Cited by 198Housing Market and EconomicsChina's Socioeconomic Reforms and GovernanceUrban and Rural Development Challenges

The winners in China's urban housing reform

Open access
Logan, John R., Fang, Yiping, Zhang, Zhanxin·2010·Housing Studies

Abstract

Housing reform in China has proceeded on two tracks: privatization of public housing and development of a new private housing sector. During this period of transition, rents have remained relatively low in the remaining public housing, and purchase prices offered to occupants of public housing have been well below market prices. Although these rents and prices are partly based on known formulas, there is considerable variability in how much people pay for similar apartments. This study uses 2000 Census data to estimate the housing subsidy received by the remaining renters in the public sector and purchasers of public housing, based on private sector prices for housing of comparable quality and size. The paper also analyzes variation in the estimated discount from market prices that these people receive. The findings show that the biggest winners in China's transition from socialist housing allocation are those who were favored in the previous system, based on such factors as residence status, education and occupation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02673030903240660

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 Logan et al., 2010

    The Chinese Case section links work-unit characteristics and registration status to opportunities to purchase public housing, and the Discussion and Conclusion reports disadvantages for people with rural registration. It discusses Communist Party membership in relation to housing quality and purchase prices, but says its own Census data cannot test whether Party members obtained more valuable housing. It does not establish the claimed association between Party membership and access to homeownership. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • 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).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Davis D Forrest R Lee J From welfare benefit to capitalized asset: the re-commodification of residential space in urban china Housing and Social Change: East-West Perspectives 2003 London and New York Routledge 183 198
  2. Yang L Wang Y Housing Reform: Theory Rethinking and Reality Selection [Zhufang Gaige: Lilun de Fansi yu Xianshi de Xuanze] 1995 Tianjin Tianjin People’s Press

Cited by

Authors
Logan, J. R., Fang, Y., & Zhang, Z.
Affiliations
  • Brown University (US)
  • Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Logan, John R.
Venue
Housing Studies
Published
2010-01
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
101-117
ISSN
  • 0267-3037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-1810
OpenAlex
W2022591330
Cited by
198
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 6
FWCI
8.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Housing Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • PDXScholar (Portland State University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R24HD041020)
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 reform, housing subsidies, housing allocation

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