The purpose of this course is to summarize new directions in Chinese history and social science produced by the creation and analysis of big historical datasets based on newly opened Chinese archival holdings, and to organize this knowledge in a framework that encourages learning about China in comparative perspective. Our course demonstrates how a new scholarship of discovery is redefining what is singular about modern China and modern Chinese history. Current understandings of human history and social theory are based largely on Western experience or on non-Western experience seen through a Western lens. This course offers alternative perspectives derived from Chinese experience over the last three centuries. We present specific case studies of this new scholarship of discovery divided into two stand-alone parts, which means that students can take any part without prior or subsequent attendance of the other part. Part 1 (this course) focuses on comparative inequality and opportunity and addresses two related questions ‘Who rises to the top?’ and ‘Who gets what?’. Part 2 (https://www.coursera.org/learn/understanding-china-history-part-2) turns to an arguably even more important question ‘Who are we?’ as seen through the framework of comparative population behavior - mortality, marriage, and reproduction – and their interaction with economic conditions and human values. We do so because mortality and reproduction are fundamental and universal, because they differ historically just as radically between China and the West as patterns of inequality and opportunity, and because these differences demonstrate the mutability of human behavior and values. Course Overview video: https://youtu.be/dzUPRyJ4ETk
3.4: Property Distribution in Contemporary China
Loading...
Do curso por The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
Understanding China, 1700-2000: A Data Analytic Approach, Part 1
37 classificações
The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
37 classificações
Na lição
Module 3: Social Mobility and Wealth Distribution in Late Imperial and Contemporary China
Conheça os instrutores
James Z. LeeDean and Chair Professor of the School of Humanities and Social Sciences
As we discussed at the beginning of week two, the rising income inequality in
China is extremely well known. As China's Gini coefficient has doubled
from a level of roughly the level of inequality of Sweden.
To a level of inequality which is greater than the United States.
But what's less recognized is that this pattern of equal of relative equal wealth
equality. As well as the income inequality that we
saw in [UNKNOWN], is also true of contemporary China.
And that this wealth equality therefore blunts to a tremendous degree the
inequality measured by the Gini coefficient.
And this is documented in the part three of today's talk which summarizes the
findings from a 2011 China Household Finance Survey.
done by a, led by a professor at UT Austin [UNKNOWN].
with the participation of China University of Southwest Finance and
Economics. Now what [UNKNOWN] and his colleagues
discovered was, that in contrast to the world average, where about 63% of
households own their home... In the United States, it's 65%, in Japan
it's 60%. In China, almost 90% of all families own
at least a home. Which by the way I should say is much,
much, much greater than Hong Kong, another example of one country, two
systems. so in urban populations overall, 85% of
households own a home somewhere, not necessarily the home where they're
living. But a home, but a home somewhere.
And in rural, 93% of households own a home, usually the home where they're
living. what's quite striking, about this finding
is that you look at these households by income or by age.
You find that the distribution ownership is remarkably similar.
for example. And by income, if you're in the second
quartile, 25-50%, the third quartile, 50-75%, or the fourth quartile, 75-100%,
it's roughly the same. 84, 86, 88% of households own a home.
Even in the bottom quartile. 77% of households own a home.
Now again, it's important to remember, that this may not be a home where they're
living. It may be a home where they came from.
A much cheaper home in some, in some remote village.
But it does mean that they no matter what happens to them, in terms of income and
equality. They always have the potential of having
a roof over their head that they own themselves.
And if you look at age, and we even distinguish the most expensive cities in
China. Of course Not considering Hong Kong,
which definitely qualifies for being one of the most expensive cities.
So we just separate Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen from other cities.
What we see again is that this this categorization doesn't make that much
difference except to the very young age groups.
people who are 35 to 45, people who are above 45.
Again, it's over 80% of households own their own home.
That's only under age 35 where it does make a difference.
But even there whereas young people under the age of 35 in other cities, 77% of
them own their own home. Even in the most expensive cities almost
60% of young people under the age of 35 own their own home.
And the reason for this is partly because, unlike the west, where you have
both extreme inequality in terms of accumulation and wealth.
you also have in the west the transfer of wealth.
The inter generational transfer of wealth largely occurs with the passing away of
the older generation. As the older generation, you know, as the
life expectancy goes from 60 to 70 to 80. you'll find that the inheriting
generation goes from 40 to 50 to 60 years old.
Or older before they're able to inherit wealth.
Whereas in China, an enormous amount of this wealth transfer actually occurs at
marriage. So parents, when their, especially when
their son gets married, have an obligation to if they can, to provide a
home to that son. That he can use to offer his bride as an
example of his ability or his family's ability to establish a new family worthy
of marrying. indeed another important finding of
[UNKNOWN] is that not only is the total amount of home ownership much greater
than the United States or the UK. in fact 18% of households own more than
one apartment, whereas in the United States and the UK it's only about 6%.
so so we find is that home ownership is much greater than in the wealthiest
western nations. And that this home ownership is not just
the home where you live, which may give you wealth.
But doesn't give you liquid wealth because it's rare that want to actually
sell the home you live in ,in order to in order to acquire liquid capital.
But if you own two apartments, then you have the possibility of actually
converting one at least to to other kinds of investment purposes.
So again, you see an example that it's not just wealth...
That has been distributed more equally. But it's also potentially liquid wealth,
although it's, although it's still in the form of real estate.
Now, most of this capital gains, of course, happened because of early
privatization. Because of the 1980s and 1990s Chinese,
work units, allowed, their employees to buy the public housing in which they
lived at highly reduced prices. So therefore those people who were able
to buy a first apartment. As you can see in this graph, had much
higher capital gains than people who were buying a second or a third apartment.
because the second or the third apartment are usually acquired on the market, on
the private market. And therefore you don't have the kind of,
the kind of wealth transfer that you had in China from the public sector to the
private sector with early privatization. again, what you can see here is, is that
it's important of course to recognize even what we talk about the widespread
ownership of housing in China. That there's a tremendous difference in
terms of the quality of the housing. people who live in the bottom quarter or
the second quarter, their real estate has appreciated far less.
Than people who live in the top half of the income distribution in China
reflecting a phenomenon which is universal.
That while real estate as a whole has increased what the, what the Chinese call
the [UNKNOWN], the bubble of rising real estate values.
These are led especially by the better apartments.
because it is largely the better off population which is creating the demand
for more and more privatized higher value housing.
So, throughout the world, the Haves, as you see here defined by income, by
wealth, wealth, education, attainment and by occupational prestige.
In China the Haves there were also defined by such categories as work unit,
job sector, residence, geographic location.
Because a lot depends on where they were at the time of privatization.
If you are fortunate enough to live in the a very central location in Beijing or
in Shanghai, or in Shenzhen. You simply the net appreciation of your
real estate was much, much greater than if you were in a a more remote area, a
more remote residence. A less valued work unit or job sector
which didn't have the same kind of housing that a more desired more
prestigious work unit or job sector might have.
So in other words what we're looking at therefore in China is But there are two
types of have-nots. The kind of have-nots that we're more
used to in the west. Categorical have-nots, people who just,
you know, are poor. whether they are rural poor or urban
poor. In China you just have cohort have-nots.
People who are because of the real estate bubble those people who are in a cohort
that were able to take advantage of the early privatization.
And the realistic bubble did much better by period and again by age.
So young people in China facing the need to buy housing on the private market are
highly disadvantaged. Because their incomes simply don't give
them the possibility of buying an apartment on their own.
However, in China, as we've said, much wealth transfers from parents to children
occurs at marriage. Rather than at the death of parents.
So that therefore they're not so dependent on having to buy the apartment
themselves. But rather can rely to a large extent on
parental altruism and largesse, to acquire their needed real estate.
so underlying this pattern of equal wealth distribution is a pattern of
parental altruism and wealth distribution.
by contrast, home ownership is less equal say in the west.
this slide is from the United Kingdom. From a 2006 survey, and we can see that
for housing tenure by age. You can see that the young people in the
UK, very rarely own themselves own outright.
16 to 24 is 2%, 25 to 34 is 3%, 35 to 44 is 7% where it was 58% for under 35 in
the 2011 Chinese survey. So so far more unequal and far more
unequal especially by age. in the UK than in contemporary China.
Explore nosso catálogo
Registre-se gratuitamente e obtenha recomendações, atualizações e ofertas personalizadas.
O Coursera proporciona acesso universal à melhor educação do mundo fazendo parcerias com as melhores universidades e organizações para oferecer cursos on-line.
© 2018 Coursera Inc. Todos os direitos reservados.
