China’s Relocation Policy has forced the removal of millions of people from their homes. In the past decade, as China’s economic growth has become more viable, cities are changing and turning into sprawling urban centers. A problem rises when municipalities and local governments decide to build a new sky scraper or a new apartment complex while demolishing the old, ancient one story houses. What happens to the people who live there, and what kind of compensation, if any, does the government offer those who are relocated?
The three gorges dam, the Beijing Olympics park and stadium, the Shanghai EXPO area, and the massive project to divert water from the Yangtze River to the drought-prone north are only a few of the major construction projects that China has been undertaking in the past decade. These projects, which are the implementation process of the Relocation Policy, often include the relocation of millions of people away from their homes to new areas, sometimes miles away from where they used to live.
The relocation policy leaves citizens no choice but to move: The municipal or the central government decides to demolish certain areas, and the people who live in those areas are forced to relocate. The process begins when the word “拆” (chāi) - “To be demolished”, is sprayed on the wall of the building that is going to be destroyed. Usually, it is a street or a neighborhood that is meant for destruction. While the purpose of the destruction in most urban areas is to change old and poor areas into new, vibrant shopping centers, stadiums or sky scrapers, the purpose of the destruction in rural areas is often to make room for the construction of a mega-project, such as the case of the Three Gorges Dam.
However, initiatives that involve the relocation of people from natural disaster struck homes have recently been more common: according to the relocation policy, a massive relocation project involving some 2.8 million people, the largest project of its kind ever undertaken by the Chinese government, has started in 2010 in Shaanxi province. The number of people being relocated in Shaanxi province alone is about twice as many as the number of people relocated to make way for China’s Three Gorges Dam. Over the next ten years, Shaanxi will relocate 2.4 million people currently living in its disaster-prone southern region, while another 400,000 will be relocated from its northern part. Shaanxi province is vulnerable to a variety of natural disasters, including landslides and floods: In July 2010, nearly 300 people died or went missing in rain-triggered disasters in the province.
The government claims that the Relocation Policy is necessary to improve the quality of life of people. In the Shaanxi case, for example, the governor, Mr. Zhao Zhengyong was quoted as saying that “This relocation project is for the benefit of the people, and it aims to provide them with safer and more convenient environment in which to live their lives.” One of the cities that has undergone relocation in Shaanxi is Ankang, which was hit by severe flood in July 2010. The flood left 182 people dead or missing and leveled 30,000 homes in the city. This could be the reason why villagers who live nearby the city of Ankang are happy to move: “The huge mountains and deep valleys in our village put our homes in danger when there are heavy rains,” said Mr. Hong Yuanping, a villager from the village of Xinfeng in the Qinling-Bashan region. “Floods can level our houses and destroy our fields at any time. We are eager and excited to move.”
Many are the cases, though, in which people are not excited to leave their homes for a new, unknown location. In Beijing, for example, More than 6,000 households were destroyed, and some 15,000 people were forced to leave their dwellings prior to the Beijing Olympics of 2008. One of the residents, Guo Tiehui, 38, told the Washington Post that residents in his neighborhood received a notice in May 2006 from district officials informing them that the area had to be improved for the Olympics, even though it was not a venue site. Guo’s 2,153-square-foot courtyard home was torn down, but he said the compensation he had received was based on an area of only 725.4 square feet.
“Before, my family lived in several rooms and rented out other rooms,” he said. “Right now, we have to rent an apartment. Not only that we lost our shelter, but we also lost a stable income. How can we buy a new apartment with the same area with such a small amount of compensation? Chinese people do support the Olympics, but we also need reasonable compensation,” Guo said. “The government should not use the Olympics as a big hat to put on our heads. The government always blames outsiders for politicizing the Olympics, but domestically they make the Olympics a political issue.” He continued to say: “We don’t believe that our houses were torn down for the Olympics. The real purpose is moneymaking.”
The government does not see eye to eye with citizens in this issue. “The relocation project went very smoothly, so no one was forced out of their homes at any of the venues,” Zhang Jiaming, vice chair of the Beijing Municipal Construction Committee, told reporters when asked about the Beijing Olympics relocation project. “Families who could prove ownership were compensated, on average, about $87,500 RMB, enough to allow some displaced residents to pass up government-provided affordable housing, to purchase an apartment and to buy a new car”, Zhang said.
In Shaanxi, people’s wishes were taken very seriously, according to government officials. “Shaanxi will respect the wishes of its citizens during the relocation process,” says Mr. Zhao, the governor of Shaanxi province. “The relocation will not be easy to implement, and local governments are striving to ensure that all of its relocated people will be satisfied with their new homes.” The Shaanxi government will support those who are being relocated by offering them vocational training programs and farming equipment. Those being relocated will be settled in small towns with better-developed economies and environments.
Mr. Zhang Baotong, a renowned economist and the director of the Shaanxi Economic Development Research Institute, said that the relocation policy is a new method of poverty reduction, and one that demonstrates the unique strengths of China. ”Such a large-scale relocation program requires a great deal of strength and financial resources, things that China has accumulated in recent years”. He added that compared with other relocation projects, this project is designed to help those being relocated to adapt to their new homes more easily: ”This project is a new path to prosperity in that it offers professional training and new opportunities for employment. It will be an effective method for reducing poverty in China.”
China’s Relocation Policy – Where Do You Stand?
China’s Relocation Policy divides people into two extreme opinion-base camps: The first camp believes that demolishing old buildings is in the best interest of the country and that to clear the old and to make room for the new is a necessary process for economic growth – even if this process entails that families need to be relocated. The second camp believes that families have been living at their homes for generations and that there is absolutely no excuse for demolishing old buildings and forcing those families to relocate.
The middle ground is probably where logic lays – the destruction of old homes, although unfortunate, is necessary for China’s economic growth. It is up to the government to provide a reasonable amount of compensation for those who were affected by the Relocation Policy, in order to insure the successful creation of a new future for China.
(polls)
Print
Lior Paritzky is the Editor in Chief and Manager of Laowaiblog, an internet platform that provides opinion and views about social phenomena in modern China. Look for Lior on Twitter: Liorpari 
This is a difficult topic to discuss. It’s hard to say if it is OK to relocate people from their home, some of them have been living there for decades and even centuries, and they are connected to the land in a very deep way. Yet it is obviously necessary to force people to move for the benefit of the entire country.
I would agree that each case should be viewed specifically, yet the major problem to me is how it is decided and by whom. If the decision would have been objective, meaning not up to just one individual who decides whether to take down an entire block, for example, then I would have agreed more. The problem is, usually it is just one person who decides, and it is easy to “influence” his decision. That is when things get ugly and when things that should not be destroyed are ruined
What makes China unique is its own building and construction style. As a Chinese who now lives in the US, when I go to China I often witness how quickly the scenery changes, especially in major cities. The Chinese people must cherish their heritage and culture and to find a way to mix western influences without damaging their own culture too much.
China is starting to look like the US with each day that goes by…
I think it is terrible that people can simply be told they have a week to pack their things and move because their house is being torn down. What kind of a country does that to its citizens? I can’t agree with this policy in anyway. Think about it: These families have been living in these places for centuries, generation after generation. If they want to continue to live there, why can’t they? for the sake of what purpose should they move?
A good friend of mine was relocated before the olympics of 2008 in Beijing. She was very sad because she simply had no choice – she and her parents had to get out of the house in a matter of days (along with the entire block) and they moved to a different area altogether. Luckily, the compensation was very good: 2 apartments in a different part of town. Since 2008, house prices have been going up drastically, so my friend and her family were blessed in disguise. But what about all the others who weren’t so lucky?
Don’t know if it’s really worth it.. now the olympic stadium is just standing there
Just wondering how would it be possible for China to develop unless people relocated? You can’t expect them to live in slums forever and watch everything else around them develop do you..?
As someone who got relocated, I was pretty lucky. Although I was living in a pretty old area in central Beijing, and i was relocated to outside of the city, it is great because I got a really big apartment and I lived in a very old one. So I am very lucky but some people are not so lucky like I am
The World Bank estimates that forcible “development-induced displacement and resettlement” now affects 10 million people per year. According to the World Bank an estimated 33 million people have been displaced by development projects such as dams, urban development and irrigation canals in India alone.
India is well ahead in this respect. A country with as many as over 3600 large dams within its belt can never be the exceptional case regarding displacement. The number of development induced displacement is higher than the conflict induced displacement in India. According to Bogumil Terminski an estimated more than 10 million people have been displaced by development each year.
Athough the exact number of development-induced displaced people (DIDPs) is difficult to know, estimates are that in the last decade 90–100 million people have been displaced by urban, irrigation and power projects alone, with the number of people displaced by urban development becoming greater than those displaced by large infrastructure projects (such as dams). DIDPs outnumber refugees, with the added problem that their plight is often more concealed.
This is what experts have termed “development-induced displacement.” According to Michael Cernea, a World Bank analyst, the causes of development-induced displacement include water supply (dams, reservoirs, irrigation); urban infrastructure; transportation (roads, highways, canals); energy (mining, power plants, oil exploration and extraction, pipelines); agricultural expansion; parks and forest reserves; and population redistribution schemes.
I am currently researching on this topic in Shanghai and found out through interviews, that most people are very happy to relocate as their living standards from no toilet and small, often 1 room apartments, change to bigger apartments with own bathroom. The complains are rather about less mobility and longer transportation ways. As most are moving together with their neighbors to the same place, community bounds are less a problem as in other countries. However, people with a local household registration have usually no problems and get compare with migrants who still own their rural, great subsidies. Does anybody knows what happens to migrants, who are kind of permanent and own a house? Are those the group who are forced out to leave without subsides. Is there any data availabe? Or does anyone did research on it before? Thanks for your answers!!!