- Email: [email protected]
Residential satisfaction of migrants in Wenzhou, an ‘ordinary city’ of China
Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Habitat International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint
Residential satisfaction of migrants in Wenzhou, an ‘ordinary city’ of China Sainan Lin 1, Zhigang Li*, 1 School of Urban Design, Wuhan University, Hubei Provincial Engineering Research Center of Human Settlements, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 12 February 2017 Received in revised form 28 April 2017 Accepted 16 May 2017
Residential satisfaction is one of the main topics of recent urban studies, yet most focus on a relatively small group of cities, particularly megacities. This paper uses Wenzhou, China, as a case study to deepen our understanding of residential satisfaction in an ‘ordinary city’. Based on a survey of 435 migrants and 20 in-depth interviews in Shuangyu, Wenzhou, this study finds that most migrants are dissatisfied with the current housing conditions. Migrants who live in urban villages are more dissatisfied than those who live in factory dormitories. The factors that influence migrants' residential satisfaction in different housing types are also different. Moreover, marital status, education, income, length of residence, employment status, and housing facilities significantly affect residential satisfaction. Institutional factors and selected housing variables that are usually found to be important to residential satisfaction are not significant for migrants in Wenzhou. In contrast with other research conducted in megacities that emphasizes the importance of social attachment, we find that providing better facilities is likely the most effective way to improve residential satisfaction for migrants in Wenzhou. © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Residential satisfaction Migrants Housing Ordinary city Chinese cities
1. Introduction Residential satisfaction is one of the main topics that concern scholars in urban studies, yet most studies cover a relatively small group of cities, including Beijing, Guangzhou, and Shanghai (Fang, 2006; S.; Li & Song, 2009; Z.; Li & Wu, 2013; C.; Zhang & Lu, 2016). This paper follows the view of postmodernist urban studies that all cities are ‘ordinary cities’ in the sense that each is distinct in its own way, and that furthermore, the extant studies that emphasize global metropolises should take a broader perspective (Amin & Graham, 1997; Robinson, 2002, 2008; Roy, 2009). Moreover, residential satisfaction research has rarely been carried out from the perspective of migrants (Z. Li & Wu, 2013; Tao, Wong, & Hui, 2014). The process of massive migration is changing Chinese cities in unprecedented ways (Chan, 2011; Fan, 2008; Z. Li & Liu, 2011; S. Lin & Gaubatz, 2016; Ye Liu, Li, Liu, & Chen, 2014). At the end of 2015, there were 247 million temporary migrants in cities, accounting for 18 percent of China's total population (NHFPC, 2014). Housing these migrants in the city is one of the major
* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S. Lin), [email protected] (Z. Li). 1 Address: No.299 Bayi Road, Wuchang District, School of Urban Design, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China, 430072. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.05.004 0197-3975/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
concerns of the Chinese government. This paper presents a case study of Wenzhou, an ‘ordinary city’ on China's southeast coast, to reveal migrants' housing and living environment, to evaluate their residential satisfaction with different housing sources, and to provide suggestions to policy-makers. It emphasizes the importance of the experience of less prominent cities, which may differ from that of megacities. It also increases the knowledge of residential satisfaction by considering the special characteristics of China's migrants. Wenzhou is a typical case by which to examine the issue of migrant residential segregation in general and in China in particular. Among the 14 coastal cities that opened to foreign investments in 1984, and for the first time in post-reform China, Wenzhou is situated in the southwest corner of Zhejiang Province (Zhou, 1984). Wenzhou has experienced rapid development and is often taken as a model2 to examine reform-era China's rising privatization and entrepreneurship (Hu, 1987; A. P. L. Liu, 1992; Nolan & Dong, 1989;
2 The Wenzhou model, along with the Sunan model and the Pearl River Delta model, was used as an economic development model at the beginning of China's reform era. The Sunan model attributes the development of Sunan (Southern Jiangsu) to local state-directed townships and village enterprises (TVEs). The Pearl River Delta model refers to the foreign direct investment (FDI) development, due to its proximity to Hong Kong and Macau. For details, see Ye and Wei (2005).
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
Wei, 2007, 2011). Economic take-off has brought Wenzhou a great number of migrants, who make up about 36 percent of Wenzhou's total population and constitute a majority in several districts (S. Lin & Gaubatz, 2015). Based on a survey of 435 migrants and 20 indepth interviews in Wenzhou from 2012 to 2014, this paper aims to examine the residential satisfaction of migrants in Wenzhou and identify the determinants that influence their residential satisfaction. Moreover, the current research on migrants' residential satisfaction has focused mainly on the residential satisfaction of migrants who live in urban villages (Du & Li, 2010; Z.; Li & Wu, 2013). Little attention has been given to the residential satisfaction of migrants with different housing sources. This paper attempts to fill this gap by comparing the residential satisfaction of migrants who live in urban villages and migrants who live in employer-provided dormitories. By identifying different factors that may influence migrants with different types of housing, we express the idea that the residential satisfaction of migrants with different housing sources should be improved in different ways. The remainder of this paper is structured as followings: the first part is a literature review on residential satisfaction and the current migrant housing condition in Chinese cities. The second part introduces the survey of migrant settlements in Wenzhou and summarizes the socioeconomic status, transitional characteristics, and housing characteristics of the migrants surveyed. The final part examines the residential satisfaction of migrants overall and the residential satisfaction of migrants in different housing types by running linear regression in SPSS software. It concludes by explaining the factors affecting residential satisfaction and presenting policy implications. 2. Literature review 2.1. Residential satisfaction across different contexts Residential satisfaction is an important topic in the field of urrigo & Aragone s, 1990; Barreira, Agapito, ban studies (Ame Panagopoulos, & Guimar~ aes, 2016; Dekker, de Vos, Musterd, & van Kempen, 2011; Herfert, Neugebauer, & Smigiel, 2013). Empirical studies have identified a number of important determinants that influence residential satisfaction. In general, these determinants can be grouped into three categories (Z. Li & Wu, 2013). First, the respondents’ residential satisfaction may be affected by their socioeconomic status, such as their age, education, gender, marital status, race, and income. For example, respondents with higher income tend to be more satisfied with their residence (Chen, Zhang, Yang, & Yu, 2013). A second set of determinants related to residential satisfaction is housing characteristics, such as housing size, housing location, housing tenure, housing cost, and physical conditions. Positive housing characteristics, including larger size and better housing facilities, have been found to be important for improved residential satisfaction (Chen et al., 2013; Mohit, Ibrahim, & Rashid, 2010). Third, neighborhood characteristics may also affect residential satisfaction. For instance, Parkes, Kearns, and Atkinson (2002) found that neighborhood factors, especially the location and condition of the neighborhood, are much more important in predicting residential dissatisfaction than socio-demographic factors. In recent years a growing number of residential satisfaction studies have been carried out in China (Fang, 2006; Huang & Du, 2015; S Li & Song, 2009; C.; Zhang & Lu, 2016). The methods of examining residential satisfaction can be divided into two categories. Some studies consider residential satisfaction as a criterion in evaluating residential quality (Huang & Du, 2015; Z.; Li & Wu, 2013; C.; Zhang & Lu, 2016). The aim of these studies is to find the major factors that determine the degree of residential
77
satisfaction, and then make suggestions to help improve residential quality. Other studies consider residential satisfaction as a predictor of behavior, finding a link between residential satisfaction and residential mobility. Examining the original residents' residential satisfaction in the redeveloped inner-city neighborhoods of Beijing, Fang (2006) suggests that low residential satisfaction does not lead to higher frequencies of relocation. By contrast, in the study of three different neighborhoods in Guangzhou, He and Qi (2014) found that residential satisfaction was an important factor influencing residents’ intention to move. The above two cases indicate that different local contexts matter to the dynamic relations between residential satisfaction and intention to move. Although the existing empirical studies on residential satisfaction in Chinese cities provide rich insights, little research has been carried out on the residential satisfaction of migrants. However, the massive ratio of rural to urban migrants plays a significant role in China's urban development (Chan, 2011; Fan, 2008; Z. Li & Liu, 2011; S. Lin & Gaubatz, 2016; Ye Liu et al., 2014). How to ‘urbanize’ or integrate these rural migrants into the cities has become the major goal of China's urbanization plan (according to China's National New-Type Urbanization Plan [2014e2020]). Understanding and improving the residential satisfaction of migrants is also important for realizing the national government's goal of building a ‘harmonious society’ (Z. Li & Wu, 2013). However, migrants, a relatively disadvantaged group, find it difficult to solve housing problems and improve residential satisfaction by themselves-their voices have rarely been heard. Until recently, there have been very few studies on migrants' residential satisfaction in China. On the basis of a housing survey in Guangzhou, Du and Li (2010) suggested that residents' subjective perception of neighborhood quality is the most significant factor in community satisfaction, while none of the social-demographic factors are related to residential satisfaction. Z. Li and Wu (2013) examined and compared the residential satisfaction of informal settlements in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou. Their results showed that social attachment within the community is much more important to residential satisfaction than basic facilities or most socioeconomic attributes. Based on a survey in Shenzhen, Tao et al. (2014) examined the determinants of migrant workers’ residential satisfaction. Kinship and friendship ties, mobility, family life, and housing conditions were found to be significant to residential satisfaction. One common conclusion from the above studies in global cities is that social attachment is one of the most important factors influencing residential satisfaction. From the literature review, we find that scholarly understanding of residential satisfaction is currently based on the experiences of a relatively small group of cities, particularly well-known global metropolises such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen. But little attention has been paid to smaller cities. In this paper, we follow the post-colonialism perspective of urban studies, which sees all cities as ‘ordinary’ (Amin & Graham, 1997; Robinson, 2002, 2005, 2008), and we attempt to contribute to the ‘new geographies of theory’ (Roy, 2009). As Amin and Graham (1997) put, all cities are ordinary, in the sense that each city is distinct; they also held that the extant studies, which emphasized global metropolises, needed to take a wider view. Moreover, almost none of the existing studies has examined migrants' satisfaction with various sources of housing (a notable exception being Tao et al., 2014). Most of the studies on migrants' residential satisfaction emphasize urban villages but neglect the other main type of housing-factory dormitories. Thus, through a study of migrant settlements in an ordinary city of ChinaWenzhou-this paper fills the gaps mentioned above. Specifically, we aim to address the following questions: What is the overall residential satisfaction as perceived by migrants in Wenzhou? What are the determinants of migrants' overall residential
78
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
satisfaction? What constitutes residential satisfaction for migrants with different housing types? Are their determinants similar or different? How should urban policies help improve migrants' residential satisfaction?
2.2. Housing migrants in Chinese cities and residential satisfaction Internal migration in China is one of the most striking examples in the world today. One out of every six people is on the move (NHFPC, 2014). Without a local hukou (household registration), migrants are excluded from several types of urban housing, including ‘economical and comfortable’ housing,3 municipal public housing, and work-unit public housing (W. Wu, 2002a). They have very limited housing choices (W. Wu, 2004). Thus China's current experience is marked by these migrant settlements in marginal, unregulated, or ambiguous areas, with informal housing and land use arrangements (He, 2013; Wang, Wang, & Wu, 2009a; Yuting Liu, He, Wu, & Webster, 2010). In contrast to the migrants who often built housing in slum and squatter settlements by themselves, migrants in China are not allowed to build their own housing in the city due to land-use rights (L. Zhang, Zhao, & Tian, 2003). The housing available for migrants is constructed mainly by the villagers living in urban villages. ‘Urban village’ refers to settlements that are designated as rural areas but are located within the city limits. Urban villages are a product of rapid industrialization and urbanization in the postreform era (Yuting Liu et al., 2010; Wang, Wang, & Wu, 2009b). Because of their low-cost housing and loose residency requirements, they became the main habitats of many low-income rural migrants (Wang et al., 2009a; L.; Zhang, 2011). The extensive studies have painted a vivid picture of China's urban villages, a shanty-like appearance, high densities, high rates of crime, and chaotic land uses (Z. Li & Wu, 2013). City managers and planners perceive urban villages as an eyesore or a nuisance (Yuting Liu et al., 2010). They attempt to eliminate this informality or ‘non-state space’ to create more governable spaces through formal land and infrastructure development (F. Wu, Zhang, & Webster, 2013). Therefore, the ‘demolish and redevelop’ approach to urban villages has become a common strategy to build a ‘civilized and harmonized’ urban space in China (L. Zhang, 2005). However, these redevelopment projects are often market-driven and thus profitcentered. Little attention has been given to the needs of migrants, who are, in fact, the main residents of an urban village (Y. Lin, de Meulder, & Wang, 2011). What is residential satisfaction as perceived by migrants? How would they react if the urban village where they lived were to be demolished and redeveloped? Besides housing in urban villages, another main accommodation for migrants is dormitories (Wang et al., 2009a; W.; Wu, 2004), particularly in fast-growing industrial cities such as Wenzhou. Dormitories often consist of small rooms shared by several individuals. The advantages and disadvantages of factory dormitories have been evaluated in Ding, Qiu, and Wang (2011). The advantages include affordability for migrants, ease of management for employers and city government, and ease of communication between migrants. However, lack of privacy and overcrowding are common features of this type of housing. Dormitories are also blamed for segregating migrants and local residents (Ding et al., 2011). Dormitories are often transitional or temporary housing for migrants,
3 ‘Economical and comfortable’ housing (jingji shiyong fang) is a type of affordable housing for low- or middle-income local urban residents to purchase. It is built by for-profit real estate developers and subsidized by the government to maintain a relatively low price. All affordable units are developed for sale, not for rent, and are only accessible to eligible urban residents.
particularly for single young migrants. It is also not the first choice for migrants, so are the migrants who live in dormitories less satisfied than those who live in urban villages? What are the determinants of their residential satisfaction? As stated in the literature review, a number of factors have been identified as important to residential satisfaction. For example, socioeconomic factors, especially hukou status, income, education, and occupation, are important to residential satisfaction. The housing characteristics, including housing cost, facilities, number of people sharing, housing location, and floor area, may impact the overall residential satisfaction. However, little attention has been given to the special situation of China's migrants, who are temporary/transient in the city. In this study, we use the term ‘transitional characteristics’ to indicate the temporary status of migrants in the city, which may greatly influence their housing choices (B. Li, Duda, & An, 2009; Tao et al., 2014). These features also reflect migrants' coping strategies in the face of rapid change and uncertainty about their future in the arrival city. The first transitional factor is migrants' employment status. Unlike local residents, migrants tend to work without long-term contracts, which enables them to change jobs and even cities easily. Migrants in Wenzhou in particular, who are mainly manufacturing workers, prefer to work on a daily basis or an assignment basis; this allows them to maximize their income by extending their working hours or switching to a better-paid job. Second, the length of residence may also influence migrants' residential satisfaction, as has already been addressed in several existing studies (Z. Li & Wu, 2013). Third, migrants' intention to stay is another important transitional factor. Migrants who do not plan to stay in Wenzhou may indicate their low residential satisfaction in Wenzhou. Moreover, the frequency of job changes may also affect migrants' requirements on housing quality. As such, this study systemically explores the roles of these transitional factors on migrants' residential satisfaction in Wenzhou. In the meantime, given that very few studies have been conducted to examine the residential satisfaction of migrants with different housing types in China, this paper also focuses on the two hypotheses below: 1) migrants with different sources of housing may have different levels of residential satisfaction; and 2) the determinants of residential satisfaction could be different depending on the type of housing. Based on above analysis, the research framework of this study is shown in Fig. 1. 3. Housing, living environment, and residential satisfaction of migrants in Wenzhou: an empirical analysis 3.1. Survey area Wenzhou, the birthplace of China's private economy, is wellknown for so-called ‘Wenzhou model’. The essence of the ‘Wenzhou model’ is a system of production that is centered on family enterprises and embedded in thick local institutions. Paradoxically, economic success has brought Wenzhou a great many migrants, generating fundamental changes in that local culture. However, Wenzhou is less studied as a migrant city. Approximately thirty-six percent of its total population are migrants, which is comparable with Beijing (36 percent) and Guangzhou (37 percent) (NBS, 2011). Due to the high concentration of light-manufacturing industrial clusters, the migrants in Wenzhou are mainly labor-intensive manufacturing workers. As such, this study uses Wenzhou as a case city to analyze migrants' residential satisfaction. Shuangyu, a sub-district located about five kilometers west of Wenzhou's old city center, has been selected as the main survey area (Fig. 2). Shuangyu is known for its shoe manufacturing clusters; more than 92 percent of its designated large industrial enterprises are leather
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
79
Independent variable Dependent variable Socioeconomic
status
Gender, age, hukou status, marital status, education, occupation, income
Satisfaction for migrants living
Transitional characteristics
in urban villages
Employment status, length of residency, intention to stay, the frequency of job changes
Overall satisfaction
Satisfaction for migrants Housing characteristics
living in factory dorms
Housing tenure, housing sharing, floor area, rental rate, location, facilities
Fig. 1. Research framework.
shoe manufacturing and related enterprises (LCECO, 2011). It is home to two industrial parks-China's Shoe Capital Industrial Park (Zhongguo xiedu gongye yuanqu; 2.6 sq.km) and Wenzhou Lucheng Light Manufacturing Industrial Garden (Wenzhou lucheng qing gongye yuanqu; 0.68 sq.km) (Fig. 3). It hosts a substantial number of migrants, equivalent to about six times the local population. It is becoming a typical migrant enclave, housing migrant workers of both high mobility and socioeconomic diversity. This empirical analysis is based on both questionnaire surveys and interviews from 2012 to 2014. Five types of places where migrants interact with urban space were chosen for the survey-migrants’ residential areas, workplaces, shopping areas, major public spaces, and bus stations (Fig. 4). This sampling method, not entirely random, ensured that the sample was drawn as systematically as possible to give a good representation of the migrant population living in Shuangyu. Because most migrants have low levels of educational attainment, the surveyors asked the questions verbally and then wrote down the respondents’ answers. The survey produced a total of 435 valid questionnaires and 20 in-depth interviews.
3.2. Descriptive findings 3.2.1. Socioeconomic status Many migrants in Shuangyu are young people from rural areas who have low educational attainment and who work in the manufacturing sectors (Table 1). They are working-age, and their primary reason for being in the city is to work. They are generally less educated than those in megacities, such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou (S. Lin & Gaubatz, 2016). It is worth noting that more than 80 percent of the migrants in Wenzhou work in the manufacturing sectors, which contrasts with the situation in wellstudied global cities such as Beijing. Working in the labor-intensive manufacturing industry, migrants must devote extremely long hours and intensive labor in order to improve their income. According to the survey, more than 86 percent of the migrants work more than eight hours per day (and approximately 60 percent of them work more than 10 h per day). They also have to maximize their savings by minimizing their living costs, a significant portion of which are housing costs.
3.2.2. Transitional characteristics Migrants’ temporary status and economic purpose in the city suggests that accommodations are mainly places to sleep and rest. So proximity to the workplace and low cost are higher priorities than a comfortable living environment and space (W. Wu, 2002b, pp. 212e226). Table 1 reports on transitional characteristics of the migrants surveyed. Forty-seven percent of the migrants in the survey do not have official contracts with the enterprises and are mostly hired for daily or task basis. Although most of them have lived in Wenzhou for a long time, very few of them want to stay. They would leave if there were better job opportunities in their hometown or other cities. This indicates that their major reason for being in the city is to earn money, not to live there long-term.
3.2.3. Housing characteristics Employer-run dormitories (where 36 percent of all migrants surveyed stay) and private rental housing in urban villages (where 61 percent of all migrants surveyed stay) are two major housing sources for migrants in Wenzhou. The dormitories provided by employers are usually free in Wenzhou, and workers need only pay for utilities such as electricity and water. Urban villages provide cheap and reliable accommodations for migrants. Table 2 reports the housing characteristics of migrants. The average living space per person in Shuangyu is extremely smalldless than five square meters. That is not only smaller than the average amount of living space for local residents but also smaller than most migrant settlements in other cities such as Shenzhen, Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou (Zheng, Long, Fan, & Gu, 2009). A few differences were found between migrants who live in dormitories and migrants who live in urban villages (Table 2). For example, migrants who live in dormitories tend to share with more people than those who live in urban villages. But dormitories are often free of charge and equipped with better facilities, such as air conditioners. However, many migrants do not use air conditioners even in the hot summer, because they must pay for their own utilities. Facilities in urban villages are inadequate and poorly maintained. Only 34 percent and 39 percent of migrants, respectively, have a kitchen and bathroom to themselves. As one interviewed couple said,
80
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
Fig. 2. Location map of Shuangyu.
Fig. 3. Shoe capital of China Industrial Park and Lucheng Light Manufacturing Industrial Garden in Shuangyu. Map source: base map provided by Shuangyu Street Committee Main Office
It's a very old house and simply built of iron [Tiepi fang-more like temporary housing]. There is only one bathroom on each floor. And there are about 20 rooms on one floor. And we have to wait in a line to take a bath. It's terrible. And no windows. It's dark all day and all night. The lights need to be on all day. The hallway is very narrow, which means only one person can pass at a time [he showed how narrow it is]. To be honest, the living conditions in Wenzhou are terrible. And rents are getting higher and higher. You can compare with Guangzhoudhousing there is not as expensive as here, and it is clean, with a private bathroom and balcony. Wenzhou's living environment is quite bad (August 1, 2013).
3.3. Residential satisfaction In the survey, we evaluate residential satisfaction by simply asking migrants how they feel about their residence. Respondents were asked to position themselves on a five-point scale. The scale was labeled as follows: 1 ¼ ‘very dissatisfied’; 2 ¼ ‘dissatisfied’; 3 ¼ ‘neutral’; 4 ¼ ‘satisfied’; 5 ¼ ‘very satisfied’. The higher the value, the higher the residential satisfaction. Overall, migrants are dissatisfied with their living conditions, giving them an average
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
81
Fig. 4. Major surveyed sites in Shuangyu, Wenzhou.
score of 2.65. Migrants who live in different housing sources have different levels of residential satisfaction. Migrants who live in dormitories are most satisfied with their living conditions, giving them a score of 3.08. Surprisingly, migrants who own their own housing are not necessarily satisfied, giving it a score of 2.50. Migrants who live in urban villages have the lowest level of residential satisfaction, giving them a score of 2.42. This confirms the hypothesis that migrants with different housing types have different levels of residential satisfaction.
4. Determinants of migrants’ residential satisfaction Many factors contribute to the residential satisfaction of migrants. In the existing literature, 21 variables are selected that may affect residential satisfaction, including socioeconomic status, transitional characteristics, and housing characteristics. Model 1e3 (Table 3) shows the regression results for all migrants in general, migrants who live in dormitories, and migrants who live in urban villages. Since some of the independent variables are categorical, we first conducted dummy coding. Then, in order to find the bestfit model, we undertook “Enter” (dummy variables as different blocks) stepwise regression in SPSS, eventually to identify the significant variables as the determinants for residential satisfaction. One of the main results of our regression indicates that migrants' overall residential satisfaction is influenced by various factors. First, housing tenure has a significant effect on migrants' overall residential satisfaction. Specifically, the migrants who live in factory dormitories tend to be more satisfied with their residence, which is consistent with our findings in the survey. Second, socioeconomic status, such as marital status, education, and income, contributes significantly to the level of residential satisfaction. Migrants who are married and have lower educational attainment and higher income tend to be more satisfied with their residence. This is consistent with the existing literature that suggests that socioeconomic factors are important factors in residential
satisfaction. It is also worth noting that hukou status is not significant to migrants’ residential satisfaction. This echoes our survey finding that hukou status is the issue that least concerns Wenzhou migrants (Table 4). They are also less likely to settle down in the city. Thus whether or not they have a local hukou has little impact on their residential satisfaction. As one of the migrants replied: Why would I want to become a Wenzhounese? I was born in Zhuzhou [Hunan Province], and my family roots are there too. I'd prefer to get a hukou from Henan [where her husband came from], not Wenzhou. This is only a place to get job and earn money. I'll leave if there is better opportunity in my hometown (January 3, 2014). Third, concerning the transitional factors, employment status and length of residence have a significant influence on migrants' residential satisfaction. Migrants with unstable employment status (without a contract) have less residential satisfaction. Meanwhile, staying longer in the city does not help migrants build their social attachment with the neighborhood and improve their residential satisfaction. Finally, the positive effect of selected facilities is surprisingly significant, in contrast with the findings in the megacities. Based on research in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, Z. Li and Wu (2013) claimed that social attachment is the most important factor influencing residential satisfaction, and no facilities can compensate for it. In Wenzhou's case, a private bathroom, a television, and an air conditioner are all important for improved residential satisfaction. The regression result also shows that residential satisfaction for migrants who live in dormitories and urban villages is affected by different factors, which supports the hypothesis that the determinants of residential satisfaction could be different depending on the housing type. For the migrants who live in factory dormitories, only two factors influence residential satisfaction: the intention to stay and air conditioners. No evidence has shown that
82
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
Table 1 Socioeconomic and transitional characteristics of migrants in the survey.
Origins of residence registration Rural hukou Urban hukou Age <18 18e25 26e35 36e45 46e60 >60 Gender Male Female Marital status Single Married Divorced or widowed Educational attainment Primary school and under Middle school Senior high school or technical school Post-secondary school College and up Income <1,000 RMB 1,000e2,000 RMB 2,000e3,000 RMB 3,000e5,000 RMB >5,000 RMB Industry (occupation) Manufacturing (Manager level) Self-employed and business Construction and transport Services Vendors Unemployed Others, such as teacher Employment status Contract basis Daily basis Task basis Others Length of residence Less than half a year Half a year to 1 year 1e2 years 2e5 years More than 5 years Intention to stay Yes, will stay in Wenzhou No, if there is job opportunity at hometown No, if there is job opportunity in other cities Never thought about it The frequency of job change More than 3 times 2e3 times 1 time Never Total
Table 2 Housing characteristics of migrants in the survey.
No. of Migrants
%
391 44
89.9 10.1
21 133 181 86 12 2
4.8 30.6 41.6 19.8 2.8 0.5
257 178
59.1 40.9
144 284 7
33.1 65.3 1.6
49 263 97 18 8
11.3 60.5 22.3 4.1 1.8
11 30 186 155 53
2.5 6.9 19.8 35.6 12.2
360 42 26 7 8 12 15 7
82.8 9.7 6.0 1.6 1.8 2.8 3.4 1.6
174 84 120 57
40.0 19.3 27.6 13.1
24 34 55 84 238
5.5 7.8 12.6 19.3 54.7
84 161 66 124
19.3 37.0 15.2 28.5
83 137 60 155 435
31.5 13.8 35.6 100.0
socioeconomic factors have significant effects on the residential satisfaction of migrants who live in the dormitories. Migrants who plan to work in another city or who are not sure of their future plans tend to be more dissatisfied with their residential situation. Air conditioners also contribute to a higher level of satisfaction. For migrants who live in urban villages, employment status has an important effect on residential satisfaction. Migrants who work as day laborers, in particular, are less satisfied than those who have a long-term contract with the employer. Also, long-term residence reduces their residential satisfaction. However, their satisfaction
Dormitories (N ¼ 156)
Rented housing (N ¼ 267)
Total (N ¼ 435)
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
14.7 25.0 39.1 21.2
6 58 142 61
2.2 21.7 53.2 22.9
30 104 204 97
6.9 23.9 46.9 22.3
62.8 28.9 6.4 1.9
154 82 22 9
57.7 30.7 8.2 3.4
257 128 33 17
59.1 29.4 7.6 3.9
59.6 32.0 5.8 1.3 1.3
1 27 118 92 29
0.4 10.1 44.2 34.4 10.9
95 80 129 96 35
21.8 18.4 29.7 22.1 8.0
46.2 38.5 11.5 3.8
46 123 68 30
17.2 46.1 25.5 11.2
122 188 88 37
28.1 43.2 20.2 8.5
3.8 26.3 21.2 55.1 15.4
34 39 90 25 43
12.7 14.6 33.7 9.4 16.1
44 84 130 116 73
10.1 19.3 29.9 26.7 16.8
Housing sharing More than 5 people 23 3 to 5 people 39 1 to 2 people 61 Alone 33 Floor area Less than 5 m2 98 5 to 10 m2 45 2 10 10 to 20 m 2 More than 20 m 3 Housing cost Free 93 Less than 150 RMB 50 150 to 300 RMB 9 300 to 500 RMB 2 More than 500 RMB 2 Housing location (distance to work) Less than 5 min. 72 5 to 10 min. 60 10 to 30 min. 18 Longer than 30 min. 6 Housing facilitiesa Private kitchen 6 Private bathroom 41 Television 33 Air conditioner 86 Internet 24
a Note: the total percentage for housing facilities is more than 100%, because respondents were able to give more than one answer to the question.
could be improved significantly by providing better housing facilities, such as a private bathroom, private kitchen, and television. This indicates that for migrants who live in urban villages, housing size or whether they are sharing with other people matters little, but basic facilities would contribute greatly to their residential satisfaction.
5. Conclusions and discussions Residential satisfaction studies in Chinese cities have previously focused primarily on a small group of cities, particularly wellstudied megacities such as Beijing, Guangzhou, Shanghai and Shenzhen. Little attention has been given to the other “ordinary cities.” Moreover, few residential satisfaction studies have been carried out from the perspective of migrants. The tremendous ratio of rural to urban migrants has greatly influenced the urban sociospatial structure (Douglass, Wissink, & van Kempen, 2012; Gu & Shen, 2003; He, 2013; Z.; Li & Wu, 2006; Liu et al., 2012). Providing these rural migrants with affordable and decent housing in the city is a great challenge for the national and city government. However, migrants, as a relatively disadvantaged group, are rarely able to speak up for themselves to solve housing problems and improve residential satisfaction in the city (Z. Li & Wu, 2013). In fact, their major residential areas-urban villages-were often demolished and redeveloped without considering their wishes, and they were forced to leave. As such, it is urgent to evaluate residential satisfaction from the perspective of migrants. This paper aims to fill the above knowledge gap by using Wenzhou, an ordinary city where migrants make up more than 35 percent of the total population, as a case study to scrutinize the current migrants’ housing condition, to evaluate their residential satisfaction, and to identify the determining factors that influence residential
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
83
Table 3 Linear regression for the determinants of residential satisfaction. Dormitories
(Constant) Gender (Female ¼ 0, male ¼ 1) Hukou status (Urban ¼ 0, rural ¼ 1) Age Marital statusþ Single (as reference) Married Divorced or widowed Educationþ Primary school and under (as reference) Middle school High school and technical school Post-secondary College and up Occupationþ Manufacturing (as reference) Business owners Taxi driver Construction worker Management-level worker Services Vendors Income Employment statusþ Contract (as reference) Daily basis Task basis Others Length of residency Intention of stayþ Yes (as reference) No, go to other city No, go back to hometown Not sure Frequency of job changes Housing tenureþ Ownership (as reference) Private rented housing Factory dorm Other sources Housing sharing Floor room Rental rate Housing location (Distance to work) Private kitchenþ Private bathroomþ Televisionþ Air conditionerþ Internetþ F R Square Adjusted R Square Number
Urban village
Overall satisfaction
B
t
Sig.
B
t
Sig.
B
t
Sig.
1.971
3.053
**
3.237
8.623
***
2.920
8.408
***
0.138
1.214
0.282 0.792
1.218 1.461
0.167 0.73
1.117 1.157
0.291 0.670
2.486 1.615
*
0.227 0.157 0.533 0.31
0.622 0.381 1.059 0.516
0.176 0.371 0.569
0.905 1.624 1.349
0.101 0.390 0.679 0.488
0.599 2.003 2.261 1.163
0.57 1.769 1.858
0.94 1.713 1.77
0.865 1.029
0.849 1.003
0.561 0.359 0.381 0.284 0.282 0.63
1.685 0.994 0.971 0.792 0.805 1.293
0.009 0.033 0.146 0.252 0.097 0.558 0.124
0.033 0.098 0.402 0.758 0.314 1.337 2.036
0.393 0.353 0.157
1.615 2.631 2.595 3.501
0.276 0.565 0.395
1.878 3.170 2.598
** **
0.410
3.185
**
0.524 0.278 0.418
3.597 2.422 2.814
*** * **
0.014 0.329 0.914
0.748 0.292 0.554 0.142
0.052 1.456 1.924
2.548 1.253 2.342 1.65
0.404
1.92
0.656
3.25
* *
0.441 0.335 0.403 0.149
2.354 1.934 1.381 2.647
0.222 0.215 0.241
0.946 1.095 1.192
0.429 0.408 0.364 ***
4.272 0.401 0.307 156
2.546 0.179 0.109 267
2.032 2.041 2.608
*
**
* * **
* *
*
** ** ***
6.501 0.276 0.233 435
Notes: þdummy variable; *significant at 5%; **significant at 1%; ***significant at 0.1%. Model 3 includes a total of 21 variables; Model 1e2 includes 20 variables (housing tenure has been excluded).
satisfaction. Moreover, we discuss the residential satisfaction of migrants by shedding some light upon comparing different housing types. According to the survey, the majority of the migrants in Wenzhou are from rural areas, have low educational attainment, and work in the labor-intensive manufacturing sectors. This represents the typical type of migrants in China-‘peasant workers’ (nongmingong). Employer-provided dormitories and rented housing in urban villages are the two major housing types for migrants. Overall, migrants feel dissatisfied with their residences. It confirms our hypothesis that migrants with different housing types have different levels of residential satisfaction. It is also consistent with the conclusions of Tao et al. (2014) and Li and Duda (2010), who
found that migrants are more satisfied with factory dormitories than private rental housing in urban villages. The residential satisfaction of migrants and its determinants are examined by three categories of variables: socioeconomic status, transitional characteristics, and housing characteristics. The results are quite revealing. First, socioeconomic factors have significant effects on migrants' residential satisfaction. It indicates that migrants who are married and who have lower educational attainment and higher income tend to be more satisfied with their residence. It is also worth noting that hukou status is not significant to migrants’ residential satisfaction. In fact, obtaining a local hukou is the issue least important to migrants, according to the survey. Second, transitional characteristics play important roles in
84
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
Table 4 Issues that concerned migrants in the survey.
Salary Living cost Safety Health and social welfare Living environment Children's education Job opportunities Leisure Local hukou
No.
%
306 90 81 80 78 71 69 41 16
70.3 20.7 18.6 18.4 17.9 16.3 15.9 9.4 3.7
Note: The total percentage is more than 100%, because respondents were able to give more than one answer to the question: “What are the most important things you are concerned about in Wenzhou?”.
migrants’ residential satisfaction. The temporary/transient status of migrants in the city does not necessarily lower their expectations on housing quality and thus contribute to higher residential satisfaction. In fact, migrants who work without a long-term contract and who plan to leave Wenzhou in the future are less satisfied than the others. Moreover, the longer they stay in the city, the less satisfied they are. This indicates that staying longer in the city does not help migrants to build their social attachment with the neighborhood and improve their sense of belonging. Changing their transitional/temporary status and making them more settled in the city is a possible way to increase their residential satisfaction. Third, in contrast to findings in major metropolises such as Beijing, Guangzhou, and Shanghai (Z. Li & Wu, 2013) that emphasize the importance of social attachment, we found that facilities play a more important role in determining migrants’ residential satisfaction. This result demonstrates that migrants in general have very low requirements concerning housing-providing basic facilities could greatly boost their residential satisfaction. Last but not the least, migrants’ residential satisfaction with different housing sources is influenced by different factors. For migrants who live in the dormitories, the only two important factors are whether they intend to stay and whether they have an air conditioner. However, for migrants who live in urban villages, employment status, length of residence, and facilities such as private kitchen, private bathroom, and television all contribute significantly to their residence satisfaction. This is probably because most migrants who live in the dormitories regard them as temporary housing and have no intention of staying. But migrants who live in urban villages and who are often with families tend to stay longer and thus care more about basic facilities. The findings of the study show that the determinants of migrants' residential satisfaction in Wenzhou are, to some extent, different from those of migrants in Chinese megacities. This demonstrates that each city is unique and increases our knowledge of the migrants' residential satisfaction within an ordinary city. With China's New-Type Urbanization emphasis on a people-centered approach, it is important to solve migrants' housing problems by considering the unique characteristics of migrants. The findings of this study let policy-makers know that simply providing a local hukou does not help improve migrants' residential satisfaction. Providing better housing facilities is a more direct and efficient way to boost their residential satisfaction. It also accords with current China's urban planning strategy, which has gradually transferred from increment planning to inventory planning. Improving migrants' residential satisfaction by promoting the usage of current residential space is more efficient and realistic than building new residential areas. Moreover, the fact that migrants with different housing types have different levels of residential satisfaction suggests that housing policies aimed at improving residential
satisfaction should be contextualized. Future research would include more emotional factors, such as social attachment, to compare with the physical environment of the housing situation, and would discuss their importance to residential satisfaction. Furthermore, future research can extend to more case cities to provide more empirical evidence. References rigo, M., & Aragone s, J. I. (1990). Residential satisfaction in council housing. Ame Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10(4), 313e325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S0272-4944(05)80031-3. Amin, A., & Graham, S. (1997). The ordinary city. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 22(4), 411e429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.00202754.1997.00411.x. ~es, M. H. (2016). Exploring Barreira, A. P., Agapito, D., Panagopoulos, T., & Guimara residential satisfaction in shrinking cities: A decision-tree approach. Urban Research & Practice, 1e22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2016.1179784. Chan, K. W. (2011). China, internal migration. In I. Ness, & P. Bellwood (Eds.), The encyclopedia of global migration. Blackwell publishing. Chen, L., Zhang, W., Yang, Y., & Yu, J. (2013). Disparities in residential environment and satisfaction among urban residents in Dalian, China. Habitat International, 40, 100e108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.03.002. Dekker, K., de Vos, S., Musterd, S., & van Kempen, R. (2011). Residential satisfaction in housing estates in European cities: A multi-level research approach. Housing Studies, 26(04), 479e499. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2011.559751. Ding, C., Qiu, A., & Wang, J. (2011). Zhongguo kuaisu chengshihua shiqi nongmingong zhufang leixing jiqi pingjia [Migrant Housing During Rapid Urbanization in China: Typology and Assessment]. Urban Studies (In China), 18(6), 49e54. Douglass, M., Wissink, B., & van Kempen, R. (2012). Enclave urbanism in China: Consequences and interpretations. Urban Geography, 33(2), 167e182. http:// dx.doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.33.2.167. Du, H., & Li, S. (2010). Migrants, urban villages, and community sentiments: A case of Guangzhou, China. Asian Geographer, 27(1e2), 93e108. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/10225706.2010.9684155. Fan, C. (2008). China on the Move: Migration, the state and the household. London and New York: Routledge. Fang, Y. (2006). Residential satisfaction, moving intention and moving behaviours: A study of redeveloped neighbourhoods in inner-city beijing. Housing Studies, 21(5), 671e694. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673030600807217. Gu, C., & Shen, J. (2003). Transformation of urban socio-spatial structure in socialist market economies: The case of beijing. Habitat International, 27(1), 107e122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0197-3975(02)00038-3. He, S. (2013). Evolving enclave urbanism in China and its socio-spatial implications: The case of Guangzhou. Social & Cultural Geography, 14(3), 243e275. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2012.762112. He, S., & Qi, X. (2014). Guangzhoushi sanlei shequ juzhu manyidu yu qianju yiyuan yanjiiu [Determinants of relocation satisfaction and relocation intention in chinese cities: an empirical investigation on three types of residential neighborhood in Guangzhou]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 34(11), 1327e1336. Herfert, G., Neugebauer, C. S., & Smigiel, C. (2013). Living in residential Satisfaction? Insights from large-scale housing estates in central and Eastern Europe. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 104(1), 57e74. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1467-9663.2012.00727.x. Hu, Z. (1987). The characterristics and geographical background of Wenzhou model [Wenzhou Moshi de Tezheng yu Dili Beijing]. Economic Geography, 7(1), 5. Huang, Z., & Du, X. (2015). Assessment and determinants of residential satisfaction with public housing in Hangzhou, China. Habitat International, 47, 218e230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.01.025. Li, B., & Duda, M. (2010). Employers as landlords for rural-to-urban migrants in Chinese cities. Environment and Urbanization, 22(1), 13e31. Li, B., Duda, M., & An, X. (2009). Drivers of housing choice among rural-to-urban migrants: Evidence from Taiyuan. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 2(2), 142e156. Li, Z., & Liu, Y. (2011). Beyond spatial segregation: Neo-migrants and their social networks in Chinese cities. Acta Geographica Sinica, 66(6), 785e795. Lin, Y., de Meulder, B., & Wang, S. (2011). Understanding the ‘village in the city’ in Guangzhou: Economic integration and development issue and their implications for the urban migrant. Urban Studies, 48(16), 3583e3598. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042098010396239. Lin, S., & Gaubatz, P. (2015). New Wenzhou: Migration, metropolitan spatial development and modernity in a third-tier Chinese model city. Habitat International, 50, 214e225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.08.040. Lin, S., & Gaubatz, P. (2016). Socio-spatial segregation in China and migrants' everyday life experiences: The case of Wenzhou. Urban Geography, 1e20. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2016.1182287. Li, S., & Song, Y. (2009). Redevelopment, displacement, housing conditions, and residential satisfaction: A study of Shanghai. Environment and Planning A, 41(5), 1090e1108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a4168. Liu, A. P. L. (1992). The “Wenzhou model” of development and China's modernization. Asian Survey, 32, 696e711. Liu, Y., He, S., Wu, F., & Webster, C. (2010). Urban villages under China's rapid
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85 urbanization: Unregulated assets and transitional neighbourhoods. Habitat International, 34(2), 135e144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2009.08.003. Liu, Y., Li, Z., & Breitung, W. (2012). The social networks of new-generation migrants in China's urbanized villages: A case study of Guangzhou. Habitat International, 36(1), 192e200. Liu, Y., Li, Z., Liu, Y., & Chen, H. (2014). Growth of rural migrant enclaves in Guangzhou, China: Agency, everyday practice and social mobility. Urban Studies. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042098014553752. Li, Z., & Wu, F. (2006). Socio-spatial differentiation and residential inequalities in Shanghai: A case study of three neighbourhoods. Housing Studies, 21(5), 695e717. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673030600807365. Li, Z., & Wu, F. (2013). Residential satisfaction in China's informal settlements: A case study of beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou. Urban Geography, 34(7), 923e949. Mohit, M. A., Ibrahim, M., & Rashid, Y. R. (2010). Assessment of residential satisfaction in newly designed public low-cost housing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Habitat International, 34(1), 18e27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2009. 04.002. NBS. (2011). Communiqu e of the national Bureau of statistics of People's Republic of China on major figures of the 2010 population Census[1] (No. 1). National Bureau of Statistics. NHFPC. (2014). National health and family planning commission. In Report on China's migrant population development 2014. Beijing: China Population Publishing House. Nolan, P., & Dong, F. R. (1989). Market forces in China: Competition and small businessethe Wenzhou debate. London: Zed Books. Office, L. C. E. C. (2011). Lucheng nianjian. Beijing: Fangzhi. Parkes, A., Kearns, A., & Atkinson, R. (2002). What makes people dissatisfied with their neighbourhoods? Urban Studies, 39(13), 2413e2438. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/0042098022000027031. Robinson, J. (2002). Global and world cities: A view from off the map. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 26(3), 531e554. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/1468-2427.00397. Robinson, J. (2005). Urban geography: World cities, or a world of cities. Progress in Human Geography, 29(6), 757e765. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/ 0309132505ph582pr. Robinson, J. (2008). Developing ordinary Cities: City visioning processes in durban and johannesburg. Environment and Planning A, 40(1), 74e87. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1068/a39127. Roy, A. (2009). The 21st-century Metropolis: New geographies of theory. Regional Studies, 43(6), 819e830. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343400701809665. Tao, L., Wong, F. K. W., & Hui, E. C. M. (2014). Residential satisfaction of migrant workers in China: A case study of shenzhen. Habitat International, 42, 193e202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.12.006.
85
Wang, Y., Wang, Y., & Wu, J. (2009a). Housing migrant workers in rapidly urbanizing regions: A study of the Chinese model in shenzhen. Housing Studies, 25(1), 83e100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673030903362019. Wang, Y., Wang, Y., & Wu, J. (2009b). Urbanization and informal development in China: Urban villages in shenzhen. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33(4), 957e973. Wei, Y. (2007). Restructuring industrial districts, scaling up regional development: A study of the Wenzhou model, China. Economic Geography, 83(4), 421e444. Wei, Y. (2011). Beyong the GPNenew regionalism divide in China: Restructuring the clothing industry, remaking the Wenzhou model. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 93(3), 237e251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.14680467.2011.00375.x. Wu, W. (2002a). Migrant housing in urban China: Choices and constraints. Urban Affairs Review, 38(1), 90e119. Wu, W. (2002b). Temporary migrants in Shanghai: Housing and settlement patterns. In J. R. Logan (Ed.), The new Chinese City: Globalization and market reform (pp. 212e226). New York: Blackwell. Wu, W. (2004). Sources of migrant housing disadvantage in urban China. Environmental and Planning A, 36, 1285e1304. Wu, F., Zhang, F., & Webster, C. (2013). Informality and the development and demolition of urban villages in the Chinese peri-urban area. Urban Studies, 50(10), 1919e1934. Ye, X., & Wei, Y. D. (2005). Geospatial Analysis of Regional Development in China: The Case of Zhejiang Province and the Wenzhou Model. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 46(6), 445e464. http://dx.doi.org/10.2747/1538-7216.46.6.445. Zhang, L. (2005). Migrant enclaves and impacts of rdevelopment policy in Chinese cities. In L. J. C. Ma, & F. Wu (Eds.), Restructuring the Chinese City: Changing society, economy and space. London and New York: Routledge. Zhang, L. (2011). The political economy of informal settlements in post-socialist China: The case of chengzhongcun(s). Geoforum, 42(4), 473e483. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.03.003. Zhang, C., & Lu, B. (2016). Residential satisfaction in traditional and redeveloped inner city neighborhood: A tale of two neighborhoods in beijing. Travel Behaviour and Society, 5, 23e36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2015.08.001. Zhang, L., Zhao, S. X. B., & Tian, J. P. (2003). Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(4), 912e937. Zheng, S., Long, F., Fan, C., & Gu, Y. (2009). Urban villages in China: A 2008 survey of migrant settlements in beijing. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 50(4), 425e446. Zhou, C. (1984). Chongfen fahui yanhai kaifang chengshi de youshieshisige xinkaifang chengshi jianjie [Take Full Advantage of the Coastal Cities that Opened to Foreign InvestmenteIntroduction of 14 Newly Opened Cities]. Economic Management, (9), 53e59.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Habitat International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint
Residential satisfaction of migrants in Wenzhou, an ‘ordinary city’ of China Sainan Lin 1, Zhigang Li*, 1 School of Urban Design, Wuhan University, Hubei Provincial Engineering Research Center of Human Settlements, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 12 February 2017 Received in revised form 28 April 2017 Accepted 16 May 2017
Residential satisfaction is one of the main topics of recent urban studies, yet most focus on a relatively small group of cities, particularly megacities. This paper uses Wenzhou, China, as a case study to deepen our understanding of residential satisfaction in an ‘ordinary city’. Based on a survey of 435 migrants and 20 in-depth interviews in Shuangyu, Wenzhou, this study finds that most migrants are dissatisfied with the current housing conditions. Migrants who live in urban villages are more dissatisfied than those who live in factory dormitories. The factors that influence migrants' residential satisfaction in different housing types are also different. Moreover, marital status, education, income, length of residence, employment status, and housing facilities significantly affect residential satisfaction. Institutional factors and selected housing variables that are usually found to be important to residential satisfaction are not significant for migrants in Wenzhou. In contrast with other research conducted in megacities that emphasizes the importance of social attachment, we find that providing better facilities is likely the most effective way to improve residential satisfaction for migrants in Wenzhou. © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Residential satisfaction Migrants Housing Ordinary city Chinese cities
1. Introduction Residential satisfaction is one of the main topics that concern scholars in urban studies, yet most studies cover a relatively small group of cities, including Beijing, Guangzhou, and Shanghai (Fang, 2006; S.; Li & Song, 2009; Z.; Li & Wu, 2013; C.; Zhang & Lu, 2016). This paper follows the view of postmodernist urban studies that all cities are ‘ordinary cities’ in the sense that each is distinct in its own way, and that furthermore, the extant studies that emphasize global metropolises should take a broader perspective (Amin & Graham, 1997; Robinson, 2002, 2008; Roy, 2009). Moreover, residential satisfaction research has rarely been carried out from the perspective of migrants (Z. Li & Wu, 2013; Tao, Wong, & Hui, 2014). The process of massive migration is changing Chinese cities in unprecedented ways (Chan, 2011; Fan, 2008; Z. Li & Liu, 2011; S. Lin & Gaubatz, 2016; Ye Liu, Li, Liu, & Chen, 2014). At the end of 2015, there were 247 million temporary migrants in cities, accounting for 18 percent of China's total population (NHFPC, 2014). Housing these migrants in the city is one of the major
* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S. Lin), [email protected] (Z. Li). 1 Address: No.299 Bayi Road, Wuchang District, School of Urban Design, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China, 430072. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.05.004 0197-3975/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
concerns of the Chinese government. This paper presents a case study of Wenzhou, an ‘ordinary city’ on China's southeast coast, to reveal migrants' housing and living environment, to evaluate their residential satisfaction with different housing sources, and to provide suggestions to policy-makers. It emphasizes the importance of the experience of less prominent cities, which may differ from that of megacities. It also increases the knowledge of residential satisfaction by considering the special characteristics of China's migrants. Wenzhou is a typical case by which to examine the issue of migrant residential segregation in general and in China in particular. Among the 14 coastal cities that opened to foreign investments in 1984, and for the first time in post-reform China, Wenzhou is situated in the southwest corner of Zhejiang Province (Zhou, 1984). Wenzhou has experienced rapid development and is often taken as a model2 to examine reform-era China's rising privatization and entrepreneurship (Hu, 1987; A. P. L. Liu, 1992; Nolan & Dong, 1989;
2 The Wenzhou model, along with the Sunan model and the Pearl River Delta model, was used as an economic development model at the beginning of China's reform era. The Sunan model attributes the development of Sunan (Southern Jiangsu) to local state-directed townships and village enterprises (TVEs). The Pearl River Delta model refers to the foreign direct investment (FDI) development, due to its proximity to Hong Kong and Macau. For details, see Ye and Wei (2005).
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
Wei, 2007, 2011). Economic take-off has brought Wenzhou a great number of migrants, who make up about 36 percent of Wenzhou's total population and constitute a majority in several districts (S. Lin & Gaubatz, 2015). Based on a survey of 435 migrants and 20 indepth interviews in Wenzhou from 2012 to 2014, this paper aims to examine the residential satisfaction of migrants in Wenzhou and identify the determinants that influence their residential satisfaction. Moreover, the current research on migrants' residential satisfaction has focused mainly on the residential satisfaction of migrants who live in urban villages (Du & Li, 2010; Z.; Li & Wu, 2013). Little attention has been given to the residential satisfaction of migrants with different housing sources. This paper attempts to fill this gap by comparing the residential satisfaction of migrants who live in urban villages and migrants who live in employer-provided dormitories. By identifying different factors that may influence migrants with different types of housing, we express the idea that the residential satisfaction of migrants with different housing sources should be improved in different ways. The remainder of this paper is structured as followings: the first part is a literature review on residential satisfaction and the current migrant housing condition in Chinese cities. The second part introduces the survey of migrant settlements in Wenzhou and summarizes the socioeconomic status, transitional characteristics, and housing characteristics of the migrants surveyed. The final part examines the residential satisfaction of migrants overall and the residential satisfaction of migrants in different housing types by running linear regression in SPSS software. It concludes by explaining the factors affecting residential satisfaction and presenting policy implications. 2. Literature review 2.1. Residential satisfaction across different contexts Residential satisfaction is an important topic in the field of urrigo & Aragone s, 1990; Barreira, Agapito, ban studies (Ame Panagopoulos, & Guimar~ aes, 2016; Dekker, de Vos, Musterd, & van Kempen, 2011; Herfert, Neugebauer, & Smigiel, 2013). Empirical studies have identified a number of important determinants that influence residential satisfaction. In general, these determinants can be grouped into three categories (Z. Li & Wu, 2013). First, the respondents’ residential satisfaction may be affected by their socioeconomic status, such as their age, education, gender, marital status, race, and income. For example, respondents with higher income tend to be more satisfied with their residence (Chen, Zhang, Yang, & Yu, 2013). A second set of determinants related to residential satisfaction is housing characteristics, such as housing size, housing location, housing tenure, housing cost, and physical conditions. Positive housing characteristics, including larger size and better housing facilities, have been found to be important for improved residential satisfaction (Chen et al., 2013; Mohit, Ibrahim, & Rashid, 2010). Third, neighborhood characteristics may also affect residential satisfaction. For instance, Parkes, Kearns, and Atkinson (2002) found that neighborhood factors, especially the location and condition of the neighborhood, are much more important in predicting residential dissatisfaction than socio-demographic factors. In recent years a growing number of residential satisfaction studies have been carried out in China (Fang, 2006; Huang & Du, 2015; S Li & Song, 2009; C.; Zhang & Lu, 2016). The methods of examining residential satisfaction can be divided into two categories. Some studies consider residential satisfaction as a criterion in evaluating residential quality (Huang & Du, 2015; Z.; Li & Wu, 2013; C.; Zhang & Lu, 2016). The aim of these studies is to find the major factors that determine the degree of residential
77
satisfaction, and then make suggestions to help improve residential quality. Other studies consider residential satisfaction as a predictor of behavior, finding a link between residential satisfaction and residential mobility. Examining the original residents' residential satisfaction in the redeveloped inner-city neighborhoods of Beijing, Fang (2006) suggests that low residential satisfaction does not lead to higher frequencies of relocation. By contrast, in the study of three different neighborhoods in Guangzhou, He and Qi (2014) found that residential satisfaction was an important factor influencing residents’ intention to move. The above two cases indicate that different local contexts matter to the dynamic relations between residential satisfaction and intention to move. Although the existing empirical studies on residential satisfaction in Chinese cities provide rich insights, little research has been carried out on the residential satisfaction of migrants. However, the massive ratio of rural to urban migrants plays a significant role in China's urban development (Chan, 2011; Fan, 2008; Z. Li & Liu, 2011; S. Lin & Gaubatz, 2016; Ye Liu et al., 2014). How to ‘urbanize’ or integrate these rural migrants into the cities has become the major goal of China's urbanization plan (according to China's National New-Type Urbanization Plan [2014e2020]). Understanding and improving the residential satisfaction of migrants is also important for realizing the national government's goal of building a ‘harmonious society’ (Z. Li & Wu, 2013). However, migrants, a relatively disadvantaged group, find it difficult to solve housing problems and improve residential satisfaction by themselves-their voices have rarely been heard. Until recently, there have been very few studies on migrants' residential satisfaction in China. On the basis of a housing survey in Guangzhou, Du and Li (2010) suggested that residents' subjective perception of neighborhood quality is the most significant factor in community satisfaction, while none of the social-demographic factors are related to residential satisfaction. Z. Li and Wu (2013) examined and compared the residential satisfaction of informal settlements in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou. Their results showed that social attachment within the community is much more important to residential satisfaction than basic facilities or most socioeconomic attributes. Based on a survey in Shenzhen, Tao et al. (2014) examined the determinants of migrant workers’ residential satisfaction. Kinship and friendship ties, mobility, family life, and housing conditions were found to be significant to residential satisfaction. One common conclusion from the above studies in global cities is that social attachment is one of the most important factors influencing residential satisfaction. From the literature review, we find that scholarly understanding of residential satisfaction is currently based on the experiences of a relatively small group of cities, particularly well-known global metropolises such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen. But little attention has been paid to smaller cities. In this paper, we follow the post-colonialism perspective of urban studies, which sees all cities as ‘ordinary’ (Amin & Graham, 1997; Robinson, 2002, 2005, 2008), and we attempt to contribute to the ‘new geographies of theory’ (Roy, 2009). As Amin and Graham (1997) put, all cities are ordinary, in the sense that each city is distinct; they also held that the extant studies, which emphasized global metropolises, needed to take a wider view. Moreover, almost none of the existing studies has examined migrants' satisfaction with various sources of housing (a notable exception being Tao et al., 2014). Most of the studies on migrants' residential satisfaction emphasize urban villages but neglect the other main type of housing-factory dormitories. Thus, through a study of migrant settlements in an ordinary city of ChinaWenzhou-this paper fills the gaps mentioned above. Specifically, we aim to address the following questions: What is the overall residential satisfaction as perceived by migrants in Wenzhou? What are the determinants of migrants' overall residential
78
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
satisfaction? What constitutes residential satisfaction for migrants with different housing types? Are their determinants similar or different? How should urban policies help improve migrants' residential satisfaction?
2.2. Housing migrants in Chinese cities and residential satisfaction Internal migration in China is one of the most striking examples in the world today. One out of every six people is on the move (NHFPC, 2014). Without a local hukou (household registration), migrants are excluded from several types of urban housing, including ‘economical and comfortable’ housing,3 municipal public housing, and work-unit public housing (W. Wu, 2002a). They have very limited housing choices (W. Wu, 2004). Thus China's current experience is marked by these migrant settlements in marginal, unregulated, or ambiguous areas, with informal housing and land use arrangements (He, 2013; Wang, Wang, & Wu, 2009a; Yuting Liu, He, Wu, & Webster, 2010). In contrast to the migrants who often built housing in slum and squatter settlements by themselves, migrants in China are not allowed to build their own housing in the city due to land-use rights (L. Zhang, Zhao, & Tian, 2003). The housing available for migrants is constructed mainly by the villagers living in urban villages. ‘Urban village’ refers to settlements that are designated as rural areas but are located within the city limits. Urban villages are a product of rapid industrialization and urbanization in the postreform era (Yuting Liu et al., 2010; Wang, Wang, & Wu, 2009b). Because of their low-cost housing and loose residency requirements, they became the main habitats of many low-income rural migrants (Wang et al., 2009a; L.; Zhang, 2011). The extensive studies have painted a vivid picture of China's urban villages, a shanty-like appearance, high densities, high rates of crime, and chaotic land uses (Z. Li & Wu, 2013). City managers and planners perceive urban villages as an eyesore or a nuisance (Yuting Liu et al., 2010). They attempt to eliminate this informality or ‘non-state space’ to create more governable spaces through formal land and infrastructure development (F. Wu, Zhang, & Webster, 2013). Therefore, the ‘demolish and redevelop’ approach to urban villages has become a common strategy to build a ‘civilized and harmonized’ urban space in China (L. Zhang, 2005). However, these redevelopment projects are often market-driven and thus profitcentered. Little attention has been given to the needs of migrants, who are, in fact, the main residents of an urban village (Y. Lin, de Meulder, & Wang, 2011). What is residential satisfaction as perceived by migrants? How would they react if the urban village where they lived were to be demolished and redeveloped? Besides housing in urban villages, another main accommodation for migrants is dormitories (Wang et al., 2009a; W.; Wu, 2004), particularly in fast-growing industrial cities such as Wenzhou. Dormitories often consist of small rooms shared by several individuals. The advantages and disadvantages of factory dormitories have been evaluated in Ding, Qiu, and Wang (2011). The advantages include affordability for migrants, ease of management for employers and city government, and ease of communication between migrants. However, lack of privacy and overcrowding are common features of this type of housing. Dormitories are also blamed for segregating migrants and local residents (Ding et al., 2011). Dormitories are often transitional or temporary housing for migrants,
3 ‘Economical and comfortable’ housing (jingji shiyong fang) is a type of affordable housing for low- or middle-income local urban residents to purchase. It is built by for-profit real estate developers and subsidized by the government to maintain a relatively low price. All affordable units are developed for sale, not for rent, and are only accessible to eligible urban residents.
particularly for single young migrants. It is also not the first choice for migrants, so are the migrants who live in dormitories less satisfied than those who live in urban villages? What are the determinants of their residential satisfaction? As stated in the literature review, a number of factors have been identified as important to residential satisfaction. For example, socioeconomic factors, especially hukou status, income, education, and occupation, are important to residential satisfaction. The housing characteristics, including housing cost, facilities, number of people sharing, housing location, and floor area, may impact the overall residential satisfaction. However, little attention has been given to the special situation of China's migrants, who are temporary/transient in the city. In this study, we use the term ‘transitional characteristics’ to indicate the temporary status of migrants in the city, which may greatly influence their housing choices (B. Li, Duda, & An, 2009; Tao et al., 2014). These features also reflect migrants' coping strategies in the face of rapid change and uncertainty about their future in the arrival city. The first transitional factor is migrants' employment status. Unlike local residents, migrants tend to work without long-term contracts, which enables them to change jobs and even cities easily. Migrants in Wenzhou in particular, who are mainly manufacturing workers, prefer to work on a daily basis or an assignment basis; this allows them to maximize their income by extending their working hours or switching to a better-paid job. Second, the length of residence may also influence migrants' residential satisfaction, as has already been addressed in several existing studies (Z. Li & Wu, 2013). Third, migrants' intention to stay is another important transitional factor. Migrants who do not plan to stay in Wenzhou may indicate their low residential satisfaction in Wenzhou. Moreover, the frequency of job changes may also affect migrants' requirements on housing quality. As such, this study systemically explores the roles of these transitional factors on migrants' residential satisfaction in Wenzhou. In the meantime, given that very few studies have been conducted to examine the residential satisfaction of migrants with different housing types in China, this paper also focuses on the two hypotheses below: 1) migrants with different sources of housing may have different levels of residential satisfaction; and 2) the determinants of residential satisfaction could be different depending on the type of housing. Based on above analysis, the research framework of this study is shown in Fig. 1. 3. Housing, living environment, and residential satisfaction of migrants in Wenzhou: an empirical analysis 3.1. Survey area Wenzhou, the birthplace of China's private economy, is wellknown for so-called ‘Wenzhou model’. The essence of the ‘Wenzhou model’ is a system of production that is centered on family enterprises and embedded in thick local institutions. Paradoxically, economic success has brought Wenzhou a great many migrants, generating fundamental changes in that local culture. However, Wenzhou is less studied as a migrant city. Approximately thirty-six percent of its total population are migrants, which is comparable with Beijing (36 percent) and Guangzhou (37 percent) (NBS, 2011). Due to the high concentration of light-manufacturing industrial clusters, the migrants in Wenzhou are mainly labor-intensive manufacturing workers. As such, this study uses Wenzhou as a case city to analyze migrants' residential satisfaction. Shuangyu, a sub-district located about five kilometers west of Wenzhou's old city center, has been selected as the main survey area (Fig. 2). Shuangyu is known for its shoe manufacturing clusters; more than 92 percent of its designated large industrial enterprises are leather
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
79
Independent variable Dependent variable Socioeconomic
status
Gender, age, hukou status, marital status, education, occupation, income
Satisfaction for migrants living
Transitional characteristics
in urban villages
Employment status, length of residency, intention to stay, the frequency of job changes
Overall satisfaction
Satisfaction for migrants Housing characteristics
living in factory dorms
Housing tenure, housing sharing, floor area, rental rate, location, facilities
Fig. 1. Research framework.
shoe manufacturing and related enterprises (LCECO, 2011). It is home to two industrial parks-China's Shoe Capital Industrial Park (Zhongguo xiedu gongye yuanqu; 2.6 sq.km) and Wenzhou Lucheng Light Manufacturing Industrial Garden (Wenzhou lucheng qing gongye yuanqu; 0.68 sq.km) (Fig. 3). It hosts a substantial number of migrants, equivalent to about six times the local population. It is becoming a typical migrant enclave, housing migrant workers of both high mobility and socioeconomic diversity. This empirical analysis is based on both questionnaire surveys and interviews from 2012 to 2014. Five types of places where migrants interact with urban space were chosen for the survey-migrants’ residential areas, workplaces, shopping areas, major public spaces, and bus stations (Fig. 4). This sampling method, not entirely random, ensured that the sample was drawn as systematically as possible to give a good representation of the migrant population living in Shuangyu. Because most migrants have low levels of educational attainment, the surveyors asked the questions verbally and then wrote down the respondents’ answers. The survey produced a total of 435 valid questionnaires and 20 in-depth interviews.
3.2. Descriptive findings 3.2.1. Socioeconomic status Many migrants in Shuangyu are young people from rural areas who have low educational attainment and who work in the manufacturing sectors (Table 1). They are working-age, and their primary reason for being in the city is to work. They are generally less educated than those in megacities, such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou (S. Lin & Gaubatz, 2016). It is worth noting that more than 80 percent of the migrants in Wenzhou work in the manufacturing sectors, which contrasts with the situation in wellstudied global cities such as Beijing. Working in the labor-intensive manufacturing industry, migrants must devote extremely long hours and intensive labor in order to improve their income. According to the survey, more than 86 percent of the migrants work more than eight hours per day (and approximately 60 percent of them work more than 10 h per day). They also have to maximize their savings by minimizing their living costs, a significant portion of which are housing costs.
3.2.2. Transitional characteristics Migrants’ temporary status and economic purpose in the city suggests that accommodations are mainly places to sleep and rest. So proximity to the workplace and low cost are higher priorities than a comfortable living environment and space (W. Wu, 2002b, pp. 212e226). Table 1 reports on transitional characteristics of the migrants surveyed. Forty-seven percent of the migrants in the survey do not have official contracts with the enterprises and are mostly hired for daily or task basis. Although most of them have lived in Wenzhou for a long time, very few of them want to stay. They would leave if there were better job opportunities in their hometown or other cities. This indicates that their major reason for being in the city is to earn money, not to live there long-term.
3.2.3. Housing characteristics Employer-run dormitories (where 36 percent of all migrants surveyed stay) and private rental housing in urban villages (where 61 percent of all migrants surveyed stay) are two major housing sources for migrants in Wenzhou. The dormitories provided by employers are usually free in Wenzhou, and workers need only pay for utilities such as electricity and water. Urban villages provide cheap and reliable accommodations for migrants. Table 2 reports the housing characteristics of migrants. The average living space per person in Shuangyu is extremely smalldless than five square meters. That is not only smaller than the average amount of living space for local residents but also smaller than most migrant settlements in other cities such as Shenzhen, Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou (Zheng, Long, Fan, & Gu, 2009). A few differences were found between migrants who live in dormitories and migrants who live in urban villages (Table 2). For example, migrants who live in dormitories tend to share with more people than those who live in urban villages. But dormitories are often free of charge and equipped with better facilities, such as air conditioners. However, many migrants do not use air conditioners even in the hot summer, because they must pay for their own utilities. Facilities in urban villages are inadequate and poorly maintained. Only 34 percent and 39 percent of migrants, respectively, have a kitchen and bathroom to themselves. As one interviewed couple said,
80
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
Fig. 2. Location map of Shuangyu.
Fig. 3. Shoe capital of China Industrial Park and Lucheng Light Manufacturing Industrial Garden in Shuangyu. Map source: base map provided by Shuangyu Street Committee Main Office
It's a very old house and simply built of iron [Tiepi fang-more like temporary housing]. There is only one bathroom on each floor. And there are about 20 rooms on one floor. And we have to wait in a line to take a bath. It's terrible. And no windows. It's dark all day and all night. The lights need to be on all day. The hallway is very narrow, which means only one person can pass at a time [he showed how narrow it is]. To be honest, the living conditions in Wenzhou are terrible. And rents are getting higher and higher. You can compare with Guangzhoudhousing there is not as expensive as here, and it is clean, with a private bathroom and balcony. Wenzhou's living environment is quite bad (August 1, 2013).
3.3. Residential satisfaction In the survey, we evaluate residential satisfaction by simply asking migrants how they feel about their residence. Respondents were asked to position themselves on a five-point scale. The scale was labeled as follows: 1 ¼ ‘very dissatisfied’; 2 ¼ ‘dissatisfied’; 3 ¼ ‘neutral’; 4 ¼ ‘satisfied’; 5 ¼ ‘very satisfied’. The higher the value, the higher the residential satisfaction. Overall, migrants are dissatisfied with their living conditions, giving them an average
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
81
Fig. 4. Major surveyed sites in Shuangyu, Wenzhou.
score of 2.65. Migrants who live in different housing sources have different levels of residential satisfaction. Migrants who live in dormitories are most satisfied with their living conditions, giving them a score of 3.08. Surprisingly, migrants who own their own housing are not necessarily satisfied, giving it a score of 2.50. Migrants who live in urban villages have the lowest level of residential satisfaction, giving them a score of 2.42. This confirms the hypothesis that migrants with different housing types have different levels of residential satisfaction.
4. Determinants of migrants’ residential satisfaction Many factors contribute to the residential satisfaction of migrants. In the existing literature, 21 variables are selected that may affect residential satisfaction, including socioeconomic status, transitional characteristics, and housing characteristics. Model 1e3 (Table 3) shows the regression results for all migrants in general, migrants who live in dormitories, and migrants who live in urban villages. Since some of the independent variables are categorical, we first conducted dummy coding. Then, in order to find the bestfit model, we undertook “Enter” (dummy variables as different blocks) stepwise regression in SPSS, eventually to identify the significant variables as the determinants for residential satisfaction. One of the main results of our regression indicates that migrants' overall residential satisfaction is influenced by various factors. First, housing tenure has a significant effect on migrants' overall residential satisfaction. Specifically, the migrants who live in factory dormitories tend to be more satisfied with their residence, which is consistent with our findings in the survey. Second, socioeconomic status, such as marital status, education, and income, contributes significantly to the level of residential satisfaction. Migrants who are married and have lower educational attainment and higher income tend to be more satisfied with their residence. This is consistent with the existing literature that suggests that socioeconomic factors are important factors in residential
satisfaction. It is also worth noting that hukou status is not significant to migrants’ residential satisfaction. This echoes our survey finding that hukou status is the issue that least concerns Wenzhou migrants (Table 4). They are also less likely to settle down in the city. Thus whether or not they have a local hukou has little impact on their residential satisfaction. As one of the migrants replied: Why would I want to become a Wenzhounese? I was born in Zhuzhou [Hunan Province], and my family roots are there too. I'd prefer to get a hukou from Henan [where her husband came from], not Wenzhou. This is only a place to get job and earn money. I'll leave if there is better opportunity in my hometown (January 3, 2014). Third, concerning the transitional factors, employment status and length of residence have a significant influence on migrants' residential satisfaction. Migrants with unstable employment status (without a contract) have less residential satisfaction. Meanwhile, staying longer in the city does not help migrants build their social attachment with the neighborhood and improve their residential satisfaction. Finally, the positive effect of selected facilities is surprisingly significant, in contrast with the findings in the megacities. Based on research in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, Z. Li and Wu (2013) claimed that social attachment is the most important factor influencing residential satisfaction, and no facilities can compensate for it. In Wenzhou's case, a private bathroom, a television, and an air conditioner are all important for improved residential satisfaction. The regression result also shows that residential satisfaction for migrants who live in dormitories and urban villages is affected by different factors, which supports the hypothesis that the determinants of residential satisfaction could be different depending on the housing type. For the migrants who live in factory dormitories, only two factors influence residential satisfaction: the intention to stay and air conditioners. No evidence has shown that
82
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
Table 1 Socioeconomic and transitional characteristics of migrants in the survey.
Origins of residence registration Rural hukou Urban hukou Age <18 18e25 26e35 36e45 46e60 >60 Gender Male Female Marital status Single Married Divorced or widowed Educational attainment Primary school and under Middle school Senior high school or technical school Post-secondary school College and up Income <1,000 RMB 1,000e2,000 RMB 2,000e3,000 RMB 3,000e5,000 RMB >5,000 RMB Industry (occupation) Manufacturing (Manager level) Self-employed and business Construction and transport Services Vendors Unemployed Others, such as teacher Employment status Contract basis Daily basis Task basis Others Length of residence Less than half a year Half a year to 1 year 1e2 years 2e5 years More than 5 years Intention to stay Yes, will stay in Wenzhou No, if there is job opportunity at hometown No, if there is job opportunity in other cities Never thought about it The frequency of job change More than 3 times 2e3 times 1 time Never Total
Table 2 Housing characteristics of migrants in the survey.
No. of Migrants
%
391 44
89.9 10.1
21 133 181 86 12 2
4.8 30.6 41.6 19.8 2.8 0.5
257 178
59.1 40.9
144 284 7
33.1 65.3 1.6
49 263 97 18 8
11.3 60.5 22.3 4.1 1.8
11 30 186 155 53
2.5 6.9 19.8 35.6 12.2
360 42 26 7 8 12 15 7
82.8 9.7 6.0 1.6 1.8 2.8 3.4 1.6
174 84 120 57
40.0 19.3 27.6 13.1
24 34 55 84 238
5.5 7.8 12.6 19.3 54.7
84 161 66 124
19.3 37.0 15.2 28.5
83 137 60 155 435
31.5 13.8 35.6 100.0
socioeconomic factors have significant effects on the residential satisfaction of migrants who live in the dormitories. Migrants who plan to work in another city or who are not sure of their future plans tend to be more dissatisfied with their residential situation. Air conditioners also contribute to a higher level of satisfaction. For migrants who live in urban villages, employment status has an important effect on residential satisfaction. Migrants who work as day laborers, in particular, are less satisfied than those who have a long-term contract with the employer. Also, long-term residence reduces their residential satisfaction. However, their satisfaction
Dormitories (N ¼ 156)
Rented housing (N ¼ 267)
Total (N ¼ 435)
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
14.7 25.0 39.1 21.2
6 58 142 61
2.2 21.7 53.2 22.9
30 104 204 97
6.9 23.9 46.9 22.3
62.8 28.9 6.4 1.9
154 82 22 9
57.7 30.7 8.2 3.4
257 128 33 17
59.1 29.4 7.6 3.9
59.6 32.0 5.8 1.3 1.3
1 27 118 92 29
0.4 10.1 44.2 34.4 10.9
95 80 129 96 35
21.8 18.4 29.7 22.1 8.0
46.2 38.5 11.5 3.8
46 123 68 30
17.2 46.1 25.5 11.2
122 188 88 37
28.1 43.2 20.2 8.5
3.8 26.3 21.2 55.1 15.4
34 39 90 25 43
12.7 14.6 33.7 9.4 16.1
44 84 130 116 73
10.1 19.3 29.9 26.7 16.8
Housing sharing More than 5 people 23 3 to 5 people 39 1 to 2 people 61 Alone 33 Floor area Less than 5 m2 98 5 to 10 m2 45 2 10 10 to 20 m 2 More than 20 m 3 Housing cost Free 93 Less than 150 RMB 50 150 to 300 RMB 9 300 to 500 RMB 2 More than 500 RMB 2 Housing location (distance to work) Less than 5 min. 72 5 to 10 min. 60 10 to 30 min. 18 Longer than 30 min. 6 Housing facilitiesa Private kitchen 6 Private bathroom 41 Television 33 Air conditioner 86 Internet 24
a Note: the total percentage for housing facilities is more than 100%, because respondents were able to give more than one answer to the question.
could be improved significantly by providing better housing facilities, such as a private bathroom, private kitchen, and television. This indicates that for migrants who live in urban villages, housing size or whether they are sharing with other people matters little, but basic facilities would contribute greatly to their residential satisfaction.
5. Conclusions and discussions Residential satisfaction studies in Chinese cities have previously focused primarily on a small group of cities, particularly wellstudied megacities such as Beijing, Guangzhou, Shanghai and Shenzhen. Little attention has been given to the other “ordinary cities.” Moreover, few residential satisfaction studies have been carried out from the perspective of migrants. The tremendous ratio of rural to urban migrants has greatly influenced the urban sociospatial structure (Douglass, Wissink, & van Kempen, 2012; Gu & Shen, 2003; He, 2013; Z.; Li & Wu, 2006; Liu et al., 2012). Providing these rural migrants with affordable and decent housing in the city is a great challenge for the national and city government. However, migrants, as a relatively disadvantaged group, are rarely able to speak up for themselves to solve housing problems and improve residential satisfaction in the city (Z. Li & Wu, 2013). In fact, their major residential areas-urban villages-were often demolished and redeveloped without considering their wishes, and they were forced to leave. As such, it is urgent to evaluate residential satisfaction from the perspective of migrants. This paper aims to fill the above knowledge gap by using Wenzhou, an ordinary city where migrants make up more than 35 percent of the total population, as a case study to scrutinize the current migrants’ housing condition, to evaluate their residential satisfaction, and to identify the determining factors that influence residential
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
83
Table 3 Linear regression for the determinants of residential satisfaction. Dormitories
(Constant) Gender (Female ¼ 0, male ¼ 1) Hukou status (Urban ¼ 0, rural ¼ 1) Age Marital statusþ Single (as reference) Married Divorced or widowed Educationþ Primary school and under (as reference) Middle school High school and technical school Post-secondary College and up Occupationþ Manufacturing (as reference) Business owners Taxi driver Construction worker Management-level worker Services Vendors Income Employment statusþ Contract (as reference) Daily basis Task basis Others Length of residency Intention of stayþ Yes (as reference) No, go to other city No, go back to hometown Not sure Frequency of job changes Housing tenureþ Ownership (as reference) Private rented housing Factory dorm Other sources Housing sharing Floor room Rental rate Housing location (Distance to work) Private kitchenþ Private bathroomþ Televisionþ Air conditionerþ Internetþ F R Square Adjusted R Square Number
Urban village
Overall satisfaction
B
t
Sig.
B
t
Sig.
B
t
Sig.
1.971
3.053
**
3.237
8.623
***
2.920
8.408
***
0.138
1.214
0.282 0.792
1.218 1.461
0.167 0.73
1.117 1.157
0.291 0.670
2.486 1.615
*
0.227 0.157 0.533 0.31
0.622 0.381 1.059 0.516
0.176 0.371 0.569
0.905 1.624 1.349
0.101 0.390 0.679 0.488
0.599 2.003 2.261 1.163
0.57 1.769 1.858
0.94 1.713 1.77
0.865 1.029
0.849 1.003
0.561 0.359 0.381 0.284 0.282 0.63
1.685 0.994 0.971 0.792 0.805 1.293
0.009 0.033 0.146 0.252 0.097 0.558 0.124
0.033 0.098 0.402 0.758 0.314 1.337 2.036
0.393 0.353 0.157
1.615 2.631 2.595 3.501
0.276 0.565 0.395
1.878 3.170 2.598
** **
0.410
3.185
**
0.524 0.278 0.418
3.597 2.422 2.814
*** * **
0.014 0.329 0.914
0.748 0.292 0.554 0.142
0.052 1.456 1.924
2.548 1.253 2.342 1.65
0.404
1.92
0.656
3.25
* *
0.441 0.335 0.403 0.149
2.354 1.934 1.381 2.647
0.222 0.215 0.241
0.946 1.095 1.192
0.429 0.408 0.364 ***
4.272 0.401 0.307 156
2.546 0.179 0.109 267
2.032 2.041 2.608
*
**
* * **
* *
*
** ** ***
6.501 0.276 0.233 435
Notes: þdummy variable; *significant at 5%; **significant at 1%; ***significant at 0.1%. Model 3 includes a total of 21 variables; Model 1e2 includes 20 variables (housing tenure has been excluded).
satisfaction. Moreover, we discuss the residential satisfaction of migrants by shedding some light upon comparing different housing types. According to the survey, the majority of the migrants in Wenzhou are from rural areas, have low educational attainment, and work in the labor-intensive manufacturing sectors. This represents the typical type of migrants in China-‘peasant workers’ (nongmingong). Employer-provided dormitories and rented housing in urban villages are the two major housing types for migrants. Overall, migrants feel dissatisfied with their residences. It confirms our hypothesis that migrants with different housing types have different levels of residential satisfaction. It is also consistent with the conclusions of Tao et al. (2014) and Li and Duda (2010), who
found that migrants are more satisfied with factory dormitories than private rental housing in urban villages. The residential satisfaction of migrants and its determinants are examined by three categories of variables: socioeconomic status, transitional characteristics, and housing characteristics. The results are quite revealing. First, socioeconomic factors have significant effects on migrants' residential satisfaction. It indicates that migrants who are married and who have lower educational attainment and higher income tend to be more satisfied with their residence. It is also worth noting that hukou status is not significant to migrants’ residential satisfaction. In fact, obtaining a local hukou is the issue least important to migrants, according to the survey. Second, transitional characteristics play important roles in
84
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85
Table 4 Issues that concerned migrants in the survey.
Salary Living cost Safety Health and social welfare Living environment Children's education Job opportunities Leisure Local hukou
No.
%
306 90 81 80 78 71 69 41 16
70.3 20.7 18.6 18.4 17.9 16.3 15.9 9.4 3.7
Note: The total percentage is more than 100%, because respondents were able to give more than one answer to the question: “What are the most important things you are concerned about in Wenzhou?”.
migrants’ residential satisfaction. The temporary/transient status of migrants in the city does not necessarily lower their expectations on housing quality and thus contribute to higher residential satisfaction. In fact, migrants who work without a long-term contract and who plan to leave Wenzhou in the future are less satisfied than the others. Moreover, the longer they stay in the city, the less satisfied they are. This indicates that staying longer in the city does not help migrants to build their social attachment with the neighborhood and improve their sense of belonging. Changing their transitional/temporary status and making them more settled in the city is a possible way to increase their residential satisfaction. Third, in contrast to findings in major metropolises such as Beijing, Guangzhou, and Shanghai (Z. Li & Wu, 2013) that emphasize the importance of social attachment, we found that facilities play a more important role in determining migrants’ residential satisfaction. This result demonstrates that migrants in general have very low requirements concerning housing-providing basic facilities could greatly boost their residential satisfaction. Last but not the least, migrants’ residential satisfaction with different housing sources is influenced by different factors. For migrants who live in the dormitories, the only two important factors are whether they intend to stay and whether they have an air conditioner. However, for migrants who live in urban villages, employment status, length of residence, and facilities such as private kitchen, private bathroom, and television all contribute significantly to their residence satisfaction. This is probably because most migrants who live in the dormitories regard them as temporary housing and have no intention of staying. But migrants who live in urban villages and who are often with families tend to stay longer and thus care more about basic facilities. The findings of the study show that the determinants of migrants' residential satisfaction in Wenzhou are, to some extent, different from those of migrants in Chinese megacities. This demonstrates that each city is unique and increases our knowledge of the migrants' residential satisfaction within an ordinary city. With China's New-Type Urbanization emphasis on a people-centered approach, it is important to solve migrants' housing problems by considering the unique characteristics of migrants. The findings of this study let policy-makers know that simply providing a local hukou does not help improve migrants' residential satisfaction. Providing better housing facilities is a more direct and efficient way to boost their residential satisfaction. It also accords with current China's urban planning strategy, which has gradually transferred from increment planning to inventory planning. Improving migrants' residential satisfaction by promoting the usage of current residential space is more efficient and realistic than building new residential areas. Moreover, the fact that migrants with different housing types have different levels of residential satisfaction suggests that housing policies aimed at improving residential
satisfaction should be contextualized. Future research would include more emotional factors, such as social attachment, to compare with the physical environment of the housing situation, and would discuss their importance to residential satisfaction. Furthermore, future research can extend to more case cities to provide more empirical evidence. References rigo, M., & Aragone s, J. I. (1990). Residential satisfaction in council housing. Ame Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10(4), 313e325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S0272-4944(05)80031-3. Amin, A., & Graham, S. (1997). The ordinary city. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 22(4), 411e429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.00202754.1997.00411.x. ~es, M. H. (2016). Exploring Barreira, A. P., Agapito, D., Panagopoulos, T., & Guimara residential satisfaction in shrinking cities: A decision-tree approach. Urban Research & Practice, 1e22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2016.1179784. Chan, K. W. (2011). China, internal migration. In I. Ness, & P. Bellwood (Eds.), The encyclopedia of global migration. Blackwell publishing. Chen, L., Zhang, W., Yang, Y., & Yu, J. (2013). Disparities in residential environment and satisfaction among urban residents in Dalian, China. Habitat International, 40, 100e108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.03.002. Dekker, K., de Vos, S., Musterd, S., & van Kempen, R. (2011). Residential satisfaction in housing estates in European cities: A multi-level research approach. Housing Studies, 26(04), 479e499. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2011.559751. Ding, C., Qiu, A., & Wang, J. (2011). Zhongguo kuaisu chengshihua shiqi nongmingong zhufang leixing jiqi pingjia [Migrant Housing During Rapid Urbanization in China: Typology and Assessment]. Urban Studies (In China), 18(6), 49e54. Douglass, M., Wissink, B., & van Kempen, R. (2012). Enclave urbanism in China: Consequences and interpretations. Urban Geography, 33(2), 167e182. http:// dx.doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.33.2.167. Du, H., & Li, S. (2010). Migrants, urban villages, and community sentiments: A case of Guangzhou, China. Asian Geographer, 27(1e2), 93e108. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/10225706.2010.9684155. Fan, C. (2008). China on the Move: Migration, the state and the household. London and New York: Routledge. Fang, Y. (2006). Residential satisfaction, moving intention and moving behaviours: A study of redeveloped neighbourhoods in inner-city beijing. Housing Studies, 21(5), 671e694. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673030600807217. Gu, C., & Shen, J. (2003). Transformation of urban socio-spatial structure in socialist market economies: The case of beijing. Habitat International, 27(1), 107e122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0197-3975(02)00038-3. He, S. (2013). Evolving enclave urbanism in China and its socio-spatial implications: The case of Guangzhou. Social & Cultural Geography, 14(3), 243e275. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2012.762112. He, S., & Qi, X. (2014). Guangzhoushi sanlei shequ juzhu manyidu yu qianju yiyuan yanjiiu [Determinants of relocation satisfaction and relocation intention in chinese cities: an empirical investigation on three types of residential neighborhood in Guangzhou]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 34(11), 1327e1336. Herfert, G., Neugebauer, C. S., & Smigiel, C. (2013). Living in residential Satisfaction? Insights from large-scale housing estates in central and Eastern Europe. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 104(1), 57e74. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1467-9663.2012.00727.x. Hu, Z. (1987). The characterristics and geographical background of Wenzhou model [Wenzhou Moshi de Tezheng yu Dili Beijing]. Economic Geography, 7(1), 5. Huang, Z., & Du, X. (2015). Assessment and determinants of residential satisfaction with public housing in Hangzhou, China. Habitat International, 47, 218e230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.01.025. Li, B., & Duda, M. (2010). Employers as landlords for rural-to-urban migrants in Chinese cities. Environment and Urbanization, 22(1), 13e31. Li, B., Duda, M., & An, X. (2009). Drivers of housing choice among rural-to-urban migrants: Evidence from Taiyuan. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 2(2), 142e156. Li, Z., & Liu, Y. (2011). Beyond spatial segregation: Neo-migrants and their social networks in Chinese cities. Acta Geographica Sinica, 66(6), 785e795. Lin, Y., de Meulder, B., & Wang, S. (2011). Understanding the ‘village in the city’ in Guangzhou: Economic integration and development issue and their implications for the urban migrant. Urban Studies, 48(16), 3583e3598. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042098010396239. Lin, S., & Gaubatz, P. (2015). New Wenzhou: Migration, metropolitan spatial development and modernity in a third-tier Chinese model city. Habitat International, 50, 214e225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.08.040. Lin, S., & Gaubatz, P. (2016). Socio-spatial segregation in China and migrants' everyday life experiences: The case of Wenzhou. Urban Geography, 1e20. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2016.1182287. Li, S., & Song, Y. (2009). Redevelopment, displacement, housing conditions, and residential satisfaction: A study of Shanghai. Environment and Planning A, 41(5), 1090e1108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a4168. Liu, A. P. L. (1992). The “Wenzhou model” of development and China's modernization. Asian Survey, 32, 696e711. Liu, Y., He, S., Wu, F., & Webster, C. (2010). Urban villages under China's rapid
S. Lin, Z. Li / Habitat International 66 (2017) 76e85 urbanization: Unregulated assets and transitional neighbourhoods. Habitat International, 34(2), 135e144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2009.08.003. Liu, Y., Li, Z., & Breitung, W. (2012). The social networks of new-generation migrants in China's urbanized villages: A case study of Guangzhou. Habitat International, 36(1), 192e200. Liu, Y., Li, Z., Liu, Y., & Chen, H. (2014). Growth of rural migrant enclaves in Guangzhou, China: Agency, everyday practice and social mobility. Urban Studies. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042098014553752. Li, Z., & Wu, F. (2006). Socio-spatial differentiation and residential inequalities in Shanghai: A case study of three neighbourhoods. Housing Studies, 21(5), 695e717. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673030600807365. Li, Z., & Wu, F. (2013). Residential satisfaction in China's informal settlements: A case study of beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou. Urban Geography, 34(7), 923e949. Mohit, M. A., Ibrahim, M., & Rashid, Y. R. (2010). Assessment of residential satisfaction in newly designed public low-cost housing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Habitat International, 34(1), 18e27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2009. 04.002. NBS. (2011). Communiqu e of the national Bureau of statistics of People's Republic of China on major figures of the 2010 population Census[1] (No. 1). National Bureau of Statistics. NHFPC. (2014). National health and family planning commission. In Report on China's migrant population development 2014. Beijing: China Population Publishing House. Nolan, P., & Dong, F. R. (1989). Market forces in China: Competition and small businessethe Wenzhou debate. London: Zed Books. Office, L. C. E. C. (2011). Lucheng nianjian. Beijing: Fangzhi. Parkes, A., Kearns, A., & Atkinson, R. (2002). What makes people dissatisfied with their neighbourhoods? Urban Studies, 39(13), 2413e2438. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/0042098022000027031. Robinson, J. (2002). Global and world cities: A view from off the map. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 26(3), 531e554. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/1468-2427.00397. Robinson, J. (2005). Urban geography: World cities, or a world of cities. Progress in Human Geography, 29(6), 757e765. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/ 0309132505ph582pr. Robinson, J. (2008). Developing ordinary Cities: City visioning processes in durban and johannesburg. Environment and Planning A, 40(1), 74e87. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1068/a39127. Roy, A. (2009). The 21st-century Metropolis: New geographies of theory. Regional Studies, 43(6), 819e830. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343400701809665. Tao, L., Wong, F. K. W., & Hui, E. C. M. (2014). Residential satisfaction of migrant workers in China: A case study of shenzhen. Habitat International, 42, 193e202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.12.006.
85
Wang, Y., Wang, Y., & Wu, J. (2009a). Housing migrant workers in rapidly urbanizing regions: A study of the Chinese model in shenzhen. Housing Studies, 25(1), 83e100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02673030903362019. Wang, Y., Wang, Y., & Wu, J. (2009b). Urbanization and informal development in China: Urban villages in shenzhen. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33(4), 957e973. Wei, Y. (2007). Restructuring industrial districts, scaling up regional development: A study of the Wenzhou model, China. Economic Geography, 83(4), 421e444. Wei, Y. (2011). Beyong the GPNenew regionalism divide in China: Restructuring the clothing industry, remaking the Wenzhou model. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 93(3), 237e251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.14680467.2011.00375.x. Wu, W. (2002a). Migrant housing in urban China: Choices and constraints. Urban Affairs Review, 38(1), 90e119. Wu, W. (2002b). Temporary migrants in Shanghai: Housing and settlement patterns. In J. R. Logan (Ed.), The new Chinese City: Globalization and market reform (pp. 212e226). New York: Blackwell. Wu, W. (2004). Sources of migrant housing disadvantage in urban China. Environmental and Planning A, 36, 1285e1304. Wu, F., Zhang, F., & Webster, C. (2013). Informality and the development and demolition of urban villages in the Chinese peri-urban area. Urban Studies, 50(10), 1919e1934. Ye, X., & Wei, Y. D. (2005). Geospatial Analysis of Regional Development in China: The Case of Zhejiang Province and the Wenzhou Model. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 46(6), 445e464. http://dx.doi.org/10.2747/1538-7216.46.6.445. Zhang, L. (2005). Migrant enclaves and impacts of rdevelopment policy in Chinese cities. In L. J. C. Ma, & F. Wu (Eds.), Restructuring the Chinese City: Changing society, economy and space. London and New York: Routledge. Zhang, L. (2011). The political economy of informal settlements in post-socialist China: The case of chengzhongcun(s). Geoforum, 42(4), 473e483. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.03.003. Zhang, C., & Lu, B. (2016). Residential satisfaction in traditional and redeveloped inner city neighborhood: A tale of two neighborhoods in beijing. Travel Behaviour and Society, 5, 23e36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2015.08.001. Zhang, L., Zhao, S. X. B., & Tian, J. P. (2003). Self-help in housing and chengzhongcun in China's urbanization. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(4), 912e937. Zheng, S., Long, F., Fan, C., & Gu, Y. (2009). Urban villages in China: A 2008 survey of migrant settlements in beijing. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 50(4), 425e446. Zhou, C. (1984). Chongfen fahui yanhai kaifang chengshi de youshieshisige xinkaifang chengshi jianjie [Take Full Advantage of the Coastal Cities that Opened to Foreign InvestmenteIntroduction of 14 Newly Opened Cities]. Economic Management, (9), 53e59.