China's Short March

[crazyyaya 4]

China's Short March

Suburban expansion in China

This is based on an article I saw then I look at alittle further into it. Here's an exert and pictures.

"In a migration dwarfing that of America after 1945, millions of newly affluent Chinese are moving to the vast suburbs rising on the fringes of the country's megacities."

"For the past decade and a half, the frantic pace of urbanization has been the transformative engine driving this country's economy, as some 300-400 million people from dirt-poor farming regions made their way to relative prosperity in cities. Within the contours of that great migration, however, there is another one now about to take place — less visible, but arguably no less powerful. As China's major cities — there are now 49 with populations of one million or more, compared with nine in the U.S. in 2000 — become more crowded and more expensive, a phenomenon similar to the one that reshaped the U.S. in the aftermath of World War II has begun to take hold. That is the inevitable desire among a rapidly expanding middle class for a little bit more room to live, at a reasonable price; maybe a little patch of grass for children to play on, or a whiff of cleaner air as the country's cities become ever more polluted.

This is China's Short March. A wave of those who are newly affluent and firm in the belief that their best days, economically speaking, are ahead of them, is headed for the suburbs. In Shanghai alone, urban planners believe some 5 million people will move to what are called "satellite cities" in the next 10 years. To varying degrees, the same thing is happening all across China. This process — China's own suburban flight — is at the core of the next phase of this country's development, and will be for years to come. 

The consequences of this suburbanization are enormous. Think of how the U.S. was transformed, economically and socially, in the years after World War II, when GIs returned home and formed families that then fanned out to the suburbs. The comparison is not exact, of course, but it's compelling enough. The effects of China's suburbanization are just beginning to ripple across Chinese society and the global economy. It's easy to understand the persistent strength in commodity prices — steel, copper, lumber, oil — when you realize that in Emerald Riverside construction crews used more than three tons of steel in the houses and nearly a quarter of a ton of copper wiring. There are 35 housing developments either just finished or still under construction in New Songjiang alone, a town in which 500,000 people will eventually live. And as Lu Hongjiang, a vice president of the New Songjiang Development & Construction company puts it, "we're only at the very beginning of this in China." 

[Full Article]quote>

This tren

[Godzillaman 21]

I would rather live in Bixel's towers...

Edit: You're not Duke! Impostor!

[sakarr 1]

i love how the new suburban houses all have either a european or an american look to them lol

[SimRabbit 48]

yeah these houses look very "american" to me.

but seriously who gives a damn on the enviroment, i rather live on a nice new neighborhood in the middle of a forest than on an old brutalist aparment from the 60's.

[Duke87 1,070]

Whoa.. for a second there I thought dirk actually posted something not directly site related. You avatar thief!

On topic: Just goes to show you that nothing is new in the world anymore. History always repeats itself.

[DuskTrooper 316]

You think American sprawl and traffic is bad? Wait til you have over one billion Chinese folks in the suburbs going to work in a car each day....

EDIT: Looks like they're using a form of Feng Shui here in this image, as all of the houses seem to be facing the same direction:

[Mulefisk 15]

This is pretty bad, but not suprising at all. It's really just a natural development. I think one of the biggest problems Chinas suburbanization will face, along with environmental consequences, is the increasing pressure on water sources. Vast suburban areas will undoubtedly steal water from agriculture. I don't have the numbers, but I'm fairly sure that a suburban household uses much more water on average than an urban one. So in a country that already has little water, this will be pretty devestating for farmers, especially in the northern regions. Another problem that comes into this is that the glaciers in the Himalayas, Chinas primary water source, are melting away pretty quickly. People in the highlands around himalaya are already being forced to move because rivers that used to be full of water are drying out. So what China migh basically be left with if suburbanization continues, is massive amounts of low density housing that steals away the little water that's available from farmers, even moreso than today, running the Chinese agricultural industry into the ground, forcing farmers to migrate into cities, pushing food prices up, etc etc etc. All in all it seems like a terrible idea. But hey, everyone's entitled to their own house and a yard for their kids to play in. Right?

[villagemayor 0]

The issue with China is that there is simply not enough land to support a population that is growing, and a population that is demanding a higher standard of living. There are a few scenarios in the future. Either:

A) Status quo and import food

B) Relocate people to other places with little population growth

C) Realize the fact that there is not enough land and start planning more progressively (not necessarily meaning building like Hong Kong)

[hamsterTK 93]

To me China's economic development is a good thing

And as grim as the enviromental implications may seem they do create more market demand for greener technologies.

[SimRabbit 48]

why critize china for doing something that many western countries did very long ago. I guess nobody cared back then.

[crazyyaya 4]

Originally posted by: hamsterTK To me China's economic development is a good thing

And as grim as the enviromental implications may seem they do create more market demand for greener technologies.quote>

 

Yes, but I don't think new technology will counter balance to the huge affect China's and the whole worlds deveolpment has and will have on the enviroment. And if we are just talking about effeciency with new technology, that has it's own paradox. Increasing effeicency, while conserving energy in theory, encourages people to consume more in reality.

[Deaghaidh 5]

Originally posted by: SimRabbit why critize china for doing something that many western countries did very long ago. I guess nobody cared back then.

quote>

Nope, they didn't.  People still believed in the "miracle" of progress back then.

But only a fool would deliberately copy the move.  Suburbanization contributed to most of America's current problems (domestic ones anyway).  Aside from the resource consumption, look at the burden it placed on our infrastructure.  I recall hearing that the average american spends the equivilant of a work week stuck in traffic each year.  The exodus of the middle and upper classes from cities widened the gulf between classes and races, leading to the American pattern (unusual in world history) of having the poor in the inner city.  Suburban enclaves allow people to buy insulation from society's ills.

In any case, it won't reach the point of America's, because it can't.  There simply aren't enough resources to support it.  Personally I think China's boom is going to come to a sudden, painful end in the next year or two.  The social and enviornmental problems that China's been so strenuously suppressing, and which outsiders (who rarely go into the rural areas where most Chinese live) don't see are growing along with the economy.  They'll reach crisis levels fairly soon, imho.  Add to this increasing protectionist sentiment in US politics, especially as regards Chinese manufactured goods, and the house of cards has to come tumbling down.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: SimRabbit why critize china for doing something that many western countries did very long ago. I guess nobody cared back then. quote>

Because those western countries did it, and later realized it was a mistake. China is now heading down that path knowing full well that it's a mistake, but they're doing it anyway. When we did it, it hadn't been done before so we didn't know it was a mistake until we had already done it. Now it's been done, and those mistakes ought to be acknowledged.

But hey, nobody ever learns anything from history.

[hamsterTK 93]

Yes, but I don't think new technology will counter balance to the huge affect China's and the whole worlds deveolpment has and will have on the enviroment. And if we are just talking about effeciency with new technology, that has it's own paradox. Increasing effeicency, while conserving energy in theory, encourages people to consume more in reality.quote>

Perhaps the better question would be: what is anyone going to do about it?

And also, people's consumption habits will change as certain products become more scarce. And new technology closing the gap in regards to scarcity is how society becomes more livable and developed.

Anyways, the form of China's suburbs despite what is seen in these pics may not take the same shape as North American ones. Never been to China, but to me what these pictures show are villas for rich people. All countries in the world have them. Does anyone know what the mass produced suburban housing for average people look like yet? Suburbs of China may in the long run look more like the Netherlands or Britain than the US or Canada. As land becomes premium obviously density will rise. Unlike the US they do not have the room to spread out

They do need to begin planning for this though or else it will be a big mess.

[crazyyaya 4]

Originally posted by: hamsterTK

Anyways, the form of China's suburbs despite what is seen in these pics may not take the same shape as North American ones. Never been to China, but to me what these pictures show are villas for rich people. All countries in the world have them. Does anyone know what the mass produced suburban housing for average people look like yet? Suburbs of China may in the long run look more like the Netherlands or Britain than the US or Canada. As land becomes premium obviously density will rise. Unlike the US they do not have the room to spread out  quote>

 

Oh no, these suburbs are for China's growing middle class. There isn't enough pictures to show it but these suburbs, built in the style of North American ones, are afforable by the new middle of business people in China. Although these areas are still unatable for the workers building the suburbs, a huge amount of mid-wealth Chinese are ready to spring to sattelite cities as the huge urban centers in china continue to fill with new arrivals from the rural areas.

[hamsterTK 93]

what percentage of the population does this middle class make up? In the US, 68% of households own their own home. Is china even remotely close to that number?

I mean sure with the large population these could do some damage but even then I think when everyone has money and consuming on the levels of the US then there will be the need to go denser.

[crazyyaya 4]

Originally posted by: hamsterTK what percentage of the population does this middle class make up? In the US, 68% of households own their own home. Is china even remotely close to that number?

I mean sure with the large population these could do some damage but even then I think when everyone has money and consuming on the levels of the US then there will be the need to go denser.quote>

 

Of course China's Middle class isn't %68, but considering China's population is 4 times greater (approx.), and it's stil a developing country, then in a period of even less than a decade, the gap between those numbers is growing to shrink significantly. I found one report claiming that China's Middle class only consists of somewhere between 4-5 percent of its total population. But the Middle class could make up to %50 of it's population by the end of the next decade [source]. This could be an exageration but even if it doubles, and its likely it will and then some, in the next tens years, that a big number. Alot of the people in this growing social class are naturally going to demand a better life, and many will seek it in satelite cities.

[starrdarcy 4]

Despite being some legitimate reasons why people want to live the "good life" i find it disturbing that the chinese think they will be able to find it by copying to some degree the planning that can be seen in places like America and Europe. The fact is that the despite all of the growth in infrastructure and urbanization there is one weakness that could turn all of this progress into a curse... that is its dependency on oil.

China is already set to become the largest consumer of petroleum, with no end in sight. It worries me that 1.4 billion people will try to aspire to the same living standards as the west does. i have heard that we will need another planet earth to satisfy chinas growth in 30 years, how will we do that?

Of course we can come up with new ways to get energy and we should never underestimate the human imagination and will to succeed. However, why must china go by "western standards"?

[HONG KONG 74]

Originally posted by: Duke87

Originally posted by: SimRabbit why critize china for doing something that many western countries did very long ago. I guess nobody cared back then. quote>

Because those western countries did it, and later realized it was a mistake. China is now heading down that past knowing full well that it's a mistake, but they're doing it anyway. When we did it, it hadn't been done before so we didn't know it was a mistake until we had already done it. Now it's been done, and those mistakes ought to be acknowledged.

But hey, nobody ever learns anything from history.quote>

 

That is correct. Only that  China makes today the same mistakes on larger areas with more energy and more people.

[crazyyaya 4]

Originally posted by: starrdarcy Of course we can come up with new ways to get energy and we should never underestimate the human imagination and will to succeed. However, why must china go by "western standards"?quote>

 

I think a question with just as much merit is; why does the west have to go by "western standards"  If the world hopes to have a sustable future, everyone is going to have to sacrifice something. If it doesn't happen now (it won't) then it will happen in several decades. We can't just expect developing nations to just stop expanding and industrializing, especially if we don't as well.

[Gugliaga 0]

Wouldnt a good solution to urbanization be to build skyscrapers with apartments/condos ranging from 1500-3000 feet (450-950 meters). Or just build buildings that contain multi-story units? If people (particularly the middle class) want some room, then that would be a good solution. The only problem with this is setting a price that would compete with the suburban houses. But that only deals with the problem of space being a factor. If people want to own land, then thats another problem......

And i do agree that following the western ways in urbanization is problematic. It causes dependency of oil, causes more pollution, and when there are more cars in the street, causes congestion and even deaths (car accidents, pedystrians being run-over, etc.)

[Frankie_Grove 32]

Sprawl is probably one of the biggest environmental problems (but not a "concern") in the US. 100 Acres of sprawl probably leads to more pollution than 10 coal fired power plants. The Atlanta metro (probably second worst sprawl area in the country after Texas) used to lose 700-800 acres of land per day to new development, however in recent years that uncontrolled sprawl has changed the city's perspective, and new development is being focused along mass transit instead of Interstates. Sprawl is merely the first step in a longer development. First comes sprawl, which "clears the way", establishes boundaries and resource distribution. Then comes a wave of higher density development, in which roads become more squared off, and large high rise/mid rise structures begin to come in.

Sprawl seems cost effective, when in reality it drains resources, and in China's case, that is not a good idea at all.

[patriots_1228 51]

"fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."

quotes can be so useful sometimes....

[robertg0902 0]

If China wants to implode, then let them that is their right so let them build what they want how they want , it would'nt be anybodies fault but thier own.

[starrdarcy 4]

Yeah, if you want to see for yourself what all of the growth looks like, just go into google earth and go to some to big cities like Chengdu, Shanghai, Beiging, Wuxi, Guangzhou, the list goes on! You can see that the sarrounding area in and around these cities is changing rapidly, and that most of the urban area was once just farmland.

[Gugliaga 0]

Frankie_Grove- Yes, i do agree that atlanta has one or the worst sprawls....and yea you are correct that they are errecting many high rise and mid rises...but there is still one problem....they are errecting the buildings according to the mass transit, but that plan is useless since the atlanta mass transit is probably the worst in the united states. (and other than the fact that atlanta really doesnt have a mass transit (MARTA really sucks). 

Roberg0902-  It is  not good if China implodes because if that happens, then basically the whole world will suffer (IF China falls, then everyone will get hurt via stock markets).

[hamsterTK 93]

on a tangent:

MARTA rail has high ridership by American standards. It wouldn't suck if the georgia state government would help fund it and not let it starve for funds.

[masssc4 3]

wow those houses expecially the bottom right look very nice, ALOT better than whats being build in MA or the cookie cutter houses in DE. althogh it is a shame that China hasn't taken into consideration history, which many mistakes were made

[TRNSTN 0]

greeeeeatt. I wish the Chinese would start being more Chinese instead of trying to copy the West so much -__-

[tankmank 853]

some pics of shanghai suburbs and traditional buildings

 they look extreamly british 

and this one also looks very brittish

 and the building in middle looks american 

Some more traditional housing 

And a bonus image which looks remarkably like somewhere in manhatten but is Shanghai