【24h】

Introduction

机译:介绍

获取原文
           

摘要

Urban China has witnessed rapid urban (re)development since the 1980s, which is featured by the forced relocation of millions of residents and large-scale demolition of old neighbourhoods, such as the old inner city neighbourhoods, danwei communities or urban villages (He et al., 2010; Liu and Wu, 2006). Compared to urban redevelopment programmes in the USA and Western Europe, the scale and numbers of affected residents and neighbourhoods demolished in China is substantial. For instance, between 2008 and 2012, about 12.6 million households were involved in the national Shantytown Redevelopment Projects (SRPs) (MOHURD, 2013), which aim to improve the living conditions of low-income residents and to stimulate the depressed housing market. Their dwellings were demolished by local governments and they were forced to move to relocation neighbourhoods established by local governments, or to purchase dwellings elsewhere within the city, assisted by monetary compensation from local governments. There is still more to come. In 2013, the central state has triggered the second round of large-scale SRPs. It was estimated that approximately 10 million households will be affected by this second round (Li et al., 2017a; The State Council of PRC, 2013). Such extensive residential redevelopment projects have resulted in tremendous social, economic and physical changes in urban areas, parallel to the emergence of massive numbers of relocatees.Compared with the sheer numbers of affected residents in China, the research on the experiences and perceptions of residents involved in forced relocation and urban redevelopment is still limited. Previous research in China often takes urban redevelopment and forced relocation as a single event and mostly targets the postrelocation situation (Day and Cervero, 2010; Fang, 2006; Gilroy, 2012; He and Liu, 2013; Hu et al., 2015). In addition, some studies and news reports have shown the conflicts and tensions between relocatees and local governments or developers from a macro-, meso- or political-economic perspective (He, 2012; Hin and Xin, 2011; Qian and He, 2012; Sichuan News, 2009; Weinstein and Ren, 2009), which gives an impression that the role of residents in redevelopment projects is always passive. On the one hand, this might reflect wider experiences, since residents in declining neighbourhoods often have limited resources and rights to influence thenbsp;redevelopment process in order to maximise their own benefits (He, 2012; Shin, 2016). On the other hand, however, this impression can lead to the ignorance of the active role that relocatees may play before and during the process of urban redevelopment and forced relocation; an active role which may be revealed by their behaviours and perceptions regarding their original neighbourhoods, the neighbourhood redevelopment and forced relocation as well as their choices during this process (Ho, 2013; Shi and Zhu, 2013).In particular, different residents with different perceptions and neighbourhood experiences can have different coping strategies, which means that a seemingly similar intervention (urban redevelopment and forced relocation) is likely to be experienced in various ways by different residents (Kleinhans, 2003; Kleinhans and Van der Laan Bouma-Doff 2008; Posthumus and Kleinhans, 2014). For instance, various forms of neighbourhood decline, such as crime, social disorder or physical environmental deterioration, often have a negative influence on residents’ perceived quality of life, which can trigger some residents to move out as shown for the United States, United Kingdom and the Netherlands (Feijten and van Ham, 2009; Livingston et al., 2010; Vale,1997). Forced relocation might be an opportunity for improvement for those who want to move in the context of redevelopment, by using the relative advantages offered by relocation compensation schemes (Kleinhans and Van der Laan Bouma-Doff, 2008). However, other residents, especially those who are deprived (e.g. with low-incomes, unemployed or age-related diseases), might feel disrupted if they are highly dependent on their neighbourhoods in various ways (e.g. closeness to job opportunities, cheap rent, and social networks) (Day and Cervero, 2010; Fried, 1963). In addition, some residents may feel increasingly ambivalent facing forced relocation as they may have both positive and negative experiences in their neighbourhoods which might make it difficult to evaluate the negative and positive influences of urban redevelopment and forced relocation before they actually relocate. Similarly, in China, the effects of forced relocation on relocatees during and after urban redevelopment projects are diverse and not necessarily negative. While several scholars have blamed large-scale property-led restructuring projects in China for causing displacement of low-income residents (Gong, 2012; He, 2012; He and Wu, 2007; La Grange and Pretorius, 2016;), other studies have demonstrated real improve
机译:自20世纪80年代以来,中国城市以来全国迅速发展,这是由数百万居民的强迫搬迁和大规模拆迁的旧社区,如旧城社区,丹威社区或城市村庄(他al。,2010;刘和吴,2006)。与美国和西欧的城市重建计划相比,受影响居民的规模和数量和在中国拆迁的社区是很大的。例如,在2008年至2012年期间,大约1260万个家庭参与了国家棚户区重建项目(SRP)(2013年),旨在改善低收入居民的生活条件并刺激抑郁的住房市场。他们的住所被地方政府拆除,他们被迫搬到地方政府建立的搬迁社区,或者在城市的其他地方购买住宅,由地方政府的货币赔偿协助。还有更多的来。 2013年,中央州已引发第二轮大规模SRP。据估计,这次第二轮的约1000万户(Li等人,2017A; 2013年国务院)。如此广泛的住宅重建项目已导致城市地区的巨大社会,经济和体质变化,与大量的雷纳西人类的出现平行,得到了中国受影响居民的纯粹数量,研究了居民的经验和看法在强制搬迁和城市重建仍然有限。以前在中国的研究通常需要城市重建和强迫搬迁作为一个事件,主要是针对PostreLocation情况(日期和Cervero,2010; Fang,2006; Gilroy,2012; He和Liu,2013; Hu等,2015)。此外,一些研究和新闻报道显示了搬迁和地方政府或政治经济视角之间的搬迁和地方政府或开发人员之间的冲突和紧张局势(2012年;欣和鑫,2011;钱及统日,2012年;四川新闻,2009年; Weinstein和Ren,2009),这给人一种印象,即居民在重建项目中的作用总是被动。一方面,这可能反映了更广泛的经历,因为居民衰落的居民往往具有有限的资源和影响ThenBSP;重建过程,以最大限度地提高自己的福利(他,2012; Shin,2016)。然而,另一方面,这种印象可能导致对城市重建和强制搬迁过程中可能发挥的积极作用的无知;可能是有关其原始社区的行为和看法可能揭示的积极作用,邻里重建和强迫搬迁以及他们在此过程中的选择(HO,2013; Shi和Zhu,2013)。在特殊的,不同的居民不同看法和邻里的经历可以具有不同的应对策略,这意味着不同居民(Kleinhans,2003; Kleinhans和Van der Laan Bouma-Doff 2008的各种方式可能会在各种方面经历Posthumus和Kleinhans,2014)。例如,各种形式的社区下降,例如犯罪,社会疾病或身体环境恶化,往往对居民的居民的生活质量产生负面影响,这可以引发一些居民,如美国,英国所示和荷兰(Feijten和2009年Feijten和Van Ham; Livingston等,2010; Vale,1997)。强迫搬迁可能是通过使用搬迁补偿计划(Kleinhans和Van der Laan Bouma-Doff,2008)所提供的相对优势在重建中移动的人提供改进的人。然而,其他居民,特别是那些被剥夺的人(例如有低收入,失业或与年龄相关的疾病)可能会扰乱,如果他们以各种方式高度依赖于其社区(例如就业机会,便宜的租金和廉价租金社交网络)(日与Cervero,2010; Fried,1963)。此外,一些居民可能会越来越矛盾地面对强迫搬迁,因为它们可能在其社区中具有积极和消极的经验,这可能使得难以评估城市重建和强迫搬迁之前的消极和积极影响力在实际重新安置之前。同样,在中国,在城市重建项目期间和之后强制搬迁对搬迁的影响是多元化的,不一定是负面的。虽然有几位学者归咎于中国的大规模物业导致的重组项目,以造成低收入居民的流离失所(Gong,2012;他,2012;他和吴,2007; La Grange和Pretorius,2016;),其他研究证明真正的改进

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号