IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rgovxx/v6y2021i3p396-416.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The institutional challenge to co-deliver migrant integration and urban greening—evidence from Haizhu Wetland Park Project in Guangzhou, China

Author

Listed:
  • Jieling Liu
  • Franz W. Gatzweiler

Abstract

We aim to investigate the governance challenges of many Chinese urban governments to co-deliver migrant integration and urban green space provision. In specific, we examine the existing institutional arrangements applied in the Haizhu Wetland Park Project in Guangzhou and the consequential marginality. Why is it challenging for many urban governments to take social marginality into account in the conservation of urban green spaces? We approach this research question with the concepts of marginality, complex social-ecological systems, and institutional fit. We construct a conceptual framework to identify and explain the types of marginality emerged and to analyze the institutional fit in the case study. Our analysis reveals a segregative effect in the current institutional arrangements. On the one hand, they are cost-efficient in ecological restoration and urban green space conservation; on the other, not effective in addressing migrant integration and wellbeing. Current institutional arrangements segregate these two interconnected issues, leading to the marginalization of urban migrants. The current institutional segregativity reveals the degree of challenge to balance the pursuits between social equity and ecological benefits. For more collaborative and inclusive urban governance, future research is needed to understand whether the lacking integration of urban migrants is an institutional blind spot.

Suggested Citation

  • Jieling Liu & Franz W. Gatzweiler, 2021. "The institutional challenge to co-deliver migrant integration and urban greening—evidence from Haizhu Wetland Park Project in Guangzhou, China," Journal of Chinese Governance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(3), pages 396-416, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rgovxx:v:6:y:2021:i:3:p:396-416
    DOI: 10.1080/23812346.2020.1760069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/23812346.2020.1760069
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/23812346.2020.1760069?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.

    More about this item

    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:taf:rgovxx:v:6:y:2021:i:3:p:396-416. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rgov .

    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.