Contrastive Study on the Participation Mechanisms of Multiple Subjects in Urban regeneration of Megacities in the Context of China’s New Urbanization Transition: Case Study Based on Three Typical Urban Villages in Guangzhou

This abstract has open access
Abstract Summary
In recent years, as China's economy has entered a transition period of medium and low-speed growth, the New Urbanization policy has been put forward. The policy pays more attention to the overall consideration of urban space, economy, society and ecological environment, whose core is people-oriented and goal is to promote harmonious and sustainable development. China's urban planning has also changed from "incremental planning" to "stock planning". In this process, the old city regeneration is put on the agenda as an important part of it. Among them, the urban villages (villages in the city) formed by urban sprawl and asynchronous development have become an important part of the old city regeneration in China’s megacities. Most of the early urban regeneration in China was based on the government's "top-down" subjective planning and financial subsidies, and adopted the infrastructure construction mode based on the command and control. With the deepening of the old city regeneration, the problem of this model has gradually emerged. In the process of the old city renewal, the news of fierce contradictions between the government and residents is often seen. As a result, the “bottom-up” urban regeneration model, which encourages multi-group public participation, has gradually begun to be adopted. However, due to the complex composition of stakeholders involved and the great particularity of environmental conditions, the urban villages regeneration in China’s mega-cities has not yet formed a fixed mode for public participation. This paper takes Xian village, Pazhou village and Lijiao village as examples from Guangzhou, one of the most representative mega-city in the regeneration of urban villages in China. Among them, Xian Village represents the old city renewal mode led by the traditional government, Pazhou Village represents the old city renewal mode led by the real estate developers, while Lijiao Village represents the old city renewal mode led by the villagers' clans. By using the methods of literature analysis, field interviews and questionnaires, the attitudes and participatory details of different groups will be obtained, and the specific processes of multi-subject participation in the three modes will be compared and analyzed. The research results will involve: (1) Under different regeneration modes of urban villages, the specific participation process and mechanism of urban government, real estate developers, village committees (local government), villagers and other main bodies. (2) The roles of different subjects under the three modes, as well as the advantages, disadvantages and significance of each mode. (3) How to effectively and reasonably negotiate and play a role for each stakeholder in the old city renewal? (4) Summarize better methods to promote public participation in old city regeneration as well as the response of planning and management to promote sustainable regeneration of old city.
Abstract ID :
ISO404
Submission Type
College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University

Similar Abstracts by Type

Abstract ID
Abstract Title
Abstract Topic
Submission Type
Primary Author
ISO540
1: Limitless cities and urban futures: planning for scale
Paper
Wala Bashari
ISO247
4: Knowledge economies and identity: planning for culture
Paper
han zou
ISO183
1: Limitless cities and urban futures: planning for scale
Paper
Kangwei Tu
ISO118
2: Beside the megacity and the role of other cities and areas: planning for balance
Paper
Sunny Bansal
ISO398
2: Beside the megacity and the role of other cities and areas: planning for balance
Paper
Asher Yang
ISO473
5: Smart futures and sustainability: planning for innovation
Paper
Swechcha Roy
ISO80
5: Smart futures and sustainability: planning for innovation
Paper
Cynthia Goytia
ISO541
5: Smart futures and sustainability: planning for innovation
Paper
Hanna Obracht-Prondzyńska
ISO215
3: Liveable places and healthy cities: planning for people
Paper
Jingwei LI