Abstract
The urbanization in China is “incomplete” and the migration of non-hukou migrants is circular, wherein rural migrants often keep their rural land in the home village as a social safety net. The informal housing market is one of the main housing providers for migrant workers. Existing studies see informal housing as the migrants’ passive choice under the discriminatory hukou system, while underplaying the migrants’ familial multi-site tenure strategies between village homes and city places. As suggested by New Economics of Labor Migration (NELM), attachment to a place of origin (such as keeping hometown lands), while choosing informal housing at the destination, is a familial utility maximization strategy that can control risks when migrating between locations. Informal housing areas, therefore, become a trans-local rural-urban gradient and semi-urban landscape. We use the 2017 Migrant Dynamics Monitoring Survey data and the binary logistic regression to examine (a) whether hometown landowning is a significant predictor of the migrants’ choosing of a temporary stay in informal settlements in urban destinations, and (b) which kind of hometown land arrangement (farmland or homestead holding or both of them) is the strongest indicator of the higher probability of staying in informal settlements in urban destinations? The data analysis reveals that homestead in hometown is a more prominent pulling factor than farmland to “glue” rural migrants together within an integrated rural land “insurance regime” between the migrant-sending and -receiving places. The land-use and informal housing governance (including urban village demolition) ignore the trans-local nature of the migratory networks and semi-urbanizing dynamics. The traditional analysis of the rural-urban gradient with many landscapes should consider the functional and tenurial linkage between the locations at different points along with the complex migration activities.
Highlights
This study examines the relationship between the circular labor migration and prevalent informal settlements that take the form of the informal housing sector in China
New Economics of Labor Migration (NELM) is distinct from Neoclassical Economics (NE), as the former assumes that people move circularly, whereas the latter assumes people move permanently and maximize lifetime earnings [25,26]
This shows that, to some extent, informal property rights are likely to be a voluntary choice of migrants, different from the scholars’ conventional thesis that China’s dual system was the “opportunities for discrimination” [46] against rural migrants
Summary
It is easy to detect the informal settlements as a typical rural-urban gradient (semi-urban and semi-rural) in China, as they are the highdensity urban villages which are the specific urbanizing phenomenon where local land losing peasants have built informal habitats to house migrant workers and other low-wage earners. They are rural patches of land within the city area and are surrounded by or next to the urbanized landscape [8]. Landuse regulations are local, ignoring incomplete urbanization between the migrant-sending and -receiving places in transitional China
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
