Changing Residential and Employment Distributions in Guangzhou An Analysis of Commuting Flows

Tremendous transformation of China cities Gradual weakening of the work-unit system Dismantling of work-unit compounds for real estate development  Working and living within a work-unit compound increasingly less common

Land re-commodification and the (re)emergence of the urban rent gradient  Re-emergence of the CBD  Spatial differentiation of land use in response to differential rent Local government as an active agent in urban restructuring  Development zones and industrial suburbanization  Central city redevelopment and showcase projects by municipal governments

Phenomenal growth in the real estate industry  Massive real estate developments, especially on the urban fringe (in the form of xiaoqu or largely gated residential estates) Equally massive investments in transport infrastructures: urban motorways, metro systems

Significantly affects where people live and where they work Hence the pattern of commuting –Time and distance (and hence cost) of commute –Pattern of the commuting flows over the city, and implications for traffic congestions –Means of commuting

Data and Methodology Two household surveys in Guangzhou 2001: 1500 households 2005: 1203 households Multi-level probability proportionate to size sampling –To ensure spatial distribution of the sample approximates the spatial distribution of the population –Level 1: Urban Districts (qu) –Level 2: Streets or Sub-districts (jiedao)

Residence/workplace recorded at street ( 街 道办 )/postal zone levels Both retrospective residential and job histories dated back to 1980 available Commute distance calculated using Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

Guangzhou Inner Core: Yuexiu, Liwan and Dongshan and the northern strip of Haizhu Inner Suburbs: The rest of Haizhu, Tianhe, Fancun, southern Baiyun and part of Huangpu Outer Suburbs: Panyu and the rest of Baiyun and Huangpu

Changing Distributions of Residence

Changing Distributions of Employment

Changing Mode of Transport

Results: Mean commute distance increased from 4.6km in 2001 to 5.7 km in 2005 Mean commute time from 26 min to 28 min –=> mean commute speed from 10.4km/h to 12.2 km/h –Probably a result of the commencement of the Metro System in 1999 and subsequent extensions in recent years

Pattern of Commute, Guangzhou 2001

Pattern of Commute, Guangzhou 2005

Commuting Pattern Despite the longer average commute distance, long distance suburb-central city commute actually declined: % people lived in inner suburb and commute to central city: from 46.3% to 26.6% % people lived in outer suburb and commute to central city: 47.8% to 18.2%

Factors affecting commute distance: Equations without Location Dummies Gender (1=male) ** Not significant Income *** *** Constant

Gender 2001 eqtn: gender takes on the “wrong” sign but highly significant –Lingering influence of work units in assignment of housing –Gender inequality in housing assignment within a work unit –Inclusion of the residential location dummies renders it insignificant eqtn: “correct” sign, although insignificant; increasing resemblance of western norm

Positive and Significant in both 2001 & 2005 eqtns. Income elasticity increased over time Increasing validity of the Alonso-Muth model (greater tendency for high income households to move to the suburbs) ? Inclusion of the residential location dummies significantly reduces the income effect in 2005 Increasingly, income has an effect on commute distance via its effect on residential location. Income

Occupation Hidden=Manual Self-employed *** Skilled and clerical Junior managerial Middle and senior managerial * Professional

Occupational status Relation between occupational status and commute distance weak in 2001 A clear association is discerned in 2005 Association strengthened significantly with inclusion of residential location dummies  High-status workers more likely to occupy inner locations, after controlling for income

Work Unit Type (hidden=private & others) SOE Gov’t *** ** Industry (1=manufacture) **

Industry and enterprise type Workers in gov’t and Party organizations had shorter commutes than those in other work units, but the difference was smaller in 2005, compared with 2001 –Gov’t and Party organizations only began to earnestly implement housing reforms after 2000 Workers in manufacturing had shorter commutes in 2005 –Out-migration of manufacturing jobs have not brought about increase in commuting distance

Conclusions Rapid suburbanization of both residence and jobs in Guangzhou Intra-zone traffic today dominates the commuting scene in both central city and suburbs Gender and income effects increasingly resemble those found in the West But lingering influence of the work unit system is still apparent.