Public Participation in Shantytown Transformation in
China: A Case Study
ARCHIVES
By
MASSACH USETTS N STI
OF TECHNOLOLGY
Luxi Lin
JUN 29 2015
B.Eng. Urban and Regional Planning
B.A. Economics
Peking University, 2013
LIBRARIES
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of
Master in City Planning
at the
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
June 2015
2015 Luxi Lin. All Rights Reserved
The author hereby grants to MIT the permission to reproduce and to distribute
publicly paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in whole or in part in
any medium now known or hereafter created.
Signature redacted
Author
Department of Urban Studies and Planning
May 20, 2015
CertifiedJ4
Signature redacted
V/7"
(TA
Accepted
by-Signature
Professor Ceasar McDowell
Department of Urban Studies and Planning
Thesis Supervisor
redacted
Prnfpc
T
rrni s
rpn rh ma n
Chair, MCP Committee
Department of Urban Studies and Planning
TFT
MITLibraries
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
http://Iibraries.mit.edu/ask
DISCLAIMER NOTICE
Due to the condition of the original material, there are unavoidable
flaws in this reproduction. We have made every effort possible to
provide you with the best copy available.
Thank you.
The images contained in this document are of the
best quality available.
Fig. 5-6 (p.36) contains faint/illegible grayscale
text.
Public Participation in Shantytown Transformation in
China: A Case Study
By
Luxi Lin
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 20, 2015 in
Partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master in City Planning
Abstract
Public participation is not a familiar concept in China but there is a growing demand
from urban planners and policymakers in China to understand and utilize public
participation tools. This research seeks to answer: How does the public participate
in planning in China? What kind of participation is appropriate in China context?
How do policymakers design for participation process in future planning projects?
These questions are approached using qualitative methods such as field
investigation, semi-structured interviews and policy document analysis. A case
study on the use public participation in Baiwanzhuang to transform a shantytown in
Beijing is the main lens for understanding participation in China. This is compared
to the example of how participation was used in the Boston Demonstration
Disposition program, another housing rehabilitation project.
The author proposes a framework to explore the activities of participation that
identifies and analyzes several phases of participation in each example to
understand the differences between the two contexts.
-
This research found that participation varies and that there are no uniform criteria
of ideal participation for every context. To identify the appropriate participation, the
context, goals and values must be understood. To do this, the author develops and
uses a "Context-Value-Participation" model for "appropriate participation". This
research also tries to summarize three main features of the China context
development anxiety, elite governance and weak community. Policymakers in China
can apply the "appropriate participation" model to China context when planning for
future participation.
Thesis Supervisor: Ceasar McDowell, Professor of the Practice
Thesis Reader: Yu-Hung Hong, Lecturer
2
Acknowledgement
I want to thank Ceasar for his guidance and encouragement in the past year on my
thesis and throughout my two years at MIT. I had a great experience working with
Ceasar and it is definitely a huge leverage of my time at MIT.
I would like to thank Hong for his support as a reader and our common passion for
urban governance issues. I also want to thank Jinhua for being a supportive
academic advisor.
I would like to thank everyone in my program, especially Meng, Fei, Cate, Carmela,
Smita, Zelin, Babak, Kate, Thierno, and Hector. I learned a lot from working with
these guys in group projects and in daily life.
Last but not least, I thank my mother and my boyfriend for the long-distance
unconditional emotional support, without which I could not possibly finish the
thesis and the degree.
3
CONTENT
1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................
1.1 Public participation in planning in China ....................................................................................
... ... .... .... ... ... .... ... ... ... ...
1.2 W hy shantytown transform ation?.............................................................
1.3 Research questions....................................................................................................................................10
1.4 Potential im pact..........................................................................................................................................10
7
. .
2 Literature Review ..........................................................................................................
2.1 W hat is participation?..............................................................................................................................12
2.2 Participation varies ...................................................................................................................................
3 Fram ew ork ..........................................................................................................................
3.1 Participation unit .......................................................................................................................................
3.2 Project level..................................................................................................................................................
3.3 Defining "participation"...........................................................................................................................
4 M ethods ................................................................................................................................
4.1 Research m ethod........................................................................................................................................23
4.2 Case selection...............................................................................................................................................23
4.3 Site visit and sam ple .................................................................................................................................
5 The Case of Baiw anzhuang.......................................................................................
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
History and ownership ............................................................................................................................
Physical conditions....................................................................................................................................
People and governance............................................................................................................................
New housing.................................................................................................................................................
6 Analysis.................................................................................................................................
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
12
14
17
17
20
21
23
25
29
29
30
34
37
41
Form ing of the idea of housing upgrading ...............................................................................
42
Surveying and seeking consent for housing upgrading.......................................................
44
Inform ing residents of the project and getting feedback ...................................................
46
Choosing asset evaluation company by deliberation, voting and lottery......................51
Negotiating one-on-one about compensation and new housing arrangement..........55
Resident m eeting w ith Subdistrict Office Official ....................................................................
61
Governm ent Housing Levy Decision and Court Enforcement...........................................63
7 Project-level Analysis..................................................................................................
7.1 Public participation in Boston Dem onstration Disposition program ............................
7.2 Project com parisons and m ajor takeaways...............................................................................
8 Discussion & Conclusion .................................................................................................
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
7
9
Participation varies ...................................................................................................................................
Ideal participation? Appropriate participation?.......................................... . .... ... .... .... ... ... ... . .
China context: priorities and constraints ..................................................................................
M oving forward: planning w ith appropriate participation in China..............................
Lim itation of the research ......................................................................................................................
Reference.................................................................................................................................88
4
66
66
69
76
76
77
82
85
87
Figures and Tables
Fig. 2-1 Arnstein's ladder of participation and Cornor's ladder of participation ...... 15
Fig. 2-2 Dem ocracy Cube by Fung (2006)...............................................................................
16
Fig. 3-1 "Participation Unit" analysis framework...............................................................
18
Fig. 3-2 Defining "participation" at activity and project level........................................
22
Fig. 4-1 Location and transport accessibility of Baiwanzhuang....................................
24
Fig. 4-2 Photos of demolition of Baiwanzhuang from Weibo.com...............................
25
Table 4-1 Site visit record &Table 4-2 Interviewee information..................................
26
Fig. 4-3 Location of the three sites.............................................................................................
27
Fig. 5-1 Maps of Baiwanzhuang from map.baidu.com.......................................................
31
Fig. 5-2 3D model of Baiwanzhuang from map.baidu.com..............................................
31
Fig. 5-3 Photos of Baiwanzhuang building after residents moved out.......................
32
Fig. 5-4 Floor plan hand-drawn by two interviewees ......................................................
32
Fig. 5-5 Space arrangement drawn by the author based on interview......................
33
Fig. 5-6 Administrative governance hierarchy of Baiwanzhuang ................................
36
Fig. 5-7 Snapshots from BTV news on Baiwanzhuang housing project...................... 38
Fig. 5-8 Photos of Rongze housing, taken by the author....................................................
38
Fig. 5-9 Floor plan image edited by the author from fire escape map and real estate
agent advertisem ent..............................................................................................................................
39
Fig. 6-1 Timeline of the seven participation phases of Baiwanzhuang housing project
........................................................................................................................................................................
41
Fig. 6-2 Participation unit analysis: exam ple..........................................................................
42
Fig. 6-3 Participation unit analysis of idea forming phase ..............................................
44
Fig. 6-4 Participation unit analysis of surveying/consent seeking phase................. 46
5
Fig. 6-5 Announcement of working group point persons and their contact
inform ation, photo taken by the author ..................................................................................
47
Fig. 6-6 Participation unit analysis of informing/getting feedback phase ............... 49
Fig. 6-7 Participation unit analysis of asset evaluation company choosing phase .... 53
Fig. 6-8 Participation unit analysis of one-on-one negotiation phase........................ 61
Fig. 6-9 Participation unit analysis of resident meeting subdistrict official phase.... 63
Fig. 6-10 Notice from the court for relocation enforcement for four families posted
on the wall in the community, photo taken by the author..............................................
64
Fig. 6-11 Participation unit analysis of government decision and court enforcement
ph a se ............................................................................................................................................................
65
Fig. 7-1 Timeline of the seven participation phases of Boston Demo-Dispo........... 67
Fig. 7-2 Participation timeline comparison between Baiwanzhuang and Boston
D e m o -D isp o ...............................................................................................................................................
72
Fig. 8-1 Overview of all the seven participation units in the Baiwanzhuang project 76
Fig. 8-2 "Context-Value-Participation" m odel.......................................................................
79
Fig. 8-3 Appropriate participation .............................................................................................
81
6
1
Introduction
1.1 Public participation in planning in China
While 'participation' has become a buzzword in the development and planning fields
in many countries all around the world, it is relatively new in China. It was not until
2008 that China passed a new planning law requiring public participation in all
planning processes.
"Article 26: Before sending plansfor approval, the planning agency should announce the draft
to the public according to law. The agency should also hold discussions, public meetings or
otherforms of participationto collect experts' and the public's opinion. The announcement
period should not be shorter than 30 days.
The planning agency should takefull considerationoffeedbacks from experts and the public.
The agency should include suggestions taken and its reasons in the materialssendingfor
approval.I"
The participation required by the law only involves informing and receiving
feedback. The participation happens late in the planning process when the planners
have already finished the plan. Also, the planning agency retains the right to decide
to what extent they will incorporate advice from the public.
On one hand, civic engagement happens at the cost of slowing down the process and
decreasing the efficiency. China is famous for its speed of construction and
development, part of which may be attributed to the top-down process that involves
little public participation.
1 Source: P.R.China official website: http://www.gov.cn/flfg/2007-10/28/content_788494.htm
7
On the other hand, participatory development is believed by some practitioners and
scholars to have more legitimacy and better outcomes. Thoughts of 'right-based
development' and 'development as freedom', contrasting with the emphasis on
economic growth and efficiency, also highlight that participation is not only a means
but also an end itself, for participation is a demonstration of right to the city and
housing and of freedom of speech and political choice.
What is the way for China? In the past few decades, China has impressed the world
by its fast economic development, poverty reduction, healthcare improvement, basic
education coverage and so on. However, recent years have seen more and more
violent confrontation between citizens and governments over land disputes,
construction of chemical plants, and so on. What's more, there is a growing
inequality among different classes, between urban and rural areas and among
different regions. More participation may help provide space for people to express
their opinions in a more gentle way and create opportunity for marginal groups to
share the fruit of development.
Before rushing to the conclusion, careful research needs to be conducted. In this
research, I tried not to go to the field with the belief that participation should be
happening in the same way as the U.S. or European countries. I went with a
somewhat neutral perspective for participation and examined it in China context.
This means that I went to the field without the assumptions that China needs the
American way of participation, or that anything that doesn't work as the American
conventional participation is wrong. After all, what works in America doesn't
necessarily works in China, with different cultural and political context and value,
and at different development phases. In later part of this paper, I tried to propose an
activity-based framework to examine single events of participation objectively
without attaching too many western values such as democracy, inclusion and so on.
8
1.2 Why shantytown transformation?
In July 2013, the Chinese central government released a document "State Council's
opinions on accelerating the transformation of shantytowns" 2. In this document,
shantytown refers to dilapidated neighborhoods in cities or towns with poor
housing quality 3. It was claimed in the document that from 2008 to 2012, with
nationwide affordable housing projects, 12.6 million households in shantytowns
have been provided with better housing. From 2013 to 2017, the government
intends to upgrade 10 million more housing units in shantytowns.
Shantytown transformation provides with a good context for examining the public
participation in planning in China for the following reasons:
1) Complexity. A shantytown transformation project is extremely complex. It
deals with existing housing, current residents, future plans and future
residents;
2) Livelihood. Housing upgrading is highly relevant to the wellbeing of residents
involved. Changes caused by the upgrading in living conditions, accessibility
and community connections will influence people's livelihood.
3) Scale. The result of this research can help shed light upon future shantytown
transformation that is taking place at large scale.
2
Source: P.R.China official website, http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2013-07/12/content_2445808.htm
3 Note: In Chinese, it is Peng Hu Qu (JMP
K), which is exactly the same word used to describe the
informal settlement in Latin America. However, Peng Hu Qu does not necessarily have to be informal.
It might be formal urban neighborhoods with bad housing quality. It also includes 'urban village',
where the housing quality is poor and migrant families rent small rooms.
9
1.3 Research questions
The research tries to answer the following questions:
1) How do residents participate in a shantytown transformation project?
2) What is "participation" in China context?
3) How do policy makers plan for appropriate public participation in future
projects in China context?
For Question 1, it should be noted that the research could only cover participation
that is on the open agenda. The research has no intention to look into the decisionmaking within different institutions. The decision-making within institutions is not
transparent enough and may account for a major part of a shantytown
transformation project in China context. However, due to limited resources and
transparency, this research will only answer Question1 within the scope of open
agenda of a housing upgrading project.
1.4 Potential impact
When conducting this research and writing the thesis, the author is hoping that the
finding of this research can serve for the following purpose:
1) Clarify what participation is for policymakers and planners in China. There is
a bias perception of participation in the field in recent years. Some planners
think any resident involvement is participatory. Some planners think
participation means public meetings. This research can help those planners
who blindly advocate the western way of participation understand that
participation varies and copying the American forms may not work in China
context.
10
2) Explore better ways to engage community for future shantytown
transformation projects.
3) Inform international scholars the current situation of participation in a
housing project in China.
11
2 Literature Review
There is a rich literature on public participation by scholars and practitioners,
covering topics from concepts, origins, purposes, its depoliticization or
repoliticization, power dynamics among players of different groups, classes,
genders, its process, cultural factors, and real-world practices. The following
paragraphs will briefly introduce the concept, purpose, and forms of participation,
which will then serve as the foundation for the participation framework in Part 3.
2.1 What is participation?
In international development discourse, the concept of participation is ambiguous.
To address the ambiguity, Ghai (1990) discussed three alternative interpretations of
participation:
a. 'Mobilization of people to undertake social and economic development
projects'. The people are mobilized to implement the projects designed topdown, thus their participation is in the form of contributing labor or
materials, free or paid for.
b. 'Decentralization in governmental machinery or in related organization'.
Powers and resources are shifted to local organs such as local officials,
elected body, project committees, without the need to engage rural or urban
masses.
c. 'A process of empowerment of the deprived and the excluded'. Three main
elements of the participation include sharing of power and resources,
deliberate efforts by social groups over critical issues, and opening up of
opportunities from below.
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) unpacks the concept of
participation further as a means and end (UNDP, 1997):
12
a. Participation as a means. Participation is a process in which local people
cooperate with externally introduced development programs or projects for
better implementation.
b. Participation as an end. Participation is a goal itself, which is expressed as
empowering of people to acquire skills, knowledge and experience in order
to take greater responsibility for their development.
White (1996) categorizes the form of participation into four types based on
observations of international participatory development projects: 1) Nominal
participation. No participation takes place, merely as display. 2) Instrumental
participation. Efficiency and labor supply is the major focus. 3) Representative
participation. People participate to make their voice heard and express their
interests. 4) Transformative participation. Empowerment of the disadvantaged
happens.
With regard to the means/end definition, Parfitt (2004) argues that participation as
a means or as an end has very different implications for analysis of power relations
in the participatory process and for the way target community is viewed. When
participation is viewed as an end, there is a transformation of power between donor
and recipient, in contrast with the 'means' view in which power transformation is
absent. He concluded that there should be a balance between participation as a
means and an end.
Moving from international to domestic (United States), scholars have different
interpretations.
Verba et al. (1972) defines participation from a political perspective. They state that
participation refers to 'activities by private citizens that are more or less directly
aimed at influencing the selection of governmental personnel and/or actions they
13
take'. Their conception leaves out the "ceremonial" or "support" participation,
where citizens participate ceremonially or express support for the government.
Arnstein (1969) put forth a simpler answer to the 'what' question based on her
experience in American communities. She argues that citizen participation is citizen
power. It means inclusion of the have-not citizens in redistributing power and
benefits. She further proposes the famous ladder of citizen participation. The ladder
starts from manipulation, therapy, to partnership, delegated power and citizen
control, with an increasing level of participation and citizen power.
In fact, most international or domestic scholars cited above do not give a concrete
definition of what participation is. Rather, they approach this issue by discussing its
attributes, its goals, its indication or its categorization.
2.2 Participation varies
When people talk about participation, it can be many things. Arnstein's ladder helps
to array the different types of activities that are under the umbrella of
"participation". In this research, the author takes Arnstein's point that participation
varies. It's a concept that pertaining to power, politics, empowerment, mobilization,
and decentralization. But it does not equate to or is not limited to any of them.
Arnstein's ladder is controversial in the sense that she imposes a hierarchy of
participation levels according to citizen power without acknowledging that in
different situations and contexts, the forms of participation at lower rung may be
better than the ones above. After all, for a real planning case, using citizen power as
the ultimate criteria for evaluating the project is bias and limited.
Connor (1988) proposes a new ladder of participation based on his 15 years of
practice in the field. He tried to answer what is the appropriate type of participation
14
for a specific situation. His ladder consist of education, information feedback,
consultation, joint planning, mediation, litigation and resolution/prevention. The
ladder is a logical progression - each rung builds upon the lower one. He advocates
for systematic approaches for specific situations.
Connor's new ladder of participation puts forth the notion that there should be
appropriate participation for certain situations.
8
Citizen Control
RESOLUTION/
PREVENTION
Delegated Power
CitiZen Power
LITIGATION
Partnership
IEDATION
Consultation
JOINT
PLANNING
Tokenism
CONSULTATION
Informing
FEEDRAC
Therapy
Nonparticipation
EDUCATION
Manipulation
Ii
i-I:
1111
Plac ation
M
--
Fig. 2-1 Arnstein's ladder of participation (left) and Cornor's ladder of participation (right)
If the ladders of participation are one-dimension, Fung (2006) develops a threedimension cube, the 'democracy cube' for understanding the range of institutional
possibilities for public participation. The three dimensions are who participate
(Participants), how participants communicate with one another and make decisions
together (Communication &Decision Mode), and how discussions are linked with
particular mechanism of participation (Authority &Power).
15
&
Authority
Power
Individual Education
Communicative Influence
A1
Advise/Cnslt
Technical Expertise
Pubt
ircipents
Deliberate and Negotiate
Develop Preferences
Exprms Preferences
Listen
as Spectator
&
Communication
Decision Mode
Fig. 2-2 Democracy Cube by Fung (2006)
Fung's democracy cube is helpful in the sense that it breaks down the ambiguous
and omnipotent concept of participation into three elements - "participants",
"communication and decision mode", and "authority and power".
The cube also helps clarify the relationship between these elements. It indicates that
a certain communication and decision mode is not necessarily associated with a
certain type of authority and power. The combination of changes in the three
dimensions indicates the potential vast variety of participation.
16
3 Framework
The current literature does not provide an analytic and neutral framework to
examine participation in a different context. To avoid fussiness and to keep a certain
level of neutrality, this research combines Fung's democracy cube approach and
Arnstein's power perspective by dissecting participation into three elements:
participant, communication and decision-making.
The typology of participation is the cumulative variance of the three elements. This
dissecting approach avoids the discourse that concerns with values such as
democracy, mobilization, empowerment, and so on. Rather, the research tries to
depict and analyze the three elements of participation in a planning project on the
ground.
The research also tries to differentiate a participation event or unit, from a project
that consist of a series of participation events.
3.1 Participation unit
A participation unit in the research is defined as the single event or phase that
involves participants using a certain communication mode to make decisions in
certain ways.
Participation Unit
Part.cipant
Decision-making
Communication
- how is opinion expressed?
who are eligible?
who actually participate?
L - -- ---
- ---
----
- -----17
- who makes the decision?
- how is decision made?
- what capacity is required?
- -----
--
Fig. 3-1 "Participation Unit" analysis framework
Participant
Who are eligible to participate in an activity is certainly decisive in rendering the
level of involvement in a certain form of participation, given communication modes
and decision-making ways remain the same. For example, an open-to-all community
meeting is more engaging than a community meeting that is only open to elites, with
same agenda.
Even an open-to-all event can be exclusive to some of the community members if
not designed properly. For instance, some community members may have
challenges in time, money, language, knowledge, information or physical
accessibility to attend an open-to-all community meeting. Therefore, it is also
important to learn who actually participate.
The "participant" element of the framework does not necessarily suggests that the
higher attendance of more groups of community members the better. Again, it tries
to describe a participation event without imposing the western democratic values.
After all, goals of participation and the situation may vary in different project and
different context.
Communication
How participants communicate with each other and with policy makers differs. It
can be informing, one-way communication from the policy makers to residents. It
can be discussion when multi-parties exchange their opinions. It can be in the form
of reporting, surveying, voting and so on, as different means of expressing opinions
and preferences.
The different communication mode may lead to different results of participation.
How information or opinion is communicated will influence the content of
18
communication and impact the decision-making. If information only flows from
policy maker to the public, the policy maker may not have enough information on
the preference of the public. If a communication mode allows residents to voice
their opinions in a community event, it doesn't necessarily guarantee residents'
voice is expressed properly. Because one may feel challenged to speak out loud in
the public or may feel threatened by the majority to voice different opinion.
Therefore, communication is a subtle issue and requires careful examination when
discussing 'participation'. The subtlety is relevant with power dynamics, sense of
safety, freedom of speech, direction and intensity of communication.
Decision-making
With same participants, same ways of communication, there can still be different
decision-making process. The decision-making can range from top-down by the
ones in power, to completely grassroots decisions. The ones in the middle are
different mechanisms that balance different side's opinion to different extent. For
example, responding to surveys conducted (communication mode) among
community representatives (participant), the ones in power can choose to
completely ignore the results, take some advice from it at their own judgment, take
the top 3 ideas, or follow everything suggested by the participants.
The difference is vital. How decisions are made by whom will have a direct influence
on the decisions made and to what extent different party's voice is takien into
account.
This "participant/communication/decision-making" participation unit will serve as
a framework to examine the participation events happening in a shantytown project
in China, without predefined perceptions of what's "good" participation.
19
3.2 Project level
Participation of a project is made up of a series of participation units above. It's hard
to examine a project or program as a whole without looking into detailed phases of
the project. After all, at different phase of participation in one project, participation
can vary in participants, modes of communication and decision-making mechanism.
For example, the common practice of Participatory Budgeting (PB) in the United
States is made up of 4 steps 4 :
a. Everyone can submit an idea online or at an assembly;
b. Volunteer budget delegates select and develop proposals;
c. Proposals announced and receive feedback from the public; and
d. Everyone can vote on the proposal, while top proposals will be implemented.
To simplify, each step can be regarded as a participation unit where participants
express preferences in different ways that will be taken into account to different
extent.
For instance, the idea submission phase is more open with regard to 'participant'
aspect than the proposal development phase because it is open to all and does not
require certain capacity of the participants. The decision making for proposal
development and for voting phase is different too. At the proposal development
stage, the budget delegates decide which ideas to develop into a full proposal, while
at the voting stage, everyone is eligible to vote and the voting result will determine
which projects to fund.
4 Source: PB website, http://www.participatorybudgeting.org/about-participatory-budgeting/what-
is-pb/
20
When we talk about how participatory PB is, are we talking about the fact that part
of the city budget is open to the community to decide, or are we talking about the
actual process? If we are talking about the former, regardless of how the process is
happening on the ground, PB may be only tokenism if copied to other places without
an appropriate participation mechanism.
If we are talking about the actual process, it's obvious that different part of the
process involves different types of participation. To what extent can we conclude
that the combination of these participation units is participatory? What if the second
step is now only open to government officials rather than open to anyone that
volunteers?
The author, therefore, advocates that participation units of a project should be
identified and examined before judging at the project level. The participation of a
project is the aggregation of all the participation units in the project.
3.3 Defining "participation"
Therefore, in this research, the author defines participation at two different levels:
(1) Participation (or Participation Unit) is the activity that involves a group of
community members using a certain communication mode to make decisions
in a certain way.
(2) Participation at the project level is the aggregation of different participation
units.
21
Project Level Participation
Participation Unit
Participation Unit
Participation Unit
Participation Unit
Participation Unit
Communication
Participant
- how is opinion expressed?
- who are eligible?
- who
actually participate?
Decision-making
-who makes the decision?
- how is decision made?
-what capacity is required?
Fig. 3-2 Defining "participation" at activity and project level
This two-level approach is critical because it dissects participation into concrete
forms and elements without imposing certain goals and values.
22
4 Methods
4.1 Research method
The research is a qualitative case study. Data is collected through field investigation,
semi-structure interviews and from policy documents. A shantytown
transformation case will be chosen and will be examined to provide a concrete
sense of what is happening on the ground. The qualitative approach will help in
revealing subtle aspects of participation in the shantytown transformation process,
compared with quantitative approach. It should also be acknowledged that the
research method chosen is a compromise of limited time, resources and potential
political sensitivity of "participation" in China.
The research also uses case comparison, placing the China case in a broader cultural
context to be compared with an American participatory housing upgrading project.
The comparison is helpful in identifying what's special about China case. It should
be noted that the comparison doesn't lead to the conclusion of which is better.
Rather, it is the application of the framework in two different contexts, and it helps
draw lessons from specific process that shares similar goals (if any).
4.2 Case selection
North Baiwanzhuang shantytown transformation project is chosen as the case for
examination. It is the first inner city shantytown transformation project in Beijing.
.
The project involves 1242 households and covers a total floor area of 46,000 M 2
Most buildings in this neighborhood were built in the 1960s 5 . It is also known as a
5 Source: Beijing Xicheng Newspaper (1/15/2014),
http://www.bjxch.gov.cn/newxchbao/xchbao-pub/2014/01/15/XC1B.pdf,
23
pilot project in Beijing, with 526 projects that involves 230, 000 households to
follow in the next 5 years in the capital city.
N
5rni
t-i*
U
onN
&0il
Urban Area
Ring Road
-Subway
sits
Fig. 4-1 Location and transport accessibility of Baiwanzhuang
In December, 2013, the detailed compensation policy was released by Xicheng
District government 6 . In January, 2014, it was reported that over 70% of the
households had signed contract and agreed future arrangement with the
shantytown transformation project Task Force. In May, 2014, the neighborhood was
in the process of demolition and photos of vacated buildings can be found on Weibo,
the Chinese twitter.
6
Source: Beijing Municipal Commission of Housing and Urban-Rural Development,
http://www.bjjs.gov.cn/publish/portalO/tab662/info86481.htm
24
7
Fig. 4-2 Photos of demolition of Baiwanzhuang from Weibo.com
This site is chosen because it is the first inner shantytown transformation in Beijing.
Lessons learned from this project can be served for future 526 projects to come.
Further, since Beijing is the capital city, cultural and political center of China, the
result of the research can potentially have bigger impact on future projects.
Ideally, more than one case should be chosen for comparative studies. Most
importantly, projects that involve urban village, where land ownership is
collectively owned rather than state owned should also be included. However, due
to limited research time and funding, only Baiwanzhuang case is examined.
4.3 Site visit and sample
7 Source: Weibo post, http://www.weibo.com/1738051242/B2K8Hjkn1?mod=weibotime
25
Date
06/28/14
07/12/14
07/20/14
07/22/14
07/23/14
07/24/14
12/19/14
12/20/14
12/22/14
12/25/14
Si te
B aiwanzhuang
X inanli
R ongze
B aiwanzhuang
B aiwanzhuang
R ongze
B aiwanzhuang
R ongze
B aiwanzhuang
B aiwanzhuang
No.
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
R10
R11
R12
R13
R14
R15
R16
R17
R18
R19
R20
R21
Age
20s
60s
50s
50s
20s
40s
20s
30s
20s
20s
40s
Gender
M
F
F
F
F
F
M
M
M
M
M
-
-
-
-
-
-
40s
50s
50s
60s
50s
60s
60s
M
F
F
M
M
M
M
Role in the project
Resident
Resident
Resident
Resident
Resident
Resident
Policy maker
Resident
Security guard
Security guard
Construction contractor
Community organization staff
Community organization staff
Community organization staff
Interior decoration contractor
Resident
Resident
Resident
Resident
Resident
Resident
Table 4-1 Site visit record &Table 4-2 Interviewee information
10 field visits were conducted at 3 sites, Baiwanzhuang, Rongze and Xinanli.
Baiwanzhuang in the inner city is the original housing site, while Rongze in the
northwest suburbs is the new housing site for residents who choose to move out
instead of moving back to the old inner city site. Xinanli, located in the south suburb,
is the temporary relocation site for residents who receive court enforcement notice.
26
Raniee&
Bakvanzh
Suitt Urban Area
Ring Road
S
subway
0 sites
* Xinanli
Fig. 4-3 Location of the three sites
21 interviews were conducted, 11 of which are in-depth interviews of 1-2 hour.
Interviewees include residents, a government official, community organization staff
members, security guards and contractors. Their age, gender and role in the project
are listed in Table 4-1. No further details are listed in order to remain anonymity
and to protect privacy of the interviewees involved since some information in the
interviews is financially or politically sensitive. For the same reason, the
conversations cited in the following parts are also anonymous.
Most residents interviewed are in the 50s or 60s. They are mostly the retired who
have lived there for over 30 years.
27
One of the limitations of the sample is that all the residents interviewed are those
who choose to relocate at the new housing site. It was at the new housing site that I
encountered with them. Residents who are currently renting apartments
temporarily in the city are not included because there is no access to them. It's hard
to track them via community organizations or neighbor connections. This problem
is inherent in projects that involved relocation and demolition that causes the
spreading out of former residents.
28
5 The Case of Baiwanzhuang
5.1 History and ownership
Baiwanzhuang housing was built in 1966 to accommodate residents relocated from
inner Beijing caused by subway construction. The original plan was that the housing
was temporary for 10 years of use. However, residents had to continue living here
for another 34 years. In the 1970s, additional one-story structures were built by
residents after the earthquake.
"The housing was established in 1966. My family moved here in 1969. It was during the time of
Cultural Revolution. I was in Grade 4 or 5 in primary school."
"It was built because ofthe displacement caused by subway construction. It was designedfor
residentsfrom Fucheng Gate and Fuxing Gate to live temporarily. The turnover time was said
to be 10years. The doors and windows were replaced or painted during the 2008 Olympics."
"I have been living herefor over 30years. I was relocated from subway Line 2."
"Ilived herefor 44years. When myfamily moved herefrom the neighborhood next to the
Forbidden City, it was quite desolate here. We were promised that we could move out after 10
years. I did not expect we lived herefor 44years instead."
"Some additional rooms were built by residents after the biq earthquake in the 1970s, very
messy. No one regulated it."
Most housing in North and South Baiwanzhuang is owned by the Beijing Housing
Authority. Residents pay monthly rent to the Housing Authority. One of the
exceptions is Building 7 in North Baiwanzhuang, which are private-owned condos
occupied by military families.
29
"Most of the rooms belong to Housing A uthority. It was sold to us before the relocation. My
faimily used to pay rents, not much. But we haven't paidfor manyyears. I didn't know the
amount. In the end, we paid all the rent due (when buying the ownership)."
"Rooms on twofloors of my building used to belong to Capital Normal University. They were
for those who don't want to live at school. Myfimily moved here many years ago, with 7
people in the family. Now the University doesn't want the rooms anymore, so they belong to the
Housing Authority. We paid rent, around 10yuan atfirst to around 100 in the end. My mom
paid the rent. (It's pretty cheap) It cannot be any more expensive with living condition like
that."
"Building 7 belongs to the militaty. The apartments are private-owned. Families of the army
live there. They have private ownership, unlike us."
5.2 Physical conditions
The shantytown transformation project consists of 23 residential buildings and
several one-story structures. Among the residential buildings, 20 of them are
considered as "shantytown". The rest 3 of them are apartments with private toilet
and kitchen.
30
SN
L.
~~~~1
*
I
I
:4
I
~:' ~~
~
~
4~)
~
~
4Ii
-)
I
1
1
-~
I
I
I
I
~I:
~>
L
10
-'
el
i
0
Fig. 5-1 Maps of Baiwanzhuang from map.baidu.com
Fig. 5-2 3D model of Baiwanzhuang from map.baidu.com
31
loom
Fig. 5-3 Photos of Baiwanzhuang building after residents moved out, taken by the author
The residential buildings are mostly four-floor, with four housing units on each floor.
Each unit is around 30-50m 2 . There are also two toilets on each floor. Two housing
.
units share one toilet, which has a squatting pit and is less than tM 2
There is no separate room for kitchen, bathroom or living room since it was built in
the 1960s when modern style of living has not reached ordinary household in China.
It was a time when many electronic appliances were not widely used. In some
buildings, each housing unit has one basin that fulfills a household's daily water
needs. In other buildings, four households share one basin that is located between
the shared toilets.
J
Fig. 5-4 Floor plan hand-drawn by two interviewees
32
UnU2
Curren
I~
Un
i--.~~--i
Unit 4
Fig. 5-5 Space arrangement drawn by the author based on interview
Current living condition is not very satisfying and creates many daily challenges for
residents in sanitation, cooking, heating and so on. There is no heating system so
residents have to use coal stove in the winter. Lack of heating system also leads to
frozen pipes in the toilet in the winter. Residents have to call the Housing Authority
to solve the toilet clogging issue.
"There is no heating in the winter. We had to burn coal. There werefour units and two public
toilets on onefloor. Two of the units are one-room apartment, 30m 2 each. The other two are
two-room apartment, around 5Cm 2 each. I never measured it."
"We used to shower in the public bath house in earlierdays. Now it's gone. So we had to fill a
washbasin with waterin summer. Later, we installed a water heater at home and connected it
with a pipe into the public toilet. You cannot really take a shower in winter. There is no
heating at home."
"We used to burn coals. Some use naturalgasforcooking. The toilets were always clogged.
There was not a single day that the toilets were not clogged. We used to call the Housing
Authority everyday. They also helped to fix the light."
"Two units share a toilet. There is a squatting pit in the less-than-im2 space. In winter, the pipe
getsfrozen very often because there is no heating. So residents cannotflush it. You know,
33
among them are many elderly and the disabled. The living condition is so terrible that there is
no dlgnity oflliving at all ... People place coal stove and naturalgas next to each other. It is
really dangerous, like a bomb once the gas leaks."
"There was only one basin in the unit. It was used for washing groceries, dishes, clothes and
everything. The housing was designed in the 1960s. You know, at that time, things were of
good quality. The corps oj engineers built this. However, there were no washing machine,
fridlge or other appliancesin that era. We cooked right at thefaucet inside the door and slept
in the space next to it. There was no notion of living room at all. Time has changed."
5.3 People and governance
There are 4400 people from 1242 households involved in the projects 8. These
residents belong to two communities: North and South Baiwanzhuang. North
Baiwanzhuang is under the governance of West Baiwanzhuang Residents'
Committee (RC), and South Baiwanzhuang is under the governance of
Huangguayuan RC.
Communities in Baiwanzhuang consist mainly of the elderly. They moved here in
their youth and lived here for over 40 years. The small home is inadequate for the
next generation to live with them. Based on the demographic information provided
by one of the RC, the total population of West Baiwanzhuang is 6022. 28% of them
are over 60 years old and 12.5% are over 80 years old. These numbers also align
with my field observations. Most residents I met and interviewed, in weekdays or on
weekends, are the elderly.
Many families who still live here are low-income. They have no better housing
alternatives and are left out in the urban development. Families that are better off
8 Source: Beijing Xicheng Newspaper (1/15/2014),
http://www.bjxch.gov.cn/newxchbao/xchbao-pub/2014/01/15/XC1B.pdf
34
may rent or own apartments elsewhere with better living conditions. They sublease
their rooms to migrants working in nearby areas.
"Residents here were asyoung asyou when they moved in, girls with little braids. Now, they
have lived herefbr many years, hair turning grey.
People here have no money, no power, and no authority. They cannot afford to buy the
'affordable housing' let alone commercial real estate. They see all the new constructionsin the
city. But the new housing development has nothing to do with them. They can only rely on the
"
government.
"Many originaltenants don't live here. They rent the room to those who work nearby, like the
Zoo Market. The housing is too shabby. Ifeel at least half of the originaltenants who still live
hearare in their 50s or 60s. Only the old men and women are left, chitchatting in theyard all
day. Young people don't live here. They don't even know how tofire the coal."
Urban communities in China are directly governed by the Residents' Committee
(RC). RC is defined by law "a grassroots organization for residents to self-govern,
self-educate and self-serve"9 . It is at the lowest rung of the administrative
management hierarchy in China. The rest of the hierarchy is - from street to central
level - subdistrict office, district government, city government, province government
and the center government. By 2011, there were around 87,000 RC across Chinese
.
cities' 0
9 Source: Ministry of Civil Affairs website:
http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/zwgk/fvfg/jczqhsqjs/200709/20070900001716.shtml
10 Source: http://www.china.com.cn/policy/txt/2011-07/14/content_22990504.htm
35
Central
Government
Beijing
City (overnment
Xicheng
District Government
Zhanlanlu
Subdistrict Office
West Baiwanzhuang
Residents'
Committee
Huangguayuan
Residents'
Committee
North Baiwanzhuang
Community
Sourth Baiwanzhuang
Community
Fig. 5-6 Administrative governance hierarchy of Baiwanzhuang
Despite active organizing by the RC, the community is not well connected in general.
In North Baiwanzhuang, there were many community activities at RC every week.
Residents can join knitting-learning, practice calligraphy or learn English. Among
the interviewees from North Baiwanzhuang, some are very active in these events.
"There are so many activities and events organized by the RC. Many people attend. Calligraphy
on Tuesday and knitting on Friday. Activities include playing Ping-Pong, dancing,singing,
learningcomputer skills, and learning English. All of them arefree, superb! Some don't want to
use computer at home. They go to the RC. Fewerpeople attend the knitting session. I tried
learningto knit a big shawl many times butfailed. Tens of peoplejoin the singing event,
including the retiredand ones that arestill working. The English-learningevent has over 30
participants,mostly young people. I know everyone in the events."
"There were 13 activity roomsforresidents in our office. They were demolished at the
beginnng (of the shantytown transformationproject). We even have a string orchestra, which
36
is the best one in communities in Beijing. We have culture and artfestival too. We have our
own community newspaper. Residents who moved out to the suburb (temporarilyduring the
relocation and construction) still come backfor rehearsalsforour July 1 st performance."
However, some residents are not interested in these activities, or have never heard
about them. These residents feel more disconnected with other community
members. The fact that many old tenants moved out and subleased their homes to
migrant workers further weakens the community ties.
"I have retiredand I usually don't attend activities in the community. Honestly speaking, it's
really hard to communicate with people in the community. People have different thoughts. It's
hard to find the something in common. I don't care whether I have the same neighbors or not
after relocation."
"I have never heard about the knitting or English-learningactivities in North Baiwanzhuang.
Never, never attendedany. I used run a cornerstore. I had to stay there all day, and didn't even
have time to buy groceries. I never chitchatted in theyard too."
(Doyou have goodfriends in the community?) "No, most of the units in my building are
subleased. Few old neighbors are left. My parents used to play cards in the park, Zizhuyuan
Park."
5.4 New housing
In this shantytown transformation project, residents can choose to move back to
Baiwanzhuang when the new housing construction is finished in 3 to 4 years, or
choose to live in new apartments at Rongze, located between the fifth and sixth ring
road of Beijing. For both housing, residents have the private ownership of their own
apartment.
37
New housing in Baiwanzhuang will be residential high-rises. The plan and
renderings were printed on panels on the wall in Baiwanzhuang. The construction
was expected to be finished in 2016 if the relocation process went smooth. However,
the moving back time may have to be postponed due to the unsuccessful one-on-one
negotiation between residents and the Task Force.
I
Fig. 5-7 Snapshots from BTV news on Baiwanzhuang housing project
Rongze is a new gated-community located in Xierqi. Unlike the new Baiwanzhuang
housing, construction of Rongze was almost finished when the residents relocated.
Residents who chose Rongze got their keys in late June. It is also a community with
high-rise residential buildings.
Fig. 5-8 Photos of Rongze housing, taken by the author
38
Staircase
Staircase
Corridor u
:
4
Elevator :Eljator
Apartment
Apartment
4 41 1*
07
Apartment
Apartment
Fig. 5-9 Floor plan image edited by the author from fire escape map and real estate agent
advertisement
Among the interviewees, some are very satisfied with the improvements in living
conditions, while some are unhappy with the accessibility and urban service. This is
not an overall evaluation of the community satisfaction, but to serve as a way to get
a rough sense of potential resident opinions.
"I am satisfied overall. After allyou cannotget everything you want."
"Good apartment, but bad location, and too little relocation compensation!"
"The living condition is certainly improved. You see the currentenvironment is great. We have
property management company 24 hours on duty. Well. the on/y shortcoming is the transport.
"
We are moving in next month!
According to a contractor of the interior decoration work of Rongze, half the
residents from Baiwanzhuang who chose to relocate to Rongze will rent out their
apartments.
39
"If a resdientis leasing the apartment, the construction of interiordecoration only takes about
30 days.
If residents are to live in the apartment themselves, it takes longer, around40 days.
Some will even get an interiordecoration desiqner Around half of the property owners choose
to rent out the apartments. They live closer to the city center. This place isfarfrom their
working places. Some residentswant to rent the apartmentsoutfbr a fewyears bejbre the
surroundingfacilities are in place. At that time, they are retired and their kids are grown-ups."
40
6 Analysis
In this section, seven phases of participation are recognized for this project. The
seven phases are identified from interviews conducted and from policy documents.
They are: 1) Forming of the idea of housing upgrading; 2) surveying and seeking
consent for housing upgrading; 3) informing residents of the project and getting
feedbacks; 4) Choosing asset evaluation company; 5) negotiating one-on-one about
compensation and new housing arrangement; 6) Resident meeting with Subdistrict
official; and 7) Government housing levy decisions and court enforcement. The time
scope of the seven phases is visualized in the timeline below.
17
2
2011
2013
2012
2014
Fig. 6-1 Timeline of the seven participation phases of Baiwanzhuang housing project
For each participation phase, the process will be analyzed using the 'Participation
Unit' framework - participants, communication and decision-making will be under
close examination. It should be noted that these elements might not be as clear to
the community members as to me, as a researcher.
Visualization is used to depict the three elements: gray circles as participants,
arrows as information flows (the sum of which is considered as communication),
and blue circles as decision maker. Two sizes of circles are used to depict
41
institutional players (big) and individual players (small). The visualization can help
simplify the complicated process that contains great details. Fig. 6-2 illustrates an
example in which information flows from institution A to person B and A is the
decision maker.
0
011
B
A
participant
> information flow
0
decision maker
Fig. 6-2 Participation unit analysis: example
6.1 Forming of the idea of housing upgrading
The idea of a housing upgrading project of Baiwanzhuang started as early as the
year 2011.
In May 2011, as one interviewee recalled, party leader of Xicheng District, Mr. Wang,
visited the community. Head of RC reported to Wang the housing situation and
history of Baiwanzhuang, and received promise right away that a housing upgrading
of Baiwanzhuang will be on the list of key livelihood projects in Xicheng District.
In the next month, party leader of the city of Beijing, Mr. Liu, visited North
Baiwanzhuang for party building. During the visit, party leader of Xicheng District
reported to party leader of Beijing the history and housing condition of the
community. The situation of Baiwanzhuang attracted Liu's attention. After that,
head of RC had close communication with government officials of Xicheng District to
inform them of the details of the housing situation.
42
On Nov. 23, 2011, Liu invited the mayor of Beijing to the Baiwanzhuang community.
They visited several residents' home, learned the housing structure and residents'
livelihood. In the following two years, city government conducted several field
researches.
In this phase, participation took place in the form of reporting in a structured way.
The head of RC reported to district government the housing problems residents
were facing and the district government reported the issue to the city government.
The decision making lied in the city and district government - they learned the
housing situation and began to form the preliminary idea for a housing upgrading
project of Baiwanzhuang community.
How residents voiced their opinion about housing was also structured. According to
the interviewees, there is a designated channel of proposal in the North
Baiwanzhuang community.
According to the 'Guidebook for Proposals from Resident Representatives and Party
Member Representatives of Baiwanzhuang Community' there are two Proposal
Management Groups in the community. Each group is made up of 7 party member
representatives selected within the party branch or 7 resident representatives.
These groups accept, undertake and reply proposals. Any resident or party member
that is registered in this community in the Household Registration System (Hukou)
can put forward a proposal. The proposal should include description, analysis and
solution of certain issues. Those without a proper solution will be rejected. After the
Proposal Management Groups receive the proposals, they will submit them to
related government agencies and reply initiators with the progress.
43
Participants and Communication
Decision Making
City
I
Initial ideas of a housing upgrading
project of Baiwanzhuang fornwd.
GoVernment
District
Government
Residents'
Committce
party member
representatives
resident
representatiVes
participant
> information flow
Q
decision maker
Fig. 6-3 Participation unit analysis of idea forming phase
6.2 Surveying and seeking consent for housing upgrading
In June 17, 2013, Xicheng government established temporary task force for a
communitywide household survey. During the next 30 days, the surveyors went to
every family in the 23 residential buildings to learn the household size, housing area,
and residents' opinion towards a housing renewal project. 97.3% households agreed
with the idea of a housing renewal project that would need to demolish current
buildings.
'They (Task Force staff member) asked me aboutthe demographic, and checked the housing
area. Nothing much. I lived in Building x and the housing condition is really bad.'
44
'They did not ask me about my income, but asked me how many people lived here. I think they
care more about my housing size. But the size is registeredon book. Most apartments here
belong to the Housing Authority of Beijing, not privately owned. They also asked me whether I
want demolition and relocation or not. Of course I want! I have lived herefor over 40years
with no heating during winter.'
It is noticeable that only homeowners or people who are renters of the Housing
Authority (original tenants) had the right to participate in the survey and express
their opinion, either agree or disagree, to the temporary Task Force. People who
rent from original tenants or homeowners had no right to participate.
'The tenants (who rent roomsfrom original tenants or homeowners) have nothing to do with
"
this process. They resolve contractissues with landlords.
Three months later, on Oct. 15, 2013, Xicheng government officially established the
housing upgrading project of Baiwanzhuang. It was framed as the pilot project of
527 Beijing inner city shantytown transformation projects that will take place in the
next five years".
Therefore, in this phase, participants were limited to homeowners or original
tenants, with subleasers excluded. The participants expressed their opinions in the
house visit surveys. Since this housing project would only be officially established
when the percentage of homeowners/original tenants that agree with the project
reaches a certain level, they are the major decision makers at this phase.
11 Source: http://www.chinanews.com/tp/hd2011/2014/01-08/288228.shtml
45
Participants and Communication
City
GOvrmnent
Decision Making
China Development
Bank
)
Different levels of government, plannin acies, the real estate compathe China Development Bank
ny
decided the details of this project: the
, implefinancing, process, plan
so on.
mentation, constrnction
Planning
District
Goernment
Agencies
Subdistrict
Real Estate
Government
Derelopment
Company
Temporary
Task Force
ne
honie o
original teat 49
rsi
participant
ub sr
subleasers
Q)
I
>; information flow
A certain percentage of
homeowners and original tenants'
agreement is necessary for the
official establishment of the project.
Over 97% agrered.
Q
decision maker
Fig. 6-4 Participation unit analysis of surveying/consent seeking phase
Even though homeowners and original tenants are the main decision makers at this
phase, the scope of participation and how they participate are pre-designed by the
government. At the same time, in the 3 months after the survey took place and
before the project was officially established, different levels of government, planning
agencies, the real estate company and the China Development Bank worked in
deciding details of this project: the financing, process, planning, implementation,
construction and so on.
6.3 Informing residents of the project and getting feedback
Since the official establishment of the project on Oct15, 2013, the task force has
established 30 consulting stands and 17 working groups in the community. Each
46
working group is responsible for residents living in a certain building or more. The
point person and contact information of each working group was announced and
posted on the wall.
Fig. 6-5 Announcement of working group point persons and their contact information,
photo taken by the author
Other announcements posted are the process of this project, the plans of in-situ
development, the process of choosing asset evaluation companies, compensation
policy draft, final compensation policies and so on. Some of them can also be found
on the Xicheng government website.
Among them, compensation policy draft explicitly asked for feedback from the
property owners:
"According to Article.1 0, Artical.11 of 'Ordinanceof Housing Levy and Compensation on Stateowned Land' and Article 7 of 'Beijing Implementation Strategiesof Housing Levy and
Compensation on State-owned Land', Office of Housing Levy ofXicheng DistrictGovernment,
47
together with Departmentof Finance, Development and Re/orm, Inspectorate, Audit,
Zhanlonlu Subdistrict Government, and The Task Force of PaiwanzhuangHousing Upgrading
project, drafted the Compensation Policiesfor the project. Upon the approval of Xicheng
Government, the policies are announced within the community to be levied to collectfeedback
from residents. The periodforcollecting feedhock is November 15, 2013 to December 14, 2013.
Residents involved can bring ID and ownership certificate or public housing lease to submit
their written opinions to their working groups. The Housing Levy Office of/Xicheng
Government will announce the information offeedbacks and announce the new compensation
policy adjusted accordingto the feedbacks.' (Announiceient on Xicheng Government weh.site
Posted on Novemiiber 15, 2013)"
In the draft, compensation policies cover introduction of the project, areas for
housing levy, laws and regulations to reference, eligibility of participants in this
project, and compensation standards.
One month later, another announcement was posted, informing the residents of the
feedback collection and compensation policy. It was stated that 16 written opinions
were collected during the past month, which were mostly on: 1) increasing in-situ
housing units and housing area, 2) increasing housing turnover compensation, 3)
increasing bonus for early contract signers, and providing more compensation for
the unemployed, low-income and families with severe-disease patient, and 4)
increasing relocation housing units and relocation compensation standard.
As a result, the Task Force made the following adjustment to the compensation
policy:
12 Source: Xicheng government website,
http://www.bjxch.gov.cn/XICXXGKIndex/XICXXGKtdzyfwcq/XICXXGKtdzyfwcqxq.ycs?GUID=567425
48
1) Increase the housing turnover compensation from RMB Y 120/m 2/month to
Y 150/m 2 /month;
2) Appropriately increase the new housing area of families with very poor housing
situation in accordance with relevant regulations.
Therefore, at this phase, the major ways of participation is informing and sending in
written feedbacks. Participants are limited to the property owners or tenants of
public housing (original tenants). Informing took place in the form of putting
announcement on walls in the community or on the government website, and in the
form of working group staff member informing households in their area. Decision
making of final compensation policy lied in the hands of the Task Force and the
Xicheng government with adjustments made according to some of the opinions
collected, while most part of the compensation policy remained the same.
Decision Making
Participants and Communication
District
Governient
After getting feedback from residents,
decisions on compensation standard were
made by the Housing Levy Office of
Xicheng District Government and the
Task Force.
Task Force
home ownersi
originail tenants
participant
> information flow
Q
decision maker
Fig. 6-6 Participation unit analysis of informing/getting feedback phase
49
Whyfew participants?
It is surprising that in a community of 1242 households, only 16 written comments
were submitted in response to the compensation policy draft. After talking to
several residents who involved in the project, many potential reasons were
identified that account for the low participation rate. Some residents were not
aware of the announcements and how to participate. Some did not have the time
and energy in participating. And some did not think their opinions matter.
"When I saw the compensation policy draft, Ifielt that the relocation housing was too far away
from the city center. (Didyou submit any written comments?) There is no point in doing that
It won't work! See those people petition every day across the street in front of the Ministry of
Housing and Construction.Nothing changes!"
"No, I didn't even think about voicing my opinion. That's useless. The policy says 42,OOQ/m2,
but everyone wants the compensation standardto be higher, say 150,000/m2. From my 30year work experience, I tellyou, when the government sets the rule, nothing can change it You
want 150,000/m2? Nonsense! (Did any residentsorganize themselves to communicate with
the Task Force?) Impossible! Every one talked about it, but no one did it. There is nothing you
can do."
"We saw the announcement, but had no comments. We just wanted to learn what the
compensation standardsare. We did not send in any feedbacks at all, since we did not have the
time or the energy to do it. At least the relocation housing is better than in-situ housingfor my
family."
"Idid not even see the announcement ofcompensation policy draft, I didn't know where the
Task Forceput it, probably a little corner in their homes. Who has the leisure to check the
walls all the time after work? They should have visited every household to ask about our
opinions, maybe with a form to tick. None of that!"
50
These are just several reasons emerging from interviews with a small sample of
residents. But they provided us with some insights into the issue of participation. If
the cost of participation (time, energy, etc.) is high for some residents, they won't
participate. If residents have the perception that participation leads to nothing, they
won't participate. This kind of perception may be formed by previous experience
with government agencies.
Almost no participationin planningprocess
The future in-situ housing plan was also among the announcements on the walls.
Residents can send in comments within the public notification period. However, this
participation happens when the plan is almost finished. And it's not clear how
residents' feedback will impact the final plans.
(Did residentsparticipatein the planning process of in-situ housing?) "The taskforce put the
Regulatory DetailedPlanning on the wall. Residents can send infeedback to government or
planning agency during the public notification period of 15 or 30 days I think. In the plan
posted, there is the overall desiqn of this place, say Lot A, Lot B, Lot C, or where the green space
is. Residents did check it out often."
(Were residents who chose in-situ housing involved in planning whatfuture housing will be
like?) "No, it was alreadyfinished. But we can choose which floor or which apartmentspace
design."
6.4 Choosing asset evaluation company by deliberation,
voting and lottery
Aside from informing residents of policies and planning of new housing, and getting
feedbacks on compensation policies, a series of participation process was designed
51
for choosing asset evaluation company. It is a 3-step process with deliberation,
voting and lottery.
On October 16, 2013, the Housing Levy Office of Xicheng posted a notice for asset
evaluation companies to sign up. On October 22, 2013, the Office announced the 15
companies that sign up and a 3-step process for choosing 3 companies out of 1513.
The series of participation is designed as followed:
1) By October 24, 2013, the Task Force should organize the homeowners or
public housing leasers for a deliberation to choose 3 asset evaluation
companies. The Residents' Committees are responsible for counting the
results and announce the results.
2) If deliberation does not form a majority opinion, the Task Force should
organize a voting process, 1 household 1 vote, to determine the 3 companies.
The Task Force should announce the results within the project area.
3) If voting does not lead to a majority opinion again, the Task Force should
organize a public lottery by resident representatives to choose the 3
companies and announce the results within the project area.
At this stage, participants were homeowners and leasers of public housing (original
tenants). For step 1, participants were expected to deliberate - voice opinions and
listen to other people's perspectives then come to a majority consensus. Participants
have the direct influence on the decision-making. For step 2, participants were
expected to vote for the ones they favor, without any formal communication needed.
Decisions were directly made by the voting results. For step 3, participation is left to
the machine. The machine made the decision randomly.
13
Source: Xicheng government website,
http://www.bjxch.gov.cn/XICXXGKIndex/XICXXGKtdzyfwcq/XICXXGKtdzyfwcqxq.ycs?GUID=561446
52
Participants and Communication
Decision Making
Step I
I
I
Home onwers deliberate to choose
the ral estate evaluating company.
However, deliberation did not happen
due to lack of participants.
home owners
original tenants
Step 21
ownersf
-rtia
teat
homle
0 0
Decisions were supposed to be made by
voting. However, no enough votes were
collected. So voting as decision making
0
failed at this stage.
Step 3
I
LOTTERY
Machine made the decision by lottery.
Fig. 6-7 Participation unit analysis of asset evaluation company choosing phase
It seems the participation was deliberately designed in advance, with the 3 steps
laid out: deliberation, voting and lottery. In reality, deliberation did not happen
because there weren't enough people showed up. Voting also failed because only 20
votes were collected out of 1242 households. The decision of choosing 3 asset
evaluation companies was left to lottery to decide.
"You know, in this project, we used real-time lottery - having one resident press the lottery
button. I was the hostessfor that event Dozens of residents attended the event Every leaserof
the public housing or property owner can attend this event. A SubdistrictOffice official was
going to host this event, but residents strongly disagree. They didn't trusthim. So I had to host
the event on the spot They trust me because I am always representing theirinterest ... At the
deliberationstage, it was required that at least half of the leasers andproperty owners present
Itfailed because it's impossibleforeveryone to gather together at the same time. So we moved
to voting. Unfortunately, we only collected around20 votes, because residents knew very little
about these asset evaluation organizations.In the end, we had to leave it to lottery. People
53
were actually in favor of the lottery process. They were hoping to let the fate decide. Maybe
they could get lucky. Overall, I think each stage was really democratic and deliberate this time.
Why a series of participation failed and residents would rather leave the decisionmaking to lottery?
"I think I voted, but I cannot remember clearly. Even if I voted, I knew nothing about that. I
think the real estate developer came and introduced. Since I couldn't understand what were
the differences among them, I chose the numbers ramdornly. It's merely tokenism.
"
(Haveyou heard about voting for asset evaluation com panies?) "I have no idea.
(Didyou votefor the asset evaluation companies?) "No, we didn't know how they evaluated.
We still don't know it by now. How exactly do they evaluate? We did not participateor even
ask."
"I am too busy working for that."
Various reasons may account for it.
1) Some residents were not aware of the process. The notice was posted on the
walls and on the government website. However, these two means did not cover
everyone involved in the project. It's probably not most people's daily routine to
check a section of a district government website or to check what's new on certain
walls in the community.
2) Some did not have the time to participate. It should also be noted that
participation happens at the cost of the time, energy, and money of participants.
Also, the process only gave two days after the announcement for people to
deliberate. It is a rather short time for 1242 households and for a process as
complicated as deliberation that requires intensive real-time communication.
54
3) For those who knew the process and had time to participate, they were not well
informed of the choices they were expected to make. Participants knew little about
the differences between different asset evaluation companies. After all, it requires
certain expertise to understand the subtle differences in the field of asset evaluation.
-
In the future, potential improvements can be: 1) Integrate more ways of informing
paper announcements, government websites, SMS, social media, emails, phone, and
so on, to have a full coverage of the process. 2) Leave more time for participation
and decision-making. 3) Better inform and educate residents in decision-making
that requires certain expertise.
Despite the issues listed above, the process is good in the sense that it made the
process of choosing asset evaluation companies transparent and open. Through
these processes, the Housing Levy Office of Xicheng District gave people a signal that
the decisions were not made backroom, but by residents or lottery.
6.5 Negotiating one-on-one about compensation and new
housing arrangement
After the final compensation policies were announced and the asset evaluation
companies were chosen, the project moved into the phase of one-on-one negotiation.
Each household negotiates with the corresponding working group of the Task Force
to finalize the moving compensation and new housing arrangement. Once an
agreement is reached, the household will sign a contract with the working group. If
the percentage of household that sign contracts reaches 70% in the first 60 days, the
housing levy of this housing project will officially begin. Otherwise, the project will
be terminated.
55
i) The contract pre-siqninq period is 60 days withfirst 9 days as consulting periodfor residents.
Before the contract is in efject, no real monetary compensation should be paid, and no
relocation housing should be given.
ii) Within the contract pre-signing period, when the percentage of homeowners/leasers of
public housing that sign con tracts reaches 70%, the project moves into official contract
signing period. For those who have already signed in the previous period, their contracts are
as effective as contracts signed in this period.
If the percentage does not reached 70% at the end of the contract pre-signing period, this
housing project will be terminated.
14
At this stage, participation took place in the form of intensive negotiation. Each
household negotiated individually with staff members from corresponding working
group. Both parties had direct decision-making power over the issue of
compensation and new housing. The working group provided compensation details
and new housing arrangement details under the guideline of the publicized
compensation policies. And each household could decide whether they were happy
with the arrangements. The aggregated results of household decisions also have
impact on whether the project moves on or not. If less than 70% of the households
sign the contract in 60 days, the project would be terminated.
The contract pre-signing period started on December 17. The first 9 days were for
residents to communicate with working group staff members and learn the
compensation policies. After that, they could start signing the contract on December
25. However, residents queued up as early as December 20 in order to choose a
satisfying housing unit in the new housing.
14 Source: Xicheng government website,
http://www.bjxch.gov.cn/XICXXGKndex/XICXXGKtdzyfwcq/XICXXGKtdzyfwcqxq.ycs?GUID=568342
56
At the end of the December 25, 2013, the first day when residents could sign the
contract with working groups of the Task Force, 50% of the households signed. Till
January 14, 2015, 882 out of 1242 households singed the contracts, accounting for
71.01% of the total households. The housing levy phase officially started. All the
contracts signed previously became effective. And the relocation officially started.
I signed in December. There were not toliets in our onild apartmentat all. I am very satisfied
now. xx in our working group is really nice. Thanks to the Communist Party. Everything has
been improved. Now we have toilets.
Moving out
After households reached an agreement with the working group, they had little time
to find temporary housing and to move out. One resident interviewed had three
days to move out after signing contract. And on the fourth day, after the key was
turned in, the staff member at the Task Force smashed her home. Another resident
told me her family had to move out before signing the contract to hand in the keys
upon signing.
"I have a lot of sentiments attached to my house at Baiwanzhuang. I signed on December 26
lastyear. They alsofbrced me to put a thumbprinton a guarantee,promising that I will
definitely leave my home on December30 in order to get bonus monetary compensation of
Y200,000.
After signing the contract, I came back to my room and criedJbra whole day, not
exaggerating at all I did want new housing, but I stillfelt so sad when I had to move. I lived
here since 11, and now I am 58. 1 cried while I was packing the stuff in the room. On December
30, as soon as I walked out of my home, the Task Force'sbig hammer was here. Bang! I felt so
"
sad.
"You need to ask the head of the household. My mom was in charge oftalking to the Task Force.
I was not. She discussed with Lis on choosing housing at the new site or at originalsite. Really
quick. It took only one month to move since I knew about it. We looked for temporary rental
57
housing in thefirst day, and moved out the next day. It all happened in December lastyear.
(Why such a rush?) We can only siqn contract after moving out because we need to hand in
our keys when we sgn. If the government asksyou to do it this way, then just do it. What can
you do?"
Though this stage was very participatory in the sense that households negotiated
with the working group individually and had the right to decide to sign or not, they
had little power over the relocation process once an agreement was reached. Their
right to housing was endangered in the sense that they had little time and little help
to find new housing, to move their personal belongings and to express nostalgia to
the old apartment where many of them lived for over 40 years. Through the
interviews, I felt a strong sense of powerlessness among residents when they talked
about the relocation process.
Variance in compensation
In the negotiation between households and the working groups, the final
compensation policies announced on December 16 served as a guideline, or a
standard for working group to decide appropriate compensation.
However, residents were doubtful if the policies were implemented consistently
among different households. Some feel if they had been tougher in the negotiation,
they could have got more compensation. Some residents think there might be some
backroom deals going on, but there were no solid evidences. Some questioned
whether the compensation standards would rise for the last batch to leave, based on
previous relocation experience in real estate development projects.
Through interviews, I also observed great differences among residents on the
results of negotiation.
58
"I did not get in touch with people in the Task Force. My parents did. So I know little about the
negotiation process. I guess residents'desire is not 100% satisfied. Everyone wants more. Some
got through by pulling some strings in the social network. Well, you know, a wordfrow the
boss gotyou better compensation. I did not know any specific case because nobody shows it off.
But I am sure the situation exists."
"I tellyou, relocation is an once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Many people would risk their life to
get more compensation. I only have 1 person registeredin the Household RegistrationSystem
(Hukou), so Ijust got one new apartmentof 93M 2. Even for the households with many people
living together, the Task Force gave compensation according to number of lHukou. I cannot
make the decisionfor the person in office.
My sister doesn't have an apartment, but it's impossiblefor me to ask for a second unit. My
neighbor told me I could askfior a second unit because my originalapartmenthas two rooms.
But people at the Task Force told me, you only have one Hukou here. Do not even think about
confronting (Az
-"1 I,
1'J II!iTzl/i).'So I have to reassure myself to let it go."
"Listen to my calculation. We lived here since we wereyoung - my parents andfive brothers
and sisters. My parentslived in one of the rooms, girls lived in the second and boys lived in the
third....My kid was also born here. My brotherand I have our ownfamilies with Hukou at
Baiwanzhuang too. ... In the end, we put in all the monetary compensation and borrowed some
to get 4 new apartmentsat two relocationsites. (Most details omitted to avoid identification of
the intervieweefor privacy protection.)
Visiting new site
One of two the new housing choices is bigger apartment in the northern suburb of
Beijing. In the negotiation phase, the Task Force arranged cars to the new housing to
help residents make informed decisions.
"It's very humane this time. They (the Task Force) got us in big cars to see the new site, many
batches in a week. They showed us the sample room. Then you can decide whether move back
or move to the new site after relocation."
59
Those that haven't moved
After 8 month of negotiation stage, in July when I conducted interviews, there were
still some households that had not reached an agreement with the Task Force, thus
had not moved. According to TV interviews by Beijing Televisions, reasons for this
include: 1) some residents have self-constructed add-on part to their apartment that
cannot be compensated. 2) Conflicts inside the family are not settled. For example,
sisters and brothers all want the new housing units. 3) Some want to get more
compensation by signing as late as possible.
Regarding this issue, it is the Task Force that is under pressure. The slower the
construction of new housing, the more they need to pay the ones who have already
moved out for temporary housing.
"I lived in Building.
x.
There are many neighbors who haven't movedyet. They want more.
Some of them are really in need offinancial help. I don't care whether they move out in time or
not. The Task Force gave us rents of 3vearsfor the temporary housing. After that we can move
into the new housing at the original site. The Task Force is the one who is worried because
they have to pay us more if the new housing is not ready. I don't know if people leave later get
more.
60
Participants and Communication
Residents'
Decision Making
Task Force
Committee
Through intense
negotiations, contracts prepared by
the Task Force were signea
by home owners.
home owners
participant
)
information flow
Q
decision maker
Fig. 6-8 Participation unit analysis of one-on-one negotiation phase
6.6 Resident meeting with Subdistrict Office Official
Among the residents interviewed, some were very satisfied with the housing at the
new site. Some complained about the apartment space design, the infrastructure
and facilities nearby.
"Isigned in December. There were no toilets inside our old apartmentat all. I am very satisfied
now. Mr. Z in our working group is really nice. Thanks to the Communist Party. Everything has
been improved. Now we have toilets."
"This new apartmentis very disappointing. The space arrangementis really bad, with corners
here and there. Everyfamily is hiring people to adjust a little. (How bad is it?) The kitchen is in
61
between the master bedroom and the second bedroom. The second bedroom has no lighting at
"
a/.
Some residents who chose to move to the new site were engaged in meetings with a
Subdistrict Office official to voice their concerns about the new site. The meeting
was organized by the head of RC after she learned about residents' concerns. After
the meeting, the official reported residents' concerns to relevant city agencies for
further investigation. Residents interviewed believed that this process helped
expedite improvements in the new site.
"We have two ProposalManagement Groups in the community. Our party member
representativegroup discussed 3 issues in the proposal. Thefirst issue is inconvenient
transportation. We want bus stopsfor the community or shuttle between subway station and
the community. Second issue is the streetlghts. It's pretty dark at night. When we moved in,
the road was pavedyet, let alone streetlights. The third issue is the height limit bar at the
entrance. The firefrqhting truck cannotgetin the community if there is afire alarm."
"The Subdistrict Office official visited the community and there was a meeting with him. After
he heard our suggestions, he went to the new housing site with head of RC and me. We drove
around the areafor two hours to measure the distancefrom the new site to nearby bus stops
and the subway station. We also took photos. After that, he submitted a report to the
CoMmission of Transport through the city government. Within a week, the directorof the
Commission of Transportvisited the new site for field research. I felt since that, things
improved very fast."
At this phase, participation was initiated by the head of RC by organizing a meeting.
Participants were limited to residents who chose to move to the new housing
because the meeting was about the new site. It was not clear how participants were
informed and selected and how many residents participated. Residents participated
by expressing their concerns regarding to the new site in the meeting. Subdistrict
official participated by listening to residents' need, investigated and reported to
62
upper level of government Neither residents nor the Subdistrict official were the
decision-maker at this stage, but the Commission of Transport and related agencies.
Decision Making
Participants and Communication
I
Subdistrict office helped
report the issue to city government
agencies that make deisions on relevant
issues.
City Goernment
Subdistrict
Governmenlt
Residents'
('01mm1ittee
home owners/
oriinal tenants
(
,
participant
- information flow
Q
decision maker
Fig. 6-9 Participation unit analysis of resident meeting subdistrict official phase
6.7 Government Housing Levy Decision and Court
Enforcement
After the 60 days of contract pre-signing period, from January 17, 2014 to February
16 is the contract-signing period. Residents who failed to reach agreements with the
Task Force during this period may receive government housing levy decisions, as
stipulated by the 'Ordinance of Housing Levy and Compensation on State-owned
Land'. Residents who receive the decisions should follow the government decision
or apply for an administrative reconsideration or an administrative litigation. If the
63
receiver of the government decision did none of the above, the government can
apply for court enforcement.
During my field research, I found government housing levy decisions pasted on the
walls in the community.
Fig. 6-10 Notice from the court for relocation enforcement for four families posted on the
wall in the community, photo taken by the author
"(Looking at the police car outside of the window) The people from the court come again. I
remember the last time they did the court enforcement I was here. There were many police
cars and special armed police. Even the firefighter truck was here. I did not stay very close to
the scene because I was not allowed to. But I think they were moving out the residents'stuff
The residents must have been informed in advance. Most of them have conflicts inside the
family. These guys should move out and solve theirfamily issues elsewhere without slowing
down the process of the project."
64
At this phase, participants are residents who failed to reach agreements with the
Task Force, the district government and the court. The District Government decided
on the compensation and housing arrangement and notified the residents involved.
Residents should follow the government instructions. They can also apply for an
administrative reconsideration or an administrative litigation. Otherwise, the
district government will ask for the court to enforce the decision. Decision-makers
are the District Government, the court and city government. The District
Government decided on the compensation and housing arrangement. The District
Court has decision-making power over administrative litigation by residents. The
upper level government of District Government makes decisions on administrative
reconsideration.
Residents are rather passive at this stage. They could either follow the government
decisions or issue administrative reconsideration or litigation, which are two costly
ways of voicing opinion that require time, energy, knowledge and courage to go
against the local government.
Decision Making
Participants and Communication
City
Government
The District Government decided on the
compensation and housing arrangement
and notified the residents involved. The
District Court has decision-making power
over administrative litigation by residents.
District
Government
District
Court
home owners/ original
tenants that haven't
signed contracts
The upper level government of District
Government makes decisions on
administrative reconsideration.
home owners/
original tenants
that signed and
moved
Fig. 6-11 Participation unit analysis of government decision and court enforcement phase
65
7 Project-level Analysis
7.1 Public participation in Boston Demonstration
Disposition program
Boston Demonstration Disposition (Demo-Dispo) program is a 10-year initiative
administered by MassHousing (formerly called Massachusetts Housing Finance
Agency, MHFA) that rehabilitated and reconstructed 1862 housing units in 11
neighborhoods in Boston since 1994. The program is chosen as a housing
rehabilitation case in the U.S. to compare with Baiwanzhuang case from the
perspective of civic engagement. The program is chosen because it's a housing
upgrading project of similar scale with intense community engagement throughout
the process.
Information and evaluation of this program is not collected first-hand, but from the
evaluation report "The Demonstration Disposition Program in Boston,
Massachusetts, 1994 to 2001: A Program Evaluation" by James Jennings from Tufts
University. The report provides thorough records and evaluations on the
participation aspects of the program. The following contents in this part about the
process of Boston Demo-Dispo are information extracted from the 165-page
.
report 5
As stated in the report, goals of the Demo-Dispo program are:
"1) Eftective disposition and rehabilitation of HUD-owned developments;
2) Development of initiatives that empower residents;
3) Long-term preservation of affordable rental housing;
4) Creation ofeconomic opportunity for the comm unity and
5) Remedying discrimination against minority business enterprise."
15 Electronic version of the report: http://www.tufts.edu/-jjenni02/pdf/demo-dispo.pdf
66
There are seven key public participation phases through out the process, identified
by the author based on the information available. The timeline of these participation
phases were illustrated below. It should be noted that the timeline is not accurate
for it is a rough time estimates for all the 11 sites of the projects. It aims at providing
a rough sense of the overall sequences and time needed for participation in a
housing upgrading project.
4
F INN R iDE NT
2
1994
rt '.ALS
DD
1
~ ~
"12IY
7
S
IN
iN
OL
51NG
-
N
1995
1997
1996
1998
1999
Fig. 7-1 Timeline of the seven participation phases of Boston Demo-Dispo
1) Forming resident organizations and building capacity
Before the Demo-Dispo program, five sites had standing resident associations. In
August 1994, resident associations were formed in sites where no resident
organization existed previously. Leadership and representatives of the associations
were selected by election.
Through out the whole Demo-Dispo program, many institutions helped build the
capacity of resident organizations in participation and decision-making by
providing resources, services and technical assistance. Several workshops and
trainings were held in areas such as developing effective relationships with
property managers, fundraising, planning and budgeting.
67
2000
The resident organizations worked with MHFA to maximize tenant input, served as
an arena in allowing residents to voice concerns, and is key for sharing information.
2) Selecting management teams and architects
Resident organizations selected management agents that had bid on the Request for
Proposal (RFP) and had passed the MHFA pre-selection screening process. They also
selected architects, development consultants and legal counsels. Before the selection,
trainings and workshops on how to conduct interviews, how to evaluate and select
proposals and how to negotiate contracts were provided to board members of the
resident associations. MHFA also hired its own architects to work with architects
hired by resident associations.
3) Developing plans for Demo-Dispo program
MHFA-hired architects examined issues related to the infrastructure system in each
building, while architects hired by resident associations worked with residents to
produce a "Vision Plan". These efforts were later combined into a formal plan after
several meetings.
4) Household survey to assess current needs of residents
MHFA conducted household surveys to learn resident needs and family size in order
to determine appropriate size for relocation housing and new housing. Survey
results were sent to management agents selected in previous phases.
5) Selecting relocation contractors
MHFA Relocation Contractor Selection Committee scored the RFP's and resident
associations interviewed and rated the eight companies interested in bidding. In
most cases, the two scoring matched. For the one exception where the two sides
rated differently, it was resolved when the MHFA preferred relocation contractor
subcontracted some of the work to the residents' preferred one.
68
6) Developing and implementing relocation plan
The contractors worked with resident associations to discuss relocation issues and
plans. A relocation plan must be signed off by corresponding resident association
before it is sent to MHFA for approval.
7) Selecting ownership models
Resident organizations selected tentative ownership models in 1995 under tight
time constraints. After that, several counseling sessions on ownership options were
held. The resident organizations revised the ownership models by December 2000.
Choices of 11 sites varied, including sole ownership, private community-based
ownership, limited partnership, partnership with minority interest, and cooperative
ownership.
Construction and moving back phases were not included in the analysis due to lack
of information on resident participation in these phases. It is still comparable with
Baiwanzhuang's case since the latter is still in the relocation phase. For the DemoDispo program, after the relocation, demolition and construction followed.
Residents moved back when the construction finished. Take Camfield, one of the 11
sites as an example, the demolition of old housing completed at the end of 1997 and
construction began in early 1998. Residents started moving back in the spring of
2000.
7.2 Project comparisons and major takeaways
1) Goals of the housing upgrading project
In the Boston Demo-Dispo program, unlike Baiwanzhuang's case, the goals were not
limited to improving the housing of residents, but went beyond. It covered other
aspects of development, including empowering residents, preserving affordable
rental housing, creating economic opportunity and remedying discrimination.
69
Admittedly, incorporating more goals in a single housing project is challenging for it
may require more resources and balancing among different goals. However, if a
project only focuses on the improvement of physical environment and ignores
problems in non-physical aspects, it's hard to guarantee that the livelihood and
quality of life of residents have improved. After all, breakage of community ties,
interruption of previous jobs, potential gentrification and other problems can
render the result of a shantytown transformation project to be unsatisfactory.
Also, it is possible that by integrating other goals in the project, the goal of housing
upgrading can be achieved easier. For example, by empowering and training
residents to participate in decision-making of certain issues, the implementation of
housing relocation may be easier, for it generates more buy-in and crowdsources
from people with local knowledge of the neighborhoods.
2) Scope of participation
The scope of participation in Baiwanzhuang case is mostly centered on housing levy
issues, while that of Boston Demo-Dispo program includes planning of new housing,
developing relocation plans, and selection of ownership models.
For the Baiwanzhuang project, the phases with well-defined forms of participation
are: surveying households and seeking consent for upgrading, getting feedbacks for
the compensation policies, choosing asset evaluation companies, and negotiating on
compensations. All these were closely related to housing levy and compensation.
While the participation in planning new in-situ housing is only limited to notifying
and getting feedback, without resident participation in earlier stage before the plan
was formed.
In comparison, the Boston Demo-Dispo case engaged residents in more issues.
Resident associations played a major role in selecting management agents,
70
architects, legal counsels and relocation contractors. Moreover, they worked closely
with these experts and related government agencies in developing new housing
plans, relocation plans and future ownership models.
Interestingly, from the interviews conducted for Baiwanzhuang project, I felt that
residents' attention was also drawn to the compensation they can get - how much
money and how many new units of apartment they get out of the one-on-one
negotiation. It is hard to tell whether it is the design the scope of participation was
influenced by residents' expectation and attention, or the reverse. Residents'
expectation could also be influenced by previous urban renewal projects that
created resident millionaires overnight after housing levy. However, it is still
possible that if shantytown transformation projects engage residents in a greater
scope, residents may not focus on their individual gains as intensely as
Baiwanzhuang case.
The reason why the scope of participation in Baiwanzhuang's case is mostly about
housing levy may be that housing levy ordinance and planning law have different
requirements for public participation. Seeking consent for upgrading, getting
feedbacks for the compensation policies, choosing asset evaluation companies, and
negotiating on compensations are required in the "Ordinance of Housing Levy and
Compensation on State-owned Land" (Article 9, 10, 11, 20, and 25). However, the
planning law only requires notification of the plan and getting feedback. The public
participation requirement of planning is not as structured and detailed as that of
housing levy. This is probably why the scope of public participation in a shantytown
transformation project is not about planning but about housing levy and
compensation.
3) Process and forms of participation
Aligning the timeline of Baiwanzhuang shantytown transformation project and
Boston Demo-Dispo project in same time scale, we can find that the public
71
participation of the later happened in earlier stage and last longer. In the DemoDispo case, participation took place before the plan of the project was formed.
Resident associations had a say in the process design of the project and the planning
of new housing. They worked closely with the leading agency MHFA and other
technical assistants to develop the project. In Baiwanzhuang's case, residents were
involved when the project was almost formed by planning agencies, different levels
of governments, real estate developers and the China Development Bank.
2011
2012
2013
Beijing Baiwanzhuang
2014
Boston Demo-Dispo
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Fig. 7-2 Participation timeline comparison between Baiwanzhuang and Boston Demo-Dispo
Additionally, communication forms used in different participation phases in the
Demo-Dispo project were more intense than Beijing's case. Resident associations
had regular meetings with different agencies, tenant organizations, their
management teams, and their architects, during which they could express their
concerns regarding the project. In comparison, the forms of communication in
Baiwanzhuang's case were mostly limited to voting, surveying, informing and
getting written feedback. The only one exception is the one-on-one negotiation
phase where every household has the right to discuss issues they care about with
Task Force staff.
72
Though meetings are necessarily better than other forms of communication, it
provided easy access for residents to voice their concerns to relevant parties,
especially to government agencies that they had little access to in daily life.
4) Participants
Participants in the two projects are very different. In the Demo-Dispo case, residents
associations are the main participants representing tenant interest in different
participation phases. Most decisions were made by resident associations. While in
the Baiwanzhuang case, residents participated as individuals representing their
own interest.
There are pros and cons for both. Participating individually is good in the sense that
every resident (property owners or original tenants of public housing) has the right
to express their interest and try maximizing their welfare. However, the sum of
individual maximization doesn't necessarily lead to maximization of the community
welfare as a whole, because residents may ignore public goods that have positive
externalities. For example, individual household cares more about the monetary
compensation and new housing units they could get, and has less interest in
bargaining for a park or a hospital during the negotiation. In Baiwanzhuang's case,
residents signed the contracts to move out and relocate once they felt satisfied with
the compensation package they got. After moving to the relocation site in the suburb,
they started to complain about the accessibility to public transport and public
service. In contrast, a resident association can better express the public interest of
the community as a whole, for it internalizes the positive externality.
However, resident association has its problems too. To name one, whether a
resident association truly represents community members remains questionable.
Mechanisms of selecting board members of the association need to be designed
carefully so as to include the marginal groups in the process.
73
If a shantytown transformation project in China wants to make resident association
as the main participant as Boston Demo-Dispo's approach, there are many
challenges.
Firstly, it's hard to form a resident association that represents the community. In
some well-established communities, there might be homeowner associations of
property owners in place. However, for neighborhoods where shantytown
transformation projects take place, it is unlikely that there are existing homeowner
associations. For instance, the only organization in place in Baiwanzhuang
community is the Residents' Committee (RC). Though RC plays a role in bridging
residents and different levels of governments, it is not as near to serve as an
independent entity that represents community's interest. This is because RC is a
government-affiliated organization. RC, in general, encourages grassroots
democracy while at the same time, serves for 'the party-state's efforts to exert
control over the urban populace' (Bing, 2012). The head of RC in North
Baiwanzhuang is also the leader of the communist party at community level.
Secondly, even if a resident organization that represents the community, it is hard
for residents to change the mindset of individual maximization and to trust an
association to participate in important issues for them.
Lastly, even if a resident organization is in place, it may lack the capacity to
participate in the complex issues and to reach consensus among board members.
There is no tradition of town hall meetings in China and the idea of deliberation is
not as well-embedded in America.
5) Capacity building
In the Demo-Dispo program, many trainings and workshop were held to build
resident associations' capacity in participation. Trainings covered topics like
74
financial management, ownership structure, organizational development and basic
negotiation. Resident associations even worked with an MHFA-hired consultant to
determine training needs.
However, there is no capacity building element in Baiwanzhuang's case. One
resident did complain that they knew little about asset evaluation companies. In
addition to lack of training in certain aspects related to housing issues, there is no
training in how resident can effectively participate and voice their concerns too.
75
8 Discussion & Conclusion
8.1 Participation varies
From the analysis above, it can be concluded that there are many forms of
participation in the Baiwanzhuang shantytown transformation project Participants
can be every single property owner/original tenant, party member representatives
or no community participants. Communication modes include informing,
deliberation or voting. Decision-making can be as top-down as backroom discussion
or as elaborate as one-on-one negotiation. As illustrated in Fig. 8-1, the combination
of the three elements can be completely different with each other. When people
talked about participation, it is many things.
City
(kivenirient
hina Deveopnt
ank
G
Irnmeor
Taskorace
en
Residnt
ues
hont onners!
orIginal terennts
representadts
home o0n0r
orn tena fnts
(ma
step
subleasers
ommiot
t
onovernmenOt
Dirict
Government
(0)
oe lwner
/
roriginal tenants
Dtotrt
COMO
Step
rrjgrnal rematsr
0 0
00 0
home oaner!? origimal
tenanto that hatn't
sigired orntraAs
Resients'
C('ematle
Step 3
LOTTERY
h~oe OrNmers,
origulal tenats
Fig. 8-1 Overview of all the seven participation units in the Baiwanzhuang project
76
(origintal tetttWtt
that ottored and
movedi
If taking into account other participation that is not on the agenda of the
Baiwanzhuang project, the participation landscape will be more diverse. Many
interviewees mentioned other channels of voicing opinion aside from the ones
designed in the project. These informal channels include social media (Weibo, like
twitter), traditional media (BTV journalist interview), mayor's hotline, and Internet
message software (Tencent
QQ, like Windows
Messenger). These channels are not
included in the agenda of the shantytown transformation project. They serve as
alternatives or opportunities for residents to go beyond the rules set by the project.
It is a buffer for potential conflicts and an outlet for resident voices that are
undermined in the current process.
The "Participation Unit" framework helps to capture the differences among various
participation forms well and somewhat neutrally. This framework can be used in
future investigations of participation in China and other contexts as well since it is
not value or context specific.
8.2 Ideal participation? Appropriate participation?
Whether current ways of engaging the community in Baiwanzhuang case are good
or not is still open to discussion. The author argues that there is no "good
participation" or "ideal participation", but "appropriate participation". The meaning
of appropriate participation is two-fold: 1) prioritizing and balancing different
values and goals, and 2) designing the right mechanism to meet the chosen values
and goals.
77
Prioritizingand balancingdifferent values and goals
A project cannot have it all - maximum community engagement, maximum
efficiency, maximum equality, maximum empowerment, maximum efficacy or any
other goals people have in mind.
To reach one of these goals, a certain resources are needed and the resources are
always scarce in the real world. Planners and policymakers are certainly facing time
and resources constraints when planning for a project. If speed is prioritized before
community engagement, then resources and energy will be devoted to fasten the
process, rather than coming up with a strategy to include as many people as
possible.
This statement doesn't mean that realizing one goal will prevent the other goals
from happening. After all, some goals can help other goals better achieved. For
example, more community engagement may help increased equality or community
empowerment.
Therefore, policymakers are always prioritizing and balancing different values and
goals under certain constraints. The priority of a certain value is certainly influenced
greatly by the cultural, economic and political contexts. Participation in China
contexts and in American contexts will have different goals because people
embedded in the two countries have very different values. To name a few, the
pursuit of individual freedom and of democracy is not as strong in China as in the
U.S.
Thus it will be too hasty to propose an "ideal participation" or "good participation"
without discussing the values and priorities when designing the participation. A
participation unit that involves a small group of people may be better than one that
tries to engage everyone if efficiency is placed beyond inclusion of different groups
of people. Since the values are so different between China and U.S., using American
criteria (such as Arnstein's "citizen power") to judge participation process in China
78
is unfair. It is also not proper if planners in China are to copy everything from the
American participation conventions before recognizing the value differences.
Take the Baiwanzhuang and Boston Demo-Dispo as an example. Their differences in
project goals (as stated in the previous session: Part 7.2) lead to differences in scope
of participation, process and forms of participation, participants, and capacity
building. The differences in project goals are reflections of how the policymakers in
different contexts prioritize and balance their values under time and resource
constraints.
Values,
Goals
fe
G-------->
Participation
Context
Fig. 8-2 "Context-Value-Participation" model
Designing the right mechanism to meet the chosen values andgoals
When values are prioritized, careful design of the mechanism of participation is
required to meet these values and goals. The mechanism that works is a fitting
combination of the three elements for a certain context. For example, an open-to-all
voting in the absence of necessary informing and notification can make the
seemingly democratic decision-making mechanism pointless, as in the asset
evaluation company selection phase of Baiwanzhuang.
79
Whether the combination of the three elements (participants, communication, and
decision-making) work and fit the context is a more technical question than the
previous one on values.
However, the author argues that there is no fix recipe for a mechanism that works.
What works for Boston Demo-Dispo doesn't necessarily fit in Baiwanzhuang case.
For instance, absence of resident association participation may be the most
appropriate under current community organizing situations in urban China. The
contexts change all the time, from country to country, and from communities to
communities within the same country. Even within the same city, communities may
be very diversified from each other depending on its demography, history,
governance, and physical environment.
Therefore, the policymakers need to be critical at all times and keep searching
answers to the following questions using the two-level framework proposed in Part
3: What kind of participation unit or phases do I need for the project? For each
participation unit, whom do I want to engage and what is the best way to engage
them with the available resources? What kind of communication is helpful in
reaching the goals of this participation unit? How decisions should be made for this
participation unit and what capacity is needed? Is there any training required to
facilitate this process?
80
Project Level Participation
Participation Unit
Participation Unit
Participation Unit
CO
Values,
Goals
<-
Appropriate
Participation
0
Participation Unit
CID
Participant---are eligibe?
who actually par1icpate?
-who
'0
Context
C
-
-mn - n - -- D--
how is opinon expresso-d?
-
-n
who makes the decsion?
how is decisiof made?
what capacity is required?
Participation Unit
8.3 China context: priorities and constraints
Priority of values and constraints of resources are closely associated with the bigger
institutions and environments, and will influence the appropriate participation.
What is special about China context from the comparisons above between
Baiwanzhuang and Demo-Dispo?
Development anxiety
China is still a developing country with pressure to feed 1.4 billion populations. In
fact, the initiation of nationwide shantytown transformation projects in the year
2008 was because the central government invested 4 trillion to stimulate economy
after the 2008 global financial crisis.
The anxiety is reflected in some residents' perception that the housing project is an
once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to get rich. Community ties and neighbor network
are not as important as how much compensation and how many new units of
housing they get.
It's also reflected in policy maker's top concern, which I learned through the
interview with a government official involved in overall shantytown transformation
policy making in Beijing. The top two challenges seem to be:
1) Financing. A large part of project funding is going towards resident
compensation.
"The large scale of inner city shantytown transformationprojects in Beijing started
early lastyear (20-13). I was involved in the whole policy making process. The
shantytown transformation in Beijing is not like the real shantytown transformation
in Liaoling in earlyyears where the housing is so poor that the residents are easily
satisfied by living in an apartmentbuilding. The real estate market also changes the
resident'sexpectation. What they are expecting is not 1:1 compensation, but to become
rich overnight.
82
So every project needs to consider thefinancing problem. It's not easy, especiallyJbr
Beijing. Several billions of housing levy compensation and relocation cost is a small
project. Big project needs tens of billions. The government cannot afford it at all. One
solution is to change the land use restrictionsby increasing the FAR. But inner city
Beijing has a lot of height restriction (due to historicalprotection requirements). The
FAR in Beijing is under 2.8, which means most buildings are no taller than 80m."
2) Efficiency. To finish the shantytown transformation project efficiently is a
second concern after financing.
"(What are other concerns asidefrom financing?) Progressand speed, to try to fasten
the procedures, all governmental procedures."
Elite Governance
Currently, most decisions are made top-down by government officials selected
through nationwide examination for civil servants or by so-called experts in the
field. In Baiwanzhuang's case, a lot of decisions are made with little public
participation. For example, the design and agenda of the project, the plan of new
housing, and the mechanism for public participation are decisions made backroom.
These important stages are absent from the participation unit timeline illustrated in
Part 6.
Lack of transparency creates trust issues among the public. Many interviewees
expressed their suspicion towards the justice in negotiation process and towards
the legitimacy of the Task Force staff composition. Some think there must be
corruption and bribes. Some think the Task Force staff members are not
government personnel but demolition agents hired nationwide.
Interestingly, the Task Force does not trust residents either. The entrance to the
Task Force office is really strict. There are two security guards at the gate of the
Task Force in the community next to the office of RC. Residents may need to ask the
83
RC staff to help them get in the gate. I as a researcher was refused entrance by the
security guard brutally. Therefore, no interviews were conducted with Task Force
staff.
"Sometimes residents come to the gate. The security guards don't know them. So I tell them to
wA t outside and I will go and ask the Task Force staff out, It's n prolem ofsafety issue. There
are many archives at the Task Force. They can't let outside people in easily. Residents can also
talk directly to the security guards. But they prefer to turn to me when I am around."
"(After I introducedmyself and my intention) No, I don't thinkyou can talk to the Task Force
people. (Can you just show me which room is it? I will try myself) No, if I point a room for you, I
will have to pack my stuff and go home tomorrow."
Another example of the distrust is that residents need to hand in the key of their old
apartment before signing compensation contracts so as to prevent residents moving
back again. The room will be smashed after that, as mentioned in Part 6.5.
Weak community organizing
It was not until recent years that the word "community" ( L) started to be widely
used. However, the concept and its rich meaning are still very new to the public.
Based on my personal experience, most people in China have no idea when I
introduce my concentration as "community development". Some people even think
community is equal to the physical living environments. The situation is probably
caused by the commercialization of housing in the 1990s and rapid urbanization in
recent years.
What's more, the community organizing is weak. Most urban communities have RC.
However, as stated above, RC is not an independent resident association that
represents the community.
84
8.4 Moving forward: planning with appropriate
participation in China
The combination of development anxiety, elite governance and weak community
organizing makes it impossible to apply the western values and forms of
participation directly. Therefore, policy makers and planners should design the
participation that is appropriate to China context.
It's also important that the policy maker in China design the process taking the three
elements into account, laying out the range of options for every element and
balancing them under time, capacity and resource constraint.
It should be noted that the context-value-participation model doesn't mean that the
value and goals are fixed and given. Rather, values and goals are always changing
with times in any society. For developing China, economic growth used to be of
higher priority than equality in the eras when much of the population was suffering
from hunger and inadequate material. Recent years have witnessed the rapid
economic development of China. There is the trend and tension for more equality
and inclusion in the society.
Furthermore, one should not accept the participation in any context as it is since it's
a result of contexts. Contexts and values are not excuses for not to improve
participation. Planners and policy makers should be critical and reflective on the
ever-changing values, and on improving the combination of the three elements
based on practices on the ground.
For a shantytown transformation project in the future, to design for appropriate
participation, step-by-step questions should be thought through:
85
1) What's special about the bigger political, social and economic contexts?
What's special about this community (demography, history,
governance, and physical environment)?
2) What are the values and goals of the housing upgrading project? Is
there anything in values and goals that I want to improve from
previous similar projects? What are the criteria of good participation
when taking these values and goals into consideration?
3) What are the different major phases for this project? Which phases
will influence the community the most? In which part do I want to
engage the community and other stakeholders, to what extent, in
order to realize the chosen values and goals?
4) For each part - Whom do I want to engage? How do I increase their
incentive and decrease their cost to participate? What is the best way
to communicate between community members and between different
stakeholders in order to make informed decisions? Who can make a
better decision in what way?
5) Is there any training required for the above processes? What
resources do I have for the capacity building?
These questions are also applicable to any other planning project that tries to have
some sort of participation.
If lessons are to be drawn from American counterparts, these steps should be
repeated too for analyzing each specific case. With an understanding of Question 1
and 2, one can learn more technical aspects of the participation process from
answers to Question 3, 4 and 5.
86
8.5 Limitation of the research
One big limitation of the research is the lack of information on the backroom
decision-making of governments, agencies, and real estate developers. This is due to
the sensitivity of the topic, the lack of transparency of government agencies, and
lack of personal relationship with the government.
87
Reference
Abraham, A., & Platteau, J. P. (2004). Participatory development: Where culture
creeps in. Culture and public action, 2 10-23 3.
Alexander, L. T. (2009). Stakeholder Participation in New Governance: Lessons from
Chicago's Public Housing Reform Experiment. Geo. J. on Poverty L. & Pol'y, 16, 117.
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation.Journal of the American
Institute of planners, 35(4), 216-224.
Bing, N. C. (2012). The Residents' Committee in China's Political System: Democracy,
Stability, Mobilization. Issues & Studies, 48(2), 71-126.
Blanchet, K. (2001). Participatory development: between hopes and reality.
InternationalSocial ScienceJournal,53(170), 637-641.
Chhotray, V. (2004). The negation of politics in participatory development projects,
Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh. Development and Change, 35(2), 32 7-352.
Connell, D. (1997). Participatory Development. Development in Practice,7(3),248259.
Connor, D. M. (1988). A new ladder of citizen participation. National Civic Review,
77(3), 249-257.
Cornwall, A. (2003). Whose voices? Whose choices? Reflections on gender and
participatory development. World Development, 31(8), 1325-1342.
Costa, A. C., Kottak, C. P., & Prado, R. M. (1997). The sociopolitical context of
participatory development in Northeastern Brazil. Human Organization,56(2), 138146.
Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public
administrationreview, 66(sl), 66-75.
Ghai, D. P. (1988). Participatory development: some perspectives from grass-roots
experiences. UNRISD. 2-3.
Keough, N. (1998). Participatory development principles and practice: Reflections of
a western development worker. Community developmentjournal,33(3), 187-196.
Kothari, U., & Cooke, B. (2001). Power, knowledge and social control in participatory
development. Participation:the new tyranny?, 139-152.
88
Parfitt, T. (2004). The ambiguity of participation: a qualified defence of participatory
development. Third World Quarterly,25(3), 537-555.
Platteau, J. P., & Abraham, A. (2002). Participatory development in the presence of
endogenous community imperfections. Journalof Development Studies, 39(2), 104136.
UNDP (1997). Empowering people - a guide to participation.United Nations
Development Programme, Washington DC. 3.
White, S. C. (1996). Depoliticising development: the uses and abuses of
participation. Development in practice, 6(1), 6-15.
Williams, G. (2004). Evaluating participatory development: tyranny, power and (re)
politicisation. Third world quarterly,25(3), 557-578.
Wilson, J. Q. (1963). Planning and politics: Citizen participation in urban renewal.
Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 29(4), 242-249.
89