Planning and livability of subsidized housing estates in China : a case study of Guangzhou

Abstract

Enhancement of livability has been emphasized as a precautionary measure to resolve urban problems globally. The housing marketization reform and the subsequent subsidized housing policies in China neglected the quality of the living environment, especially that for the economically disadvantaged households. The aim of this pioneering study is to evaluate the livability of subsidized housing estates (SHEs) in Guangzhou for the purpose of extending the discourse on livability and for making recommendations to improve neighborhood planning in urban China for achieving better livability. This study addresses three research questions: 1) how livable are the SHEs in Guangzhou; 2) how and why has urban planning influenced the livability of SHEs; and 3) how and why have the underlying institutional factors (i.e., governance structure, supply of land and housing finance) influenced the livability of SHEs? A three-stage analytical framework was developed to address these research questions. First, the livability attributes and performances of SHEs in urban China were examined. Second, the impacts of planning on the livability of SHEs were investigated through an in-depth investigation of Guangzhou’s planning policy and system, planning process, and planning modes. Finally, how the major underlying institutional factors affect livability were studied. Eleven SHEs constructed in three different time periods were selected as case studies, based on the data collected by a questionnaire survey, interviews, field observations and documentary analyses. The study found that the built environment of the housing estates varied due to the impact of location, land availability in different time periods, and the lack of routine maintenance. For residents’ perception of livability, “neighborly relationships” was the most positive, followed by the “sense of safety” and “support from residents’ organizations and management companies.” Residents were least satisfied with the physical environment, particularly public facilities/services. Statistical analyses show that residents’ perception of livability could be significantly explained by the attributes of the built environment itself rather than the residents’ own attributes. Although livability was embedded in planning regulations and planning schemes, the site selection, plan approval and plan implementation involved in the planning process were found to hinder its improvement. The excessive stress on the physical environment neglecting the social environment caused the mismatch between the supply of facilities/services and the actual needs of the low-income residents. Given the unique issues associated with the marketization reforms of land and finance systems, an in-depth understanding of the forces underlying the planning system was conducted. The adaptation of a bureaucrat-led mode facilitated the local government to enforce political directives from the upper-level governments. However, its pursuit of short-term economic benefits impeded the improvement of livability of SHEs. The absence of civil society in contemporary Western terms also explained the merely acceptable level of livability in SHEs in China. This study recommends that SHEs must be located in neighborhoods with convenient and sufficient public facilities and services. Furthermore, the improvements in the planning of residential communities for enhancing livability must be based on the pursuit of a fair and accountable planning system and a participatory planning process.