school of the built environment housing conditions of migrant workers in shenzhen ya ping wang...
Post on 20-Jan-2016
217 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
School of the Built Environment
Housing Conditions of Migrant Workers in Shenzhen
Ya Ping Wang School of the Built Environment, Heriot-Watt
University, Edinburgh
Prof. Yanglin Wang and Prof. Jiansheng WuCollege of Urban and Environmental Science, Beijing
University
School of the Built Environment
Permanent and Temporary Population in Shenzhen
Year
Total population at end of
year (1000)
Population with
residence cards
(hukou) (1000)
Population with
temporary residence
cards (1000)
% of residents
with temporary
cards
1980 332.9 320.9 12.0 3.6 1985 881.5 478.6 402.9 45.7 1990 2019.4 686.5 1332.9 66.0 1995 3451.2 991.6 2459.6 71.3 2000 4329.4 1249.2 3080.2 71.1 2004 5975.5 1651.3 4324.2 72.4
School of the Built Environment
Most Migrants live in Urban Villages
No. original
households
No. of original residents
No. of Private
buildings
No. of migrant tenants
Migrants per
Original households
Xiameilin 572 1376 716 61811 108 Shangmeilin 241 651 400 41384 171 Xianshan 514 1319 684 28000 55 Shangshan 497 1068 966 75000 151 Some examples from Futian
School of the Built Environment
Questions
• What relationship between housing and poverty can we identify in the fast urbanising and prosperous region?
• Does hukou status have an influence over housing conditions in regions with a mix of rural to urban and urban to urban migrant population?
• How does housing condition for migrants in Shenzhen compare with other cities?
School of the Built Environment
Data Collection
• A sample size of about 800 households.
• Stratified systematic sampling method: – three different zones – a number of urban villages in each zone
(Figure 1). – individual migrant households selected
systematically.
School of the Built Environment
Location of case study urban villages1 . Futian village; 2 . Shawei village; 3 . Xiangxi village; 4 . Hubei village;
5 . Shangmeilin, Xiameilin and Hebei villgages; 6 . Shuibei village; 7 . Dushu village; 8 . Baishizhou village; 9 . Tanglang village; 10 . Buji and Longlin Villages; 11 . Langxin
and Tianxin villages
School of the Built Environment
Migrants is a very mixed group
Origins of residence registration Urban Rural
Total
Number % Number % No. % Household type Single person household 153 56.5 223 46.6 376 46.6 Families 118 43.5 313 58.4 431 53.4 Sex of head of household Male 189 69.7 374 69.8 563 69.8 Female 82 30.3 162 30.2 244 30.2 Marital status of head of household Single 122 45.0 176 32.8 298 36.9 Married/Divorced/Other 149 55.0 360 67.2 509 63.1 Number of children of married couple or divorcee No child 35 25.0 23 6.5 58 11.7 1 66 47.1 139 39.3 205 41.5 2 29 20.7 133 37.6 162 32.8 3 8 5.7 46 13.0 54 10.9 4 2 1.4 9 2.5 11 2.2 5 0 0.0 4 1.1 4 .8 Final education level of the head of household Not finished primary School
5 1.8 14 2.6 19 2.4
Primary School 12 4.4 62 11.6 74 9.2 Junior Middle School 44 16.2 280 52.2 324 40.1 High School 67 24.7 117 21.8 184 22.8 Career/Technical Certificate
38 14.0 33 6.2 71 8.8
College Diploma 50 18.5 21 3.9 71 8.8 University Degree 48 17.7 8 1.5 56 6.9 Postgraduate degree 7 2.6 1 0.2 8 1.0
School of the Built Environment
Sources of housing (%)
Shenzhen Shenyang Chongqing Housing Tenure No. respondents % % % Owners 11 1.4 8.7 1.2 Provided by employers 107 13.3 5.0 5.7 Rented from the market 675 83.6 82.6 81.7 Borrowed from friend/relative 14 1.7 1.9 2.5 Total 807 100.0 100.0 100.0 Notes: Shenyang and Chongqing surveys were conducted in 2000; Shenzhen survey in 2005/06.
School of the Built Environment
Condition: Sharing House sharing No. of
households % Floor space per
person (m2) Sharing a room with others 187 23.2 7.7 Family use 1 room 131 16.2 13.0 Family use 2 rooms 5 0.6 42.6* Family use 1 whole unit 479 59.4 23.7 Other 5 0.6 25.6 Total 807 100.0
One person households
Two or more person households
No. of Households
% No. of households
%
Sharing a room with others 162 43.1 25 5.8 Family use 1 room 57 15.2 74 17.2 Family use 2 rooms 2 0.5 3 0.7 Family use 1 whole unit 152 40.4 327 75.9 Other 3 0.8 2 0.5 Total 376 100.0 431 100.0
Note: * The small number of cases and the unexpected large space per person may indicate that this category is not reliable. Respondents may have included all housing areas including these used by other families sharing with them.
School of the Built Environment
Housing floor space a) Among households that has exclusive use of a housing unit
No. of respondents
Average housing
floor space of the unit
Standard Deviation
Average housing
floor space per person
Standard deviation
From urban areas 181 43.4 21.3 26.7 18.8 From rural areas 298 45.2 24.8 21.9 16.2 Male 355 45.8 23.1 22.1 16.8 Female 124 40.8 24.3 28.5 18.1 b) Among those who sharing a room No of
respondents Average housing
floor space per person
Standard Deviation
Average No. of persons in
room
Standard deviation
From urban areas 46 9.5 6.1 3.0 2.3 From rural areas 131 7.0 5.4 4.3 3.2 Male 114 7.4 5.9 4.33 3.5 Female 63 8.1 5.3 3.4 1.9 Overall 7.7
(1.5-45) 5.7 4.0
(2-20) 3.1
School of the Built Environment
Sharing a room
Number of persons sharing a room Number of respondents
%
2 people 77 42.5 3 people 32 17.7 4 people 28 15.5 5 to 10 people 36 19.9 10 to 20 people 8 4.4 Total 181 100.0 Housing floor space per person Less than 2 m2 13 7.3 2.1-4 m2 37 20.9 4.1-6 m2 49 27.7 6.1-8 m2 20 11.3 8.1-10 m2 27 15.3 10-15 m2 18 10.2 Over 15 m2 13 7.3 Total 177 100.0
School of the Built Environment
School of the Built Environment
Income distribution
Income per capita Head of households Partner No. of
Households % No. of
respondents % No of
respondents %
<500 77 10.0 19 2.6 13 5.8 501-1000 205 26.7 165 22.1 77 34.6 1001-1500 133 17.3 124 16.6 51 23.0 1501-2000 122 15.8 153 20.6 29 13.0 2001-2500 45 5.9 40 5.3 7 3.2 2501-3000 55 7.1 77 10.4 15 6.7 3001-4000 42 5.5 49 6.6 8 3.6 4001-5000 48 6.2 57 7.6 9 4.1 5001-10000 33 4.3 51 6.9 10 4.6 >10000 9 1.2 10 1.3 3 1.4 Total 769 100.0 745 100.0 222 100.0
School of the Built Environment
Average monthly rent
No. of respondents Average monthly rent
Whole group 805 534 One person households
Male Female From urban areas From rural areas
375 217 158
153 222
422 403 448
512 360
Sharing a unit with others 182 342 Sharing a room with others 130 203
Multi-person households Headed by a male Headed by female Family head from urban areas Family head from rural areas
430 344 86
118 312
632 640 600
741 590
School of the Built Environment
Housing and food costs
Affordability
On housing On food On housing and food Percentage income spent No. of cases % No. of cases % No. of cases % Less than 10% 141 21.0 123 16.1 7 1.0 11-20% 221 32.9 219 28.7 44 6.6 21-30% 142 21.1 188 24.6 110 16.4 31-40% 71 10.6 124 16.2 120 17.9 41-50% 46 6.8 68 8.9 113 16.9 More than 50% 51 7.6 42 5.5 275 41.1 Total 672 100.0 764 100.0 669 100.0
School of the Built Environment
Housing preferences Suitable house under
current income Ideal house if income increased in the future
No. of Respondents
% No. of Respondents
%
Current house or rent other urban village housing
547 67.9 149 18.5
Rent government sponsored cheap rental housing
73 9.1 27 3.4
Rent private housing in commercial housing estate
70 8.7 86 10.7
Buy housing in urban village 8 1.0 44 5.5 Buy government sponsored affordable housing
52 6.5 146 18.2
Buy ordinary commercial housing 38 4.7 310 38.6 Other 17 2.1 42 5.2 Total 805 100.0 804 100.0
School of the Built Environment
Conclusion: Housing and Poverty
• 40 percent of the sample is in housing poverty. – 220 (58.5%) out of 376 single person
households has 5 square metres or less living floor space.
– 101 (30.6%) out of 330 families live either in only one room or have to share a room with other people.
School of the Built Environment
Conclusion: Rural migrants vs Migrants
• Housing condition among migrants from urban areas is slightly better than rural migrants.
• This, however, could be the result of differences in educational background.
School of the Built Environment
Conclusion: Comparison with other cities• Migrant housing condition in Shenzhen is not
worse than that in other cities due to the huge number of migrants
• Housing condition is not much better either in a rich city
• However, we are looking at young working age persons, who work very hard for long hours.
School of the Built Environment
A major challenge for Shenzhen• As a new city, the proportion of migrants among
the total population is extremely large. • Improving migrant housing will be a long and
hard process.• Redevelopment should be progressed with
caution.• Other soft policy options should be tested,
aiming for a gradual improvement and upgrading.
School of the Built Environment
A fragmented and divided housing market
Factory dormitory and construction site shelter
Older houses in suburban villages
New houses in suburban villages
Older houses in inner city villages
Privatised older public houses
Government sponsored rental housing
New houses in inner city villages
Economic/affordable housing
Ordinary commercial housing
Luxury flats
Townhouse/cottages
Owners’ ladder Renters’ Ladder
The rich
The professionals
Low and middle income official urban residents
The original village residents
The urban migrants and established rural migrants
Low and middle income official urban residents
Informal Market
Formal Market
The rich and international migrants
School of the Built Environment
Our recommendation:Integration of different housing markets
Factory dormitory and construction site shelter
Older houses in suburban villages
New houses in suburban villages
Older houses in inner city villages
Privatised older public houses
Government sponsored rental housing
New houses in inner city villages
Economic/affordable housing
Ordinary commercial housing
Luxury flats
Townhouse/cottages
Owners’ ladder Renters’ Ladder
The rich
The professionals
Low and middle income official urban residents
The original village residents
The urban migrants and established rural migrants
Low and middle income official urban residents
Informal Market
Formal Market
The rich and international migrants
top related