Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros4Social housing as a multi-functio...

Social housing as a multi-functional tool: understanding the social housing expansion in Nanjing, China

Danyang Li

Résumés

Bien que le retrait des gouvernements du secteur du logement social, inspiré par l’idéologie néolibérale, ait été fréquent dans le monde entier au cours des dernières décennies, le Gouvernement chinois est revenu à son rôle de fournisseur de logements sociaux depuis 2007. Cela soulève la question intéressante de savoir pourquoi le Gouvernement chinois a redonné la priorité à l’offre de logements en tant que projet majeur à une époque où la croissance économique est soutenue. Cet article examine les raisons derrière ce retournement. Il explore les motivations concrètes des interventions en matière de logement social au niveau urbain à travers un examen des politiques de logement social dans la ville de Nanjing. L’étude a révélé que les motivations qui sous-tendent l’offre massive de logements sociaux sont complexes et qu’elles peuvent être liées à des pressions politiques, à la volonté d’assurer l’égalité face au logement et à des considérations économiques. Cette étude enrichit la recherche sur les interventions en matière de logement dans le contexte urbain chinois.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

Thank you to Professor Maarten Loopmans and Dr. Yunpeng Zhang for their ideas and revision work during the drafting process. Special thanks to Jia Zheng for his work of proofreading. I also want to thank the two anonymous referees for their valuable comments.

Introduction

1Social housing became a dominant housing type in many Western European countries after World War Ⅱ. For example, the Netherlands witnessed a significant government-led housing construction initiative, particularly in the 1960s. By the early 1990s, social housing made up no less than 44% of the total housing stock in the Netherlands. France and UK also embarked on a massive construction effort for social housing after the war (Whitehead, 2002). However, in recent decades, governments shifted from direct housing provision to housing subsidies, influenced by neoliberalism (Colburn, 2022). Keith Jacobs describes the characteristics of neoliberal housing policy as: encouraging homeownership, the retreat of public sector from housing provision and much dependence on the private housing (Jacobs, 2019). He describes the role of the government as maintaining conditions for wealth creation that is accrued through investment in housing stock and real estate, rather than caring for disadvantaged groups and promoting housing equality (Jacobs, 2019). For example, in the UK, the government transferred housing to independent non-profit organizations during the 1990s and 2000s, leaving the local authority account for only half the public housing stock. The Netherlands has applied stricter criteria for tenants to qualify for social housing and has limited the support from the state, which relates to the decline and residualisation of social housing sector (Van Gent & Hochstenbach, 2020). Priemus and Dieleman (2002) predicted that the governments will keep distance from direct housing provision. This trend has persisted and as of the year 2021, the proportion of public and social housing stock in total housing stock in Europe is only at 11% (Lakatos & Turnbull, 2021; Poggio & Whitehead, 2017).

2Meanwhile, on the other side of the continent, the Chinese government is turning back to its role of providing large scale social housing. During the CCP’s 17th National Congress in October 2007, the Chinese central authority set a political promise of “provide adequate housing for everyone” (Hu, 2012). Between 2012 and 2022, China provided over 59 million units of social housing (including relocation of shantytown inhabitants), accommodating approximately 140 million people (Xu, 2022). By the year 2020, China has established a well-off society (xiaokangshehui), of which one of the standards on housing development is “one housing unit per household and one room per person” (Huaxia Jingwei Network, 2004). The huge provision of social housing units has also played a significant role in achieving this accomplishment.

3Although the massive social housing provision in China already had a huge practical impact, the motivations behind the provision remain unclear. This paper will focus on the social housing development in Nanjing, a major city in the Yangtze River Delta region, attempting to elucidate the characteristics of its social housing policy and examine the motivations behind this policy. Since the local government is the policy implementer, it is necessary to explore this issue from the local perspective. The article will contribute to a more profound understanding of the role of social housing within the context of urban development in China, providing insights into the resurgence of the Chinese state’s involvement in social housing.

4This article follows the structure outlined below: It begins by reviewing the impact of China’s economic reforms on urban housing change. The subsequent section is a literature review, theoretically discussing the motivations behind housing interventions. The following part delves into the social housing development trajectory in Nanjing, with a particular focus on the changes since 2007. Lastly, the article analyzes the motivations behind housing interventions from the perspective of local governments.

Economic reform and its outcome in China

  • 1 Data source: China National Bureau of Statistics.
  • 2 Data source: China National Bureau of Statistics.
  • 3 Data source: Nanjing Municipal Finance Bureau.

5After the shift from a socialist to a market-oriented economy in China, pursuing the absolute numbers of GDP and economic growth has become the primary driver of economic development. According to Wu (2018) and Wu et al. (2022), local governments in China have undergone a process of corporatization, operating in a market-oriented manner with a profit motive. Specifically, land finance has become a major source of revenue for local governments. This could date back to China’s tax-sharing reform in 1994 which adjusted central and local tax allocation. The result of this reform is that the central government received more tax revenue, while local fiscal revenue is weakened. This indirectly led to local government’s dependence on land finance. In 2020, central tax revenue accounted for 51.6% of the total income, while local tax revenue accounted for 48.4%1, as opposed to 22% and 78% respectively in 19932. However, local governments bore 75.2% of the local expenditures. In the case of Nanjing, the land transfer income accounts for about half of the total government fiscal revenue from the year 2015 to 20213 . This dependence on land finance is also reshaping urban redevelopment. In both the urban central areas and the urban peripheries, numerous urban villages are being demolished (Jin, 2023; C. Liu et al., 2023). By auctioning the vacant land at high prices to developers for the construction of high-profit residential areas, commercial centres, or upscale office spaces, the government gains substantial financial revenue.

  • 4 Danwei is the place where socialist workers work. Workers’ housing was usually directly allocated b (...)
  • 5 Chengzhongcun refers to the villages in the downtown or outskirts in city in China. In a broad sens (...)
  • 6 Hukou is a tool of China’s population management system. Citizens are tied to a specific location t (...)

6The economic reforms not only reshaped governmental behavior but also gave rise to new urban poverty and housing inequality issues (Lai, 1998). "New poverty" refers to a social group distinct from the "old poverty” (G. Chen et al., 2006; Wu, 2004). Old poverty are individuals who lack work capabilities, cannot access job opportunities, and struggle to receive family support (Babar & Kesteloot, 2009). New poverty refers to those who lose job opportunities due to economic transition and find themselves in vulnerable positions in the new market economy (Babar & Kesteloot, 2009). Urban laid-off workers and migrant workers are considered typical examples of new poverty groups. As a result, the old work-unit (danwei)4 housing and the informal residences in urban villages (chengzhongcun)5 have been the main accommodations for urban poor for a long period of time (Y. Liu & Wu, 2006; Wu, 2016; Zhan, 2018). Compared with newly-built commercial housing, the inferior dwellings often lack basic infrastructure, face overcrowding problems, and are poorly governed (Wu, 2016; Wu & He, 2005). While constrained by limited financial sources, the urban poor face challenges in improving their housing conditions through market means. The housing differentiation between high-end commercial properties and urban poor enclaves becomes increasingly pronounced (Fang & Iceland, 2018; Logan et al., 1999). Nonetheless, for a long time, government aid housing and housing subsidy in China only open for local residents holding household registration (hukou)6 and migrants were excluded from the system (C. Liu et al., 2023).

7On the other hand, the prices of commercialized housing continue to rise, exacerbating the affordability issues for the young generation (Yang & Chen, 2014). Recent studies have indicated that intergenerational transfer of wealth plays a crucial role in the housing pathway of young individuals (Cui et al., 2020; Deng et al., 2016; Zhu, 2018). Those who receive more intergenerational wealth transfer appear to be more competitive in the housing market. Conversely, some young individuals, especially rural migrants, who cannot benefit from financial support from their parents, find it challenging to attain homeownership. Furthermore, similar to some Western countries, the phenomenon of social atomization in Chinese society is becoming more apparent (Tian & Fang, 2010; Zhang et al., 2023). The trend of young people living alone is on the rise, leading to an increasing demand for single-person apartments. However, the current rental market is still largely dominated by shared accommodation, which falls short of meeting the preferences and needs of young individuals.

Literature review

The argument of social housing intervention

8In industrialized modern societies, housing serves not only as a place for living but also encompasses a range of socioeconomic issues for the government (Whitehead, 2002). As Oxley argues that housing has multiple attributes, among which social and urban externalities are very obvious (Oxley, 2000). Corresponding to this, public intervention in the housing sector often occurs in response to a wide array of social, political and economic needs (Angel, 2000). Maclennan (1998) recognized that housing provision is an efficient way of addressing macroeconomic problems, such as income distribution, employment issue as well as maintaining the macroeconomic stability. In post-war period in England, France and the Netherlands, the targeted people of social housing were mostly skilled working class (J. Chen, Stephens et al., 2013; Forrest & Lee, 2003; Goossens, 1997). This was driven by the high demand for skilled workers for economic development and social reconstruction. In some other countries, including many Commonwealth countries, housing is primarily provided directly to government employees (Whitehead, 2003).

9In addition to economic factors, redistribution based on welfare and social equality is also considered the purpose of housing intervention (Mertha, 2009; Whitehead, 2003). The rationale is based on neoclassical economics’ argument about market failures. The immobility of real estate, high transaction costs, and other factors determine that the housing market is imperfect and non-competitive. Lund (2017) believes that housing policy is best understood as the government’s attempt to regulate the housing market in order to achieve social objectives. Housing, as an expensive necessity with social value, is not affordable for each citizen. In northern Europe, social housing is provided as a kind of welfare which opens to residents from all social class cohorts (Musterd, 2014; Whitehead, 2003). In Singapore, extensive housing has been constructed by the government as part of a broader social policy, resulting in over 80% of the population residing there (Whitehead, 2003). Housing provision and subsidies are also an optional choice for the government to ensure minimum housing standards (Maclennan, 1990; Whitehead, 2003). For example, in the UK and France, social housing is usually limited to rental housing for low-income families nowadays (Lévy-Vroelant, 2013).

10However, in many instances, social and economic objectives are not isolated; they are often combined goals of social housing policies (Oxley, 2004). For example, social housing provision in East Asian countries is generally considered as developmental welfare signifying a combination of economic policy and social policy. Social expenditures are seen not as detracting from but as contributing positively to economic development (J. Chen et al., 2014; Jorg, 2010; Midgley & Tang, 2001; Shuid, 2016). For instance, the provision of social housing in East Asia has long been connected with poverty, resettlement and extreme housing shortage (Forrest & Lee, 2003). In Korea, public housing provides permanent rental, purchased and leased housing for the lowest income tier. It also provides national rental housing for those earning below 50% of the average income, redevelopment rental housing for tenants of redevelopment projects, and shift housing for the middle-income class (Jang & Kim, 2013). In Taiwan, socially or economically disadvantaged households, such as resettlement family after natural disasters, civil servants, dependents of servicemen are the main residents in social housing (C.-O. Chang & Yuan, 2013). Hong Kong provides the resettlement housing to accommodate victims of slum clearance or natural disaster. In addition, the low-cost housing is aimed at skilled blue-collar and junior white-collar workers (Yip, 2013).

11Even if it follows the convergent intervention logic, the approach to intervention in social housing sector depends much on the impact of past policies, existing strength of organizational, regulatory and market frameworks (Whitehead, 2002). There is no uniform routine for social housing development. Besides, social housing policy aims are dependent and regional much according to local socioeconomic background and changes in time and space (Lund, 2017). Murie (2013) identified a wide range of contextual factors, including demography, economic environment and political pressures that influence housing development outcomes and are driving transitions in the housing system.

Contextualizing arguments about social housing provision in China

12Some researchers have studied the social housing provision in urban China after the housing reform. Most of them contend that the economic reason is crucial for promoting social housing. Chen et al. (2013) believe that the housing reform in China is assumed to promote economic growth and cooling down the real estate market. Through a study in Shanghai, Chang & Chen (2013) suggest that the Shanghai Municipal Government uses the new public housing regime, which accommodates large relocated population from inner city, as a way to buttress local economic growth and increase revenue through gentrifying the inner city land and further using the inner city for the mega events and flagship projects to market the city. Dang et al. (2014) argue that the spatial pattern of social housing in Beijing is mainly driven by financial factors: the concern over the loss of the social housing land-transfer fees and the concern for additional financial and administrative cost for land acquisition. While the economic factors cannot explain the whole picture of the social housing intervention in China given the complexity of social housing attributes.

13Though some literature’s touche upon the topic of motivations for social housing intervention in Chinese society, most of them focus on economic factors, with relatively little discussion on social and political aspects. This article seeks to fill in this gap by presenting a case study in Nanjing, China.

Redefining social housing in China

14The specific meaning of social housing may vary in each country due to differences in socioeconomic and political context. Hansson & Lundgren (2019) gives the definition of social housing in Europe as x is social housing if and only if x is a system providing long-term housing to a group of households specified only by their limited financial resources, by means of a distribution system and subsidies. Wu (1996) summarizes some features that social housing shares across countries: (1) the non-profit or limited-profit status of the providing organization (landlord); (2) administrative allocation according to ‘need’ of state and people; and (3) directly affected by political decision-making. Current social housing in China shares these characteristics. In essence, social housing is non-profit, or limited-profit housing allocated to certain social groups, in forms of lease or sale in accordance with the eligibility criteria established by the government.

15As housing is a context-based issue, social housing systems vary in each country (Kemeny & Lowe, 1998). In the context of China, the central government takes absolute policy-making power, assigning political missions to the local. Considering the imbalance of regional development and the divergent social conditions across the huge territory, the local government is empowered with executive autonomy. In terms of funding sources, housing construction funds are primarily provided by local governments. The mission of social housing construction is assigned step by step from the central government to provincial governments, then to prefectural level. The local government has the autonomy of deciding how to implement the task, from launching municipality-specific policies to making detailed social housing plans and deciding the way of social housing construction. Consequently, social housing development in each Chinese city could show some extent of difference (You et al., 2011). Therefore, it is important to understand the diversity within a single national context (Zhou & Ronald, 2017).

Data and methodology

16This study employs a qualitative research method of policy analysis drawing on second-hand data, including policy documents, media and statistics data. The analysis uses interpretive approach which focus the meaning and words used in policy, along with a mainstream approach which concentrates on the actors in policy making (Browne et al., 2019; Yanow, 2007). Specifically, the author conducts a brief retrospective analysis of the historical development of social housing from 1998 to 2007 through references to historical data and literature. In the policy review part, the article systematically reviews policy documents and statistics data relating to social housing in Nanjing from 2007 to 2021 by interpretive approach, based on which it summarizes three key features of housing development. Policy documents are sourced from Nanjing Housing Security and Real Estate Bureau’s website. Other data mainly originates from the Nanjing Real Estate Yearbook and Nanjing Yearbook spanning from 2005 to 2020. In the analysis of policy driving forces, the power relationship between the central and local governments is mentioned, with a focus on the motivations behind local government action.

Social housing development in Nanjing

A short review of social housing history in Nanjing

17Nanjing, the capital of Jiangsu Province, is a city with a population of 9.4 million in 2021 (Nanjing municipal bureau statistics, 2022). The city’s social housing development mirrors overall trend in China but exhibits its own development character. Historically, Nanjing’s social housing development has undergone fluctuations amid the process of housing marketization and urbanization. It has played roles of “solving the problem of urban housing shortage", "promoting housing monetization", and "tools for demolition of old cities” (Wang et al., 2017).

  • 7 In a market economy system, not all citizens can rely on their own income to acquire homeownership. (...)

18From 1980 to 1994, the provision of social housing continued to adhere to the preceding socialist housing system. Facing the predominant problem of housing shortage, social housing was provided to people within danwei, more often as a form of welfare. It was allocated to danwei workers depending on workers’ marital status, family size, position and seniority in danwei. Therefore, the criteria of allocation were hardly related to individuals’ economic status. This process was then halted in 1998, the year when China’s housing market reform was officially kicked off. The physical housing distribution in China was officially dismantled, and gradually replaced by a monetized distribution system. During this period, the conception of housing security (zhufangbaozhang) system7 was initially formed. The economic comfortable housing program (ECH) was launched as a way of improving the housing condition of the urban residents. The main role of ECH was to alleviate the shortage of urban housing, but not targeting low-income urban families, but mainly families with moderate economic capabilities. In 2001, the Nanjing authority first proposed social housing for low-income families in order to improve their housing situation, though only people with local hukou were eligible and very limited housing was provided. However, this was suddenly paused in 2003. The government suspended social housing provision to low-income households. Instead, social housing would only be provided to households displaced by demolition and farmers whose housing/land was expropriated by the state. It was not until 2007 that social housing for urban low-income individuals was reinstated. In the subsequent years, a broader range of social housing types has been introduced, leading to increased diversity in the functions and targeted beneficiaries of social housing.

Current social housing system in Nanjing

19In response to the central state’s request, the Nanjing municipal government prioritized social housing provision since 2007, as outlined in the 12th, 13th and 14th five-year plans. It introduced a range of supporting policies, some of which are highlighted in Table 1. In the policy of IOPT (2015), it is made clear that the social housing in Nanjing refers to the housing used for fulfilling the basic housing needs of specific groups, constructed or collected through direct investment or political support from the government.

  • 8 The shared proportion by households can be 50% to 80%.

20Nanjing’s housing security system now comprises three types: Public Rental Housing (PRH), Shared Ownership Housing (SOH), ECH and Affordable Rental Housing (ARH). ECH is a kind of affordable housing. Eligible social groups for ECH are local resettlement households and local low-to-moderate income households. The resettlement households access to ECH through direct government allocation or through purchase with subsidies from the government. The housing tenure of ECH is private-owned, which contrasts with PRH. PRH was not introduced in the social housing system until 2007. The dwellings are owned by the municipal government and provided in the form of lease. Previously, it was mainly for urban low-income households, but in 2011 university graduates and migrants were also made eligible. SOH is a new type of social housing introduced in the housing system in 2015. It is another kind of affordable housing provided to university graduates, local low-to-moderate income households, and local families without housing ownership yet in Nanjing. Buyers can share part8 of the ownership with the government at first and purchase the remaining property rights gradually. In the post-2020 era, the Nanjing Urban Housing Development Plan for the 14th Five Year Plan (2021) explicitly outlines a shift in the social housing provision towards ARH. This initiative primarily targets on young graduates and new citizens in Nanjing, distinguishing it from the PRH.

Table 1. Policy relating to social housing in Nanjing from 2011 to 2021.

Table 1. Policy relating to social housing in Nanjing from 2011 to 2021.

Table 2. Current social housing types in Nanjing and targeted social groups.

Table 2. Current social housing types in Nanjing and targeted social groups.

Three aspects of social housing expansion in Nanjing

21The social housing development in Nanjing since the year 2007 can be described in terms of three aspects: the expansion of housing provision scale, the expansion of targeted social groups and the spatial diffusion of social housing.

Expansion of social housing provision scale

  • 9 Data source: Nanjing Real Estate Book, 2019.

22The most prominent characteristic of social housing development in Nanjing since 2007 is its significant scale expansion. In fact, prior to the extensive housing initiative, the provision of social housing in Nanjing was relatively limited. The PTFP policy launched by the municipal government in 2012 announces to implement “million people housing improvement plan”. Figure 1 demonstrates the social housing provision scale in terms of number of new social housing apartment constructed and surface area constructed before and after 2007. Between 2007-09 and 2010-21, there is a discernible surge, surpassing the levels seen in preceding years. Despite some fluctuations in the subsequent years, the 2010s witnessed significant expansion. The nuances in these fluctuations can be attributed to the fact that the Nanjing government’s social housing quotas are typically established on a five-year or ten-year basis, rather than seeking annual incremental growth. By the end of 2018, 56,197 units of public rental housing are in use in the social housing system. The number for the ECH is 447,880, and 3,281 for the SOH9.

23In addition to absolute numbers, the expansion of social housing scale can also be reflected by its increasing proportion in the holistic housing system of Nanjing. Since the housing marketization in 1998, commercial housing had been the protagonist in urban China. It was regarded as the dominant tool to improve housing condition of the urban residents. At the same time, the real estate market plays an irreplaceable role in promoting economic development. However, this trend has been transforming since the social housing initiative. In Nanjing, the THFYP (2016) escalated social housing development to be equally crucial as the commercial housing development, which indicates the significance of social housing at municipal level. Figure 2 shows the ratio of social housing provision scale in terms of number of apartments and surface area to that of the commercial housing from 2004 to 2018. Both ratios saw a substantial leaping growth during the period from 2010 to 2012, which go up to 0.50 and 0.57 respectively. Although there is fluctuation in the following six years, the ratios are higher than that before 2007.

Figure 1. Social housing constructed from 2004 to 2018.

Figure 1. Social housing constructed from 2004 to 2018.

Data sources: Collected by the author from Nanjing Real Estate yearbooks 2005-2019

Figure 2. The ratio of social housing provision to commercial housing provision.

Figure 2. The ratio of social housing provision to commercial housing provision.

Data sources: Collected by the author from Nanjing Real Estate yearbooks from 2005 to 2019.

Expansion of targeted social groups

24Another remarkable achievement of social housing development is the expansion in targeted groups. As mentioned before, the social housing development has always been coordinated with the development of the housing system and has played different roles at different stages. As a result, the targeted social groups have been constantly changing from danwei workers, moderate income citizens, to resettlement households. The urban disadvantaged group was not the focus.

25Nonetheless, since the year 2007, housing policy placed a greater emphasis on providing housing for low-income households. The IOPT policy (2015) sets a political goal to ensure that the local low-income households with housing difficulties are guaranteed to be housed by the end of the 2010s. Furthermore, the THFYP (2017) declares to build a multi-level, widely covered housing security system aiming to fulfill the needs of low-to-moderate income households. It proposes that the social housing system should accommodate 23% of the total urban population, endeavoring to include all the low-to-moderate income households.

26Another noticeable development is the inclusion of rural migrants, university graduates and new citizens into the targeted groups. University graduates here refer to employees who have graduated from college/university and scientific research institutes for less than 5 years, with stable occupations and hukou in the city. The IOHT (2018) further emphasizes the housing preference for young graduates. Rural migrants here refer to employees who have stable occupations in Nanjing and have paid for social insurance (shehuibaoxian) continuously for three years, yet do not have a local hukou. Starting from 2021, the focus of social housing policies has shifted towards ARH, aiming to meet the housing needs of new urban residents (individuals/families) and youth.

27Table 3 illustrates the number of households in different types of social housing from 2010 to 2018. Obviously, the numbers of PRH shows an overall growth after university graduates, migrants and low-income households were included in the year 2011. Despite of the very short time of the introduction of SOH, it demonstrates that thousands of households are benefiting. It is noticeable that the inclusion of more social groups does not necessarily mean that the newly included groups would become the majority. In fact, in terms of quantity, the resettlement households still take up the largest proportion.

Table 3. The number of new allocated households in each type of social housing.

Table 3. The number of new allocated households in each type of social housing.

Data sources: Nanjing Real Estate yearbooks from 2010 to 2019

Spatial diffusion of social housing

  • 10 The term "Main City" is defined by the Nanjing Master Plan, referring to the central area character (...)

28The spatial distribution of social housing demonstrates a diffusion within the urban area. Figure 3 shows the spatial distribution of the newly built social housing estates from 2003 to 2008. The majority of the estates concentrate within and around the ring expressway, namely the boundary of the main city10. Only a small number of the estates locates outside this boundary. After the year 2009, while part of the newly built housing projects are still distributed along the main city boundary, there is a general trend of stronger diffusion: most of the projects are located outside the main city, as shown in Figure 4.

  • 11 The four areas are Dingjiazhuang, Huagang, Shangfang and Daishan social housing area.

29The expansion of social housing towards the outskirts of the city results in the establishment of large-scale social housing complexes. Contrary to the highly crowded inner city, the outside urban districts provide ample open spaces, allowing for the implementation of large-scale housing projects. The most famous social housing projects in Nanjing are the “four massive social housing areas”11, which provide a huge amount of 82,800 housing units in 338 blocks (Nanjing Daily news paper, 2022). The four areas took up one third of the total social housing provision during the 2010s in Nanjing. Figure 5 shows the spatial distribution of the four areas, all of which are located beside the main city boundary. The largest of them, Daishan social housing area, locates in the southwest of the city. The total construction area of this project is 3,867,300 square meters, with a total number of 32,151 housing units which accommodates over 140 thousand residents (Nanjing Daily news paper, 2021). Figure 6 is a photo of Daishan.

Figure 3. The spatial distribution of new-built social housing estates from 2003 to 2008.

Figure 3. The spatial distribution of new-built social housing estates from 2003 to 2008.

Data source: Author collected from Nanjing real estate year books 2004-2009.

Figure 4. The spatial distribution of new-built social housing communities from 2009 to 2019.

Figure 4. The spatial distribution of new-built social housing communities from 2009 to 2019.

Data source: Author collected from Nanjing real estate year books 2010-2020

Figure 5. The spatial distribution of the four massive social housing areas.

Figure 5. The spatial distribution of the four massive social housing areas.

Data source: Author collected from Nanjing real estate year books 2004-2020

Figure 6. A picture of Daishan social housing estates.

Figure 6. A picture of Daishan social housing estates.

Data source: Author collected online

The motivations of social housing provision

Social housing provision as a political task

  • 12 In China’s top-down official appointment system, local officials at all levels are assigned and app (...)

30To a large extent, the expansion of Nanjing’s social housing provision was directly driven by the political force from the central government. Prior to this massive project, social housing provision had not been placed high on the political agenda at municipal level. As other national initiatives, the social housing project was promoted from top to bottom. Provision quotas were put forward by the central government to local level. Local governments are racing to meet their quotas, which is directly connected with the evaluation of the performance of the government itself and officials12. Under this pressure, local governments are therefore taking social housing provision as one of their primary tasks.

31Nonetheless, this governance system has not entirely escaped what is often termed fragmented authoritarianism as described by Brødsgaard (2016) and Mertha (2009). The power dynamics between the central government and local governments in China exhibit a certain degree of complexity. The central government seeks to maintain uniformity in national policies and control. Meanwhile, local governments also wield resources and negotiation leverage in various aspects, in terms of economic development, political support to central government, policy execution and local reform. Hence, power negotiations and discussions between the central and local governments are inevitable during policy implementation (Lim, 2021). A new policy initiative must garner broad consensus within this vast bureaucratic apparatus. On one hand, the Nanjing Municipal Government endeavored to complete their quotas. In just a dozen years, hundreds of thousands housing was provided. On the other hand, the municipal government takes this opportunity to maximize its own economic interest in housing development process as will be discussed later.

Social Housing provision as a tool to alleviate housing inequality

32From the standpoint of housing inequality, the expansion of the social housing system is correcting the failure of the commercial housing market. Ranking third in China, Nanjing is rather rich in higher education resources with a large number of graduates looking for jobs locally each year. For example, there are 248.2 thousand college graduates in Nanjing in 2020, and about 1/3 of them seek jobs locally. In 2019, 390 thousand new college students were employed in Nanjing (China Jiangsu website, 2022). Meanwhile, as the capital of Jiangsu province in the developed eastern region and one of the central cities of the Yangtze River Delta Megalopolis, Nanjing is attractive to domestic migrants, with currently 2.65 million in the city (Nanjing Municipal Bureau of Statistics, 2021). Most migrants come from rural areas, often with low levels of education, and therefore have less access to decent jobs. They mostly work in informal jobs and their wages are relatively low (Deng et al., 2016). However, the ratio of housing price to average income is 18 in Nanjing2, which is higher than that of most developed countries. This indicates that most urban disadvantaged social groups including the youth, rural migrants and low-income people could hardly afford commercial housing. Furthermore, the extensive demolition of urban villages in Nanjing has made it increasingly difficult for farmers and workers to find affordable housing in the city. Against this background, the city urgently needs a tool to address the inequality brought about by market mechanisms.

33By offering PRH and ARH, Nanjing municipal government provides decent living spaces for the housing disadvantaged in urban areas. The average rental price of commercial housing in Nanjing is 41 yuan/m2 in the year 2020 (Cityhouse, 2020), while the average rental price of PRH is only 16 yuan/m2. For the low and low to moderate income households, they only need to pay 20% and 50% of this price respectively (Nanjing Daily news paper, 2023). Through the provision of SOH and ECH, it enables households with limited financial resources to access home ownership. The provision of social housing has greatly improved the living conditions of vulnerable urban populations and it has, to some extent, alleviate housing inequality brought by market .

Social housing as an economic growth promoter

34Besides political and social motivations, economic motivation is another important concern for the municipal authority. The changing spatial distribution of social housing towards urban periphery is based on the local government’s desire to save on financial expenditures. As a matter of fact, the construction funds for social housing are mainly the responsibility of local governments. Local governments often choose remote sites for social housing projects where the land value is much lower than the inner city area. In this way, the government could avoid the loss of land value. In addition, social housing is normally constructed in a very dense way which could save construction cost. Most of Nanjing’s social housing comprises densely populated, large-scale estates with over 200 units per building, aiming to accommodate a larger population while utilizing minimal land area. Given that land transfers have been a significant source of revenue for local governments, this social housing development pattern can help save a huge amount of land cost. Moreover, during the urban regeneration process in Nanjing, a significant number of urban villages in the city center were demolished. As compensation, most displaced residents are given the opportunity to relocate to social housing in remote areas. This can significantly save resettlement costs for the municipal government. The displacement process often leads to the government exploiting a substantial amount of interest due to the difference of land value between city center and urban peripheries.

35The emphasis of housing policies on including young graduates in the social housing system also largely aims to promote urban economic development. Since 2018, young graduates, particularly those considered talents (rencai), have been favored in terms of policies and have access to various types of social housing. In fact, a portion of the PRH is specifically designated for university graduates, known as talent apartments (rencaigongyu) in Nanjing. This type of housing typically consists of single-person apartments, catering to the housing needs of current young individuals. By providing housing accessibility, the Nanjing government aims at encouraging young graduates to settle down in the city considering that talent competition became intensive in recent years. As shown by Chen et al. (2019), the attractiveness of China’s cities to talents is changing due to high housing prices. Therefore, cities that can provide housing security for talents will attract more talents and be more economically competitive.

Conclusion

36The evident growth trend in social housing provision, observed from 2007 to 2018, has benefited over a million residents in Nanjing. Supported by a set of reformative policies, a comprehensive housing security system has gradually emerged, catering to displaced families, low-income families, low-to-moderate income families, urban migrants, young graduates and new citizens.

37The underlying motivations of recent social housing policies in China are multi-oriented encompassing political, social and economic aspects. Lead by the central government, the social housing development at the local level is much influenced by the top-down administrative power. This approach ensures the successful fulfillment of the massive task at the national level. Besides, faced with the pressing issues of escalating housing price, growing housing inequality, and the marginalization of vulnerable housing groups, the municipal government regard social housing as a tool to alleviate the inequality brought by marketization. Furthermore, within the national context of urban development contributing to economic growth, the economic factor is also a primary concern for the Nanjing municipal government in social housing provision. Placing large-scale clusters of social housing in the city’s periphery helps reduce land transfer costs. Simultaneously, land acquired from the regenerated urban village areas can be used for commercial development, yielding higher economic returns. The emphasis of housing policy on young graduates aim to attract young talents and boost urban economic competitiveness.

  • 13 This number is calculated by the author with data of current social housing stock, total living sur (...)

38The maturation of the social housing system in Nanjing reflects a transformation in the Chinese housing landscape: not only rely on the market to solve housing issues but also on coordinated efforts between the market and government interventions. Currently, the proportion of social housing in total housing stock in Nanjing is about 10%13. It cannot be simplistically concluded that this transformation signifies either progress or regression of the housing system, but a choice based on the status quo. This aligns with Chen et al.’s (2013) argument that the push for social housing in China reflects the central authority’s growing recognition of the complexity of urban housing systems in market economy.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

ANGEL S. (2000), Housing policy matters: A global analysis, New York and Oxford, Oxford University Press.

BABAR L. & KESTELOOT C. (2009), “Poverty and Residential Environment in Nanjing: Is there a Neighbourhood Effect?”, Espace Populations Sociétés, 3, pp. 533–549, https://doi.org/10.4000/eps.3854

BRØDSGAARD K. E. (2016), “‘Fragmented authoritarianism’or ‘integrated fragmentation’? ”, in Chinese politics as fragmented authoritarianism, pp. 50–67, Routledge.

BROWNE J., COFFEY B., COOK K., MEIKLEJOHN S. & PALERMO C. (2019), “A guide to policy analysis as a research method”, Health Promotion International, 34, 5, pp.1032–1044.

CHANG C.-O. & YUAN S.-M. (2013), “Public housing policy in Taiwan”, in The Future of Public Housing: Ongoing Trends in the East and the West, pp. 85–101, Berlin, Springer.

CHANG Y. & CHEN J. (2013), “Public housing in Shanghai: A tool with multiple purposes”, in The Future of Public Housing: Ongoing Trends in the East and the West, pp. 49–64, Berlin, Springer.

CHEN G., GU C. & WU F. (2006), “Urban poverty in the transitional economy: A case of Nanjing, China”, Habitat International, 30, 1, pp. 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2004.06.001

CHEN J., HU M. & LIN Z. (2019), “Does housing unaffordability crowd out elites in Chinese superstar cities? ”, Journal of Housing Economics, 45, p.101571, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhe.2018.03.003

CHEN J., JING J., MAN Y. & YANG Z. (2013), “Public Housing in Mainland China: History, Ongoing Trends, and Future Perspectives”, in Chen J., Stephens M. & Man Y. (eds.), The Future of Public Housing, pp. 13–35, Berlin, Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41622-4_2.

CHEN J., STEPHENS M. & MAN Y. (eds.) (2013), The Future of Public Housing: Ongoing Trends in the East and the West, Berlin, Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41622-4

CHEN J., YANG Z. & WANG Y. P. (2014), “The New Chinese Model of Public Housing: A Step Forward or Backward”, Housing Studies, 29, 4, pp. 534–550, https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2013.873392

CHINA JIANGSU WEBSITE (2022, June 2), The toughest employment season in history? Nanjing University Graduates with Over 250000 and 200000 Positions Waiting for You, https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1668372630403882280&wfr=spider&for=pc

CITYHOUSE (2020, December), http://nj.cityhouse.cn/lmarket/

COLBURN G. (2022), “Neoliberal housing policy: An international perspective, by Keith Jacobs”, Journal of Urban Affairs, 44, 7, pp. 1049–1051, https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2021.2020064

CUI C., HUANG Y. & WANG F. (2020), “A relay race: Intergenerational transmission of housing inequality in urban China”, Housing Studies, 35, 6, pp.1088–1109, https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2019.1648771

DANG Y., LIU Z. & ZHANG W. (2014), “Land-based interests and the spatial distribution of affordable housing development: The case of Beijing, China”, Habitat International, 44, pp. 137–145, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.05.012

DENG W. J., HOEKSTRA J. S. C. M. & ELSINGA M. G. (2016), “The changing determinants of homeownership amongst young people in urban China”, International Journal of Housing Policy, 16, 2, pp. 201–222, https://doi.org/10.1080/14616718.2015.1135857

FANG C. & ICELAND J. (2018), “Housing inequality in urban China: The heritage of socialist institutional arrangements”, The Journal of Chinese Sociology, 5, 1, p.12, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40711-018-0082-9

FORREST R. & LEE J. (2003), “Concluding observations”, in Housing and Social Change, pp. 276–282, London, Routledge.

GOOSSENS L. (1997), “De slinger van de selectiviteit: De onzekere lotgevallen van de doelgroepen van het woonbeleid in België”, in Bouwstenen van sociaal woonbeleid: De VHM bekijkt 50 jaar volkshuisvesting in Vlaanderen, pp. 253–294, Brussel, Vlaamse huisvestingsmaatschappij.

GRANATH HANSSON A. & LUNDGREN B. (2019), “Defining Social Housing: A Discussion on the Suitable Criteria, Housing, Theory and Society, 36, 2, pp. 149–166, https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2018.1459826

HU J. (2012), “Full text of Hu Jintao’s report at 17th Party Congress”, Xinhua News, pp. 2007–2010, https://www.cscc.it/upload/doc/full_text_of_hu_jintaos_report_at_17th_party_congress___qiushi_journal.pdf

HUAXIA JINGWEI NETWORK (2004, November 22), The Ministry of Construction announces the goal of building a moderately prosperous society in all respects by 2020, https://news.sina.com.cn/c/2004-11-22/09594309803s.shtml

JACOBS K. (2019), Neoliberal housing policy: An international perspective, New York, Routledge.

JANG Y.-H. & KIM S.-H. (2013), “New experiments in public housing supply in Seoul, South Korea: The possibilities and limits”, in The Future of Public Housing: Ongoing Trends in the East and the West, pp. 123–142, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer.

JIN Y. (2023), “Informalising formality: The construction of penghuqu in an urban redevelopment project in China”, Housing Studies, 38, 3, pp. 463–483, https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2021.1888888

JORG M. D. (2010), “The Developmental Welfare State and Social Policy: Shifting From Basic to Universal Social Protection”, The Korean Journal of Policy Studies, 25, 3, pp.147–172, https://doi.org/10.52372/kjps25308

KEMENY J. & LOWE S. (1998), “Schools of Comparative Housing Research: From Convergence to Divergence”, Housing Studies, 13, 2, pp. 161–176, https://doi.org/10.1080/02673039883380

LAI O.K. (1998), “Governance and the housing question in a transitional economy, the political economy of housing policy in China reconsidered”, Habitat International, 22, 3, pp. 231–243.

LAKATOS E. & TURNBULL D. (2021), Impact of The Recovery Plans on The Social &Affordable Housing Sector, Housing Europe, the European Federation for Public, Cooperative and Social Housing, https://www.housingeurope.eu/file/1056/download

LÉVY-VROELANT C. (2013), “'Everyone Should Be Housed': The French Generalist Model of Social Housing at Stake”, in Chen J., Stephens M. & Man Y. (eds.), The Future of Public Housing, pp. 215–237, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41622-4_13

LIM J. (2021), “The End of Fragmented Authoritarianism? Evidence from Military-Civil Fusion Policy under Xi Jinping”, Japan and the World in the Age of ‘Multilayer Globalism’ 2020 to 2023, The Japan Forum on International Relations, Japan.

LIU C., YUAN Y. & QI X. (2023), “Who Cashed the Rent Gap? An Alternative Narration of a Shantytown Renovation Project in Nanjing, China”, Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, p. 12606, https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12606

LIU Y. & WU F. (2006), “Urban poverty neighbourhoods: Typology and spatial concentration under China’s market transition, a case study of Nanjing”, Geoforum, 37, 4, pp. 610–626, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2005.11.006

LOGAN J. R., BIAN Y. & BIAN F. (1999), “Housing inequality in urban China in the 1990s”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 23, 1, pp.7–25, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00176

LUND B. (2017), “Understanding housing policy”, in Understanding Housing Policy, pp. 1–22, Bristol, Policy Press, https://bristoluniversitypressdigital.com/display/book/9781447330479/ch001.xml

MACLENNAN D. (1990), Affordable housing in Britain and America, York, Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

MACLENNAN D. (1998), “Asymmetries in housing and financial market institutions and EMU”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 14, 3, pp.54–80, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/14.3.54

MERTHA A. (2009), “Fragmented authoritarianism 2.0: Political pluralization in the Chinese policy process”, The China Quarterly, 200, pp. 995–1012.

MIDGLEY J. & TANG K. (2001), “Introduction: Social policy, economic growth and developmental welfare”, International Journal of Social Welfare, 10, 4, pp.244–252.

MURIE A. (2013), “Public Housing in Europe and North America”, in The Future of Public Housing: Ongoing Trends in the East and the West, pp. 165–180, Berlin, Springer.

MUSTERD S. (2014), “Public Housing for Whom? Experiences in an Era of Mature Neo-Liberalism: The Netherlands and Amsterdam”, Housing Studies, 29, 4, pp.467–484, https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2013.873393

NANJING DAILY NEWS PAPER (2021, April 28), Party building leads the high-quality development of affordable housing areas ‘Daishan Practice’, htt p://www.njdaily.cn/news/2021/0328/3318550255699997732.html

NANJING DAILY NEWS PAPER (2022, October 13), Ten years of affordable housing company’s ‘construction’ certificate for a better life, https://www.sohu.com/a/www.sohu.com/a/592279451_121388342

NANJING DAILY NEWS PAPER (2023, September 22), More than 800 households in the main urban area will complete housing selection this month, https://www.nanjing.gov.cn/zzb/ywdt/njxx/202309/t20230922_4017248.html

NANJING MUNICIPAL BUREAU STATISTICS (2022), Nanjing statistics year book, 2022, https://tjj.nanjing.gov.cn/material/njnj_2022/renkou/index.htm

OXLEY M. (2000), Future of Social Housing: Learning from Europe, London, Institute for Public Policy Research.

OXLEY M. (2004), Economics, Planning and Housing, London, Macmillan Education UK, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-0-230-21356-2

POGGIO T. & WHITEHEAD C. (2017), “Social Housing in Europe: Legacies, New Trends and the Crisis”, Critical Housing Analysis, 4, 1, pp.1–10, https://doi.org/10.13060/23362839.2017.3.1.319

PRIEMUS H. & DIELEMAN F. (2002), “Social housing policy in the European Union: Past, present and perspectives”, Urban Studies, 39, 2, pp.191–200.

SHUID S. (2016), “The housing provision system in Malaysia”, Habitat International, 54, pp.210–223, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.11.021

TIAN Y. & FANG L. (2010), “Social atomization: Theoretical genealogy and its problem expression”, Tianjin Soc. Sci., 5, pp.68–73.

VAN GENT W. & HOCHSTENBACH C. (2020), “The neo-liberal politics and socio-spatial implications of Dutch post-crisis social housing policies”, International Journal of Housing Policy, 20, 1, pp.156–172, https://doi.org/10.1080/19491247.2019.1682234

WANG Y., HE M. & WANG L. (2017), “The Policy Evolution and Spatial Evolution of Affordable Housing: A Case Study of Nanjing City”, Sustainable Development Rational Planning - Proceedings of the 2017 China Urban Planning Annual Conference (20 Housing Construction Planning).

WHITEHEAD C. M. (2002), “The economics of social housing”, Housing Economics and Public Policy, pp.135–152.

WHITEHEAD C. M. (2003), “Restructuring social housing systems”, in Housing and social change, pp. 58–80, Routledge.

WU F. (1996), “Changes in the Structure of Public Housing Provision in Urban China”, Urban Studies, 33, 9, pp.1601–1627, https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098966529

WU F. (2004), “Urban poverty and marginalization under market transition: The case of Chinese cities”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28, 2, pp.401–423, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00526.x

WU F. (2016), “Housing in Chinese Urban Villages: The Dwellers, Conditions and Tenancy Informality”, Housing Studies, 31, 7, pp. 852–870, https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2016.1150429

WU F. (2018), “Planning centrality, market instruments: Governing Chinese urban transformation under state entrepreneurialism”, Urban Studies, 55, 7, pp.1383–1399, https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017721828

WU F. & HE S. (2005), “Changes in Traditional Urban Areas And Impacts of Urban Redevelopment: A Case Study of Three Neighbourhoods In Nanjing, China”, Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 96, 1, pp.75–95, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9663.2005.00440.x

WU F., PAN F. & CHEN J. (2022), “Financialization under state entrepreneurialism in China”, Regional Studies, 56, 8, pp.1237–1243, https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2022.2051471

XU Q. (2022, September 14), “China has built the world’s largest housing security system in a remarkable decade, and billions of people are happy to fulfill their ‘dream of living in peace’”, China Real Estate Business, https://m.thepaper.cn/baijiahao_20157249

YANG Z. & CHEN J. (2014), Housing Affordability and Housing Policy in Urban China, Berlin, Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54044-8

YANOW D. (2007), “Interpretation in policy analysis: On methods and practice”, Critical Policy Studies, 1, 1, pp.110–122, https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2007.9518511

YIP N. M. (2013), “Challenges to public housing in post-colonial Hong Kong”, in The Future of Public Housing: Ongoing Trends in the East and the West, pp. 65–83, Berlin, Springer.

YOU J., WU H. & HAN S. S. (2011), What is affordable housing in China? Evidence from Nanjing, China, Research Paper, Presented for ERES2011 Annual Conference, June, pp. 15–18.

ZHAN Y. (2018), “The urbanisation of rural migrants and the making of urban villages in contemporary China”, Urban Studies, 55, 7, pp. 1525–1540, https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017716856

ZHANG B., ZHANG H. & YANG X. (2023), “Research on Social Atomization Risk and Governance Decision Making in Emerging Community”, in Wang T., PATNAIK S., HO JACK W.C. & ROCHA VARELA M.L. (eds.), Applications of Decision Science in Management, 260, pp. 119–126, Singapore, Springer Nature Singapore, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2768-3_11

ZHOU J. & RONALD R. (2017), “Housing and welfare regimes: Examining the changing role of public housing in China”, Housing, Theory and Society, 34, 3, pp. 253–276.

ZHU L. (2018), “Intergenerational housing asset transfer and the reproduction of housing inequality in urban China”, Chinese Journal of Sociology, 4, 4, pp. 453–480, https://doi.org/10.1177/2057150X18792835

Haut de page

Notes

1 Data source: China National Bureau of Statistics.

2 Data source: China National Bureau of Statistics.

3 Data source: Nanjing Municipal Finance Bureau.

4 Danwei is the place where socialist workers work. Workers’ housing was usually directly allocated by their danwei. Danwei housing was state-owned property.

5 Chengzhongcun refers to the villages in the downtown or outskirts in city in China. In a broad sense, urban villages refer to residential areas that, in the process of rapid urban development, lag the pace of societal progress, exist outside the realm of modern urban management, and exhibit low living standards.

6 Hukou is a tool of China’s population management system. Citizens are tied to a specific location through their hukou. The hukou is closely associated with residents’ social welfare and various services.

7 In a market economy system, not all citizens can rely on their own income to acquire homeownership. To ensure that everyone has a dwelling to live in, the government needs to implement some special policy measures to help groups that cannot solve housing problems solely relying on the market. The general term for this policy system is called the housing security system.

8 The shared proportion by households can be 50% to 80%.

9 Data source: Nanjing Real Estate Book, 2019.

10 The term "Main City" is defined by the Nanjing Master Plan, referring to the central area characterized by dense urban buildings.

11 The four areas are Dingjiazhuang, Huagang, Shangfang and Daishan social housing area.

12 In China’s top-down official appointment system, local officials at all levels are assigned and appointed by their superiors. Therefore, officials need to be responsible to their superiors, and their evaluation and promotion are mainly determined by their superiors. Whether one can implement superior policies is closely related to official evaluation.

13 This number is calculated by the author with data of current social housing stock, total living surface and average living surface area.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Table 1. Policy relating to social housing in Nanjing from 2011 to 2021.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/docannexe/image/65206/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 908k
Titre Table 2. Current social housing types in Nanjing and targeted social groups.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/docannexe/image/65206/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 156k
Titre Figure 1. Social housing constructed from 2004 to 2018.
Crédits Data sources: Collected by the author from Nanjing Real Estate yearbooks 2005-2019
URL http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/docannexe/image/65206/img-3.png
Fichier image/png, 32k
Titre Figure 2. The ratio of social housing provision to commercial housing provision.
Crédits Data sources: Collected by the author from Nanjing Real Estate yearbooks from 2005 to 2019.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/docannexe/image/65206/img-4.png
Fichier image/png, 32k
Titre Table 3. The number of new allocated households in each type of social housing.
Crédits Data sources: Nanjing Real Estate yearbooks from 2010 to 2019
URL http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/docannexe/image/65206/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 108k
Titre Figure 3. The spatial distribution of new-built social housing estates from 2003 to 2008.
Crédits Data source: Author collected from Nanjing real estate year books 2004-2009.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/docannexe/image/65206/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 156k
Titre Figure 4. The spatial distribution of new-built social housing communities from 2009 to 2019.
Crédits Data source: Author collected from Nanjing real estate year books 2010-2020
URL http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/docannexe/image/65206/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 144k
Titre Figure 5. The spatial distribution of the four massive social housing areas.
Crédits Data source: Author collected from Nanjing real estate year books 2004-2020
URL http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/docannexe/image/65206/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 148k
Titre Figure 6. A picture of Daishan social housing estates.
Crédits Data source: Author collected online
URL http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/docannexe/image/65206/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 65k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Danyang Li, « Social housing as a multi-functional tool: understanding the social housing expansion in Nanjing, China »Belgeo [En ligne], 4 | 2023, mis en ligne le 29 décembre 2023, consulté le 16 novembre 2025. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/65206 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/belgeo.65206

Haut de page

Auteur

Danyang Li

Division of Geography and Tourism, KU Leuven,Belgium
ORCID 0000-0003-4432-9871
danyang.li@kuleuven.be

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont susceptibles d’être soumis à des autorisations d’usage spécifiques.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search