Embracing market and civic actor participation in public rental housing governance

new insights about power distribution

Journal Article (2020)
Author(s)

Juan Yan (TU Delft - Housing Institutions & Governance)

M.E.A. Haffner (TU Delft - Housing Institutions & Governance)

Marja G. Elsinga (TU Delft - Housing Institutions & Governance)

Research Group
Housing Institutions & Governance
Copyright
© 2020 J. Yan, M.E.A. Haffner, M.G. Elsinga
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2020.1813258
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2020
Language
English
Copyright
© 2020 J. Yan, M.E.A. Haffner, M.G. Elsinga
Research Group
Housing Institutions & Governance
Issue number
3
Volume number
37
Pages (from-to)
435-458
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

In recent decades, government intervention in welfare states has witnessed a shift from ‘government’ to ‘governance’: policy making shifted from hierarchical government steering to mixed forms involving government, market and civic actors. Such terminology has also entered Chinese policy language on public rental housing (PRH) provision. To unravel the perceived power distribution in the relationships between the involved actors, this article draws from in-depth interviews in two Chinese cities: Chongqing and Fuzhou. The article thereby contributes new insights to the perceived power relations in Chinese PRH provision on the ground. It also develops an analytical framework based on Billis by complementing it with Social Network Analysis to measure the power relations. Such a framework will allow the comparison of different governance systems across time and different jurisdictions within and beyond China. This study shows the structures and mechanisms for non-governmental actors to play a role, which they do not have in the ‘government’ period, in the governance of PRH.