Ab

Ha

b

c

d

3

a

ARRA

KRRHRFFC

I

irbppmiow

RCf

0d

Land Use Policy 29 (2012) 11– 22

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Land Use Policy

journa l h o me pa g e: www.elsev ier .com/ locate / landusepol

ccelerated restructuring in rural China fueled by ‘increasing vs. decreasingalance’ land-use policy for dealing with hollowed villages

ualou Longa,b,∗, Yurui Lia,c, Yansui Liua,b, Michael Woodsd, Jian Zoua,c

Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research (IGSNRR), Chinese Academy of Sciences, 11A Datun Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100101, ChinaKey Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, ChinaGraduate University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, ChinaInstitute of Geography and Earth Sciences (IGES) and Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research, Data and Methods (WISERD), Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth SY23DB, UK

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle history:eceived 1 March 2011eceived in revised form 26 April 2011ccepted 27 April 2011

eywords:ural restructuringural–urban developmentollowed villageural protestarmland protectionood security

a b s t r a c t

Rapid industrialization and urbanization in China has produced a unique phenomenon of ‘village-hollowing’, shaped by the dual-track structure of socio-economic development. This paper analyzes thephenomenon of ‘village-hollowing’, identifying the processes and influences that have driven their evolu-tion, and highlighting the challenge that the locking-up of unused rural housing land in ‘hollowed villages’presents for China in the context of concerns over urban development and food security. The paper exam-ines the ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-use policy has been adopted by the Chinese governmentin response to the problem, which seeks to balance increases in urban construction land with a reductionin rural construction land. The implementation of the scheme is discussed through a case study of Huantaicounty in Shandong province, drawing attention to its contested and contingent nature. It is argued thatthe policy is a top-down approach to rural restructuring that necessarily requires the acquiescence oflocal actors. However, it is noted that failures to adequate engage with local actors has led to resistance to

hina the policy, including violent protests against the demolition of housing. The paper suggests that lessonsmight be learned from Europe by incorporating elements of ‘bottom-up’ planning into the process. Assuch, the paper demonstrates that rural restructuring in China is a dynamic, multi-scalar and hybrid pro-cess that shares common elements and experiences with rural restructuring in Europe and elsewhere,but which is also strongly shaped by the distinctive political, economic, social and cultural context of

2i2ie

cpi

China.

ntroduction

Rural China has experienced a rapid and far-reaching transitionn the past three decades since Deng Xiaoping launched economiceforms in 1978. The traditional centrally planned economy haseen transformed into a market based economy, with accom-anying processes of industrialization and urbanization. Theserocesses have impacted on the social, economic and environ-ental landscape of both urban and rural China, with key trends

ncluding mass migration from rural to urban areas and the devel-pment of ‘villages-in-the-city’ (chengzhongcun) of rural migrantorkers (Chan, 2010; Chung, 2010; Liang et al., 2002; Song et al.,

∗ Corresponding author at: Institute of Geographic Sciences and Naturalesources Research (IGSNRR), Chinese Academy of Sciences, 11A Datun Road,haoyang District, Beijing 100101, China. Tel.: +86 10 64888169;ax: +86 10 64857065.

E-mail address: longhl@igsnrr.ac.cn (H. Long).

naaerimetb

264-8377/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.oi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.04.003

© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

008); the growth of urban sprawl and the loss of agricultural landn peri-urban districts (Lin, 2006; Liu et al., 2010b; Wang and Scott,008; Wei and Zhao, 2009; Yu and Ng, 2007); and rural industrial-

zation, especially in districts close to cities with highly liberalizedconomies (Peng, 2007).

As China evolves into a majority urban country, these pro-esses present a number of challenges to the continuing ruralopulation, who have been confronted with significant changes

n demographic structures, employment opportunities, commu-ity organization, lifestyles and standards of living, accessibilitynd rural culture (Goodman, 2008; Long et al., 2010; Mukherjeend Zhang, 2007; Tilt, 2008; Unger, 2002; Xu and Tan, 2002; Zhangt al., 2001). Whilst rural income levels have improved in manyegions, especially those close to large urban centres, urban–ruralnequalities in income and uncoordinated urban–rural develop-

ent have increased in more developed regions (Liu, 2009; Longt al., 2011). Indeed, there are significant spatial variations inhe experience and impact of economic transition in China, bothetween urban and rural regions, and within rural regions (Li and

1 se Pol

W2

btsil2aseihpai2

tstoca2aretaiZIsbruiprg22tnep

cnblt‘erctdmnvrh

H

toi218pl40sLdtti

simllfib2(o(a2airapdoc

mvdmstcalvtdta2

2 H. Long et al. / Land U

ei, 2010; Liu, 2009; Wan et al., 2007; Wang and Li, 2008; Wei,007).

Yet, rural restructuring in China continues to be strongly shapedy national macroeconomic development strategies that tendo treat rural China as a singular entity. In the reform periodince 1978, these strategies have particularly emphasized themplementation of ‘household responsibility system’, the estab-ishment of township and village enterprises (TVEs) (Liang et al.,002; Putterman, 1997; Shen and Ma, 2005; Xu and Tan, 2002),nd social and infrastructural developments such as road con-truction, irrigation, electrification and investments in health andducation provision – adopted in 2006 under the slogan of ‘Build-ng a New Countryside’ (Long et al., 2010). However, researchas revealed spatial variations in the implementation of theseolicies, demonstrated the importance of local actors in medi-ting change, and questioned the appropriateness of strategiesn some districts (Hang and Iseman, 2009; Long et al., 2009b,c,010).

As such, rural transformation in China is a hybrid and con-ested process, that involves actors and forces operating at multiplecales, and which echoes elements of rural restructuring in bothhe ‘developed world’ of Europe and North America and the ‘devel-ping world’ of the global south, yet has distinctively differentharacteristics. On the one hand, globalization has been identifieds a key driver of urbanization and industrialization in China (Ge,009; Lin, 2006; Wei, 2007; Wu and Ma, 2006), and has also had

direct impact on social, economic and environmental change inural regions (Lin, 2006; Wei, 2007) – such that parts of rural Chinaxhibit at least some of the features of the emergent ‘global coun-ryside’ (Woods, 2007). On the other hand, commentators havelso stressed the importance of endogenous factors in explain-ng China’s urban transformation (Chan, 2010; Friedmann, 2006;hang, 2008), and the argument applies equally to rural change.ndeed, China’s rural transformation is arguably unique in scale andpeed. It is distinctive not only because of the rapidity of change,ut also because it combines changes that were experienced inural Europe during the early-to-mid twentieth century (such asrbanization, depopulation, industrialization and the decreasing

mportance of agricultural employment) with aspects of contem-orary European rural restructuring (such as the comodification ofural cultural and environmental resources, and integration intolobal networks) (see for example, Cloke et al., 1997; Gant et al.,011; Hoggart and Paniagua, 2001; Robinson, 2004; Woods, 2005,010, 2011). As such, whilst there are lessons to be learned fromhe ‘west’ and opportunities for policy transfer in areas such as eco-omic development, conservation and land use planning (e.g., Tant al., 2009, 2011), there is also a need for distinctively Chineseolicy solutions.

This paper accordingly aims to contribute to the analysis andritique of rural restructuring in China by focusing on the phe-omenon of ‘village-hollowing’, where rural communities arelighted by depopulation and the abandonment of buildings and

and. After examining the process and effects of village-hollowing,he paper discusses the government response in the form of aincreasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-use policy, which involveslements of assisted accelerated restructuring such as settlementationalization, illustrated through a brief case study of Huantaiounty in Shandong province. The paper further argues that whilsthe ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-use policy has beenriven by national and regional imperatives, its successful imple-entation is dependent on the enrolment of local actors and the

egotiation of intervening local factors. As such, the problem ofillage-hollowing and its proposed solution illustrate that ruralestructuring in China, as elsewhere, is a dynamic, multi-scalar andybrid process.

(0

icy 29 (2012) 11– 22

ollowed villages and land-use policy

China has experienced drastic changes in land use since the ini-iation of economic reforms in 1978, especially through the lossf farmland to construction, driven primarily by urbanization andndustrialization (Lin and Ho, 2003; Liu et al., 2008; Long et al.,007; Qu et al., 1995; Xie et al., 2005; Zhong et al., 2011). Between996 and 2008, total farmland in China decreased by approximately.32 Mha, or about 6.4% (MLRC, 2009), whilst during the sameeriod China’s population increased from 1224 million to 1328 mil-

ion, with the proportion living in urban areas rising from 30.5% to5.7% (NBSC, 2009). As such the per capita area of farmland fell from.106 ha in 1996 to 0.092 ha in 2008, raising concerns about foodecurity (Christiansen, 2009; Lichtenberg and Ding, 2008; Yang andi, 2000; Li and Wang, 2003; Long and Zou, 2010). With the pro-uction capacity for grain and other key commodities falling withhe loss of farmland, in spite of the booming population, the ques-ion posed by Brown (1995) of ‘Who will feed China?’ has becomencreasingly critical.

In response, the Chinese central government has introducedtrict farmland protection objectives, with the aim of maintain-ng the total farmland area at no less than 1.8 billion mu (120

illion ha) in the period to 2020.1 However, as the agriculturaland area had already fallen to only 1.826 billion mu (121.7 mil-ion ha) by 2007, the target leaves little room for further loss ofarmland, particularly as the trends of urbanization and industrial-zation show no signs of abating. The pressure on farmland comesoth from urban expansion (Wang and Scott, 2008; Yu and Ng,007), and from the changing use of land in rural communitiesHuang et al., 2011). According to the statistical data of the Ministryf Land and Resources of China (MLRC), ‘Rural construction land’that is, land in rural areas occupied by housing and other non-gricultural buildings) in China amounted to 16.56 million ha in006, or just over half of all built-up land in China. Significantly, therea of rural construction land has continued to expand marginallyn spite of a decreasing rural population, such that the volume ofural housing land per capita increased by 18.28% between 1996nd 2007 according to the statistical data of MLRC, and at 228 m2

er head in 2007, which is considerably above the national stan-ard of 150 m2 per head (MCC, 1993). In part this reflects a processf housing modernization and improved living standards in ruralommunities.

There is consequently a major tension between urban develop-ent and farmland protection, in which the position of ‘hollowed

illages’ is pivotal. ‘Hollowed villages’ are communities in whichepopulation and housing modernization has led to the abandon-ent of a significant number of properties, spread throughout the

ettlement (Liu et al., 2009, 2010a; Long et al., 2009a). Althoughhere is a physical resemblance to the abandoned farms andottages found in many parts of rural western Europe (Garciand Ayuga, 2007), or perhaps more closely, to the ‘dying vil-ages’ of parts of rural eastern Europe (Reichert-Schick, 2010),illage-hollowing in China is a unique rural settlement morphologyhat has been shaped by the ‘dual-track’ structure of rural–urbanevelopment (Wu, 1997; Long et al., 2010), including the con-ribution of economic, socio-cultural, institutional-managerialnd environmental factors, as described below (Long et al.,009a).

1 China determined to retain 1.8-billion-mu of farmland.http://www.china.org.cn/government/NPC CPPCC sessions2008/2008-3/17/content 12877551.htm).

se Pol

V

piapsht1weccrffiv

dtaerao(hhtttas

rhddhTmos(

itrwtlriwrtaitfmh

hmriimowtm

hhpbpovritt

l‘Tu2lfipgpasssgipati(mo2tevpoitHwmpti

H. Long et al. / Land U

illage-hollowing: causal factors and driving mechanisms

Economic factors: Prior to 1978, the rationale of economiclanning policy in China had been to eradicate regional dispar-

ties through an even distribution of productive materials andctivities. The centrally planned economy compelled the ruralopulation to primarily work on collective farms, with outputhared more-or-less equally between members. Rural house-olds were hence tied to low incomes, making improvementso housing conditions impossible. Economic liberalization after978, however, including the growth of TVEs, permitted greaterealth accumulation by individuals. As the affluence of farm-

rs increased they invested in new more spacious and moreomfortable housing, often at the expense of investment in agri-ultural production. Together with the effects of wider economicestructuring, low agricultural investment meant that returnsrom agricultural land decreased, such that it became attractiveor farmland on the edge of villages to be converted to hous-ng, replacing dwellings in village centres which in turn becameacant.

Socio-cultural factors: The ‘dual-track’ policy of rural–urbanevelopment in China dictates that the millions of rural migrantso cities are not granted permanent household registration in citiesnd are not eligible for many social welfare entitlements andmployment opportunities that are reserved for permanent urbanesidents (Shen, 2002). This temporary, unofficial status in citiesnd the bifurcated social security system, together with the lackf security of urban employment in a fluctuating global economyWang, 2010), encourages many migrants to retain vacant ruralousing and idle rural land to give the opportunity of returningome. Absenteeism is hence a key factor in the disparity betweenhe rural resident population and the rural housing stock. Addi-ionally, ambiguous property rights and limited understanding ofhe law act as deterrents to residents who have built new housescting to sell or demolish their former homes, as does nostalgia anduperstition.

At the same time, improved economic conditions in ruralegions and diversification of employment away from agricultureave reduced the traditional dependency on the ‘big family’. Tra-itional models of the ‘coalition family’ and the ‘stem family’, withiverse family members forming a single inter-generational house-old, are being replaced by smaller, ‘nuclear family’ households.he number of rural households in China increased from 173.5illion in 1978 to 256.6 million in 2008, even against the trend

f a falling rural population since 1995 (Fig. 1). This proliferation ofmaller households has been a key driver of rural house-buildingSargeson, 2002).

Institutional and managerial factors: Village-hollowing is alsonfluenced by a number of factors pertaining to legal and insti-utional frameworks and the management of rural land. Firstly,estrictions on the sale of property and ambiguous property rightsith respect to collective land limit the opportunity for farmers

o sell poor-returning farmland (Ding, 2003). Secondly, a historicegacy of poor land-use planning, including a lack of effectiveoad planning, has left many communities with unwieldy andmpractical morphologies. Village centres may be over-crowded,

hilst peripheral farmland may fall into disuse because accessoads are insufficient for modern agricultural vehicles. These fac-ors encourage new house-building. Thirdly, the absence of rulesnd regulations aimed at dealing with vacant or abandoned hous-ng means that local governments are limited in their capacity to act

o address the problem, whilst the inspection and approval processor new house-building is unsound, e.g., heads of villages usually

ake money from selling lands to farmers who want to build a newouse.

srav

icy 29 (2012) 11– 22 13

Environmental factors: Finally, in some cases village-hollowingas responded to both natural and human-induced local environ-ental conditions. Liberalization has enabled rural residents to

elocate housing to avoid risks from natural hazards such as flood-ng, debris flow and landslides. At the same time, relocation hasn some instances been necessitated by human-induced environ-

ental problems, often resulting from the unregulated activitiesf TVEs. For example, drinking water pollution and the lowering ofater tables through over-extraction have led in some instances to

he abandonment of established village centres and the develop-ent of village fringes where water supplies are clean and plentiful.The above factors combine to drive the phenomenon of village-

ollowing in rural China. The engagement of farmers in excessiveouse-building on village fringes whilst failing to release vacatedroperties in village centres may be the core driver of the process,ut this behaviour is conditioned by the interaction of a com-lex web of background influences, and facilitated by the lackf regulatory control, as Fig. 2 shows. As such, the process ofillage-hollowing is embedded in the wider context of economicestructuring and rural-to-urban migration in China, and hences susceptible to temporal and spatial variations in these broaderrajectories. Thus, village-hollowing will evolve differentially overime, and may lead to different end results in different places.

Evidence from Europe suggests two possible models for theonger-term evolution of hollowed villages, presented here as thecyclical evolution model’ and the ‘vanishing evolution model’.he ‘cyclical evolution model’ draws on European experiences ofrbanization, suburbanization and counterurbanization (Antrop,004; Champion, 2001), to propose that village-hollowing will fol-

ow a cyclical pattern moving through four phases (Fig. 3). In therst stage, the centralizing phase, the initial economic buoyancyroduced by liberalization stimulated dramatic rural populationrowth that was reflected in the expansion of village centres aseople migrated in from outlying properties to support cooperativegricultural production and implement household responsibilityystem. The progression of economic restructuring in the secondtage, however, has contracted opportunities in rural communities,timulating urbanization and the slowing down of rural populationrowth. This translates to a ‘sub-hollowing’ phase in which increas-ng house-building on village fringes is mirrored by the vacating ofroperties in the village centre. Generally, competition betweengricultural and non-agricultural land uses is at its most intense athe interface between the urban and the rural, frequently result-ng in a succession of land uses at any one location over timeRobinson, 2004, p. 206). In the aspects of village-hollowing, the

ain factors driving such successions are the fluctuating strengthsf urban and rural economies, which alter the bid rents (Robinson,004, p. 206), and cause the depreciation of rural housing relativeo urban housing in the process of urbanization under the influ-nce of the rent law (Li, 2002). This will speed up the process ofillage-hollowing and translate to the third phase, the ‘hollowing’hase, in which rapid urbanization leads to a sharp slump in theverall village population, with decreasing occupancy of housesn both the village centre and the village fringe. This is arguablyhe situation faced by many rural communities in the last decade.owever, the model also projects a fourth ‘recentralizing’ phase, inhich a broader trend of counterurbanization contributes to returnigration and a re-growth in village populations, potentially sup-

orted by migration from other rural communities. Significantly,he model envisages that the recentralizing phase will see increasesn the occupancy of houses in the village core exceeding the con-

truction of new houses on the village fringe, reflecting both theeoccupation of properties by return migrants and the attractionnd availability of cheaper, vacant property for redevelopment inillage centres.

14 H. Long et al. / Land Use Policy 29 (2012) 11– 22

700

725

750

775

800

825

850

875

900

170

180

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

260

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Rur

al re

side

nt p

opul

atio

n (m

illio

n pe

rson

s)

Num

ber o

f rur

al h

ouse

hold

s(m

illio

n ho

useh

olds

)

s

t popu

vsbdormotrptspovcop

Aa

nvarbOidpbplidZ

is

ri

ubiobgptfgmds

S

ail2ivpnismall, remote villages that appear to be on a trajectory towardsextinction? As such, the policy aims at the more efficient distribu-tion of both land and infrastructural resources by concentrating the

3 The State Council of the People’s Republic of China, Number 47 document,2010: to strictly standardize the implementation of linking up increased urban con-

Number of rural household

Fig. 1. Changes of number of rural households and rural residen

The fulfillment of the ‘cyclical evolution model’ for hollowedillages is contingent on both the development of appropriateocial and economic conditions in China that will permit counterur-anization, and the adoption of appropriate policy instruments toirect redevelopment into the village cores and restrict new devel-pment on village fringes. However, even if these conditions areealized, not all hollowed villages may be regenerated. Smaller andore remote villages may find that they continue on a trajectory

f population decline to the point of extinction, as represented byhe second, ‘vanishing evolution model’ (Fig. 4). In this they will beeplicating the experience of villages in peripheral regions of Euro-ean countries such as France and Ireland that have in effect ceasedo exist through depopulation and the abandonment of housing. Inome cases this will result from a natural withering away of theopulation over time, yet in China it is likely that the abandonmentf some villages will be assisted by settlement rationalization andillage combination programmes, with remaining residents relo-ated to neighbouring communities in order to remove the costsf supporting separate villages and to free up land for agriculturalroduction or nature rehabilitation.

dapting policy: ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’ land usend ‘accelerated restructuring’

Hollowed villages present both a challenge and an opportu-ity for rural planning policy in China. On the one hand, hollowedillages show tremendous potential for development that wouldssist in achieving an optimal allocation of rural land resources,eleasing and protecting agricultural land and helping to strike aalance between the demands of food security and urbanization.n the other hand, realizing this potential will require new pol-

cy strategies and instruments in order to intervene and facilitateevelopment in the vacated village cores. As local government hasroved to be ineffective in controlling village-hollowing, primarilyecause of a lack of appropriate regulations, the emphasis has beenlaced on a more strategic policy approach at national or regional

evel. In 2005, the Ministry of Land and Resources proposed annnovative land management policy, known as the ‘increasing vs.ecreasing balance’ land-use policy (Zengjian Guagou Tudi Liyonghengce).2 Following a number of pilot schemes, the policy was

2 MLRC, Number 207 document, 2005: to standardize the implementation of link-ng up increased urban construction land with decreased rural construction land atelected test points.

sp

lTnbcosn

Rural resident population

lation in China from 1978 to 2008 (MAC, 2009; DCSNBS, 2010).

evised and formally adopted by the central government of Chinan 2010.3

The key objective of the ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-se policy is to achieve equilibrium in the supply of land in China byalancing increases in urban construction land (driven by urban-

zation) with decreases in rural construction land (facilitated byut-migration). Former rural construction land could consequentlye reclaimed as agricultural land, thus supporting food securityoals and broader socio-economic development in rural areas. Therogramme is to be implemented at a county level, but criticallyhe key mechanisms to be employed are all top-down in nature,ocusing on spatial-territorial reorganization, administrative reor-anization, and industrial reorganization (Liu et al., 2009). Theseechanisms are intended to accelerate trends that are already evi-

ent in some rural areas, and thus constitute a distinctively Chinesetrategy of ‘accelerated restructuring’.

patial-territorial reorganization

One of the main tenets of the ‘increasing vs. decreasing bal-nce’ land-use policy is that there are too many rural communitiesn China. In 2007 there were 2,647,035 identified ‘natural’ vil-ages in China, within 571,611 ‘administrative villages’ (MHURDC,008).4 Research carried out by the Chinese Academy of Sciences

n Shandong province suggests that most villages are experiencingillage-hollowing, currently in the ‘sub-hollowing’ or ‘hollowing’hases (Liu et al., 2009; Long et al., 2009a). This presents the Chi-ese state with a significant dilemma as it seeks to improve rural

nfrastructure: is it justifiable to invest in new infrastructure for

truction land with decreased rural construction land at selected test points andractically carry out rural land consolidation.4 In China, village is a component entity of town, the lowest one of four de facto

evels of local government (the other three are province, prefecture and county).he village level serves as an organizational division (census, mail system) and doesot have much importance in political representative power, but it has definedoundary and a head voted out by villagers. Rural areas are organized into villageommittees or villager groups. A “village” in this case can either be a natural village,ne that spontaneously and naturally exists, or an administrative village, which is aemi-bureaucratic entity. Usually, an administrative village may have one or moreatural villages.

H. Long et al. / Land Use Policy 29 (2012) 11– 22 15

Population gr owth Reconfigu rati on of households

Rural housing desig n House-building qua lity Rural infras tructure development Phy sica l en vironment

Increased de mands for hous ing

Customs and geomantic omens

Inh erent defec ts of ol der hous ing

Strong house -building

desire

Market-base d economy Favorab le agr icul tur al poli cy Adva nce in agricu ltural technology

The “dual track” struc ture of rural-urban soci o-eco nomic devel opment

Development ofagro-production

Non-agricultural emplo yment in urban area s

Stron g hou se-building

capacity

Farmers’ ho use-building

decisio ns

Farmers ’ house- buil ding

behaviour

Low opportunit y cost of obtaining new sit e Social coor dinat ion betwee n farmers

Unsound inspect ion and approva l pr oces s Restrictions on tran sfer and exchange of old hous e

Vacan t an d dere lict houses in the core of village

(Inside ru in)

Disorderl y ne w houses in the fring e of village (Outer development )

The ph enomenon of villag e-ho llowing

evolu

rif

n(tocitttalm

srtat

A

rto

Fig. 2. Driving mechanisms of the

ural population in communities that can be sustained and revital-zed, with an expanded social, production and ecological serviceunction

Spatial-territorial reorganization might be achieved through aumber of different models depending on the geographical contextFig. 5). Villages on the edge of cities might be naturally subsumedhrough the increase in urban construction land, whilst residentsf hollowed villages further out from cities and around small townsould be relocated in the cities or towns. ‘Village to town’ consol-dation has been identified as one of the main objectives of smallown development strategy. In most rural areas, however, ‘villageo village’ consolidation will be the dominant model of spatial-

erritorial reorganization. This involves one village being identifieds the central settlement – either because it has a larger popu-ation, or a better location, or more modern infrastructure, or a

ore prosperous economy – and residents being resettled from

mtol

tion of hollowed villages in China.

urrounding villages into this community. In particular, relocatedesidents would be resettled in the ‘hollowed-out’ core of the cen-ral village, allowing for a more efficient use of land, whilst thebandoned villages would be demolished and returned to agricul-ural use.

dministrative reorganization

Spatial-territorial reorganization is accompanied in ‘acceleratedestructuring’ by administrative reorganization, aimed at reducinghe number of ‘administrative villages’ in China. The consolidationf villages into a single settlement logically leads to an amalga-

ation of administrative units, with the administrative area of

he central village being extended to cover the former territoriesf the consolidated villages. Administrative re-organization canead to improvements in the effectiveness and efficiency of local

16 H. Long et al. / Land Use Policy 29 (2012) 11– 22

0 time

core

fringe

whole village

Inha

bite

d ho

uses

cha

nge

rate

Sub -hollo wing phase esahp gniwolloH esahp gnizilartneC Recen traliz ing phas e

Counterurbaniz atio n Villag e co mbinat ion Popula tion rever sal

Rapid urbanizati onPopulation slu mp

Urbaniz ati on Slowing population gro wth

Rura l development Drastic populat ion growth

Fig. 3. Cyclical evolution model of the development stages of hollowed villages in China.

0 time

core fringe

whole village

Inha

bite

d ho

uses

cha

nge

rate

Sub-holl owin g phase

Centralizing phase

Hollowingphase

Van ishi ng phase

Withe ring away Emigrati on

Rapid urbanizatio nPopulation slu mp

Urbanizati on Slowing population gro wth

Rural development Drast ic po pulation growth

Fig. 4. Vanishing evolution model of the development stages of hollowed villages in China.

Fig. 5. A conceptualization of the models of spatial-territorial reorganization in rural China.

se Policy 29 (2012) 11– 22 17

gmfawldpeadit

I

ilimsddrbto

ioges(eipglflttfdefpmpIil

sUelil2

Table 1The status of rural construction land in Kangyang village, Huantai county.

Land-use types Number of plots Area (ha)

Rural housing landInhabited housing land 331 9.02Abandoned or ruined housing land 52 1.19Idle housing land 58 1.59Total 441 11.80

Land for industry and mining 3.39Land for agricultural facilities 2.65Land for transportation 10.35Unused land and others 1.90

C

msiSSwbcn5i(

a5utfmwwao4aN

rwsSrHis

H. Long et al. / Land U

overnance in rural communities, but the process of amalgamationay be fractious. Competition (and conflict) may develop between

ormer village heads for power in the new administrative unit,nd tensions may also exist between residents of former villageshich may differ in terms of customs, economic specialism and

evel of development. Integrating the production elements of theifferent sections and formulating and implemented an integratedrogramme for the new unit could be challenging for village lead-rs. Furthermore, as the administrative village in China also forms

territorial framework for the organization of agricultural pro-uction and TVEs, administrative reorganization necessarily also

nvolves economic reorganization, with both challenges and oppor-unities.

ndustrial reorganization

As noted above, spatial-territorial reorganization and admin-strative reorganization both have an impact on the structure ofocal industry, including agriculture. Indeed, the consolidation andntegration of economic resources to promote the strategic adjust-

ent of agriculture, improve rural product circulation, and enhanceervices to agriculture is itself a key aim of the ‘increasing vs.ecreasing balance’ land-use policy. At the same time, farm pro-uction will benefit from the availability of additional farm landesulting from village consolidation, whilst some released land maye used for industrial development, especially of industries linkedo food processing, storage and transportation, with an emphasisn attracting inward investment.

It is worth mentioning that the implementation of ‘increas-ng vs. decreasing balance’ land-use policy, in essence, is a kindf ‘spatial transfer’ of land development rights, from which localovernments can make a huge land acquisition revenue (Wangt al., 2009; Zhou, 2007). China’s 1994 tax-sharing reforms wereuccessful in improving the central government’s fiscal conditionLoo and Chow, 2006). However, the revenue share for local gov-rnments was not increased at a level commensurate with theirncrease in responsibility, e.g., the responsibilities for urban andublic services were shifted from the central government to localovernments (Ding, 2007). Local governments mainly relied onand to finance urban construction, and the revenues generatedrom land can account for up to 60% of total fiscal incomes ofocal governments (Ding, 2007). Zhou (2007) argued that this cen-ral government’s policy “squeezes” to motivate local governmentso find alternative revenue sources,5 and that is one key reasonor local governments’ intense interests in participating in landeals. In some cases, 60–80% of extra-budgetary government rev-nue as well as more than one third of budgetary revenue camerom land development and transfers (Zhou, 2007). There are highrofit margins created by the large gap between local governments’onopoly over land rights and regulations and the meager com-

ensation they pay to peasants (Wang et al., 2009; Zhou, 2007).n this connection, the local governments have great enthusiasmn the implementation of the ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’

and-use policy.

5 The overwhelming alternative revenue source is land deals. The land revenueource was implied by the “Measures for the Administration of the Collection andse of Land-Use Fees for Newly added Construction Land”, No. 117 documentnacted by the Ministry of Finance of China & MLRC in 1999, in which 70% of theand-use fees for newly added construction land belongs to local governments. Dur-ng the period 2000–2003, the collected land-use fees for newly added constructionand amounted to 31,016 billion RMB¥ (US$ to RMB¥: 1–8.2), 70% of which, i.e.1,714 billion RMB¥, was possessed by local governments (Zhou, 2007).

ra4cawc

h

Total 30.09

ase study of Huantai county, Shandong province

Shandong province, located in eastern coastal China approxi-ately 400 km south east of Beijing, was one of the five provinces

elected by the Ministry of Land and Resources to pilot the ‘increas-ng vs. decreasing balance’ land-use policy in April 2006. Withinhandong, eight pilot counties were identified (Huantai, Pingyin,houguang, Wenshang, Feicheng, Juxian, Hedong and Shanxian), inhich the methodology and implementation of the policy would

e tested, the first of which to be initiated was Huantai. Huantaiounty is situated by the lower reaches of the Yellow River in theorth of Shandong province (Fig. 6). With a land area of just under0,000 ha, the county had a population of 496,700 in 2007, giving

t a high population density by rural standards 995 persons/km2

SSB, 2008; NBSC, 2008).Huantai has a warm temperate monsoon climate, with an aver-

ge annual temperature of 12.5 ◦C and mean annual rainfall of87 mm, creating good conditions for agriculture. In 1983, justnder half (49.43%) of the county’s GDP came from primary indus-ries, but extensive economic restructuring saw this contributionall to just 5.8% of GDP in 2007 (compared with 68.5% derived from

anufacturing and other secondary industries) (SSB, 2008). Evenithin rural communities there has been significant diversification,ith 72% of peasant incomes now generated by non-agricultural

ctivities. However, this economic transformation has boosted theverall affluence of the county, with GDP per capita standing at1,909 RMB¥ (US$5600) in 2007, significantly higher than the over-ll Chinese GDP per capita of 18,934 RMB¥ (US$2500) (SSB, 2008;BSC, 2008).

Industrialization in Huantai county has been accompanied byapid urbanization and the phenomenon of village-hollowing isidespread, with the majority of affected villages at an advanced

tage in the ‘hollowing’ or ‘vanishing’ phases described in Fig. 4.tatistical data from the Huantai Bureau of Land and Resourcesecorded 719.28 ha of idle or abandoned rural housing land inuantai, such that the ratio of 188 m2 of rural housing land per head

s considerably above the national average, suggesting a significanturplus.

The village of Kangyang is typical in this respect. By combiningemote sensing imagery and data collected through field surveysnd household interviews,6 we were able to identify that 110 of the41 housing plots in Kangyang were uninhabited or abandoned,omprising just under a quarter (23.6%) of the total rural housing

rea in the village (Table 1). Although idle and abandoned plotsere to be found throughout the village, there was a particular

oncentration in the village centre, consistent with the model of

6 Remote sensing data provided by the Chinese Academy of Sciences from a 0.25 migh-resolution remote sensing image from EarthView Image Inc., 2009.

18 H. Long et al. / Land Use Policy 29 (2012) 11– 22

study

vtttibnoota

Ft

tc

oaat

Fig. 6. Location of the

illage-hollowing (Fig. 7) (idle housing land here refers to houseshat are in good condition, but only used for less than one month inwo consecutive years; abandoned housing land refers to proper-ies that are not suitable for occupation). Significantly, whilst theres an official policy of ‘one household, one house’ in China, the num-er of housing plots in Kangyang (441) was notably higher than theumber of households (362) at the time of the fieldwork. The total

f idle and abandoned housing land in Kangyang exceeds the areaccupied by industry or by agriculture in the village centre – indeed,he agricultural-related land had largely lost its traditional functions drying and threshing grounds for crops due to farm mechaniza-

ig. 7. The status of rural housing land in Kangyang village, Huantai county, iden-ified by plot.

n6wionvptfajra

Iwwowvbtvmlilnht

D

c

area, Huantai county.

ion, and much was also unused. As such, Kangyang village showsonsiderable land consolidation potential.

Since the initiation of the pilot in 2006, restructuring basedn the new policy in Huantai county has been advanced rapidly,nd to positive assessments (Yang, 2009). For example, in the arearound Maqiao town a process of resettlement has been startedhat will relocate residents from 27 scattered villages into fourewly constructed communities. This process will release over60 ha (10,000 mu) of former rural housing land, most of whichill be converted to farmland. Additionally, the restructuring will

nvolve the construction of new roads, irrigation facilities andther auxiliary services, as well as the establishment of two largeon-agricultural enterprises in the new centres, which will pro-ide employment for 13,000 local residents, or just under half theopulation. Combined with improvements to agricultural produc-ivity that are anticipated to result from the elimination of landragmentation and the creation of new units suitable for moderngricultural machinery and practices, these developments are pro-ected to reduce the agricultural workforce in the area by 80% –egarded locally as key steps in modernization and poverty allevi-tion.

Following the pilot schemes, a comprehensive Plan for themplementation of linking up increased urban construction land

ith decreased rural construction land in Huantai (2006–2020)as mapped out in early 2009. This proposes the consolidation of

ver 300 villages into around 50 towns and centralized villages, asell as the incorporation of 10 ‘urban villages’ and 18 peri-urban

illages into larger urban areas. The ‘village to town’ model wille employed to resettle residents of 147 villages into nearby smallowns; whilst the ‘village to village’ model will see 160 remoteillages reorganized into 41 centralized villages or new rural com-unities. Overall, the plan will reduce the area of rural housing

and in Huantai county by 54.3%, from 5305 ha in 2005 to 2426 han 2020. Over 2800 ha will be released for conversion to farm-and, although some present farmland will be developed for theew centralized villages and through urban expansion. On balance,owever, the plan is promoted as achieving a win–win situationhat will support both rural and urban development goals.

issonances from grassroots and exposed problems

There are also some dissonances from the grassroots in the pro-ess of implementing this innovative land management policy. A

se Pol

cPNtit‘pwiIwtfiaftrt4(wwjrans

cillpiuarolttpsci(icts

D

d

spitrw

pnwalrraatimhrSricppimmdr

hLwcaRlviiddt

iaopccddrfsrc

H. Long et al. / Land U

ore news entitled “Withdrawing Villages and Enclosing Land toursue Land Finance in Many Provinces” reported on The Beijingews came first on the list (Tu, 2010). It reported that, in more

han 20 provinces in China, local governments were withdraw-ng villages to get in return the construction land quota so aso expand land finance by making irrational use of the flaws ofincreasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-use policy even misinter-reting the policy, and the farmers who lost their housing landere forced to live in high-rise building (Tu, 2010). Zhucheng city

n Shandong province was taken as a typical case in this report.n Zhucheng, there are 1249 administrative villages, which will be

ithdrawn and merged into 208 rural communities, according tohe implementation plan of the policy. Each community containsve villages in a radius of 2 km, and has about 1500 households,pproximately 10,000 people. If the plan can be smoothly pushedorward and all the farmers move into new houses in communi-ies, 80,000 mu (5333 ha) old rural housing land potential will beeleased, annual increased revenue from land development andransfers may amount to 200–300 million RMB¥ by reclaiming300 mu (287 ha) old housing land and obtaining about 3000 mu200 ha) construction land quota.7 However, some of the farmersere reluctant to change their living and production mode; someere not in favor of living in high-rise building; and some who

ust built a new house and could not get expected compensationesisted to implement the policy. It is reported that violent protestsgainst the demolition of housing occurred, and some farmers hado alternative but to move out because their power and waterupply were cut off by local governments.8

Under the background of construction land quota being strictlyontrolled by the central government, the ‘increasing vs. decreas-ng balance’ land-use policy has been taken as an opportunity byocal governments for pursuing land finance and four major prob-ems have been exposed since its implementation (Liu, 2010): (1)utting undue emphasis on construction land quota, and choos-

ng the test points implementing the policy of linking up increasedrban construction land with decreased rural construction landnd expanding their area and working quota scale without autho-ization; (2) pursuing land finance, engaging in violent demolitionf rural houses violating farmers’ desire, and enclosing rural col-ective land without restraint; (3) being keen on consolidatinghe villages with good location and considerable land consolida-ion potential instead of the hollowed villages with considerableotential but inferior location; and (4) blindly pursuing land con-olidation potential and building high-rise resettlements with lessonsideration for the convenience of farmers’ living and engag-ng agricultural production. Despite these exposed problems, Liu2010) argued that rural construction land consolidation is anndispensable way to build a new countryside and shape a moreoordinated urban–rural development pattern in China, and theesting value of policy innovation in allocating urban–rural landhould be impersonally assessed.

iscussion and implications

The policy of accelerated restructuring and the ‘increasing vs.ecreasing balance’ land-use strategy are a distinctively Chinese

7 Other 1300 mu (87 ha) will be used for resettlement land.8 The report of Tu (2010) may be exaggerated to some extent. Aiming at under-

tanding the effects of implementing ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-useolicy on rural development, we carried out household interviews and field surveys

n Zhucheng city this March and found that this policy was generally supported byhe farmers. The water and power supply was still kept for the few households whoefused to move out. The dissonances for this policy from the grassroots were fareaker than what Tu (2010) reported.

accehpa

la

icy 29 (2012) 11– 22 19

olicy solution that reflects the unique hybrid nature of Chi-ese political-economy, with economic liberalization combinedith a strong state. Although problems of rural depopulation,

bandoned properties, unregulated exurban development and theoss of farmland have all featured in the long-term trajectory ofural restructuring in western liberal democracies, governmentesponses have tended to use less directive mechanisms for encour-ging behaviour changes, such as planning application processesnd incentives for economic investment. The possibility of permit-ing remote depopulating communities to ‘die’ by removing statenfrastructure and subsidies has been debated in Australia, but was

et by fierce resistance; whilst in the former east Germany plansave been floated to demolish ‘dying villages’ and create natureeserves, but such ideas are again high controversial (Reichert-chick, 2010). No western country has attempted a settlementationalization programme on the scale proposed by China, and it isnconceivable that a liberal democracy would be able to compel theompulsory resettlement of residents on the scale required. Thus,aradoxically given the direction of China’s economic reforms, therogramme most closely resembles the rural settlement rational-

zation projects of the former Soviet Union (Pallot, 1988). Yet,odern China is not a totalitarian state and the successful imple-entation of the ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-use policy

epends on the enrolment and compliance of a diverse set of actors,eflecting the complex and hybrid process of rural restructuring.

The first key group of actors is local governments. The policyas been driven by the central state, represented by the Ministry ofand and Resources, but has been implemented at a county level,ith much of the costs borne by local actors. For example, the

ost of the implementation plan for Huantai county is estimatedt 6.894 billion RMB¥ (US$920 million), to be met by 4.253 billionMB¥ from farmers for new housing construction, and 2.641 bil-

ion RMB¥ from governments, for obtaining land and demolishingacated buildings. The cost to both farmers and local authoritiess hence immense, and whilst an affluent county such as Huantais able to find the resources, many poorer areas will struggle. Theirector of the strategy in Shanxian, a much poorer county in Shan-ong province, told us in an interview that the implementation ofhe scheme urgently needed funds from outside the county.

Local administrators have also questioned the ability to balancencreasing urban construction with decreasing rural constructiont a county scale, given pre-existing geographies of uneven devel-pment (Long et al., 2009c; Liu, 2006). For example, in Shandongrovince, there is a high demand for land in affluent, urbanizingounties such as Qingdao and Rizhao, with limited supply, butonversely a low demand but plentiful supply of land in under-eveloped rural counties such as Dezhou and Heze. In the moreeveloped counties, there may be insufficient idle or abandonedural construction land available to compensate for the demandor urban expansion; whilst in less developed counties there is con-iderable potential for land consolidation but limited capacity foreleasing this potential. The rescaling of the policy to the provin-ial level has been tested, allowing county authorities to link upnd offset land development in rapidly urbanizing areas with landonsolidation projects in more rural counties. However, the provin-ial scale approach has been criticized for fuelling the uncheckedxpansion of large cities, and the Ministry of Land and Resources

as reaffirmed that ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’ land useolicies should be only implemented at the county scale, with themount of new construction land strictly limited.9

9 MLRC, Number 138 document, 2008: management measures for implementinginking up increased urban construction land with decreased rural construction landt selected test points.

2 se Pol

c‘neopliHtectlrelwnap

ibobmwropcehtfsnorbm2fmAaCcpc

taoibcamipra

ttoce

ulggtnatpbiwtftbmwllltifwist

C

heeaaaadofrfqpmimat

oa

0 H. Long et al. / Land U

The second key group of actors is private enterprise, espe-ially external investors. In general, the implementation of theincreasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-use policy relies on exter-al investment, most of which is provided by enterprises who arenticed to set up factories in centralized rural communities as partf the accelerated restructuring process. Such enterprises hencerovide alternative non-agricultural employment which assists

and consolidation by allowing farmers to leave the land, whilstn return the enterprise gets access to a supply of land and labour.owever, the profit-orientation of enterprises introduces uncer-

ainties with regard to their long-term participation. Many of thenterprises involved in the schemes work in industries that areurrently labour-intensive, but which are undergoing mechaniza-ion and upgrading. As such, ex-farmers who are recruited intoow skilled jobs may find that their positions become surplus toequirement within a few years and face unemployment (Longt al., 2009b). Moreover, whilst enterprises may be attracted toocations in rural China by cheap land and labour, costs will rise

ith development and enterprises may subsequently relocate toew, cheaper locations, as has been the case with many enterprisesttracted to rural regions in parts of Europe by industrializationolicies in 1960s and 1970s (Woods, 2010).

The third key group of actors is therefore the farmers. As notedn the earlier discussion, individual decision making by farmers haseen a critical factor in driving village-hollowing. The acquiescencef farmers is similarly essential to the ‘increasing vs. decreasingalance’ land-use policy, but farmers’ perceptions of the schemeay be affected by a number of concerns. Firstly, many farmersho take up non-agricultural jobs with new enterprises may be

eluctant to give up their land because of the perceived insecurityf industrial employment and the inadequacies of social welfarerovision. Secondly, the new housing constructed as part of villageonsolidation may compared unfavourably with existing housing,ven if more modern in character. This is especially the case withousing built by enterprises for their workers, which often takeshe form of high-rise apartment blocks in order to maximize spaceor industrial land use. Residents who have been relocated intouch accommodation from farms and rural houses have expressedostalgia for their former homes. Thirdly, a sound understandingf inconsistencies between various laws and ambiguous propertyights (Ding, 2003), together with an awareness of the huge gapetween the market value of land and the small amounts govern-ents pay in compensation for expropriation of the land (Ding,

007; Zhou, 2007), have been the major factors that discouragearmers from releasing vacated properties, and they continue to

ilitate against the upheavals involved in village consolidation.ccordingly, the implementation of the policy has been resistednd contested by grassroots campaigns in many parts of ruralhina. Farmers’ organizations have voiced grievances to provin-ial and national authorities, and the demolition of housing as aart of the process has been met with violent protests in someommunities.

The ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-use policy hasherefore been developed at national and provincial levels toddress the perceived national problem of balancing the demandsf urban development and food security. Yet, its successfulmplementation depends on local scale negotiation and coalition-uilding. It is a top-down rural development strategy and, inommon with some top-down strategies for rural developmentttempted in Europe and North America, risks being compro-ised by a failure to adequately engage and enroll local actors

nto the planning and decision-making process. Although somerogrammes, such as new community construction and industryestructuring, have involved grassroots participation, more gener-lly the input of local people is perceived to be limited. As such,

iaos

icy 29 (2012) 11– 22

here are potentially lessons that China could learn from the shiftowards bottom-up endogenous development in the rural devel-pment strategies of Europe and other western countries, whichould lead to the more diverse and embedded activities in the ruralconomy (Bristow, 2000; Woods, 2011).

At the same time, the ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-se policy is also framed by global issues and trends. With economic

iberalization China has become increasingly integrated into thelobal economy, and hence is not immune from the effects of thelobal economic downturn. Wang (2010), for example, suggestshat the downturn has contributed to migrant workers in Chi-ese cities losing jobs and returning home to rural communities,

trend that might bring into question some of the assumptions ofhe policy. Equally, concerns about food security, which have alsorompted the policy, have a global dimension in that if food cannote adequately sourced for urban China from within the country,

t will need to be imported from elsewhere. Thus, the extent tohich Chinese farmland needs to be protected for food produc-

ion is to some degree linked to the capacity of China to sourceood from outside. Perhaps more intriguingly, global environmen-al issues, and notably the need to combat climate change, haveeen evoked in support of the policy. At the United Nations Cli-ate Change Summit in September 2009, China announced that itould contribute towards carbon sequestration by planting 40 mil-

ion ha of forest over 10 years (Fu et al., 2009). However, identifyingand for afforestation is difficult given constraints on China’s ruraland (Feng et al., 2005; Long et al., 2006), and with the potentialo increase available rural land by 13%, the ‘increasing vs. decreas-ng balance’ land-use policy could make a major contribution toreeing land for afforestation. This would also help to meet theider social and economic aims of the proposal, as afforestation has

ncome-generation potential for rural communities, both throughtate subsidies for tree-planting and through the cultivation of fruitrees (see also Tubiello et al., 2009).

onclusions

‘Village-hollowing’ is a distinctively Chinese phenomenon thatas resulted from the dual-track structure of rural and urban socio-conomic development in China, following the introduction ofconomic liberalization reforms in 1978. The rapid urbanizationnd industrialization of the country has drawn migrants from ruralreas to the cities, leading to a trend of population decline in ruralreas. At the same time, the transformation of the rural economynd improvements to rural living standards have seen rural resi-ents abandon traditional housing in village cores for new housingn village fringes. However, neither rural migrants in cities norarmers who have relocated to the edge of villages are keen toelease the properties that they have vacated in village centres,or a number of social, cultural, economic and legal reasons. Conse-uently the process of ‘village-hollowing’ has developed in whichlots of vacant and abandoned housing land have become com-onplace in many Chinese rural communities, often concentrated

n the village cores. Furthermore, as rural depopulation continuesore and more disused housing land appears in rural communities,

nd left unchecked villages can fall into a ‘vanishing evolutionary’rajectory in which they eventually become fully depopulation.

The presence of ‘hollowed-villages’ presents a challenge notnly for the localities concerned, but increasingly for the countrys a whole. The combination of rampant urbanization and decreas-

ng farmland area has raised major concerns in the Chinese statebout future food security. From this perspective the large amountf unused rural housing land in ‘hollowed villages’ represents aubstantial waste of a valuable resource. Accordingly, the Chinese

se Pol

gadiiisaa

itrnilptac

st2tsms‘hmtetcatEpplr

A

KKSfa

R

A

B

B

C

C

C

C

C

D

D

D

F

F

FG

G

G

G

H

H

H

K

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

H. Long et al. / Land U

overnment in 2005 launched a new ‘increasing vs. decreasing bal-nce’ land-use policy, aimed at reconciling the demands of urbanevelopment and farmland protection, and in particular at address-

ng the problem of hollowed villages. The policy requires plansmplemented at the county scale that seek to balance increasesn urban construction land with a reduction in the amount of con-truction land in rural areas, achieved through a process of assistedccelerated restructuring that involves settlement rationalization,dministration reorganization and industrial restructuring.

Pilots of the ‘increasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-use pol-cy since 2005 have achieved a number of successes, includinghe slowing down of out-migration from rural areas, and in someegions a reversal of the migration trend; the creation of millions ofew jobs to replace those lost as part of agricultural modernization;

mprovements to rural infrastructure; increased prosperity for vil-ages selected as the centralized ‘growth poles’; and releasing theotential of rural land resources. However, the top-down nature ofhe programme has proved controversial, and generated conflictsnd compromises to the scheme when local actors have refused toomply in the way anticipated.

Strategies for the development of rural space, and proposals forpecific developments, are always political and have the poten-ial to attract conflict and protest anywhere in the world (Woods,003). Kiss (2000), in work on Hungary, argued that rural restruc-uring should be considered as the result of interaction betweenupralocal and local factors, and that the responses and adjust-ents made by local actors can be considered to be survival

trategies. This analysis appears to resonate with the case of theincreasing vs. decreasing balance’ land-use policy in China. As weave argued, the policy is in essence a top-down rural develop-ent strategy based on state intervention, and like many similarly

op-down strategies attempted in Europe and elsewhere, it hasncountered resistance when sufficient time has not been devotedo enrolling local actors. In particular, the strategy has been per-eived as threatening many traditional elements of rural lifestylend culture, as well as farmers’ rights and interests, leading tohe mobilization of a new wave of rural protests. Learning fromuropean experience by incorporating elements of ‘bottom-uplanning’ into the strategy, along with reforms to collective landroperty rights, could help to secure the successful enrolment of

ocal actors, safeguarding farmers’ rights and mitigating againstural protests.

cknowledgements

This work was supported by the Main Direction Program ofnowledge Innovation of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Grant Nos.ZCX2-YW-QN304 and KZCX2-EW-304) and the National Naturalcience Foundation of China (Grant No. 40771014). The insight-ul and constructive comments of two anonymous reviewers areppreciated.

eferences

ntrop, M., 2004. Landscape change and the urbanization process in Europe. Land-scape and Urban Planning 67, 9–26.

ristow, G., 2000. Structure, strategy and space: issues of progressing integratedrural development in Wales. European Urban and Regional Studies 7, 19–33.

rown, L., 1995. Who will Feed China: Wake up Call for a Small Planet. W.W. Nortonand Company, New York.

hampion, T., 2001. Urbanization, suburbanisation, counterurbanisation and reur-banisation. In: Paddison, R. (Ed.), Handbook of Urban Studies. Sage, London, pp.

143–161.

han, K.W., 2010. Fundamentals of China’s urbanization and policy. China Review10, 63–93.

hristiansen, F., 2009. Food security, urbanization and social stability in China. Jour-nal of Agrarian Change 9, 548–575.

L

icy 29 (2012) 11– 22 21

hung, H., 2010. Building an image of villages-in-the-city: a clarification of China’sdistinct urban spaces. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34,421–437.

loke, P., Goodwin, M., Milbourne, P., 1997. Rural Wales: Community and Marginal-ization. University of Wales Press, Cardiff.

epartment of Comprehensive Statistics of National Bureau of Statistics (DCSNBS),2010. China Compendium of Statistics 1949–2008. China Statistics Press, Beijing.

ing, C.R., 2003. Land policy reform in China: assessment and prospects. Land UsePolicy 20, 109–120.

ing, C.R., 2007. Policy and praxis of land acquisition in China. Land Use Policy 24,1–13.

eng, Z.M., Yang, Y.Z., Zhang, Y.Q., Zhang, P.T., Li, Y.Q., 2005. Grain-for-green policyand its impacts on grain supply in West China. Land Use Policy 22, 301–312.

riedmann, J., 2006. Four theses in the study of China’s urbanization. InternationalJournal of Urban and Regional Research 30, 440–451.

u, J., Li, J., Huang, X.Y., 2009. Hu promises deep carbon cuts. China Daily, 2009-09-23.ant, R.L., Robinson, G.M., Fazal, S., 2011. Land-use change in the ‘edgelands’:

policies and pressures in London’s rural–urban fringe. Land Use Policy 28,266–279.

arcia, A.I., Ayuga, F., 2007. Reuse of abandoned buildings and the rural landscape:the situation in Spain. Transactions of the ASABE 50 (4), 1383–1394.

e, Y., 2009. Globalization and industry agglomeration in China. World Development37, 550–559.

oodman, D.S.G., 2008. China’s Regional Development, fifth ed. Royal Institute ofInternational Affairs, London.

ang, M., Iseman, S., 2009. ‘Villages’ in Shenzhen: typical economic phenomena ofrural urbanization in China. Chinese Sociology and Anthropology 41, 90–107.

oggart, K., Paniagua, A., 2001. What rural restructuring? Journal of Rural Studies17, 41–62.

uang, Q.H., Li, M.C., Chen, Z.J., Li, F.X., 2011. Land consolidation: an approach forsustainable development in rural China. Ambio 40, 93–95.

iss, E., 2000. Rural restructuring in Hungary in the period of socio-economic tran-sition. GeoJournal 51, 221–233.

i, X.B., 2002. Explanation of land use changes. Progress in Geography 21 (3),195–203 (in Chinese).

i, X.B., Wang, X.H., 2003. Changes in agricultural land use in China: 1981–2000.Asian Geographer 22, 27–42.

i, Y.R., Wei, Y.H.D., 2010. The spatial–temporal hierarchy of regional inequality ofChina. Applied Geography 30, 303–316.

iang, Z., Chen, Y.P., Gu, Y., 2002. Rural industrialisation and internal migration inChina. Urban Studies 39, 2175–2187.

ichtenberg, E., Ding, C.R., 2008. Assessing farmland protection policy in China. LandUse Policy 25, 59–68.

in, G.C.S., 2006. Peri-urbanism in globalizing China: a study of new urbanism inDongguan. Eurasian Geography and Economics 47, 28–53.

in, G.C.S., Ho, S.P.S., 2003. China’s land resources and land-use change: insightsfrom the 1996 land survey. Land Use Policy 20, 87–107.

iu, H., 2006. Changing regional rural inequality in China 1980–2002. Area 38,377–389.

iu, L., 2009. National market location, income levels and urban–rural inequality inChina. International Development Planning Review 31, 397–421.

iu, Y.S., 2010. Farmers should benefit from rural constructionland consolidation (Nongcun Tudi Zhengzhi Yao Ran NongminShouyi). The People’s Daily (Renmin Ribao), 2010-11-12, A13.http://www.cas.cn/xw/cmsm/201011/t20101112 3009407.shtml.

iu, Y.S., Liu, Y., Chen, Y.F., Long, H.L., 2010a. The process and driving forces of ruralhollowing in China under rapid urbanization. Journal of Geographical Sciences20 (6), 876–888.

iu, Y.S., Liu, Y., Zhai, R.X., 2009. Geographical research and optimizing practiceof rural hollowing in China. Acta Geographica Sinica 64 (10), 1193–1202 (inChinese).

iu, Y.S., Wang, J.Y., Long, H.L., 2010b. Analysis of arable land loss and its impact onrural sustainability in Southern Jiangsu Province of China. Journal of Environ-mental Management 91 (3), 646–653.

iu, Y.S., Wang, L.J., Long, H.L., 2008. Spatio-temporal analysis of land-use conversionin the eastern coastal China during 1996–2005. Journal of Geographical Sciences18, 274–282.

ong, H.L., Heilig, G.K., Wang, J., Li, X.B., Luo, M., Wu, X.Q., Zhang, M., 2006. Land useand soil erosion in the upper reaches of the Yangtze River: some socio-economicconsiderations on China’s Grain-for-green Programme. Land Degradation &Development 17 (6), 589–603.

ong, H.L., Li, Y.R., Liu, Y.S., 2009a. Analysis of evolutive characteristics and theirdriving mechanism of hollowing villages in China. Acta Geographica Sinica 64(10), 1203–1213 (in Chinese).

ong, H.L., Liu, Y.S., Li, X.B., Chen, Y.F., 2010. Building new countryside in China: ageographical perspective. Land Use Policy 27 (2), 457–470.

ong, H.L., Liu, Y.S., Wu, X.Q., Dong, G.H., 2009b. Spatio-temporal dynamic patterns offarmland and rural settlements in Su-Xi-Chang region: implications for buildinga new countryside in coastal China. Land Use Policy 26 (2), 322–333.

ong, H.L., Tang, G.P., Li, X.B., Heilig, G.K., 2007. Socio-economic driving forces of

land-use change in Kunshan, the Yangtze River Delta Economic Area of China.Journal of Environmental Management 83 (3), 351–364.

ong, H.L., Zou, J., 2010. Grain production driven by variations in farmland use inChina: an analysis of security patterns. Journal of Resources and Ecology 1 (1),60–67.

2 se Pol

L

L

L

M

M

M

M

M

N

N

P

P

P

Q

R

R

S

S

S

S

S

T

T

T

T

T

UW

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

WWW

X

X

Y

Y

Y

Z

Z

2 H. Long et al. / Land U

ong, H.L., Zou, J., Liu, Y.S., 2009c. Differentiation of rural development driven byindustrialization and urbanization in eastern coastal China. Habitat Interna-tional 33 (4), 454–462.

ong, H.L., Zou, J., Pykett, J., Li, Y.R., 2011. Analysis of rural transformation develop-ment in China since the turn of the new millennium. Applied Geography 31 (3),1094–1105.

oo, B.P.Y., Chow, S.Y., 2006. China’s 1994 tax-sharing reforms: one system, differ-ential impact. Asian Survey 46 (2), 215–237.

inistry of Agriculture of China (MAC), 2009. New China’s Agricultural Statistics for60 Years. China Agriculture Press, Beijing.

inistry of Construction of China (MCC), 1993. Village/Small-Town Planning Stan-dards (GB 50188-93). Ministry of Construction, Beijing.

inistry of Housing and Urban–Rural Development of China (MHURDC), 2008.China Urban and Rural Construction Statistical Yearbook (2007). China Archi-tecture & Building Press, Beijing.

inistry of Land and Resources of China (MLRC), 2009. Reports on China’s LanduseSurvey and Update in 2008. China Land Press, Beijing.

ukherjee, A., Zhang, X., 2007. Rural industrialization in China and India: role ofpolicies and institurions. World Development 35, 1621–1634.

ational Bureau of Statistics of China (NBSC), 2008. China Statistical Yearbook. ChinaStatistics Press, Beijing.

ational Bureau of Statistics of China (NBSC), 2009. China Statistical Yearbook. ChinaStatistics Press, Beijing.

allot, J., 1988. The USSR. In: Cloke, P. (Ed.), Policies and Plans for Rural People: AnInternational Perspective. Unwin Hyman, London.

eng, Y.S., 2007. What has spilled over from Chinese cities into rural industry?Modern China 33, 287–319.

utterman, L., 1997. On the past and future of China’s township and village-ownedenterprises. World Development 25, 1639–1655.

u, F.T., Heerink, N., Wang, W.M., 1995. Land administration reform in China: itsimpact on land allocation and economic development. Land Use Policy 12,193–203.

eichert-Schick, A., 2010. ‘Dying villages?’: the effects of demographic change onrural settlements in west Pomerania. In: Mose, I., Robinson, G.M., Schmied, D.,Wilson, G.A. (Eds.), Globalization and Rural Transition in Germany and the UK.Cuvillier, Göttingen.

obinson, G.M., 2004. Geographies of Agriculture: Globalisation, Restructuring andSustainability. Pearson, Harlow.

argeson, S., 2002. Subduing “the rural house-building craze”: attitudes towardshousing construction and land-use controls in four Zhejiang villages. ChinaQuarterly 172, 927–955.

handong Statistical Bureau (SSB), 2008. Shandong Statistical Yearbook. ChinaStatistics Press, Beijing.

hen, J.F., 2002. A study of the temporary population in Chinese cities. HabitatInternational 26, 363–377.

hen, X.P., Ma, L.J.C., 2005. Privatization of rural industry and de facto urbanizationfrom below in southern Jiangsu, China. Geoforum 36, 761–777.

ong, Y., Zenou, Y., Ding, C., 2008. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water:the role of urban villages in housing rural migrants in China. Urban Studies 45,313–330.

an, M.H., Robinson, G.M., Li, X.B., 2011. Urban spatial development and land usein Beijing: implications from London’s experiences. Journal of Geographical Sci-ences 21, 49–64.

an, R., Beckmann, V., van den Berg, L., Qu, F., 2009. Governing farmland conver-sion: comparing China with the Netherlands and Germany. Land Use Policy 26,961–974.

ilt, B., 2008. Smallholders and the ‘household responsibility system’: adapting to

institutional change in Chinese agriculture. Human Ecology 36, 189–199.

u, C.H., 2010. Withdrawing Villages and Enclosing Land to Pursue Land Finance inMany Provinces (Duosheng Checun Quandi Yi Zai Tudi Caizheng). The Beijing News(Xin Jing Bao), 2010-11-02, A16. http://epaper.bjnews.com.cn/images/2010-11/02/A16/A16b02C.pdf.

Z

Z

icy 29 (2012) 11– 22

ubiello, F.N., Rahman, A., Mann, W., Schmidhuber, J., Koleva, M., Müller, A., 2009.Carbon financial mechanisms for agriculture and rural development: challengesand opportunities along the Bali roadmap. Climatic Change 97, 3–21.

nger, J., 2002. The Transformation of Rural China. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk.an, G.H., Lu, M., Chen, Z., 2007. Globalization and regional income inequal-

ity: empirical evidence from within China. Review of Income and Wealth 53,35–59.

ang, H., Tao, R., Tong, J.E., 2009. Trading land development rights under a plannedland use system: the “Zhejiang Model” and its national implications. China &World Economy 17 (1), 1–17.

ang, M., 2010. Impace of the global economic crisis on China’s migrant workers:a survey of 2700 in 2009. Eurasian Geography and Economics 51, 218–235.

ang, M., Li, G.P., 2008. The Shenyang-Dalian mega-urban region in transition.International Development Planning Review 30, 1–26.

ang, Y.M., Scott, S., 2008. Illegal farmland conversion in China’s urban periphery:local regime and national transitions. Urban Geography 29, 327–347.

ei, Y.H.D., 2007. Regional development in China: transitional institutions, embed-ded globalization and hybrid economies. Eurasian Geography and Economics48, 16–36.

ei, Y.P., Zhao, M., 2009. Urban spill over vs. local urban sprawl: entangling land-use regulations in the urban growth of China’s megacities. Land Use Policy 26,1031–1045.

oods, M., 2003. Deconstructing rural protest: the emergence of a new social move-ment. Journal of Rural Studies 19, 309–325.

oods, M., 2005. Rural Geography: Processes, Responses and Experiences in RuralRestructuring. Sage, London.

oods, M., 2007. Engaging the global countryside: globalization, hybridity andthe reconstitution of rural place. Progress in Human Geography 31, 485–507.

oods, M., 2010. The political economies of place in the emergent global coun-tryside: stories from rural Wales. In: Halseth, G., Markey, S., Bruce, D. (Eds.),The Next Rural Economies: Constructing Rural Place in Global Economies. CABI,Wallingford.

oods, M., 2011. Rural. Routledge, Abingdon and New York.u, C.J., 1997. The new development of rural China. BEVAS-SOBEG 1, 101–105.u, F.L., Ma, L.J.C., 2006. Transforming China’s globalizing cities. Habitat Interna-

tional 30, 191–198.ie, Y.C., Yu, M., Tian, G.J., Xing, X.R., 2005. Socio-economic driving forces of arable

land conversion: a case study of Wuxian City, China. Global EnvironmentalChange 15, 238–252.

u, W., Tan, K.C., 2002. Impact of reform and economic restructuring on rural sys-tems in China: a case study of Yuhang, Zhejiang. Journal of Rural Studies 18,65–81.

ang, H., Li, X.B., 2000. Cultivated land and food supply in China. Land Use Policy 17,73–88.

ang, X.Y., 2009. A test point drove a transform: investigation on test points in Shan-dong province for implementation of linking up increased urban constructionland with decreased rural construction land. Dazhong Daily (Dazhong Ribao),2009-05-25, A3 (In Chinese).

u, X.J., Ng, C.N., 2007. Spatial and temporal dynamics of urban sprawl along twourban–rural transects: a case study of Guangzhou, China. Landscape and UrbanPlanning 79, 96–109.

hang, L., 2008. Conceptualizing China’s urbanization under reforms. Habitat Inter-national 32, 452–470.

hang, L.X., Rozelle, S., Huang, J.K., 2001. Off-farm jobs and on-farm work in peri-ods of boom and bust in rural China. Journal of Comparative Economics 29,505–526.

hong, T.Y., Huang, X.J., Zhang, X.Y., Wang, K., 2011. Temporal and spatial variabilityof agricultural land loss in relation to policy and accessibility in a low hilly regionof southeast China. Land Use Policy, doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.01.004.

hou, F.Z., 2007. The role of government and farmers in land development andtransfer. Sociological Studies 22 (1), 49–82 (in Chinese).