4.6 Article

Planning Beijing: socialist city, transitional city, and global city

Journal

URBAN GEOGRAPHY
Volume 36, Issue 6, Pages 905-926

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02723638.2015.1067409

Keywords

urban master plan; socialist city; transitional city; global city; Beijing; hybridicity

Funding

  1. Beijing Philosophy and Social Science Planning Project [11CSA003]
  2. Chinese Ministry of Education [11JJDZH005]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cities are centers of economic, social, and political change, and urban planning is a process responding to and guiding urban change and development. In the Maoist era and under the influence of socialist ideology, China limited urbanization while promoting industrialization, and urban planning served as an instrument for socialist construction. Since the reform of the late 1970s, Chinese cities have experienced unprecedented growth and restructuring. However, the gradualist, exploratory reformexemplified by Deng Xiaoping's slogan crossing the river by feeling the stonesmakes Chinese cities constantly change without clear directions for future development. This paper uses Beijing as a case study to analyze changing institutional and global contexts underlying the transformation of Chinese cities, and planners' responses and dilemmas in making plans and implementing them. We found that market reforms, rapid growth, and dramatic change make urban master plans quickly out of date, forcing Chinese planners to frequently revise these master plans. We also found that the content of urban master planning in China has broadened from physical planning, and Chinese planning has adapted to market reform through utilizing concepts of visioning, flexibility, and governance. Increasingly what we call a hybrid form of planning is arising in which global concepts and Chinese ideas interweave in order to direct the shape and form of the Chinese metropolis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available