Abstract
Urban China reached 50% of the nation’s population by 2010, mainly as a result of massive rural–urban migration. There is substantial evidence of their social marginality in terms of occupational and housing opportunities. Here we ask about their incorporation into the neighbourhoods where they live. Rural migrants are called the ‘floating population’ in China, suggesting that their residence in the city is only temporary and that they are unlikely to develop strong local ties. This study contrasts the neighbourhood socialising of migrant tenants with that of urban homeowners who were born in the city. It draws on original survey research in Beijing that included questions on relations with neighbours and neighbourhood sentiment. It is found that migrants are more likely to engage in socialising and exchange of help with neighbours, and consequently their neighbouring helps strengthen their sentiment towards the neighbourhoods where they live. It is argued that contemporary social changes – including rising education and homeownership – may actually reduce neighbouring, while rural migrants’ marginality makes them more dependent on their local social network.
Highlights
China has been experiencing rapid urbanisation, transitioning from less than 30% urban in 1990 to about 50% in 2010
This study draws a sample from two parallel surveys administrated in the same period of time, one in urban neighbourhoods for the urban locals, and the other in the peri-urban areas for rural migrants
The most important and surprising finding of this study is that rural migrants in Beijing did not necessarily have a lower neighbouring intensity
Summary
China has been experiencing rapid urbanisation, transitioning from less than 30% urban in 1990 to about 50% in 2010. The influx of rural migrants into Chinese cities reached 230 million persons by 2012 (Wang and Fan, 2012), dramatically transforming the urban environment. The common perception of rural migrants is that they are a ‘floating population’ with high residential mobility and only a temporary, weak connection with. The city (Fan, 2008). They are a socioeconomically marginal category, with limited occupational prospects and entitlement to public services. They are concentrated at the periphery of the urban area, especially in low quality, high density housing constructed for migrants. Informal and reciprocal help, possibly neighbourhoodbased, may be an important support for vulnerable social groups as shown in Western market economies (Hays and Kogl, 2007)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
