
    15. Kraus, Sascha & Kumar, Satish & Lim, Weng Marc & Kaur, Jaspreet & Sharma, Anuj & Schiavone, Francesco, 2023. "From moon landing to metaverse: Tracing the evolution of Technological Forecasting and Social Change," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    16. Nuccio Ludovico & Marc Esteve Del Valle & Franco Ruzzenenti, 2020. "Mapping the Dutch Energy Transition Hyperlink Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-24, September.
    17. Baker, H. Kent & Kumar, Satish & Goyal, Kirti & Sharma, Anuj, 2021. "International review of financial analysis: A retrospective evaluation between 1992 and 2020," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    18. Sandra Wankmüller, 2023. "A comparison of approaches for imbalanced classification problems in the context of retrieving relevant documents for an analysis," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 91-163, April.
    19. Dehler-Holland, Joris & Schumacher, Kira & Fichtner, Wolf, 2021. "Topic Modeling Uncovers Shifts in Media Framing of the German Renewable Energy Act," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 2(1).
    20. Han, Chunjia & Yang, Mu & Piterou, Athena, 2021. "Do news media and citizens have the same agenda on COVID-19? an empirical comparison of twitter posts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).

    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:57:y:2020:i:3:p:655-671. 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.