Public Participation in Shantytown Transformation inChina: A Case Study

ARCHIVESBy

Luxi Lin

B.Eng. Urban and Regional PlanningB.A. Economics

Peking University, 2013

MASSACH USETTS N STI TFTOF TECHNOLOLGY

JUN 29 2015

LIBRARIES

Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment ofthe 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 topublicly paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in wholeany medium now known or hereafter created.

distributeor in part in

Author

CertifiedJ4

Signature redactedDepartment of Urban Studies and Planning

May 20, 2015

Signature redactedV/7"

(TA

Professor Ceasar McDowellDepartment of Urban Studies and Planning

Thesis Supervisor

Accepted by-Signature redactedPrnfpc T rrni s rpn rh ma n

Chair, MCP CommitteeDepartment of Urban Studies and Planning

MITLibraries77 Massachusetts AvenueCambridge, MA 02139http://Iibraries.mit.edu/ask

DISCLAIMER NOTICE

Due to the condition of the original material, there are unavoidableflaws in this reproduction. We have made every effort possible toprovide you with the best copy available.

Thank you.

The images contained in this document are of thebest quality available.

Fig. 5-6 (p.36) contains faint/illegible grayscaletext.

Public Participation in Shantytown Transformation inChina: A Case Study

By

Luxi Lin

Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 20, 2015 inPartial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master in City Planning

AbstractPublic participation is not a familiar concept in China but there is a growing demandfrom urban planners and policymakers in China to understand and utilize publicparticipation tools. This research seeks to answer: How does the public participatein 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 fieldinvestigation, semi-structured interviews and policy document analysis. A casestudy on the use public participation in Baiwanzhuang to transform a shantytown inBeijing is the main lens for understanding participation in China. This is comparedto the example of how participation was used in the Boston DemonstrationDisposition program, another housing rehabilitation project.

The author proposes a framework to explore the activities of participation thatidentifies and analyzes several phases of participation in each example tounderstand the differences between the two contexts.

This research found that participation varies and that there are no uniform criteriaof ideal participation for every context. To identify the appropriate participation, thecontext, goals and values must be understood. To do this, the author develops anduses a "Context-Value-Participation" model for "appropriate participation". Thisresearch also tries to summarize three main features of the China context -development anxiety, elite governance and weak community. Policymakers in Chinacan apply the "appropriate participation" model to China context when planning forfuture participation.

Thesis Supervisor: Ceasar McDowell, Professor of the PracticeThesis Reader: Yu-Hung Hong, Lecturer

2

Acknowledgement

I want to thank Ceasar for his guidance and encouragement in the past year on mythesis and throughout my two years at MIT. I had a great experience working withCeasar 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 forurban governance issues. I also want to thank Jinhua for being a supportiveacademic 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 withthese guys in group projects and in daily life.

Last but not least, I thank my mother and my boyfriend for the long-distanceunconditional emotional support, without which I could not possibly finish thethesis and the degree.

3

CONTENT1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 7

1.1 Public participation in planning in China .................................................................................... 71.2 W hy shantytown transform ation?............................................................. ... ... .... .... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... . . 91.3 Research questions....................................................................................................................................101.4 Potential im pact..........................................................................................................................................10

2 Literature Review .......................................................................................................... 122.1 W hat is participation?..............................................................................................................................122.2 Participation varies ................................................................................................................................... 14

3 Fram ew ork .......................................................................................................................... 173.1 Participation unit ....................................................................................................................................... 173.2 Project level.................................................................................................................................................. 203.3 Defining "participation"........................................................................................................................... 21

4 M ethods ................................................................................................................................ 234.1 Research m ethod........................................................................................................................................234.2 Case selection...............................................................................................................................................234.3 Site visit and sam ple ................................................................................................................................. 25

5 The Case of Baiw anzhuang....................................................................................... 295.1 History and ownership ............................................................................................................................ 295.2 Physical conditions.................................................................................................................................... 305.3 People and governance............................................................................................................................ 345.4 New housing................................................................................................................................................. 37

6 Analysis................................................................................................................................. 416.1 Form ing of the idea of housing upgrading ............................................................................... 426.2 Surveying and seeking consent for housing upgrading....................................................... 446.3 Inform ing residents of the project and getting feedback ................................................... 466.4 Choosing asset evaluation company by deliberation, voting and lottery......................516.5 Negotiating one-on-one about compensation and new housing arrangement..........556.6 Resident m eeting w ith Subdistrict Office Official .................................................................... 616.7 Governm ent Housing Levy Decision and Court Enforcement...........................................63

7 Project-level Analysis.................................................................................................. 667.1 Public participation in Boston Dem onstration Disposition program ............................ 667.2 Project com parisons and m ajor takeaways............................................................................... 69

8 Discussion & Conclusion ................................................................................................. 768.1 Participation varies ................................................................................................................................... 768.2 Ideal participation? Appropriate participation?.......................................... . .... ... .... .... ... ... ... . . 778.3 China context: priorities and constraints .................................................................................. 828.4 M oving forward: planning w ith appropriate participation in China.............................. 858.5 Lim itation of the research ...................................................................................................................... 87

Reference.................................................................................................................................88

4

Figures and TablesFig. 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

........................................................................................................................................................................ 4 1

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

p h a se ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 5

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 ............................................................................................................................................... 7 2

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 participation to collect experts' and the public's opinion. The announcement

period should not be shorter than 30 days.

The planning agency should takefull consideration offeedbacks from experts and the public.

The agency should include suggestions taken and its reasons in the materials sending for

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 decision-

making 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 top-

down, 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.

Citizen Control

Delegated Power

Partnership

Plac ation

Consultation

Informing

Therapy

Manipulation

CitiZen Power

Tokenism

Nonparticipation

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 three-

dimension 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

8

RESOLUTION/PREVENTION

LITIGATION

IEDATION

JOINTPLANNING

CONSULTATION M

FEEDRAC

EDUCATION

Ii--

i-I:

1111

Authority &Power

Individual Education

Communicative InfluenceA1

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 Communication Decision-making

who are eligible? - how is opinion expressed? - who makes the decision?

who actually participate? - how is decision made?- what capacity is required?

L - -- --- - --- - ------ ---- - ----- --

17

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

Participant Communication Decision-making

- who are eligible?- who actually participate?

- how is opinion expressed? -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.

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 government6. 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

N

Fig. 4-2 Photos of demolition of Baiwanzhuang from Weibo.com 7

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

06/28/1407/12/1407/20/1407/22/1407/23/1407/24/1412/19/1412/20/1412/22/14

12/25/14

SiBXR

BBR

BRB

B

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

te No. Age Gender Role in the project

aiwanzhuang R1 20s M Residentinanli R2 60s F Residentongze R3 50s F Residentaiwanzhuang R4 50s F Residentaiwanzhuang R5 20s F Residentongze R6 40s F Residentaiwanzhuang R7 20s M Policy makerongze R8 30s M Residentaiwanzhuang R9 20s M Security guard

aiwanzhuang R10 20s M Security guardR11 40s M Construction contractorR12 - - Community organization staffR13 - - Community organization staffR14 - - Community organization staffR15 40s M Interior decoration contractorR16 50s F ResidentR17 50s F ResidentR18 60s M ResidentR19 50s M ResidentR20 60s M ResidentR21 60s M Resident

Table 4-1 Site visit record &Table 4-2 Interviewee information

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."

"I lived 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

~~~~1

I*I

:4 I ~

~:' ~~ ~

4~)

~ ~ -~

-) I

1 1

I ~>I I L -' 10

I ~I: el

i

0 loom

Fig. 5-1 Maps of Baiwanzhuang from map.baidu.com

Fig. 5-2 3D model of Baiwanzhuang from map.baidu.com

31

4Ii

L. SN

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 tM2.

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

UnU 2 Un

Curren I~ 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, 30m2 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 earlier days. Now it's gone. So we had to fill a

washbasin with water in 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 natural gasfor cooking. 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 natural gas 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 appliances in 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 projects8. 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 constructions in the

city. But the new housing development has nothing to do with them. They can only rely on the

government. "

"Many original tenants 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 original tenants who still live

hear are 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

CentralGovernment

BeijingCity (overnment

XichengDistrict Government

ZhanlanluSubdistrict Office

West Baiwanzhuang HuangguayuanResidents' Residents'

Committee Committee

North BaiwanzhuangCommunity

Sourth BaiwanzhuangCommunity

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,

learning computer skills, and learning English. All of them arefree, superb! Some don't want to

use computer at home. They go to the RC. Fewer people attend the knitting session. I tried

learning to knit a big shawl many times butfailed. Tens of people join the singing event,

including the retired and ones that are still working. The English-learning event has over 30

participants, mostly young people. I know everyone in the events."

"There were 13 activity roomsfor residents in our office. They were demolished at the

beginnng (of the shantytown transformation project). 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 (temporarily during the

relocation and construction) still come backfor rehearsalsfor our 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 retired and 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-learning activities in North Baiwanzhuang.

Never, never attended any. I used run a corner store. 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.

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

I

Staircase Staircase

Corridor u : 4

Elevator :EljatorApartment 4 41 1* Apartment

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 cannot get everything you want."

"Good apartment, but bad location, and too little relocation compensation!"

"The living condition is certainly improved. You see the current environment 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 resdient is leasing the apartment, the construction of interior decoration only takes about

30 days. If residents are to live in the apartment themselves, it takes longer, around 40 days.

Some will even get an interior decoration 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 residents want to rent the apartments outfbr a fewyears bejbre the

surrounding facilities 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.

2 17

2011 2012 2013 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.

011 0A B

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

ICity

GoVernment

DistrictGovernment

Residents'Committce

party memberresident representatives

representatiVes

participant > information flow

Initial ideas of a housing upgradingproject of Baiwanzhuang fornwd.

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 about the demographic, and checked the housing

area. Nothing much. I lived in Building x and the housing condition is really bad.'

44

Decision Making

'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 registered on 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 contract issues 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

CityGOvrmnent

PlanningAgencies

Real EstateDerelopment

Company

) China DevelopmentBank

DistrictGoernment

SubdistrictGovernment

TemporaryTask Force

honie o ne rsi ub sr Q)original teat 49 subleasers

participant

I>; information flow

Different levels of government, plan-nin acies, the real estate compa-ny the China Development Bankdecided the details of this project: thefinancing, process, plan , imple-mentation, constrnction so on.

A certain percentage ofhomeowners and original tenants'agreement is necessary for theofficial 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

Decision Making

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 'Ordinance of Housing Levy and Compensation on State-

owned Land' and Article 7 of 'Beijing Implementation Strategies of Housing Levy and

Compensation on State-owned Land', Office of Housing Levy ofXicheng District Government,

47

together with Department of Finance, Development and Re/orm, Inspectorate, Audit,

Zhanlonlu Subdistrict Government, and The Task Force of Paiwanzhuang Housing 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 periodfor collecting 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 according to 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.

Participants and Communication Decision Making

DistrictGovernient

Task Force

home ownersioriginail tenants

participant > information flow

After getting feedback from residents,decisions on compensation standard weremade by the Housing Levy Office ofXicheng District Government and theTask Force.

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 standard to be higher, say 150,000/m2. From my 30-

year work experience, I tellyou, when the government sets the rule, nothing can change it You

want 150,000/m2? Nonsense! (Did any residents organize 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 standards are. 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."

"I did not even see the announcement of compensation policy draft, I didn't know where the

Task Force put 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 participation in planning process

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 residents participate in the planning process of in-situ housing?) "The taskforce put the

Regulatory Detailed Planning 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 already finished. But we can choose which floor or which apartment space

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

Step I

home ownersoriginal tenants

Step 21

0 0 0

Step 3

LOTTERY

III

Home onwers deliberate to choosethe ral estate evaluating company.However, deliberation did not happendue to lack of participants.

Decisions were supposed to be made byvoting. However, no enough votes werecollected. So voting as decision makingfailed at this stage.

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 hostess for that event Dozens of residents attended the event Every leaser of

the public housing or property owner can attend this event. A Subdistrict Office official was

going to host this event, but residents strongly disagree. They didn't trust him. So I had to host

the event on the spot They trust me because I am always representing their interest ... At the

deliberation stage, it was required that at least half of the leasers and property owners present

Itfailed because it's impossiblefor everyone to gather together at the same time. So we moved

to voting. Unfortunately, we only collected around 20 votes, because residents knew very little

about these asset evaluation organizations. In the end, we had to leave it to lottery. People

53

homle ownersf-rtia teat

Decision Making

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 decision-

making 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. "

(Did you 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 participate or 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 period for 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 apartment at 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 thumbprint on a guarantee, promising that I will

definitely leave my home on December 30 in order to get bonus monetary compensation of

Y200,000.

After signing the contract, I came back to my room and criedJbr a 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's big 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 original site. 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 registered in the Household Registration System

(Hukou), so Ijust got one new apartment of 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 decision for 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 original apartment has 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!iT z l/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 parents lived in one of the rooms, girls lived in the second and boys lived in the

third....My kid was also born here. My brother and 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 apartments at two relocation sites. (Most details omitted to avoid identification of

the interviewee for 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'Committee Task Force

home owners

participant ) information flow

Through intensenegotiations, contracts prepared bythe Task Force were signeaby home owners.

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.

"I signed in December. There were no toilets inside our old apartment at 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 apartment is very disappointing. The space arrangement is really bad, with corners

here and there. Every family is hiring people to adjust a little. (How bad is it?) The kitchen is in

61

Decision Making

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 Proposal Management Groups in the community. Our party member

representative group 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 cannotget in 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 area for 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 director of the

Commission of Transport visited 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.

Participants and Communication Decision Making

City Goernment

SubdistrictGovernmenlt

Residents'('01mm1ittee

home owners/oriinal tenants

ISubdistrict office helpedreport the issue to city governmentagencies that make deisions on relevantissues.

( , 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.

Participants and Communication

CityGovernment

DistrictGovernment

DistrictCourt

home owners/home owners/ original original tenants

tenants that haven't that signed andsigned contracts moved

Decision Making

The District Government decided on thecompensation and housing arrangementand notified the residents involved. TheDistrict Court has decision-making powerover administrative litigation by residents.The upper level government of DistrictGovernment makes decisions onadministrative reconsideration.

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.

F INN R iDE NT 4 1 "12IY ~ ~ 7 S IN

2 DD rt '.ALS 51NG - OL N iN

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

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

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 Demo-

Dispo 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 Demo-

Dispo 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 2014 Beijing Baiwanzhuang

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.

Irnmeor

Residnt en ues

representadts

step t

oe lwner /roriginal tenants

Step

rrjgrnal rematsr

Step 3

00 0

00

LOTTERY

hont onners!orIginal terennts

Taskorace

(ma ommiot

Resients'C('ematle

G City hina Deveopnt(kivenirient ank

home o0n0rorn tena fnts

subleasers

onovernmenOtDirictGovernment

Dtotrt(0) COMO

home oaner!? origimaltenanto that hatn't

sigired orntraAs

(origintal tetttWttthat ottored andmovedi

h~oe OrNmers,origulal tenats

Fig. 8-1 Overview of all the seven participation units in the Baiwanzhuang project

76

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

Prioritizing and balancing different 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, feG--------> ParticipationGoals

Context

Fig. 8-2 "Context-Value-Participation" model

Designing the right mechanism to meet the chosen values and goals

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 Participation Unit

<- AppropriateParticipation

Participation Unit

Participant ---- C -mn - - --n -- D - -n

-who are eligibe? - how is opinon expresso-d?who actually par1icpate?

who makes the decsion?how is decisiof made?what capacity is required?

Values,Goals

CO

0

CID

'0

Context

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 transformation projects 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 early years where the housing is so poor that the residents are easily

satisfied by living in an apartment building. The real estate market also changes the

resident's expectation. 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, especially Jbr

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 restrictions by increasing the FAR. But inner city

Beijing has a lot of height restriction (due to historical protection 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 aside from financing?) Progress and 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 introduced myself 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 culturecreeps in. Culture and public action, 2 10-23 3.

Alexander, L. T. (2009). Stakeholder Participation in New Governance: Lessons fromChicago'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 AmericanInstitute 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.International Social Science Journal, 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), 248-259.

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 andparticipatory development. World Development, 31(8), 1325-1342.

Costa, A. C., Kottak, C. P., & Prado, R. M. (1997). The sociopolitical context ofparticipatory development in Northeastern Brazil. Human Organization, 56(2), 138-146.

Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Publicadministration review, 66(sl), 66-75.

Ghai, D. P. (1988). Participatory development: some perspectives from grass-rootsexperiences. UNRISD. 2-3.

Keough, N. (1998). Participatory development principles and practice: Reflections ofa western development worker. Community developmentjournal, 33(3), 187-196.

Kothari, U., & Cooke, B. (2001). Power, knowledge and social control in participatorydevelopment. Participation: the new tyranny?, 139-152.

88

Parfitt, T. (2004). The ambiguity of participation: a qualified defence of participatorydevelopment. Third World Quarterly, 25(3), 537-555.

Platteau, J. P., & Abraham, A. (2002). Participatory development in the presence ofendogenous community imperfections. Journal of Development Studies, 39(2), 104-136.

UNDP (1997). Empowering people - a guide to participation. United NationsDevelopment Programme, Washington DC. 3.

White, S. C. (1996). Depoliticising development: the uses and abuses ofparticipation. 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