The end of a Chinese 'nail' house

by fulltimestudent 9 Replies latest social current

• 

  fulltimestudent

  Disputes between residents of resumed property in China, often become dramatic, as in these two cases.

  

  
  

  These problems are not unique to China, but can arise in any society when the community (government) wants to use the land on which a house stands for somethings different (e.g. A new school, roads, railways, etc). In China, as elsewhere, most people settle sooner rather than later with the government, but in China some refuse to settle, and the dispute goes on for much longer periods of time. The usual result is as pictured, the project goes ahead anyway and the property of the people who have refused to settle is left sticking up like a nail in a piece of wood.

  Its not always a building, in the image below, a family refused to have the tomb of a relative re-located.

  
• 

  fulltimestudent

  And sometimes the main part of a project is completed as the dispute drags on, as in the case below in Changsha, Hunan province, where failure to settle impacts the completion of a public square in front of the new shopping centre.

  
  
• 

  truthseeker100

  Full time student

  Your posts on this site are appreciated by me and others I am sure. Thank U
• 

  kaik

  This is a problem in the Czech Republic where after the fall of communism people insist to hold on property and would not negotiate a sell while it is often necessary for many infrastructure project. At the extreme cases the sales has to be forced by the court, but people often accuse the government of communist theft practice. Some cases it is a disaster, where government cannot build flood barriers after disastrous floods of 1997/2002 because people would not sell the land and would let tens of thousands people to suffer as consequences. One place there was old guy who refused to sell a part of the land for city bypass, and it was not until his granddaughter was run over and killed by a truck. He was the loudest afterwards accusing the municipality for not building the bypass. Unfortunately in many cases, the government has very little ways to prevent speculation on properties or forcing a sale of the land for the better good of the community.
  
• 

  Magnum

  Thanks, interesting. Actually, I thought the Chinese government would just forcefully confiscate the land and make a small reimbursement. It seems that the U.S. government is tougher than the Chinese in this area.
• 

  LisaRose

  We had a weird situation in our little town. The city used state redevelopment funds to start building a joint retail/low income rental property. The property was to be managed by a company previously owned by a city manager. The whole deal fell apart when the City manager got sick. An interim city manager realized the former city manager never sold the business, it was supposedly owned by his daughters, who were in college, but he was running it and gave himself a sweetheart deal. Then the recession hit, the state redevelopment money dried up and the City didn't have the money to complete it. The building was finally sold at a considerable loss, to a developer, but they then realized they had never secured egress rights from the adjacent home owners association, which they needed to complete the sale. The neighbor hoa was still upset the project had gone from two to three stories, dwarfing the adjacent homes, with no buy in from them and simply refused to grant right of way. Eventually the city pursued eminent domain and five years later the property is finally being finished.
• 

  fulltimestudent

  Magnum: Thanks, interesting. Actually, I thought the Chinese government would just forcefully confiscate the land and make a small reimbursement. It seems that the U.S. government is tougher than the Chinese in this area.

  In China, land is (usually) owned either by the state or the village as a group ( a collective). What is sold is the right to use the land. That system is not unique to China, in Australia, that's the system in use in the capital city, Canberra, but not elsewhere

  The village collective system is the most interesting to me (as an interested observer of the social changes in China). In south China, in the very large city of Guangzhou (once called Canton), the city has expanded over village owned agricultural land, The village collective still owns the land, but the system has enabled these formerly (relatively) 'poor' peasants to become very, very wealthy.

  In the west this system is often called 'leasehold.' In the Chinese version, the length of the lease is subject to the use to which the land is to be put.

  Purpose	Years of Grant
  Land for residential purposes	70 years
  Land for industrial purposes	50 years
  Land for purposes of educational, scientific and technological, cultural, health care or sports	50 years
  Land for commercial, tourism or recreational purposes	40 years
  Land for combined usage or other purposes	50 years

  So if you buy a dwelling from a previous owner, you may actually 'own' the use of the property for less than the original 70 years, which of course must affect the price.

  The above is a rather simplistic overview. The system is still evolving, as all tenure systems do, and difficult situations arise sometimes, as in the following instance. (Obviously the situation is more complicated than the FT video allows.)

  I feel some sympathy for the situation of this woman and her family.

  The family bought the house (in Beijing) during the last years of the Imperial Qing dynasty (which ended in 1912).

  Then came the official Republic of China, whose authority did not extend far from Beijing- most of the country was ruled by the so-called war-lords (local dictators). Then, from 1937 to 1945, there was a Japanese ruled authority. In 1945 the Republic of China ruled during the civil war, until 1949, when the Communist dominated Popular Front won control of North China and Beijing.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc_fGteRF0k
• 

  fulltimestudent

  The UK's BBC's website today reports on the demolition of another famous 'nail-house,' this time in Shanghai.

  For fourteen years the owners of this house had refused offers by the Shanghai City Government, so for fourteen years traffic on four-lane street had to go around this house, as in the image below.

  

  The BBC report states that the owners of the house finally accepted an offer** and shortly after, in just 90 minutes, this famous nail-house was gone, probably to the joy of some of the 200 million cars in China.

  

  ** Land in China is owned by a either a state authority or a village commune and occupied on what we call 'leasehold.' So ( I guess) in effect the price stated in the report is the value of the unexpired portion of the lease.

  Link to the BBC report: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-41303312
• 

  cofty

  Interesting thanks. In the UK the government would make a compulsory purchase order and offer a price usually quite generously above market price.

  By the way I have just finished reading a brilliant three-part history of Mao Zedong by Frank Dikotter. I would love to post some of my thoughts on it soon and would appreciate your ideas.
• 

  fulltimestudent

  cofty : By the way I have just finished reading a brilliant three-part history of Mao Zedong by Frank Dikotter. I would love to post some of my thoughts on it soon and would appreciate your ideas.

  Sure! As usual, I would like to contribute - if I can illuminate some point.

  I have not read Dikotter's books on Mao, but I am familiar with his claims. The difficulty (of course) often lies in the 'evidence' some of which may not be easily accessible, and even if it is accessible, may be subject to controversy over translation.