Housing tenure choice in transitional urban China: A multilevel analysis
Abstract
Using a 1996 national survey of housing in China and a multilevel modelling technique, we examine housing tenure choice in transitional urban China where households have been granted limited freedom of choice in the housing market since the housing reforms of 1988. We find that both market mechanisms and institutional forces affect households' tenure choice in urban China. While some socioeconomic factors such as age, household size, household income and housing price have similar effects on tenure choice as in the West, others such as the number of workers and marital status have rather different effects. In addition, factors characterising institutional relationships among the state, work units and households, such as hukou, job rank and work unit rank, still play important roles in tenure choice.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Three institutional factors (employer type, CCP membership, and hukou) were documented to be associated with access to homeownership in the literature.
“Three institutional factors were tested in the models, namely employer type, CCP membership, and hukou , each of which was docu mented to be associated with access to homeownership in the literature (Huang and Clark, 2002; Logan et al., 2010).”
From His house, her house? Gender inequality and homeownership among married couples in urban China (2023) · cites this paper as Huang and Clark, 2002
Market factors and institutional factors are both important for the intra-household distribution of homeownership.
“Although this study was not intended to join the debate of market factors versus institutional factors in affecting access to housing in China (Huang and Clark, 2002), the results reveal that they are both important for the intra-household distribution of homeownership.”
From His house, her house? Gender inequality and homeownership among married couples in urban China (2023) · cites this paper as Huang and Clark, 2002
Institutional factors are important and quite unique in the Chinese context, particularly in the pre-reform era when housing was treated as welfare and allocated by work units to their employees.
“Institutional factors are important and quite unique in the Chinese context, particularly in the pre-reform era when housing was treated as welfare and allocated by work units to their employees (Huang and Clark, 2002; Logan et al., 2010).”
From His house, her house? Gender inequality and homeownership among married couples in urban China (2023) · cites this paper as Huang and Clark, 2002
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The winners in China's urban housing reform
Logan, J. R., Fang, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2010) · Housing Studies · doi:10.1080/02673030903240660 · Cited by 198 · see citing works
Cui, C., Geertman, S., & Hooimeijer, P. (2016) · Cities · doi:10.1016/j.cities.2015.10.008 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
His house, her house? Gender inequality and homeownership among married couples in urban China
Cui, C., Yu, S., & Huang, Y. (2023) · Cities · doi:10.1016/j.cities.2022.104187 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Huang, Y., & Clark, W. A. V.
- Affiliations
- State University of New York (US)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Corresponding author
- Huang, Youqin
- Clark, William A. V.
- Venue
- Urban Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 7-32
- ISSN
- 0042-0980 (ISSN-L)
- 1360-063X
- OpenAlex
- W2139927307
- Cited by
- 377
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 17
- FWCI
- 22.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Urban Studies (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Housing Market and Economics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › China's Socioeconomic Reforms and Governance
- Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban and Rural Development Challenges
- Keywords
- housing tenure choice, transitional housing, urban housing, housing reform, household registration, work units, housing prices, household income, marital status
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
