Poverty concentration and determinants in poor urban neighbourhoods and social groups

Conference on China's Urban Land and Housing 13th-15th Dec 2007 Hong Kong Baptist University

Shenjing He, Fulong Wu, Chris WebsterSchool of City and Regional Planning, Cardiff University, UK

Poverty concentration and determinants in poor urban

neighbourhoods and social groups


Background • Large-scale industrial restructuring and State-Own-

Enterprise reforms turning laid-off workers into urban poor – Hurdles of age, skill and education – Mismatch of skill and space, – Competition among themselves and from rural migrants

• Swarming rural migrants with low-skills and living in marginal conditions in the city– Constrained by the urban-rural dichotomy – Comparatively low skills and educational attainments


The emergence of poverty concentration in urban China

• Two groups of urban poor (the new urban ‘underclass’)– Laid-off workers– Rural migrants

• Three types of poverty neighbourhood – Inner-city dilapidated neighbourhoods– Degenerated workers’ villages

– Rural migrant enclaves/urban villages


A study on poverty concentration and determinants

• Part of a research project funded by ESRC/DFID UK: urban poverty and property rights changes in China– Examining patterns of urban poverty and institutional

causes • A study on poverty concentration and determinants

in poor neighbourhoods and social groups– Based on large-scale household survey

– Social concentration, not spatial concentration


The survey

• Poverty neighbourhoods in 6 cities– Xi’an, Guangzhou, Nanjing, Wuhan, Ha’erbin,

Kunming • Selection of poverty neighbourhoods

– Inner city neighbourhoods and workers’ villages: referring to MLSS coverage rate

– Urban villages: referring to 2000 census data

• 1809 questionnaires in 25 neighbourhoods


Poverty measures and their concentration

categorised by neighbourhoods

q FGT indices (Foster, Greer, and Thorbecke 1984): P = 1/n ∑ ((Z-Ii)/Z)

i=1Where n = total population, q = the number of poor, Z is the poverty line, and I i is the average income of

the ith household (i = 1, 2, …, q ). P0 =poverty rate; P1=poverty gap; P2=weighted poverty gap; Pm=MLSS coverage rate; Pp=poverty

perception,



categorised by hukou and employment status



categorised by HH age and educational attainments



categorised by HH occupation



categorised by housing tenure


Findings on poverty concentration

• Old inner city neighbourhood has the highest concentration of poverty

• Laid-off/unemployed rather than rural migrants is the poorest group

• Mismatch between actual poverty rate and distribution of state welfare provision


Logistic regression models for poverty determinants


Inside formal urban institutional settings

Outside formal urban institutional settings

Economically active Economically inactive

Working urban residents (old urban neighbourhood, workers’ village)

Rural migrants, re-employed laid-off workers (urban village, old urban neighbourhood)

Laid-off/unemployed (workers’ village, old urban neighbourhood)

Retirees (old urban neighbourhood, workers’ village)


Findings on poverty determinants

• Workers’ village/laid-off– Countless ties with the central planned system

• Urban village/rural migrants– Exposed to the market economy to a greater extent

• Two important poverty determinants: protection of state institutions and economic activities– Finding a place in the market economy is becoming

more important, especially for those eliminated or excluded from state institutions, i.e. the laid-off and rural migrants


Thank you!

Poverty concentration and determinants in poor urban neighbourhoods and social groups

Documents

Transcript of Poverty concentration and determinants in poor urban neighbourhoods and social groups