Why build more to earn less: Property right implications of urban villages

Nie, Z A and Wong, K C (2012) Why build more to earn less: Property right implications of urban villages. International Journal of Construction Management, 12(4), pp. 65-82. ISSN 1562-3599

Abstract

Two main types of land ownerships can be identified in China mainland - the state ownership, and the collective ownership by village communes. Originated from the collective land system, the urban village is a special phenomenon. It is distinctively different from other non-village urban developments for its incomplete and ambiguous property rights and a general lack of effective building regulations and control. During the rapid urbanization of China in the past 30 years, state owned lands were sold and developed into high-density residential or commercial built-ups. Many of them were built literally surrounding existing rural villages. The surrounded villages are then called urban villages, for they are villages inside cities. Restricted by the obsolete but still effective collective land ownership, urban villages are generally not allowed to be developed unless for self-housing purpose exclusively by their inhabitants, the villagers. Yet encouraged by the high profits of the surrounding development projects, the vague definition of the "self-housing" restriction seems not able to prevent the villagers from adding more construction illegally. The truth is they build at densities even higher than those on state owned lands. By now, the political problems of these illegal developments have become too large to be handled by local city governments. As we now see, urban villages with high-density built-ups can be seen everywhere inside many Chinese cities. Very often, these villages represent a real world paradigm of overbuilt environments with higher density, poorer living conditions, and lower economic performance. This paper traces the history of this development and empirically identifies that approximately 70% of the urban village examples considered in Shenzhen, Guangzhou, and Xi'an have overdevelopment problems. We then try to induce property rights implications on excessive land exploitations, in the absence of effective building regulations and control.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: building regulation; building control; housing use; land use; property rights; urban village; village commune
Index terms: ownership, paradigm, housing, living condition, urbanization, property rights, land use, density, history, building regulation, profit, land, building control, exploitation, urban development, China
Subjects: sociology, architectural and construction history, real estate economics, Geography, economic analysis, regulatory law, education and knowledge transfer, analytical methods, management, construction type, urban design, urban planning, health safety and environment, economics
Topics: Organizational Design, Research Practice, Urban Studies, Business Strategy, Construction Technology, Legal Issues, Geographical Context, Health and Safety, Governance
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here