Speaker
Description
Following four decades of reform, China has lifted millions out of poverty. However, the social costs of the country’s growth-oriented agenda have long been scrutinised, with phenomena such as rapid urbanisation being one of the most transformative forces in this process. Under the umbrella of urban regeneration and quality of life improvements, state-led projects have been criticised for their neoliberal focus on capital accumulation through urban redevelopment, often characterised by selective physical upgrading, large-scale demolitions, forced relocations, and the socio-spatial marginalisation of vulnerable communities (He & Wu 2007). In response, recent policy and paradigm shifts such as the 2014-2020 National New-Type Urbanisation Plan started pointing towards an increased governmental interest in addressing some of the shortcomings of the past and promoting new visions for sustainable urbanisation rooted in the need to develop “people-oriented, ecologically livable, fair and just, inclusive and harmonious environments” (State Council 2014). Yet, complex structural mechanisms and institutional barriers in the Chinese context may mean that despite recent efforts to integrate practices focused on community wellbeing and quality of life, shortcomings remain. Such considerations call for a more nuanced reflection on issues of wellbeing, urban development, and urban regeneration in China.
Against this backdrop, this research examines whether shifting policy, paradigm and practitioner understandings of community wellbeing are being materialised into new urban regeneration solutions in Chinese cities. More specifically, the study focuses on the context of Shanghai, one of cities spearheading urban policy and practice experimentation and innovation efforts in China (Zhang, LeGates & Zhao 2016). In its latest Master Plan, Shanghai articulated, amongst other ambitions, a call for advancing public participation and “organic regeneration”, described as the incremental revitalisation of older residential areas with the purpose of improving living conditions and facilities (Shanghai Urban Planning and Land Administration Bureau 2018).
Drawing from policy reviews, interviews with key urban regeneration practitioners, and field observations of ongoing regeneration projects conducted in Shanghai in the period 2018-2020, the study aims to:
a) Reveal urban practitioners’ understanding of wellbeing, based on their operating within a specific disciplinary background, system of values, agendas and institutional positions;
b) Critically examine how wellbeing in urban regeneration is planned for and negotiated at local level, and how this is materialised into practice;
c) Understand what processes and outcomes of current urban regeneration projects in Shanghai reveal about the state of innovation in urban projects, at present.
The study reveals that weigengxin, or 'micro-scale urban regeneration', has become a key approach for transforming inner-city, dilapidated neighbourhoods in Shanghai, a strategy focusing on affordable, place-specific interventions that prioritise in-situ upgrade, forms of public participation, and community building. Examples include incremental housing upgrades and the improvement and/or creation of public spaces and facilities such as community gardens and elder care centers, as well as incremental housing upgrades – interventions aimed at addressing some of the needs of vulnerable groups such as elderly and low-income populations. In that sense, the research highlights an understanding of wellbeing in urban regeneration extending beyond physical improvements to include, instead, investments in people, with projects often integrating education agendas on health and environmental sustainability, as well as well as efforts to promote new forms of grassroots governance amongst residents.
The study also reflects on the pivotal role of community planners during planning, design and implementation phases, a relatively new professional role in China represented by practitioners affiliated with academia. Serving as mediators between district and local governments, and communities, community planners’ unique position places them at the crossroads between efforts to maintain existing power dynamics and business-as-usual practices, while also experimenting with new regeneration solutions and governance mechanisms.
References
He, S., & Wu, F. (2007). Socio-spatial impacts of property-led redevelopment on China’s urban neighbourhoods. Cities, 24(3), 194–208.
Shanghai Urban Planning and Land Administration Bureau (2018). Shanghai Master Plan 2017-2035. Available at: https://www.shanghai.gov.cn/newshanghai/xxgkfj/2035004.pdf
State Council of the People's Republic of China (2014). New urbanization plan, 2014–2020, Available at: http://politics.people.com.cn/n/2014/0317/c1001-24649809.html.
Zhang, L., LeGates, R. and Zhao, M. (2016). Understanding China’s Urbanisation. The Great Demographic, Spatial, Economic and Social Transformation, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
| Keywords | wellbeing; China new urban agenda; urban regeneration in Shanghai |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
