The difference of land resumption and displacement method between Hong Kong and Shanghai

Abstract

In 2009, the central Chinese government invested 4000 billion into the Chinese economy, real estate industry expanded and the housing price increased very fast afterwards. In the construction of housing, demand of land is huge. One source of land is resumption of old area and land. Land users or owners had much conflict with government and real estate developers in land resumption and displacement issue in the past few years. This study investigates the difference of land resumption and displacement method between Hong Kong and Shanghai. This can provide information for Shanghai government to evaluate its policy and take Hong Kong as a good reference. It is because there were many problems and conflicts like imbalance of interest sharing between land users and government and real estate developers that were caused by unfair land resumption and displacement regulations and procedures. In the beginning, concepts of property rights, rent seeking, eminent domain in United States are investigated. Also Hong Kong land tenure system, letter A/B, and situation in Shanghai are included. This shows the property rights are mature in United States and Hong Kong. Shanghai is comparatively weak in this concept. In the eminent domain concept, United States and Hong Kong are fully developed, but it is still weak in Shanghai. In the methodology, I compare the land resumption and displacement rules and regulations of Hong Kong and Shanghai. In Hong Kong, those are Urban Renewal Authority Ordinance, Lands Resumption Ordinance. While in Shanghai, they are Shanghai city land displacement housing management method, Urban Buildings Demolition Relocation Administration Regulations. By the results, we can see the system in Hong Kong is much more mature and complicate than that of Shanghai. Shanghai should consider the fairness and justice concept of Hong Kong land resumption and displacement regulations to modify its regulations. Example is like involving more parties in the land resumption procedure to monitor each other and minimize the chance of interest of conflict. At last, some suggestions are made to Shanghai government. One is law court should be only responsible for judgment, while execution is done by other party. Although there are some limitations of this study like the rapid changing of land resumption and displacement regulations in Shanghai, this study still provide some valuable information for the development of real estate industry in China.