Living Conditions of the Floating Population in Urban China

Living Conditions of the Floating Population in Urban ChinaLEIWEN JIANGWatson Institute for International Studies,Brown University,Providence,USA(Received May 2005;revised December 2005)A BSTRACT Slums and squatters are not widespread in most Chinese cities and towns even though China has been experiencing rapid urbanization.Moreover,statistics from the 2000Census reveal that migrants do not necessarily live in poorer housing conditions than non-migrants in urban areas;some housing facilities for the floating population,who moved without changes in household registration,are even better than those of local urban ing 1per cent of the household sample of the 2000Census dataset,this paper examines the living conditions and their determinants of the floating population in urban China.K EY W ORDS :Living conditions,floating population,urban ChinaMotivationCities in developing countries are frequently characterized by high rates of in-migration coupled with poverty and a widespread proliferation of slum and squatter areas (Brockerhoff &Brennan,1998;Costello,1987;Tangri,1968).According to the United Nations Population Division (2001),driven by increasing rural–urban migration and high fertility,95per cent of the world’s population growth in the next 30years will be absorbed by the urban areas of less developed regions,whose population will probably rise from approximately 2billion in 2000to just below 3.5billion in 2030.As the majority of the world population is migrating to urban areas,the locus of global poverty is also moving to the cities,a process now recognized as the urbanization of poverty.The combination of high population density amid poverty and limited resources makes for an environment that favours the rapid growth of slum areas.The UN-HABITAT (2003)predicts that if the current trend persists,the number of slum dwellers worldwide will rise over the next 30years to approximately 2billion,which accounts for about 40per cent of the total of urban residents.To significantly improve the lives of slum dwellers is one of the 18UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).Urban squatters and slumdwellersinlessdeveloped countries havebeena researchfocus for many years (Anderson,1928;Peattie &Aldret-Haas,1981;Portes,1972;Ulack,1976,1978).ISSN 0267-3037Print/1466-1810Online/06/050719–26q 2006Taylor &Francis DOI:10.1080/02673030600807431Correspondence Address:Jiang Leiwen,Watson Institute for International Studies,Brown University,Box 1970,Providence,RI 02912-1970,USA.Email:Leiwen_Jiang@Housing Studies,Vol.21,No.5,719–744,September2006720L.JiangSome scholars observe that squatter settlements remain the predominantfirst destination for rural–urban migrants( Greca,1977;Richardson,1977),while others argue that movingintoa slumis a rational choicefor those migrants(e.g.Portes,1972;Ulack1976).From the negative perspective,the newcomers to the city are mostly unskilled and untrained,and have difficulty gaining steady employment and income.As a result,many of the migrants congregate in squatter communities,preserving their regional prejudices and customs(Davis, 1975).On the other hand,slums are positively regarded as communities that provide a necessary adjustment for the newcomers to the city milieu(Abu-Lughod,1961).To the majority of the observers,slum communities are essentially an unavoidable consequence of migration toward the cities in the less developed world.Based on those studies,two assumptions can be made about the relationship between rural–urban migration and the expansion of urban slums and squatters in the less developed countries:(1)slums and squatters are the consequence of rapid rural–urban migration;the higher the migration rate,the faster expanding the slum and squatter population;(2)since the rural–urban migrants are most likely to move into slum and squatter communities,the living conditions of the migrants are substantively worse than those of the native urban residents.These two assumptions have actually been testified by many authors,and become the premises for the study of urbanization and migration in the developing regions.However,there are a few studies that do not support these generalizations.For example,a comparative study of housing quality between the migrants and native residents in Manila shows that the migrants do not disproportionately contribute to nor suffer from the problems of slums associated with urbanization(Hendershot,1978). Another study in a medium Philippine city,Cagayan de Oro,suggests that migrants are neither heavily settled nor segregated in the slum community(Costello,1987). However,thefindings from the Philippine cities were regarded as special cases due to either the unique characteristics of the migrants or the problem of biased samples. For instance,the housing pattern of the migrants in Cagayan de Oro City was chiefly attributed to its heavy rates of migration by young unmarried females,who mostly resided in non-slum neighbourhoods as servants,lodgers or extended relatives of the native urban residents(Costello,1987).The conclusions of the Manila study were limited by the problems of the validity of the quantitative measures of housing quality, and the representative of the sample used(Hendershot,1978).Nevertheless,these case studies reveal that the predominant proposition that rural–urban migrants disproportio-nately contribute to and suffer from the housing difficulties in the slums is questionable under certain conditions.Recent studies on the housing conditions of rural–urban migrants in China also give various results.While some authors indicate that housing inequality in urban China is expanding(e.g.Logan et al.,1999),and many migrants are segregated in and suffer from poor living conditions(e.g.Huang,2003;Ma&Xiang,1998),others argue that the informal settlements are not a viable option for the migrants since municipal authorities are intolerant of migrant congregation and squatting in China(Wu,2002;Wu&Wang,2002).However, all of the above-mentioned studies are based on data from sample surveys in one or several Chinese cities.Therefore,thefindings of these studies are limited and cannot draw any broad conclusions for the country as a whole.Moreover,the most recent statistics from the China2000Census shows that the housing conditions of migrants vary significantly from region to region(Zhai&Zhang,2003),and thefloating population does not necessarily live in poorer housing conditions than the local non-migrants(Jiang&Pang,2003).Living Conditions of the Floating Population in Urban China721 Therefore,this study is designed to study the housing conditions of rural–urban migrants in China and to answer two main questions(1)In contrast to local urban residents,are Chinese rural–urban migrants more likely to live in slums?(2)What are the major driving forces affecting the living conditions of those migrants?To answer those questions,China’s social and political settings that affect Chinese people in making migration decisions and housing choices should be taken into account.A number of studies show that the housing choice in urban China represents a remarkably different pattern from those in other developing countries,where market force plays a major role(Huang,2003).The migration decisions and housing choices of Chinese people,to a great extent,are determined by the strong regulations of urbanization policies and the transition state of urban housing reform.Under the unique household registration(or hukou)system,1each individual in the Chinese population is classified as having an agricultural(rural)or a non-agricultural(urban)household status. The system embodies a sharp differentiation of rights and privileges,and stringent conditions for converting from rural to urban status(Wu&Treiman,2003).According to their hukou status,migrants in China can be categorized in‘permanent’or ‘temporary’groups.While the permanent migrants in the urban areas holding an urban hukou are officially approved to move due to job assignment,marriage or other family reasons,the rural–urban migrants are mostly defined as temporary migrants orfloating population,whose changes in residence are officially regarded as temporary even if they are not in reality.While China is still trying to transform the old welfare housing allocation system into a market-oriented housing system in the urban areas,housing choices of thefloating population are very limited.Given that most of thefloating population in urban China consists of rural–urban migrants,this paper mainly focuses on the living conditions of thefloating population and their determinants,in contrast to that of the urban permanent migrants and non-migrants. The next section will briefly discuss the urbanization and housing reform of urban China in the past two decades.It is followed by a descriptive analysis of the living conditions of the floating population,compared with local urban residents and permanent migrants.A logistical regression analysis was conducted to study the major determinants of the living conditions of different groups of urban population.A brief conclusion and discussion is included in thefinal section.Urbanization,Housing Reform and the Floating Population in Urban China Urbanization and the Floating PopulationIn the past two decades,the surge in thefloating population in China has been closely associated with the changes of urbanization policies.At the end of the1970s and the early 1980s,the priority of urbanization was given to the development of rural township and village industries in order to absorb rural surplus labour in situ and avoid the urban problems caused by rapid rural–urban migration.In the mid-1980s,as the criteria for urban designation was adjusted in order to absorb rural surplus labour(Zhang&Zhao, 1998),a rapid proliferation of designated cities and towns and urban population was observed,while rural–urban migrants increased significantly(Li&Li,1996).Since the 1990s,urbanization has been accelerated by the urban economic reforms and the development of a market-oriented economy,leading to aflood of migrants into the urbanareas.This increasing spatial movement is often referred to as the ‘floating population’boom.The 2000Census reported that more than 11per cent of the Chinese population had left their place of household registration for more than six months.2Among the total floating population,71per cent of whom resided in the urban areas,41.4per cent had lived in their current place for at least five years.Among the floating population who had arrived within the past five years,about 50per cent had moved from rural to urban areas,31per cent moved between urban towns,16per cent moved between rural areas,and only 3.5per cent moved from urban to rural areas.In the past two decades,the proportion of urban population increased from 17.5per cent in 1978,to 36.6per cent in 2000,and to 39.9per cent in 2002(Figure 1).The government plans for this proportion to reach 45per cent in 2010,50per cent in 2020and about 70per cent in 2050(Qiu,2003).The newly published China Urban Development Report (China Mayor Association,2004)stresses the importance of mega-cities and suggests promoting the development of agglomerations.It is predicted that,as China accelerates its urbanization process,the influx of the floating population to the urban areas will continuously increase in the coming decades.As the floating population is excluded from the social welfare system designated for the local urban residents,their choices of employment,education,housing,etc.,are considerably limited.Although the Chinese government is gradually reforming the hukou system and aims to eventually remove it,resistance against this reform is still strong.Therefore,the hukou system will remain active for substantial period of time and continues to affect migration,housing choices and other decisions of the Chinese.Urban Housing ReformIn the early 1980s,China embarked on an ambitious urban housing reform process,through privatization and marketization,to solve the problem of severe housingshortage,1978198219861990199419982002200620102014201820222026203020342038204220462050Figure 1.Proportion of urban population in China,1978–2050.Source:1978–2002from Xinhua Data on Line.Available online at /xhol/xh_pwd.asp;2002–2050fromQiu (2003).722L.JiangLiving Conditions of the Floating Population in Urban China723 enhance people’s standard of living and prompt economic growth.There are already several review papers in English providing a good introduction to this process of urban housing reform(e.g.Tolley,1991;Tong&Hays,1996;Wang,2000,2001;Zhou& Logan,1996).However,it is noteworthy that the urban housing reform chronologically involves several specific steps:(1)Encourage the sitting tenants to purchase their occupied public housing atsubsidized prices.(2)Allow the suburban agricultural population and urban residents to constructhousing in the urban periphery where land is available.(3)Promote commercial housing construction,targeting the high-incomehouseholds.(4)Support affordable and comfortable housing projects for the needs of low andmedium-income households.(5)Provide subsidized municipal public housing for the lowest-income urbanhouseholds.(6)Lift the restrictions on the previous public housing purchased by the sittingtenant,and foster a regulated secondary housing market.Rapid economic development and housing reform has enabled China to achieve great success in housing construction.The newly completed housing space in urban areas in the period from1980–2000grew to more than4.6billion m2.The living space per urban resident increased from less than3.6m2in1978to approximately10m2in2000,while the rate of homeownership among urban residents has significantly increased from less than 20per cent in the early1980s to approximately73per cent(72per cent for the city,and 78per cent for the town)in2000.However,the urban housing system reform did not take into account the welfare of the floating population.Being limited by the hukou system,thefloating population theoretically has no access to public housing,affordable and comfortable housing or the land for housing construction.The only housing opportunities for thefloating population are to purchase commercial housing in the market or to rent private housing.Many cities encourage thefloating population to purchase commercial housing as a means of attracting investment,while mortgages are normally not available to thefloating population.Members of thefloating population who have bought commercial housing in the cities often obtain a blue stamp hukou status,which provides the holders with partial access to basic social welfare in the cities where they live.However,this policy only favours high-income individuals and is far beyond the reach of most of thefloating population.In fact,many of thefloating population regard their presence in the cities as temporary,and try to reduce their living costs and save for a return to their home villages in the future.Renting and sharing housing in the suburban rural areas where the rate is relatively low is one of their important housing choices.As a result,some suburban villages have experienced an influx offloating population,forming the so-called‘migrant enclaves’(Ma&Xiang,1998).Encountering the segregated employment market and limited housing access,thefloating population is generally at a disadvantage in housing choices.This situation significantly affects their living condition,which is analysed in the next sections.724L.JiangData and MeasurementDataData used for this study are mainly the0.95per cent sample dataset of the long form of the China2000Census.For thefirst time,the2000Census collected information on housing conditions in family households.A random sample of10per cent of the total households was selected tofill out the long form,while the other90per cent answered the questions in the short form.In addition to the questions on general demographic information,the selected10per cent of households were asked to provide detailed information on their housing situations.However,the2000Census did not provide housing information for those who lived in collective households,and did not count those who had left their place of household registration for less than half a year as migrants.Therefore,these data make it possible to cover all types of households.As a supplement to the Census data,the dataset from the1997Beijing Floating Population Census was adopted,which interviewed all the floating population(of both private and collective households)who had lived in Beijing for at least three days.This provided a reference for the study of the housing of thefloating population in collective households and thefloating population of family households who had stayed in one place for less than six months.Measurement of Housing ConditionsWhile housing conditions may be defined according to the nature of housing availability, affordability and qualitative aspects of the neighbourhood environment(Lawrence,1995), choice of the indicators is often context-dependent and varies over time(Wu,2002). Moreover,use of the housing indicators is often affected by data availability.For example, to measure the prevalence of slums in developing countries,the UN-HABITAT(2003) adoptedfive indicators in its statistical report:(1)access to improved water;(2)improved sanitation;(3)sufficient living space;(4)improved durable housing;and(5)secure tenure. According to UN-HABITAT,a slum is defined as a group of individuals living under the same roof lacking one or more of thefive conditions.However,data for the latter three indicators are not available for most of the countries.3A few studies on the housing conditions of China’s urban population(e.g.Logan et al.,1999;Wu,2002)construct a qualitative index of housing quality using several variables,including availability of water,bathrooms,kitchen,fuel,etc.In the current study,four indicators are considered when measuring housing conditions: tenure,crowding,privacy and facilities..For housing tenure,in addition to the status of owner or renter,the sources of housing are also compared(self-built,public or private housing,affordable and comfortable housing and commercial housing)and the cost of purchasing, constructing or renting..To measure crowding,per capita rooms and building areas are considered,as wellas the housing structure(bungalow,2–6storeys,or7þstoreys)..The index of privacy is constructed by summing two variables:sharing housingwith other households(0¼sharing;1¼none),and the function of the dwelling(0¼residential as well as working or other purpose;1¼residential only).The value of the privacy index ranges potentially from0to2.Living Conditions of the Floating Population in Urban China725 .To construct the facility index,six variables are used:tap water(1¼none;5¼yes),bathroom(1¼none;2¼shared other type;3¼sharedflushing;4¼private other type;5¼privateflushing),kitchen(1¼none;2.5¼shared;5¼private),bath or shower(1¼none;2¼other;3¼public hot water supply;4¼private water heater),building materials(1¼other;2¼grass,bamboo,or wood;3¼brick or stone;4¼concrete),cooking fuel(1¼biomass and other;2¼coal;4¼electricity or gas).Thefirst three variables represent the basic conditions of the housing,and therefore are given slightly heavier weighting thanthe latter three.The values of the six variables are summed to construct a comprehensive facility index that ranges potentially from6to27.It was not possible to derive the other important indicator,‘neighbourhood environment’, from the datasets due to lack of information.Therefore,the hypothesis that thefloating population spatially congregates in slum areas is not directly tested in this research. However,the physical neighbourhood environment is often closely related to its housing facilities.For testing the assumption of slum incidence,the definition of slum developed by the UN-HABITAT(2003)is adopted and people living without access to tap water or bathrooms are regarded as slum dwellers.Moreover,according to UN-HABITAT,it is necessary to make the distinction between slums and shanties.While slums describe residential buildings that lack essential services or old housing that has deteriorated, shanties refer to spontaneous settlements in outskirts and undeveloped areas of the city. Given that spontaneously occupied land for housing is not tolerated by the Chinese government,shanties are not common in urban China.Comparison of Living ConditionsAccording to hukou and migration status,the Chinese urban population in the2000Census can be divided into three groups:local urban residents,permanent migrants andfloating population.Floating population is defined as those who have left their place of household registration for more than half a year at the time of interview(1November2000);a permanent migrant is an individual who has moved to a place with official change of household registration within the pastfive years,while a local urban resident refers to those who have stayed at their place of household registration for at leastfive years. Comparing the housing of thefloating population and permanent migrants with that of the local residents,it would help to understand the impact of migration on living conditions; comparing the housing of thefloating population with that of the local residents and permanent migrants,it could provide evidence on the impact of hukou status on living condition.Statistical analysis of the2000Census dataset shows that of the total urban population, 68.1per cent were local residents,7.3per cent were permanent migrants and24.6per cent made up thefloating population.Among thefloating population,54per cent held an agricultural hukou,while the other46per cent had a non-agricultural one.About 40per cent of thefloating population had lived in one place for at leastfive years.Of the floating population arriving within the lastfive years,61per cent originated from rural areas,while39per cent moved in from other urban towns.Therefore,economic reform and development of market economy in the past two decades had already generated a large726L.Jiangproportion of thefloating population in urban China.Moreover,the characteristics of the floating population had become remarkably diversified.Housing Types in Collective HouseholdsAccording to the2000Census,of the total urban population92.3per cent lived in family households and7.7per cent lived in collective households.While the proportion of collective households among urban local residents was very small(0.6per cent), 28.8per cent of permanent migrants and21.3per cent of thefloating population lived in collective households.That permanent migrants had the highest propensity for living in collective households was mainly because many permanent migrants were young college students or new graduates.Ninety-four per cent of permanent migrants living in collective households were15to24years old.College students and graduates are normally accommodated in dorms by the colleges or work units,and accordingly registered as collective household members.In general,the dorms provided for the permanent migrants are adequately facilitated,although tenants of those dorms usually have to share bathrooms,eat in cafeterias and take showers at public baths.However,the housing conditions of collective households of thefloating population were generally not as good as those of permanent migrants.Since there is no housing information on collective households in the2000Census,the dataset of the1997Beijing Floating Population Census is used to obtain general information on housing conditions for thefloating population living in collective households.According to the Beijing1997survey,of the2.3million of thefloating population interviewed,97.7per cent had stayed in Beijing for at least a month,72per cent had stayed for longer than a half-year,53per cent had stayed for more than a year,and12per cent had stayed for longer thanfive years(Figure2).The differences in the definition offloating population in the Beijing survey and in the2000Census should be noted.All migrants who had stayed in Beijing for more than three days were counted in the Beijing Survey,while only migrants who had left their place of household registration for at least six months were regarded asfloating population in the2000Census.Therefore,only12per cent of thefloating population had remained in Beijing for more thanfive years,compared to 38.7per cent for the whole country reflected in the2000Census.Moreover,57per cent of thefloating population in Beijing stayed in collective households,which also reflects theirstay.relatively short duration ofThe survey provides information on where the floating population lived.Statistical analysis shows that 26.4per cent of the floating population lived in work unit dormitories,28.4per cent rented private housing,12.8per cent rented work unit housing,and about 20per cent lived at their site of pared with those living in family households,the floating population of collective households was much more likely to live in their work unit dorms (42per cent)or just on their work sites (about 30per cent)(see Table 1).Although no further information on the housing conditions of these living arrangements is provided,according to some studies (e.g.Wu,2002;Jiang &Kuijsten,2003;Wang,2000),the housing facilities of work-unit dorms of the floating population is generally poorer than that of the permanent migrants.In particular,the on-site living constitutes the worst conditions.Therefore,it is safe to conclude that the living conditions of the floating population in collective households is usually worse than for those living in family households.The next sections of the study focus on the housing of the urban population living in family households only.Housing TenureAccording to the 2000Census,the homeownership rate in urban China had reached approximately 73per cent;if those living in collective households are excluded,the homeownership for family households was even as high as 78per cent (Table 2),which is higher than in most developed countries.Analysis on the source of housing shows that self-construction was the predominant method for urban residents to achieve homeownership (accounting for 41per cent).Purchased public housing (23per cent)was next,and then rented public housing (12per cent).Although the government had been trying to enhance the housing market,purchasing or renting commercial housing was not common (together they account for less than 14per cent),and purchased affordable and comfortable housing,which could be regarded as a semi-market housing type,accounts for only approximately 6per cent.It is apparent that at this time housing reform in China was still at an early stage.Table 1.Housing types for floating population in Beijing,1997(%)Housing typesHousehold with migrantsMigrant-only householdCollective household Total Rented peasant housing2.132.9 4.414.2Rented urban resident housing 2.532.4 4.914.4Rented working unit housing3.814.512.912.8Self-built10.5 3.5 2.2 3.3Purchased housing 3.1 1.20.10.7Work-unit dormitory 10.5 5.441.226.4Work place 0.7 6.514.010.3Work plant0.815.79.3Employer’s housing 17.10.8 1.7 2.6Relative’s housing 49.2 1.50.1 4.3Hotel 0.10.3 2.2 1.4Hospital 0.00.40.2Other 0.40.10.10.1Total100.0100.0100.0100.0Among total floating population7.635.057.4100.0Living Conditions of the Floating Population in Urban China727Living Conditions of the Floating Population in Urban China729 Compared with local residents and permanent migrants,thefloating population had a lower homeownership rate,which was not unexpected.Table1indicates that thefloating population was more likely to rent housing(36.5per cent)than permanent residents (19.6per cent for permanent migrants and11.9per cent for local residents).However,the source of housing among thefloating population was much more diversified than expected.Theoretically,public housing and affordable and comfortable housing is not accessible to thefloating population.Although they had a relatively high proportion of renting or purchasing commercial housing,many of thefloating population also rented public housing(17.8per cent),purchased public housing(17.4per cent)and affordable and comfortable housing(6.6per cent).It could be argued that thefloating population themselves did not own or rent the public or affordable and comfortable housing,but might have lived with permanent residents who qualified for those types of housing.Therefore,the study further examines the housing of three groups of thefloating population according to the hukou status of householders.They are thefloating population living in households headed by(1)a local resident;(2)a permanent migrant;and(3)a member of thefloating population.Since members of the floating population were very unlikely to head households with permanent residents, the study considers a household headed by a member of thefloating population as a pure floating population household.The analyses show that the distribution of sources of housing for the purefloating population households did not differ much from that of the totalfloating population households(see Table2).In practice,many of thefloating population worked for and were accommodated by state-owned enterprises(SOEs).Some of the SOEs sold public housing to the sitting tenants of thefloating population.In some cities or towns,thefloating population rented old public housing from the municipality housing bureaus.Although the affordable and comfortable housing projects aimed to help urban permanent residents with low and middle incomes,some developers,driven by economic interests,helped thefloating population purchase their properties.Moreover, many local residents moved to newly purchased commercial housing and rented out the old public housing to thefloating population,even though renting out public housing by individual households had not yet been officially approved in many places.To purchase or rent housing,thefloating population usually had to pay substantively higher prices than the permanent residents.For rented housing,less than one-third of the floating population in2000paid low rent(less than50yuan)(Table2),while about two-thirds of local residents and more than half of permanent migrants did so.For purchased or constructed housing,the cost was also higher among thefloating population than the local residents,while permanent migrants spent the most.Although the cost of renting or purchasing housing is normally related to housing quality,thefloating population usually had no access to the subsidies given to permanent residents,and almost always had to pay extra administrative fees.Housing ConditionsIn general,the analysis shows that although their homeownership rate was relatively higher,the quality of housing for the Chinese urban population in2000was still much poorer than that of their counterparts in most developed countries.For example, more than half of Chinese urban households had no shower or bath facility,40per cent had no access to clean cooking fuel,about25per cent had no bathroom,and。