The downside of marketization: A multilevel analysis of housing tenure and types in reform-era urban China

Abstract

Based on data from the 2005 National Population Sample Survey and compiled covariates of 205 prefectures, this research adopted principal-component and multilevel-logistic analyses to study homeownership in urban China. Although the housing reform has severed the link between work units and residence, working in state sectors (government, state-owned enterprises and collective firms) remained significant in determining a household’s entitlement to reform-era housing with heavy subsidies or better qualities. While the prefecture-level index of marketization reduced local homeownership of self-built housing, affordable housing and privatized housing, its effect is moderated by cross-level interactions with income, education and working in state sectors across different types of housing. Meanwhile, the index of political and market connections promoted all types of homeownership except for self-built housing. By situating the downside of marketization within a context of urban transformation, this research not only challenges the teleological premise of the neoliberal market transition theory but calls for research on institutional dynamics and social consequences of urban transformation in China.

Intergenerational housing asset transfer and the reproduction of housing inequality in urban China

“…Consequently, they had a higher rate of home ownership, more housing assets and total household wealth after the reform. Fu et al (2015) used the 2005 National Population Sample Survey and obtained similar conclusions.…”

“…Li (2002) highlighted the inequality of China's housing reform policies and proposed that the biggest beneficiaries would be those with higher socioeconomic status in the previous, redistributive system. This perspective has gained wide empirical support from later studies (Fu et al, 2015;Logan et al, 2010;Walder and He, 2014). Using the 2000 Chinese Census data, Logan et al (2010) found that those who were favoured in the previous socialist housing allocation system (i.e.…”

The Socioeconomic, Demographic, and Political Effects of Housing in Comparative Perspective

“…Studies of former Soviet republics and East Europe are beginning to explore the consequences of mass housing privatization (Dimova & Wolf 2008, Lux et al 2013, Zavisca 2012), but there is much opportunity for future work on these countries. A burgeoning literature on China focuses on documenting the complex forms of housing tenure that have emerged as a result of reforms, the consequences for stratification in Chinese society, and the potential political repercussions of increasing homeownership (Fu et al 2015, Huang & Clark 2002, Huang & Jiang 2009, Li & Li 2006, Logan et al 2010, Walder & He 2014; Yang 2006). …”

Spatial equity in accessing secondary education: Evidence from a gravity‐based model

“…More specifically, the six factors consider the socio‐economic composition of a neighbourhood's population regarding their residence status (local vs. migrant); household registration status (urban vs. rural); education attainment (high, medium, or low); housing tenure (purchased commodity housing, purchased reform housing, self‐built housing, or rental housing); occupation (farmer, industrial worker, public sector employee, or entrepreneur); and income source (salary, retirement pension, minimum livelihood security, and/or financial income). Interested readers may refer to Fu et al () and Fu () for definitions of types of housing and occupations.…”