Characteristics? An Examination of China’s Urban Homeowners’ Committees and Movements Ngeow Chow Bing
Despite heavy regulation and
penetration by the party- T he homeowners’ committee (yezhu weiyuanhui) and the homeowners’ “rights-defense” (weiquan) move- ment in recent years have received increasing attention from scholars and policy makers alike. Some scholars state, China’s homeowners’ see these homeowners’ organizations as exemplifying organizations show potential the development of China’s civil society.1 The govern- ment did not anticipate the emergence of homeowners’ as sources of civil society, committees in China’s urban neighborhoods. The “com- munity construction” policy initiated in the early 2000s democratic development, has always focused on the revitalization of residents’ com- and effective neighborhood mittees (also called neighborhood committees), the basic quasi-administrative units in urban grassroots governance. governance. The official discourse on grassroots democracy has been defined in terms of the election of the residents’ commit- tees. Even so, the government supports the development of homeowners’ committees. Since the mid-1990s, both central and local governments have issued a body of laws and regulations to restrict, but also to define, the role and functions of homeowners’ committees in urban communi- ties and neighborhoods. The extent to which homeowners’ committees and the homeowners’ movement can be considered a phenom- enon of civil society, the kind of environment in which they operate, their democratic potential or lack thereof, and the kind of challenges they face—these are the ques- tions discussed in this article. I begin with a theoretical Dr. Ngeow Chow Bing is a lecturer at the Institute of China Studies at overview of the relationship between civil society and the University of Malaya in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. democratization in formerly communist countries and in
Problems of Post-Communism, vol. 59, no. 6, November–December 2012, pp. 50–63.
Bing Civil Society with Chinese Characteristics? 51
example, laments the loss of “combative civil society” thanks to government subsidies generally belong to the in China. Instead of a combative civil society, we find low and lower-middle income brackets, whereas those NGOs that seek to solve technical problems rather than who purchased property on the market are generally in political ones. In this way, the party-state has co-opted the middle and upper-middle income brackets. The latter the discourses on “governance” and “civil society” and group tends to be more active in protecting and advanc- turned politics into administration.10 Anthony Spires pro- ing its rights and interests as homeowners. According to poses “contingent symbiosis” as a term to describe the the nationwide census conducted in 2000, 45.2 percent phenomenon in which civil society organizations refrain of urban residents owned homes. Of those, 65.15 per- from making democratic claims and supporting griev- cent had bought property from their work unit; 20.38 ances against the state so that they can survive and work percent purchased it on the market; and 14.47 percent within an authoritarian setting, while the party-state tol- acquired it through government-subsidized “economy erates and even relies on the activities and services pro- housing.”14 In an interesting twist, the most recent cen- vided by these organizations.11 sus, conducted in 2010, removed the questions on prop- The form of civil society that is taking shape in China erty ownership.15 therefore can be said to have two aspects: a tendency Before the housing reform, the logistics departments among civil society groups not to confront the political of work units or the housing bureaus of local govern- authorities; and the close monitoring of such groups by ments maintained their properties. Since the housing the state and party organizations. The institutional en- reform, property management companies have operated vironment and legal framework in which civil society in most neighborhoods. Although property management organizations operate are also highly restrictive.12 For companies exist primarily to maintain and repair shared example, an NGO cannot register without official spon- properties and public facilities, they also perform certain sorship, and failure to register causes it to be labeled an key functions that make residents highly dependent on “illegal organization” subject to government suppres- them. Most property management companies provide sion. There is, however, constant and ongoing tension public security, trash collection, sanitation services, and between social organizations’ attempts to maintain and parking management. Many of them also take respon- enlarge their autonomy from the party-state and the sibility for public utilities (supplying running water, party-state’s efforts to control, penetrate, and lead the electricity, gas, and heat). Thus, if a property develop- social organizations. In most cases, China’s homeown- ment company were to abruptly terminate its services ers’ committees, too, exemplify this tension between the in a neighborhood, the residents’ lives could become state and civil society. extremely difficult. They would have no running water, heat, or electricity. No one would come to collect the trash and provide a security patrol. In addition, in many The Homeowners’ Committees and newly developed residential areas that do not yet have Homeowners’ Movement residents’ committees, property management companies The emergence of homeowners’ committees in Chinese also assume many of the committee’s functions—such as cities can be traced back to the housing policy reform and assisting the local government with crime watch, house- the subsequent emergence of a private housing market in hold registration, health and sanitation inspections, and China. Before the housing reform of the late 1980s, the even political propaganda and mobilization. In short, the work unit (danwei) was the main provider of housing property management company can be quite powerful (primarily apartments) to employees. The main focus of relative to ordinary resident-homeowners.16 the housing policy reform initially aimed to remove the The Urban Homeowners’ Rights-Defense heavy financial and administrative burden for work units Movement by privatizing this public housing through subsidies. More recently, the housing reform has tried to create a vibrant, “Rights-defense” (weiquan) movements have been pro- commercialized property market by encouraging real liferating in China in recent years. Ostensibly they deal property developers to develop new residential areas and with nonpolitical, “functional” issues, but their efforts to undertake urban redevelopment projects.13 sometimes have significant implications for the political Today, it is estimated that at least 40 percent of urban system. By appealing to Chinese laws and the Constitu- residents are homeowners. Those who acquired their tion when they challenge local governments, they make it property through privatization of work unit property and more difficult for the authorities to label them anti-regime
52 Problems of Post-Communism November/December 2012
movements. These rights “activists do not challenge the site of “vulnerable,” they, too, feel that their legitimate legitimacy of the state but, on the contrary, take it [at] its rights have been ignored and violated by other parties word and ask for the enforcement of the law to check the and that they have no choice but to take collective action abuses by officials.”17 In fact, sometimes higher authorities to seek redress. do sympathize and agree with a case made by rights activ- So, what issues do these comparatively well-off mem- ists.18 These movements, therefore, can be “regime support- bers of society face? The major issues in the homeown- ive” and “rights upholding” at the same time. Even so, the ers’ rights-defense movement typically involve at least government will crack down on rights-defense movements one of the following: if it perceives them to be politically destabilizing.19 (1) an unfair contract forced on property buyers by The homeowners’ “rights-defense” movement thus developers; belongs to the larger group of such movements; it is a (2) the refusal of property developers to hand over “rights-based collective action on the part of citizens the use of public facilities and equipment to homeown- armed with an awareness of the gulf between what they ers, instead illegally renting these facilities for their own are legally entitled to and what they are getting in prac- profit; tice.”20 There are, however, certain differences between (3) the failure of property developers to provide deeds the homeowners’ movement and other rights-defense (fangchanzheng) to the homeowners, without which movements. First, in comparison to the “rights-defense” ownership of the property is incomplete; movements among workers and peasant groups, which (4) changes in a neighborhood’s development plan can easily escalate into violent mass incidents, home- (such as replacing a promised garden or playground owners’ resistance is generally “reasonable, acceptable, with a supermarket or a factory from which the devel- modest, [and] persistent.”21 Although this does not mean oper can profit); that homeowners’ resistance is always peaceful and ra- (5) high property management fees imposed on hom- tional, in general the homeowners’ movement is moder- eowners, combined with poor service; ate and operates within the boundaries of the law.22 (6) loss of or damage to private property (typically Second, “the principal motor driving homeowner orga- automobiles) attributed to inadequate security services nization is not government policy at either the central or provided by the property management company; local levels but rather the ways in which homeowners feel (7) disagreements over certain extra fees and assess- their rights are being abused by the developers and proper- ments imposed by the property management company; ty management companies.”23 This is different from other (8) the occupation and use of certain shared property rights-defense movements in which local governments are and public facilities by the property management com- the principal villains. Although local governments always pany for profiteering; have suspicious ties with developers and property man- (9) homeowners’ inability to change their property agement companies, local governments generally are not management company or the refusal by the property a direct target of homeowners’ resistance. Sometimes ho- management company to transfer its services to another meowners view the local authority as a neutral force that company; will support their just demands. Even so, local govern- (10) the failure of local housing and property authori- ments can become a target, especially if its decisions are ties to settle homeowners’ complaints in a fair and neu- seen as having violated homeowners’ rights and interests. tral manner; The third difference has to do with socioeconomic (11) the failure to establish a homeowners’ committee; status. Overwhelmingly, rights-defense movements in- (12) conflicts between the homeowners’ committee volve workers, peasants, and migrant workers—those and homeowners, especially when homeowners allege described as “vulnerable groups” (ruoshi qunti) in Chi- abuses and corruption by the committee; and nese society. Homeowners are hardly “vulnerable” peo- (13) in more recent years, the adverse environmental ple. Most of them command sufficient wealth to acquire and social impact of certain decisions made by city and a piece of urban property, have professional jobs and district governments.24 stable incomes, and are well connected in business and Laws on and Legal Status of the Homeowners’ government. They would be included in the category of Committee “middle-class,” however unclear that term may be in ref- erence to Chinese socioeconomic stratification. But even The main but not the only organization through which though homeowners are people who are the exact oppo- homeowners can protect their rights is the homeowners’
Bing Civil Society with Chinese Characteristics? 53
committee. In March 1994, the Ministry of Construction alternative. One problem, then, is that the total devel- (reorganized in 2008 as the Ministry of Housing and opment project of a neighborhood can be divided into Urban–Rural Development) promulgated “Management several phases, sometimes lasting more than ten years. Measures for New Urban Residential Neighborhoods,” In that case, the local government can easily turn down the first regulation of its kind to spell out the rights and requests to establish a homeowners’ committee by stat- obligations of both property management companies and ing that not enough units have been sold or occupied (or homeowners. This is the first official document authoriz- even built!). Thus, the early occupants in a newly devel- ing the establishment of a homeowners’ organization, oped neighborhood tend to be disadvantaged. then called the “neighborhood management committee” Before an assembly can be convened and a commit- (xiaoqu guanli weiyuanhui). tee elected, a preparation committee must be formed. Despite the promulgation of the “Management Mea- The preparation committee generally includes officials sures,” conflicts involving violations of homeowners’ from the local housing and property authorities and the rights and interests persisted, even intensified, as more street office, officers of the residents’ committee, dele- commercial developments and urban renewal projects gates of the property developer (or the property manage- were undertaken in Chinese cities and the regulatory re- ment company attached to the developer), homeowners’ gime remained weak. Corruption and misbehavior among representatives, and sometimes public security officers. developers were widespread. This prompted the govern- Lack of cooperation from any of these people can easily ment to revise and update the regulatory framework of frustrate homeowners set on forming a preparation com- property management. The “Management Measures” mittee. The developer often has a lot of say regarding the were superseded by the 2003 Regulations on Property composition of the preparation committee. As a result, Management (wuye guanli tiaoli). The government report- homeowners’ representatives tend to have received spe- edly took four years to finalize the 2003 document. While cial discounts or favors from the developer or its prop- drafting it, the Ministry of Construction claimed to have erty management company.26 incorporated more than half of four thousand suggestions Moreover, the voting rights of homeowners (unless made by the public. It also claimed that the Regulations otherwise stated, tenants are disenfranchised) are not would be a powerful document protecting homeowners’ based on “one person, one vote” or even “one household, rights.25 After the enactment of the 2007 Property Law, one vote” but on the calculation of the surface footage the Regulations were also updated to synchronize with of the purchased unit. For example, the vote of a person the stipulations protecting private property rights in the who owns 200 square meters carries twice the weight of Property Law. The 2007 Property Law and the Regula- that of someone who owns 100 square meters.27 The de- tions together are the two highest laws governing prop- veloper then claims ownership rights to the surface areas erty management and homeowners’ organizations. of unsold units. It is through this technique that a devel- Unlike most NGOs in China, a homeowners’ commit- oper in Beijing has been able to thwart the establishment tee does not have to register with the Ministry of Civil of a homeowners’ committee within its development Affairs to obtain legal status. Instead, its legal existence project for more than fourteen years.28 is confirmed when it files a record (bei’an) with the lo- As Table 1 shows, in most Chinese cities (except cal housing or property authorities. Like most private- Shanghai and Nanjing), only 20–30 percent of qualified initiated NGOs in China, however, the procedure for neighborhoods have been successful in establishing ho- establishing a homeowners’ committee is quite difficult. meowners’ committees. Many property developers and Each neighborhood is allowed only one homeowners’ property management companies resist the establish- committee. Homeowners in a neighborhood can demand ment of homeowners’ committees. These companies are the convening of the first homeowners’ assembly, which often (but not always) backed by local housing and prop- elects the first-term officers of the homeowners’ com- erty authorities (some of the property officials sit on the mittee from among its members, when the surface foot- boards of the industry associations of these companies). age of homeowners’ property reaches 50 percent of the The procedures for establishing a homeowners’ com- development plan. Some provincial governments will mittee therefore provide ample opportunities for a prop- grant homeowners’ requests to establish a homeowners’ erty management company to buy off some of the com- committee one or two years after the first unit was sold mittee’s officers. Other common complaints from hom- or occupied, regardless of the total footage owned by the eowners include incompetence, alleged abuses of power, homeowners. But not all local governments permit this vote rigging, and corruption (e.g., misuse of homeown-
54 Problems of Post-Communism November/December 2012
Table 1 not register (dengji) as a “social organization.” In the ab- sence of “social organization” status, many courts have Homeowners’ Committees in Thirteen Chinese thrown out lawsuits brought by homeowners’ commit- Cities tees. Some provincial regulations have made it easier for homeowners’ committees to become litigation subjects, Homeowners’ City Neighborhoods committees % but so far these are the exceptions. The inability of the homeowners’ committee to pursue legal action remains Beijing 3,077 360 11.7 one of the most contentious issues in the homeowners’ Guangzhou about 4,000 580 15.0 rights-defense movement. Shenzhen 2,003 721 36.0 Zhengzhou 1,237 102 8.2 Residents’ Committees, Homeowners’ Shanghai 8,661 6,786 78.3 Committees, and Property Management Haikou about 600 210 35.0 Companies Nanjing 1,275 599 47.0 If homeowners have so much difficulty protecting their Chongqing 3,350 1,124 33.6 rights through the homeowners’ committee, can they do Chengdu 2,824 932 33.0 so through the residents’ committee, another organization Changsha about 800 about 200 25.0 intended to protect their interests (as residents rather than Wuhan 1,200 about 400 33.3 as homeowners)? The role of the residents’ committee in Guiyang 571 39 6.8 property management, however, is awkward. Residents’ Kunming — — 15.0 committees generally (but not always) refrain from ad- Note: Unless otherwise noted, the data collected covers the 2004– vocating homeowners’ concerns and issues. These are 2008 period. seen as frictions resulting from two parties in a private Sources: Yang Yi, “Zhongguo yixian chengshi yezhu weiyuanhui transaction (homeowners as consumers and property man- xianzhuang diaocha” (A Survey of the Present Condition of agement company and developer as providers), for which Homeowners’ Committees in Important Cities in China), Zhuzhai the residents’ committee has no formal responsibility. yu fangdichan (Housing and Real Estate), no. 11 (2006): 7–9; In effect, considerable overlapping of functions and Wu Liping, “Guanyu Guiyangshi zhuzhai xiaoqu (daxia) yezhu weiyuanhui de diaocha” (A Study of the Homeowners’ Committee responsibilities occurs among the residents’ committee, in Residential Neighborhoods in Guiyang), in Chengshi shequ the homeowners’ committee, and the property manage- yezhu weiyuanhui fazhan yanjiu (Studies of the Development ment company. The community construction policy calls of Homeowners’ Committees in Urban Communities), ed. Tang for increased residents’ committee involvement in pro- Juan (Chongqin: Chongqin chubanshe, 2005), 271; Zhang moting community health, environment, culture, safety, Nian, “Shanghaishi cong zhidu he caozuo cengmian jiaqiang yeweihui gongzuo” (Shanghai Strengthens Work on Homeowners’ and so on, which overlaps to some degree with what a Committees Through Institutional and Operational Aspects), property management company does. The relationship Zhongguo wuye guanli (Chinese Property Management), no. between property management companies and residents’ 11 (2007): 52; Zhen Pan, “Bacheng xiaoqu wei chengli yezhu committees is not without tension.30 It is not uncommon dahui” (80 Percent of the Neighborhoods Have Not Established for a residents’ committee and a property management Homeowners’ Assemblies), Kunming ribao (Kunming Daily) (December 14, 2008). company each to field a team of safety patrols or per- form similar tasks in street and building cleaning—and to collect the same sort of fees from residents for these ers’ funds) by committee members. In these situations, tasks. The residents/homeowners are thus “taxed” twice homeowners’ committees become targets of homeown- for the same service. In a sense, both bodies claim to ers’ resistance.29 be the “boss” in a neighborhood. In some newly devel- The legal status of the homeowners’ committee is oped neighborhoods, however, the residents’ committee also somewhat ambiguous, which complicates its efforts is marginalized (or not yet established) and even practi- to protect homeowners’ rights, especially in the courts. cally subordinate to the property management compa- Under Chinese civil litigation law, only a “litigation ny.31 The developer and property management company subject” can sue. A litigation subject may be a physi- generally supply office space to the residents’ committee cal person, a corporate entity, a registered (dengji) so- in these neighborhoods, so it come as no surprise that the cial organization, or “other organizations” (qita zuzhi). committee feels beholden to the company and tends to As mentioned before, the homeowners’ committee does side with it against homeowners in disputes.
Bing Civil Society with Chinese Characteristics? 55
Disputes between residents’ and homeowners’ com- times also introduced institutional innovations in self- mittees also occur often. The principal complaint of the governance. Here I present three cases. These cases were homeowners’ committee is that the residents’ committee first reported in the mainstream Chinese media—which is meddling in its internal affairs. The official stance on include Xiandai wuye (Modern Property Management), this problem is that the homeowners’ committee should the premier magazine on this subject; Shequ (Commu- be subordinate to the residents’ committee. According to nity), a magazine on community construction published article 20 of the Regulations on Property Management, by the Ministry of Civil Affairs; and Zhongguo xinwen the homeowners’ committee should (1) support the pub- zhoukan (China Newsweek), a major Chinese current af- lic security bureau and cooperate with the residents’ fairs magazine. committee in the area of public security; (2) actively co- Shangdi Xili Homeowners’ Representatives’ ordinate with the residents’ committee in terms of self- Assembly, Beijing governance; (3) be under the supervision and guidance of the residents’ committee; and (4) inform the residents’ Shangdi Xili is an affluent neighborhood in Beijing.33 In committee regarding the decisions made by the home- 2004–2005, the homeowners of this neighborhood suc- owners’ assembly and the homeowners’ committee, as cessfully established their homeowners’ committee. What well as consider suggestions made by the residents’ made this neighborhood unique was that it also set up a committee regarding these decisions. homeowners’ representatives’ assembly (yezhu daibiao The official argument is that no matter how many res- dahui) to monitor and act as a check on the homeowners’ idents are homeowners, there will still be residents who committee. The representatives’ assembly was originally do not own homes but whose lives are affected by the established as the standing committee of the homeowners’ homeowners’ committee’s decisions. The homeowners’ assembly and empowered to make important decisions committee articulates only the interests and concerns of when the homeowners’ assembly was not in session. Later, the affluent middle class. Sometimes it ignores the rights the homeowners’ assembly was abolished and replaced and interests of lower-class residents, especially the mi- by the homeowners’ representatives’ assembly. grant laborers living as tenants in the neighborhood. In The original assembly had twenty-seven representa- this case, the residents’ committee can become the orga- tives; today it has expanded to between forty and fifty. nization that articulates the interests of poorer residents All of them are elected (some are also officers of the or migrant groups. neighborhood residents’ committee). The representa- Nevertheless, homeowners generally do not welcome tives cannot serve concurrently as members of two other this interference from the semiofficial residents’ commit- institutions: the homeowners’ committee and the home- tee. They legitimately see this as increased regulation of owners’ oversight council (yezhu jianshihui). In two the homeowners’ committee (on which, more below). years of existence, the representatives’ assembly met eight times, issued six public announcements, and made important decisions, such as agreeing to a new service Institutional Innovations and contract with a property management company, approv- Homeowners’ Self-Governance ing a parking plan, drafting rules for the use of the home- Homeowners in China thus face numerous obstacles owners’ collective fund, and hiring administrative staff. and problems in defending their rights. Nevertheless, In short, this is a fully empowered institution, authorized homeowners are also among the more innovative groups to make important decisions. in pursuing collective action and defense of their rights. In addition, homeowners can contact their representa- For example, some homeowners are pioneers—active tives directly with concerns or opinions. Once informed, in using Internet forums to discuss their issues, share the representatives then draft and table bills at meetings tactics, connect with one another, influence government of the representatives’ assembly. The homeowners’ com- actions, and put pressure on their targets. Participants in mittee then carries out bills that pass. The representa- homeowners’ online forums are among the most engaged tives’ assembly can temporarily suspend any member of online activists, who regularly discuss issues related not the homeowners’ committee found guilty of corruption. only to property management but sometimes to gover- It also frequently receives and examines the work report nance as well.32 of the homeowners’ committee. In an effort to reduce conflict and improve the gov- Finally, the oversight council has three members and ernance of their neighborhoods, homeowners have at its primary responsibility is to ensure that all homeown-
56 Problems of Post-Communism November/December 2012
ers, homeowners’ representatives, and homeowners’ and homeowners that they needed a liaison that could committee members are observing the homeowners’ link the residents and the people’s congress deputies. covenant and other relevant rules and regulations. From the government’s perspective, such a mechanism In a sense, the institutional design in this neighbor- ensures that its disputes with citizens will first be chan- hood homeowners’ organization resembles the three- neled through a proper and established mechanism of way separation of power common in democratic sys- conflict resolution. This mechanism also assures resi- tems. The representatives’ assembly acts as a legislature, dents that their voices and concerns will be properly re- the homeowners’ committee fulfills executive responsi- flected in government decision making. In 2002, with bilities, and the oversight council performs certain ju- official blessing, a homeowner-activist established the dicial functions. As Chinese scholars who have inves- work station. Directors of the homeowners’ committees tigated this neighborhood point out, however, the most in Yueliangwan Pianqu all became liaison officers at the important contribution of this institutional innovation is work station. the replacement of the homeowners’ assembly with the The work station holds a monthly meeting between representatives’ assembly. The representatives’ assembly the people’s congress deputies and the residents. It has solves a persistent problem in many neighborhoods: the the power to refer public issues and problems to relevant need to involve all homeowners in the assembly, as re- government authorities and to check on the authorities’ quired by the Regulations on Property Management and progress in handling these issues. The work station also other regulations. The representatives’ assembly substi- sets up consultations on important issues among home- tutes its own “representative democracy” for the “direct owners, party and government officials, the media, and democracy” of a homeowners’ assembly. The home- scholars. Each liaison officer is individually responsible owners’ assemblies are persistently plagued by such for collecting the opinions and concerns of homeown- problems as low attendance, ineffective and inefficient ers in his or her neighborhood. The officer then pack- meetings, irregular procedures, and dominance by the ages these opinions and concerns and reports them to the property management companies or their allies among people’s congress deputies. the homeowners. In contrast, by delegating powers to a The work station is reported to be very effective. It has select group, the homeowners’ representatives can hold been able to solve more than fifty public issues involving much more efficient meetings with more attentive partic- transportation, environmental pollution, and public secu- ipants and livelier and more meaningful debates, while rity in the twelve neighborhoods of Yueliangwan Pianqu. also providing more effective oversight of the home- Since the establishment of the work station, open con- owners’ committee. Shangxidili has become a model frontations have been visibly absent. that homeowners from other neighborhoods in Beijing seek to imitate. Pinge Community Service Center Limited Company, Beijing Yueliangwan Pianqu People’s Congress Deputy Pinge is a relatively small neighborhood in Beijing, with Work Station, Shenzhen only 148 households.35 The homeowners’ committee in The Peoples’ Congress Deputy Work Station (renda this neighborhood was formed after its property manage- daibiao gongzuozhan, hereafter Work Station) is located ment company, citing unsustainable business operations, in Yueliangwan Pianqu, a big community comprising suddenly withdrew and terminated its service. The home- twelve neighborhoods in Nanshan district in Shenzhen.34 owners found themselves in a quite desperate situation, In 2001, the district government approved a project to without such services as trash collection and security locate a waste incinerator/power generator near Yueliang- guards. They turned to Shao Litang, a homeowner himself, wan Pianqu. The homeowners in the area quickly joined who had prior experience negotiating with developers. together in a campaign to force the district government Shao proved to be a capable leader. Under his guidance, to overturn this decision. the homeowners’ committee was set up within a short Facing a tense situation, a street party official con- period of time. The first decision facing the committee tacted the people’s congress deputies in the area and was whether to rehire the previous property management asked them to speak to the homeowners. As a result, company (probably at a higher rate), hire a new one, or the homeowners and the district and city governments let the homeowners themselves administer the property. were able to resolve the matter amicably. The success- A survey of the homeowners revealed that a majority of ful conclusion of this episode convinced the government them preferred the last option.
Bing Civil Society with Chinese Characteristics? 57
The homeowners then decided to create the Pinge committees are defunct or corrupt, and not all homeown- Community Service Center Limited Company, which ers’ battles end in victory for the homeowners. My main they own and operate as a group. The company is regis- point, however, is that these institutional innovations tered with the commercial bureau of Beijing. According from grassroots civil society are important not because to the company manager, all 148 homeowners became they represent general patterns or trends, but because shareholders in the company, the homeowners’ com- they serve as examples or models for other communi- mittee acts as the company’s board of directors, and ties to emulate or for the authorities to notice and study. the manager (Shao) answers to the homeowners’ com- Shangdi Xili’s reforms have prompted the government mittee. He describes the principle behind the model of to consider revising the regulations on homeowners’ or- homeowners’ self-governance in Pinge as voluntary, ganizations to empower representatives’ assemblies in self-administered, and self-disciplined. The homeown- other neighborhoods. Shao, the leader in Pinge, alludes ers’ committee itself answers to the entire homeowners’ to the famous household responsibility system, which assembly, which doubles as the shareholders’ general was introduced (illegally) as an experiment in a small meeting. village under collectivization before being promoted na- Since the homeowners own the company, everyone tionwide. Such grassroots reforms highlight the innova- has an incentive to keep its finances healthy. The new tive energies among Chinese citizens in an increasingly company hired one-third fewer staff members than the pluralistic Chinese society and point to the genuine de- previous company. Many homeowners volunteered to velopment of a Chinese civil society. help the company and pay their property fees on time. Any interested homeowner may examine the company’s books. Prudent cost management allows the company to Homeowners’ Committees, Civil Society, generate an annual profit of RMB50,000. One-third of and Democratic Development these returns go to pay bonuses to the company’s em- Homeowners’ committees are interest-based organiza- ployees, one-third into the homeowners’ collective fund, tions. They exist to articulate the private interests of and one-third on payments of the next year’s property homeowners. In this sense, China is experiencing the fees. “post-totalitarian” stage of communist authoritarianism, in which increased social activity in the arena of “low politics” is tolerated as long as the Party’s dominance of Discussion the state and “high politics” is unchallenged, similar to These cases of institutional innovation are remarkable in the communist regimes in Eastern Europe before their that they were all creative responses initiated by private collapse at the end of the 1980s.37 Homeowners’ commit- individuals to deal with difficult situations, without the tees seem to fit the bill of organizations that focus on “low direction or involvement of government officials. To use politics” and assume the role of noncritical civil society, Benjamin Read’s typology, the cases of Shangdi Xili and to use the terminology of Yanqi Tong. Pinge could be considered “fully empowered” homeown- Like other members of the middle class in China, ho- ers’ organizations, with genuine representative authority, meowners may be less interested in democratization than internal democracy, and external autonomy.36 The Yue- in securing their private space.38 Homeowners’ demands liangwan Pianqu Work Station is also remarkable, for it rarely touch on issues of how government institutions is a private citizens’ initiative to engage with the relevant should be structured, how social interests are aggregated, government authorities in a cooperative manner to solve or how power is distributed. Most of the time, they focus problems and disputes. The result is at least as effective on their immediate neighborhood, concentrating on par- as more confrontational tactics. ticular issues of the moment—including the well-known In terms of the capacity for social self-organization, and well-reported case of the PX Plant in Xiamen, in the largely self-started homeowners’ rights-defense which residents, most of them homeowners, took a col- movement, the emergence of the homeowners’ commit- lective “walk” to protest the government’s permission tees, and the institutional innovations in homeowners’ to build a chemical plant near residential neighborhoods self-governance can be read as signs of a developing and forced the government to withdraw the permit. Such civil society. We may question whether these cases can incidents certainly indicate the growing lobbying power be generalized to other, similar cases or whether they of homeowners and the increasing political pluralization stand out as exceptions. Of course, many homeowners’ of policy making in China.39
58 Problems of Post-Communism November/December 2012
Even so, homeowners do sometimes discuss the na- homeowners take seriously the elections of their hom- ture of property ownership, corruption of local govern- eowners’ committees. Electoral participation thus has ment, the rule of law, environmental protection, and their the effect of socializing the participants in the process of own democratic participation. A minority has begun to procedural democracy. see its actions as part of a larger movement demanding While the above discussion points to the democratic po- more citizens’ participation in politics. There are tenta- tential of homeowners’ committees, we should also note tive signs that some homeowners’ activities have spilled certain factors that undercut such potential, principally the over from “low politics” to “high politics” or from the authorities’ ability to regulate and penetrate these groups. noncritical to the critical realm. As Benjamin Read, a As Deborah Davis has observed, “the homeowner revo- knowledgeable observer of homeowners’ organizations, lution has unleashed social and economic forces whose opines, “they constitute a new model for private associa- autonomy the [Party] has not anticipated and against tions in [China] as well as an attractive laboratory for which they are now imposing new constraints.”46 Stricter activists who have ambitions for far-reaching political government regulations and penetration of the homeown- change.”40 ers’ committees does not mean that they are inevitably One of the most important indications of this change becoming less capable of protecting homeowners’ rights. is the emergence of so-called “independent candidates” In fact, there are cases in which the involvements of party in local people’s congress elections since 2003. Many of or government officials are indispensable to the success- these candidates have active experience as homeowners’ ful defense of homeowners’ rights and to better neighbor- committee officers.41 They clearly saw the necessity of hood governance. But such regulations and involvement becoming more directly political to better protect their also mean that the potential of homeowners’ committees interests.42 By offering themselves as alternatives to par- to become a powerful force acting as a “social buffer” ty-sanctioned candidates, independent candidates knew against party-state encroachment is limited. that they were making a not-so-subtle challenge to the Control and Regulations long-established norms of fixed elections under commu- nism. Local people’s congress elections have, as a re- Increasingly, local governments are trying to control and sult, become more competitive, challenging, and mean- regulate homeowners’ committees. In Shenzhen, a city ingful. There were less than a hundred “independent that has one of the most active homeowners’ movements candidates” in the 2003 election in China. The number in China, the city government in 2005 issued a new regu- exploded in the recent rounds of people’s congress elec- lation/instructional guidance (“Rules of Conduct for the tions, prompting John F. Thornton, the chairman of the Homeowners’ Assembly and the Homeowners’ Commit- board of the Brookings Institution, to talk about “pros- tee”) that places the homeowners’ committees under the pects for democracy” in China.43 At the same time, the supervision and guidance of the residents’ committees and government has moved to restrict the activities of “inde- the street offices.47 The regulation also gives local property pendent candidates,” fearing that they might grow into and housing authorities the power to dissolve any home- a democratic movement challenging the Party’s candi- owners’ committee that is found to be in violation of the dates. Hence one can interpret this development as con- “Rules.” It also strongly suggests that a joint meeting on firming the observations made by Weigle and Butterfield property management be institutionalized, purportedly for when they argue that “groups which had narrowly de- better coordination. Participants in the meetings include fined claims during the defensive period [now] widened the residents’ committee, the street office, local housing their scope . . . [and] became more stridently political in and property authorities, the district party committee demanding increased scope for independent activity and on politics and law, community work stations, public input into policymaking processes.”44 security bureaus, the property management company, We can also observe that homeowners’ committees and the homeowners’ committee. The presence of many serve a useful role as a “democratic training ground.” more actors significantly dilutes homeowners’ influence. Elections of homeowners’ committees are becoming as Many homeowners in Shenzhen expressed concerns that important as residents’ committee elections in China’s this new regulation will diminish the autonomy of the grassroots democratic development. Compared with homeowners’ committee and strongly opposed it.48 residents’ reactions to electoral abuses in residents’ com- After issuing these regulations, the city’s complaints mittee elections, homeowners react much more force- bureau received fewer petitions regarding property man- fully.45 Despite the lack of institutionalization, many agement. The number of such cases fell by 30 percent
Bing Civil Society with Chinese Characteristics? 59
from 2004 to 2005, and by 21 percent from 2005 to The Party’s Cooptation and Penetration 2006. There were no more collective visits to the com- plaints bureau, an improvement attributed to the new Another factor is the cooptation and penetration of home- rules. More involvement by the street office and the resi- owners’ committees by the Party. Scholars have long noted dents’ committee may actually promote better coordina- the tendency of Leninist-type parties to “forestall any tion among different organizations and better solutions organization not sponsored by the regime. Everyone who to neighborhood conflicts.49 But this phenomenon could shows any potentiality of initiative and leadership, politi- also be interpreted as the successful taming of the home- cal or otherwise, is brought into its ranks.”53 Shanghai is owners’ movement. the prime example of this tactic. As shown in Table 1, far Regulations similar to those in Shenzhen have also more homeowners’ committees have been established in been decreed in other cities: Jinan (2007), Zhengzhou Shanghai than in other cities. This accomplishment is (2007), and Beijing (2009). Benjamin Read argues that offset by the integration of the homeowners’ committees these local regulations and “implementation measures” into the community party-building policy, specifically tend to restrict and diminish homeowners’ rights stipu- under a program called “property-management party lated in the more general provisions contained in na- building” (wuye guanli dangjian).54 Below I describe tional documents.50 Not all such provisions are meant to several elements of this party-building program in a restrict homeowners’ rights and autonomy, however. For Shanghai community.55 example, the Beijing regulations remove one of the com- Party members are encouraged to run in elections for mon restrictions on homeowners running for a post on homeowners’ committees and to establish party cells the homeowners’ committee: the failure to pay property within the committees. If a homeowners’ committee fees. Greater control through regulation of homeowners’ does not have enough members for a cell, the commu- committees by local government therefore can be seen nity party organization will send a liaison officer to work as a double-edged sword: the regulations dilute societal with the committee. The community party organization autonomy, but in some instances they also lead to better also directs the formation of a party cell in the property governance. management company. If both the director of the com- mittee and the head of the property management com- Restrictions on Organizing an Association of pany are party members, both are included in the leader- Homeowners’ Committees ship of the neighborhood party branch. In addition, joint There is also a deliberate policy to keep homeowners’ orga- meetings of the homeowners’ committee, the property nizations from becoming large. Homeowners’ committees management company, and the party organization are are small, localized, fragmented, and grassroots-based. held regularly to coordinate and resolve neighborhood Generally speaking, there is no coherence, coordination, issues. or organization among homeowners’ committees in the Local property and housing authorities also employ rights-defense movement. Each committee struggles on the “dual leadership” mechanism. Horizontally, a par- its own. Other homeowners’ committees can only offer ty committee in a local housing and property authority moral support, share experience and legal knowledge, and comes under the leadership of the district party com- recommend certain tactics or a good lawyer. mittee, while vertically it also answers to a higher-level Attempts to form an Association of Homeowners’ party committee within the same bureaucratic hierarchy. Committees (yezhu weiyuanhui lianhehui) to unite the This setup ensures greater coordination between prop- homeowners’ committees within an administrative area erty management and party building. Assessments of the have been consistently thwarted. The lack of an offi- performance of community party leaders now include cial government sponsor (required by Chinese law for their work in the area of “property-management party the registration of a social organization) is the principal building.” This “property-management party building” reason for these associations’ inability to register.51 Al- aims to create a “holy trinity” of the homeowners’ com- though housing and property authorities are obvious can- mittee, the property management company, and the par- didates for the role of official sponsor, many authorities ty organization through the extensive network of party refuse to serve in this capacity. Fearing that the home- members in the neighborhoods. owners’ organizational power and influence will grow, Some district authorities in Shanghai have also stated the local authorities tend to resist the formation of these that party members must fill the leadership positions on associations.52 the homeowners’ committee.56 One local party commit-
60 Problems of Post-Communism November/December 2012
tee report stated that 80 percent of the officers on home- as some rights-conscious homeowners are beginning to owners’ committees were party members.57 The Party’s use political channels to articulate their interests. This penetration of a nongovernmental organization is remi- development is something the party-state did not expect. niscent of its efforts to insert itself into every social sector It has tried to limit the power and influence of this move- and organization in the past. The Party justifies its pen- ment by regulating homeowners’ organizations, limiting etration and cooptation of homeowners’ committees by their growth, and coopting them through party penetra- arguing that it strengthens the committee and improves tion. Still, the party-state has not suppressed the move- neighborhood administration. In a 2006 consultation be- ment and, to a certain extent, has even encouraged it. tween Shanghai municipal people’s congress deputies Here we have another episode in the complex picture of and representatives of residents’ and homeowners’ com- citizens’ interaction with the party-state in China. mittees, some homeowners’ committee directors felt that conflict-ridden or badly managed neighborhoods tended to be places in which the party organization was particu- Notes larly weak.58 An earlier version of this paper was presented, together with Professor Su- zanne Ogden, at the International Conference on Chinese-Style Democracy That the party-state wants to regulate and penetrate a in Wuhan in November 2009. The author wishes to thank Professor Ogden for sector of civil society should come as no surprise to any her collaboration and comments and the two anonymous reviewers for their student of communist politics. Such penetration and regu- suggestions. The author also wishes to thank the Center for Emerging Markets at Northeastern University for funding the conference trip to Wuhan in 2009. lation in effect contribute not only to the disappearance of 1. Xia Jianzhong, “Zhongguo gongmin shehui de xiansheng: yi yezhu autonomy but also to the increased ineffectiveness of so- weiyuanhui weili” (Forerunners of China’s Civil Society: The Homeowners’ cial organizations. Ultimately they fail, strengthening civil Committee), Wenshizhe (Journal of Literature, History, and Philosophy), no. 2 (2003): 115–21; Fei Meiping, “Yezhu weiyuanhui yu Zhongguo de shimin society’s resolve to resist party-state encroachment. In the shehui” (The Homeowners’ Committee and China’s Civil Society), Huadong case of the Chinese homeowners’ committees, however, ligong daxue xuebao (Journal of East China University of Science and Tech- nology), no. 2 (2001): 57–64. party-state regulation and encroachment have not neces- 2. Graeme Gill, The Dynamics of Democratization: Elites, Civil Society, sarily decreased effectiveness despite the loss of autono- and the Transition Process (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2005). my. This result suggests that civil society in China may be 3. Marcia A. Weigle and Jim Butterfield, “Civil Society in Reforming more amenable to the dictates of the party-state.59 Communist Regimes: The Logic of Emergence,” Comparative Politics 25, no. 1 (1992): 1–23. 4. Yanqi Tong, “State, Society, and Political Change in China and Hun- gary,” Comparative Politics 26, no. 3 (1994): 333–53. Conclusion 5. For example, see Thomas Gold, “Party-State Versus Society in China,” in Building a Nation-State: China After Forty Years, ed. Joyce K. Kallgren China’s reforms have led to an increasing “decentraliza- (Berkeley: Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, tion and pluralization of power bases” in Chinese soci- 1990), 124–51; Barrett L. McCormick, Su Shaozi, and Xiao Xiaoming, “The 1989 Democracy Movement: A Review of the Prospects for Civil Society in ety.60 The development in this decentralized context of China,” Pacific Affairs 65, no. 2 (1992): 182–202. a more complex society has led to its segmentation into 6. B. Michael Frolic, “State-Led Civil Society,” in Civil Society in China, ed. more specialized organizations being set up to deal with Timothy Brook and B. Michael Frolic (Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1997), 48. their specific needs and interests. Social organizations 7. Suzanne Ogden, Inklings of Democracy in China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2002), 266. have been ideally situated to step into the breach, leading 8. Rebecca R. Moore, “China’s Fledging Civil Society: A Force of De- inevitably to their gaining influence and independence, but mocratization?” World Policy Journal 18, no. 1 (2001): 59. thus far it has not led to a widespread demand for regime 9. Yiyi Lu, “NGOs in China: Development Dynamics and Challenges,” in China’s Opening Society: The Non-State Sector and Governance, ed. Zheng change. In fact, in many places, it has helped the regime Yongnian and Joseph Fewsmith (New York: Routledge, 2008), 89–105. maintain social stability. Increasingly, the party-state, 10. Jean-Philippe Béja, “The Changing Aspects of Civil Society in China,” preoccupied with broad issues of economic development in China’s Opening Society: The Non-State Sector and Governance, ed. Zheng Yongnian and Joseph Fewsmith (New York: Routledge, 2008), 71–88. and reform, needs civil society organizations to cope with 11. Anthony Spires, “Contingent Symbiosis and Civil Society in an Au- the wide variety of issues at the grassroots level. thoritarian State: Understanding the Survival of China’s Grassroots NGOs,” The development of the homeowners’ rights-defense American Journal of Sociology 117, no. 1 (2011): 1–45. movement and homeowners’ committees signifies emerg- 12. He Zengke, “Institutional Barriers to the Development of Civil Society in China,” in China’s Opening Society: The Non-State Sector and Governance, ing capabilities for self-organization among members of 161–73. the more affluent Chinese strata and their willingness 13. For housing reform in China, see Ya Ping Wang and Alan Murie, “Social to engage in collective actions, including protests and and Spatial Implications of Housing Reform in China,” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 24, no. 2 (2000): 397–417; and Jieming Zhu, lobbying. There are signs that homeowners’ movements “The Changing Mode of Housing Provision in Transitional China,” Urban are not just a phenomenon of noncritical civil society, Affairs Review 35, no. 4 (2000): 502–19.
Bing Civil Society with Chinese Characteristics? 61
14. See Liu Yongli, “Jumin zhufang zhuangkuang dagaiguan” (Huge Homeowners’ Rights) and “Anju leye you duonan” (How Difficult to Live Changes in the Patterns of Urban Housing), Zhongguo xinxibao (China Infor- Peacefully), Zhongguo fangdi xinxi, no. 8 (2006): 66–69; as well as “Dangge mation Daily) (October 28, 2002). yezhu you duonan” (How Difficult to be a Homeowner) and “Huange wuye 15. See Li Qian, “Di liuci renkou bucha busheji fangwu chanquan” (The you duonan” (How Difficult to Change a Property Management Company), Sixth Census Will Not Query Property Ownership), Shanghai jinrong bao Zhongguo fangdi xinxi, no. 9 (2006): 68–71. (Shanghai Financial Daily) (October 29, 2010). 25. Zhan Diyou and Hu Yibing, “Dui ‘wuye guanli tiaoli’ youzan youtan” 16. Today, there are at least twenty thousand property management com- (Praises and Criticisms of the Regulations on Property Management), Zhongwai panies operating in Chinese cities. About 70 percent of these companies are fangdichan daobao (Chinese and Foreign Real Estate Times), no. 14 (2003): privatized logistics departments of work units or privatized housing bureaus 119–23; “Wuye guanli tiaoli” (Regulations on Property Management), Shequ of local governments. These companies primarily service homeowners who (Community), no. 14 (2003): 51–53. purchased their property from their work units or through government subsidies. 26. For the problems of the preparation committee, see Yang Buo, Cong These companies generally maintain close ties to the local government or the chongtu dao zhixu: hexie shequ jianshezhong de yezhu weiyuanhui (From Con- work units to which they were formerly attached. In the commercial property flict to Order: Homeowners’ Committees in the Construction of Harmonious market, however, property management companies are generally established Community) (Beijing: Zhongguo shehui chubanshe, 2006), 93, 97–99. by property developers in the form of “after-sale services” (around 20 percent 27. Note that American homeowners’ right to vote in elections for the boards of all property management companies). Generally speaking, these companies of directors of their residential community associations is similarly qualified by tend to act as an agency of the developers and side with the developers in their the size of the owned property. See Robert Jay Dilgor, Neighborhood Politics: disputes with homeowners. Finally, about 10 percent of the property manage- Residential Community Associations in American Governance (New York: New ment companies are independently established by private entrepreneurs or with York University Press, 1992), 34–35. foreign investment. The service provided by this type of company tends to be the best and the most professional but is also the most expensive. See Xu Jiansu 28. Xu Hao, “Zhiyushanzhuang yezhu: 14nian nanshe yeweihui” (The and Wang Yan, “Xiaoqu yezhu weiquan de xiangguan wenti tantao” (Discus- Homeowners of Zhixushan Villa: Fourteen Years of Difficulty in Establish- sion of Issues Related to Rights-Defense Among Neighborhood Homeowners), ing a Homeowners’ Committee), Zhongguo jingji zhoukan (China Economic Hebei jingmao daxue xuebao (Journal of Hebei University of Economics and Weekly), no. 11 (2007): 32–33. A similar situation is reported in Cai Yongshun, Trade) 7, no. 1 (2007): 35. “China’s Moderate Middle Class,” 784. 29. See Cai Yongshun, Collective Resistance in China: Why Popular Pro- 17. Béja, “The Changing Aspects of Civil Society in China,” 86. tests Succeed or Fail (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010), 90–105. 18. Bruce J. Dickson, “The Future of the Chinese Communist Party: Strate- 30. See Zhu Yanfei, “Urumqishi wuye fuwu qiye, juweihui, yeweihui gies of Survival and the Prospects for Change,” in Charting China’s Future: guanxi chutan” (A Preliminary Inquiry into the Relationship between Property Political, Social, and International Dimensions, ed. Jae Ho Chung (Lanham: Service Enterprises, Residents’ Committees, and Homeowners’ Committees in Rowman and Littlefield, 2006), 35–36. Urumqi), Zhongguo wuye guanli, no. 9 (2008): 24–25. 19. Some rights activists do not see their rights-defense movements as 31. Cai Yongshun, “China’s Moderate Middle Class,” 785. purely asserting the rights guaranteed in Chinese law, knowing full well that authoritarian state and party leaders are not bound by laws that they have 32. For homeowners’ online forums, see Hu Weihua, “Xiaoqu yezhu luntan formulated. In such case, rights-defense movements can morph into regime- de zuoyong yu jianshe” (The Functions and Contributions of Neighborhood defying dissident movements, as happened in the Soviet Union in the 1960s Homeowners’ Forums), Xiandai yezhu (Modern Property Management), no. 2 and the 1970s. See Weigle and Butterfield, “Civil Society in Reforming Com- (2006): 30–31; Wu Gongsun, “Wuye gongsi bufang changshi yixia zai wang- munist Regimes,” 8. shang yu yezhu goutong” (Property Management Companies Should Interact with Homeowners Through the Internet), Shequ, no. 7 (2007): 23; and Zhu 20. Benjamin Read, “Democratizing the Neighborhood? New Private Dahui, “Yezhu luntan yu wuye guanli” (Homeowners’ Forums and Property Housing and Home-Owner Self Organization in Urban China,” China Journal Management), Xiandai wuye—xin yezhu (Modern Property Management—New 49 (2003): 58. Proprietor), no. 2 (2009): 6–7. 21. Cai Yongshun, “China’s Moderate Middle Class: The Case of Home- 33. Based on Wei Jian and Meng Qian, “Bei ‘yezhu daibiao dahui’ zhidu owners’ Resistance,” Asian Survey 45, no. 5 (2005): 793–94. tongling de yige xiaoqu” (A Neighborhood Governed by the “Homeowners’ 22. There have been incidents of physical violence in the homeowners’ Representatives Assembly”), Shequ, no. 7 (2007): 6-9; Guo Weijiang, “Cheng- rights-defense movement. See Zhou Yan, “Zai kongzhi yezhu zhijian fei shi shequ zizhi de kunjing, shijian, fangxiang he duice” (The Difficulty, Practice, lixing weiquan zhong tisheng wuye guanli pinzhi” (Improving the Quality Direction, and Countermeasures of Urban Community Self-Governance), of Property Management in the Control of Irrational Rights Defense among Xiandai wuye –xin yezhu, no. 9 (2007): 35–37; Lin Yihai and Zhao Heng, Homeowners), Zhongguo wuye guanli (Chinese Property Management), no. “Chongjian chenshi shequ zizhi de zuzhi jichu” (Rebuilding the Foundation 3 (2005): 62–63. of Urban Community Self-Governance), Zhongguo gaige (China Reform), 23. Benjamin Read, “Property Rights and Homeowner Activism in New no. 10 (2004): 97–99. Neighborhoods,” in Privatizing China: Socialism from Afar, ed. Li Zhang and 34. Based on Tang Juan, “Yueliangwan de yezhu weiquan xinmoshi” (A Aihwa Ong (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2008), 45. New Model of Homeowners’ Rights Defense in Yueliangwan), Xiandai wuye, 24. Zhao Linmin, “Yezhu weiquan, zhengfu zenmeban?” (Homeowners no. 3 (2006): 5–7. Protecting Their Rights, What Should the Government Do?), Nanfengchuang 35. Based on He Zhongzhou, “Pinge xiaoqu: ‘zizhi’ xinfu shenghuo” (Pinge (Southern Wind), no. 7 (2005): 52–53; “Wuda jiaodian wenti” (Five Critical Neighborhood: A “Self-Manufactured” Happy Life), Zhongguo xinwen zhoukan Issues), Renmin fayuanbao—fazhoukan (People’s Court Daily—Legal Weekly), (China Newsweek) (July 23, 2007): 35–37. (September 1, 2006); Li Ji et al., “Nanliqing de wuye he yezhu weiquan zhi- 36. Benjamin L. Read, “Inadvertent Political Reform via Private Associa- zheng” (Hard-to-Solve Conflicts Between Property Management and Hom- tions: Assessing Homeowners’ Groups in New Neighborhoods,” in Grassroots eowners’ Rights Defense), Renmin fayuanbao (People’s Court Daily) (June 5, Political Reform in Contemporary China, ed. Elizabeth J. Perry and Merle 2007). See also the case studies reported in Zou Shubin, “Zhuzhai xiaoquzhong Goldman (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007), 162. de minzhu” (Democracy in Residential Neighborhoods), in Chengshi shequ yezhu weiyuanhui fazhan yanjiu (Studies of the Development of Homeown- 37. Weigle and Butterfield, “Civil Society in Reforming Communist ers’ Committees in Urban Communities), ed. Tang Juan (Chongqin: Chongqin Regimes.” A Chinese political scientist uses a similar term to describe the chubanshe, 2005), 3–7. The plight of homeowners also receives sympathetic post-Mao state of affairs in China. See Xiao Gongqin, Zhongguo dazhuanxing: coverage in the official media, including the paramount “mouthpiece of the cong fazhan zhengzhixue kan Zhongguo biange (The Great Transformation party”: the People’s Daily. In June 2006, the newspaper published a series of of China: China’s Changes from the Perspective of Developmental Politics) articles highlighting the difficulties with which homeowners in Beijing were (Beijing: Xinxing chubanshe, 2008). dealing. These reports were reproduced in the magazine Zhongguo fangdi xinxi 38. Shigeto Sonoda, “Emergence of Middle Classes in Today’s Urban China: (Real Estate Information of China). The sources I draw on here come from Will They Contribute to Democratization in China?” International Journal of this magazine. See “Yezhu weiquan you duonan” (How Difficult to Defend China Studies 1, no. 2 (2010): 351–69.
62 Problems of Post-Communism November/December 2012
39. Andrew C. Mertha, China’s Water Warriors: Citizen Action and Policy Xiaoxia, “Yezhu weiyuanhui xiehui heyi nanchan” (Why the Association of Change (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2008). Homeowners’ Committee Failed to Form), Zhongguo jingji shibao (China 40. Read, “Inadvertent Political Reform via Private Associations,” 150. Economic Times) (September 20, 2006); Li Chunwei, “Chongqing ‘yezhu weihuanhui xiehui’ ganga choubei” (The Awkward Preparation of the “As- 41. Zou Shubin, Tang Juan, and Huang Weiping, “2003nian renda daibiao sociation of Homeowners’ Committee”), 21shiji jingji baodao (Twenty-First- jingxuan de qunti xiaoying: Beijing yu Shenzhen bijiao” (The Mass Implica- Century Economic Tribune) (May 14, 2007); and Zhang Zhaoguo, “Jianli tions of Competitive Elections for Deputies to the People’s Congresses in 2003: xiehui: Yeweihui de youyibo quanli zhizheng” (Establishing the Association: Comparing Beijing and Shenzhen), in Zhongguo xianshi wenti yanjiu qianyan Another Battle for Rights of the Homeowners’ Committees), Renmin fayuanbao baogao 2005–2006 (A Report on Frontier Research on China’s Present Issues, (People’s Court Daily) (January 26, 2007). Shenyang remains the only city 2005–2006), ed. Li Huibin and Xue Xiaoyuan (Shanghai: Huadong shifan to have formed an association of homeowners’ committees at the community daxue chubanshe, 2006), 282–85. level. See Zhao Xupu, “Chengli yezhu weiyuanhui xiehui de jidian sikao” 42. Fan Qing, “Zou Jiajian: yezhu wenzheng” (Zou Jiajian: A Homeowner’s (Several Points About the Establishment of an Association of Homeowners’ Political Participation), Xin Jingbao (New Beijing Daily) (January 4, 2004); Committees), Xiandai wuye-xinyezhu, no. 5 (2007): 60–61. Guo Hua, “Shenzhen: Shequ xuanmin tuidong jingxuan fengyun” (Shenzhen: 53. C. W. Cassinelli, “The Totalitarian Party,” Journal of Politics 24, no. Community Voters Pushing for Eventful Competitive Elections), Shequ, 9, 1 (1962): 136. no.17 (2003): 6–11. 54. Zhang Nian, “Shanghaishi cong zhidu he caozuo cengmian jiaqiang 43. John L. Thorton, “Long Time Coming: The Prospects for Democracy yeweihui gongzuo” (Shanghai Strengthens the Work on Homeowners’ Com- in China,” Foreign Affairs 87, no. 1 (2008): 8. mittee Through Institutional and Operational Aspects), Zhongguo wuye guanli, 44. Weigle and Butterfield, “Civil Society in Reforming Communist no. 11 (2007): 52–53. Regimes,” 12. 55. He Haibing and Yu Mengmiao, “Wuye dangjian lianjian rang shequ 45. See Wang Jianjun, “Mofanxiaoqu de yeweihui xuanju fengbo” (Disputes jumin de haochu” (Property Management Party Building Benefits Community of a Homeowners’ Committee Elections in an Exemplary Neighborhood), Residents), Shequ, no. 18 (2007): 13–14. Xiandai wuye-xinyezhu, no. 3 (2009): 8–12; Tang Juan and Yu Pinchi, “Shequ 56. See Zhou Meiyan and Yan Rui, “Cong Shanghai Xiqu Huading xiaoqu yeweihui xuanju zhidu shizheng yanjiu (shang)” (An Empirical Study of the yezhu weiyuanhui xuanju kan yezhu zizhi xianzhuang yu qianjing” (The Present Election System for the Homeowners’ Committee [Part 1]), Xiandai wuye- Situation and Prospects of Homeowners’ Self-Governance from the Perspec- xinyezhu, no. 2 (2009): 28–33; Tang Juan and Yu Pingchi, “Shequ yeweihui tive of a Homeowner’s Committee Election in Huading Neighborhood, West xuanju zhidu shizheng yanjiu (zhong)” (Part 2), Xiandai wuye-xinyezhu, no. 3 District of Shanghai), in Chengshi shequ yezhu weiyuanhui fazhan yanjiu, 252. (2009): 20–25; and Tang Juan and Yu Pingchi, “Shequ yeweihui xuanju zhidu See also the policy directive circulated by the Pudong New District govern- shizheng yanjiu (xia)” (Part 3), Xiandai wuye-xinyezhu, no. 4 (2009): 52–54. ment: “Pudong xinqu guanyu jiaqiang dui yezhu weiyuanhui gongzuo zhidao 46. Deborah S. Davis, “Urban Chinese Homeowners as Citizens-Consum- he guanli de ruogan guiding” (Some Measures to Strengthen Work Guidance ers,” in The Ambivalent Consumer: Questioning Consumption in East Asia and Management of the Homeowners’ Committee in Pudong New District), and the West, ed. Sheldon Garon and Patricia L. Maclachlan (Ithaca: Cornell Pudong kaifa (Pudong Development), no. 8 (2001): 57–58, in which article University Press, 2006), 286. 4 of the directive states that party members are to play a major role on the 47. “Shenzhenshi yezhu dahui he yezhu weiyuanhui zhidao guize” (Guid- homeowners’ committees. ance Rules for the Homeowners’ Assembly and Homeowners’ Committee in 57. Zhonggong Shanghai shiwei zuzhibu (Shanghai Party Committee Shenzhen), Xiangdai wuye-xinyezhu, no. 5 (2005): 24–27. Organizational Department), Zhimian tiaozhan: Shanghai jiceng dangjian 48. Tang Juan, “Chengshi shequ jiegou bianqianzhong de chongtu yu zhili” shijian chuangxin chengguo (Facing Challenges: Results of Innovation in (Conflicts and Governance in Structural Changes of Urban Communities), in the Practice of Grassroots Party Building in Shanghai) (Shanghai: Shanghai Chengshi shequ yezhu weiyuanhui fazhan yanjiu (Studies of the Development Jiaotong daxue chubanshe, 2001), 81. of Homeowners’ Committee in Urban Communities), ed. Tang Juan (Chongqin: 58. Wang Haiyan, “Jiaqiang yeweihui gongzuo ying naru shequ dangjian” Chongqin chubanshe, 2005), 64–69; Ni Binlu, “Ruhe jieding yeweihui zhuguan (Strengthening the Work of Homeowners’ Committees Should Be Brought bumen de xingzhengquan?” (How to Determine the Administrative Authority of Under Community Party Building), Jiefang ribao (Liberation Daily) (August the Government Agency Overseeing the Homeowners’ Committee?), Xiandai 8, 2006). wuye-xinyezhu, no. 5 (2005): 7–8. 59. In this regard, Chinese civil society could be considered an example of 49. Wu Chunxing and Tian Zuo, “Pobing zhiju, chuangxin zhilu” (Icebreak- the view that civil society can become a means of social control by an authori- ing Action, Innovative Path), Zhongguo wuye guanli, no. 9 (2007): 36–37. tarian government. See Quintan Wiktorowicz, “Civil Society as Social Control: 50. Read, “Property Rights and Homeowner Activism in New Neighbor- State Power in Jordan,” Comparative Politics 33, no. 1 (2000): 43–61. hoods,” 45, 54. 60. Ogden, Inklings of Democracy in China, 222. 51. Homeowners’ committees are required to apply for bei’an but not to register (dengji), but if these committees are to join together as an association of homeowners’ committees, then the association has to register as a social organization. To order reprints, call 1-800-352-2210; 52. See the press reports on the failures to form such an association in outside the United States, call 717-632-3535. the cities of Chongqing, Guangzhou, Xiamen, Chengdu, and Beijing: Wang
Bing Civil Society with Chinese Characteristics? 63
Copyright of Problems of Post-Communism is the property of M.E. Sharpe Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.