Don't those giving up registration in their old locality give up property rights when they move registration?
I do not know if those rights are valuable but I am baffled as to why this issue has not been resolved.
Also wonder if hurdles to moving registration are such that many simply do not apply as they would be denied. In other words, the study might not mean anything at all. Not saying I know this is the case, but I know I've seen plenty of similar studies in areas I was familiar with and I found them laughably off-base.
Thanks for the thoughtful questions. If you hold a rural residence, or in plain speak a farmer, then yes, moving your hukou to the city would mean giving up your land rights. However, in most cases, the benefits of moving to a city far outweigh the benefits of staying in a rural area. It's mostly when you are from a village close to a city and have the prospect of getting large sums of money when the sprawling city takes over your land, then moving hukou to the city is not a good deal. But in any case, it's a trade-off people have the liberty to choose for themselves.
As to your second question, the research is based on the hypothetical premise that everyone residing in a city applies for the hukou of that city. Yes in reality, not everyone applies for Hukou, due to many reasons such as the one above, but it is still meaningful to measure the accessibility of hukous using this premise.
Thanks for your response. It sounds like the authors of the study did a fine job.
Have to share something that I think is true in the US. Obviously, it has its history of segregation but one of the reasons it was "kind of but not really" easy to get rid of and something that I think has benefitted the US is the Equal Protection clause of the constitution. That particular provision was added after the US Civil War for good reasons but it wound up providing lots of other benefits that were not anticipated at the time of its passage. Lucky is always better than good!
I'm horrified by hukou but hopefully, it will wind up being lucky for many. That is part of reason I never really get upset when things aren't like I prefer. I start thinking about unanticipated benefits.
I think Hukou is a policy devised at a certain era that suited the needs of that time, and the consensus is that it's something China can do away with down the path, hence the gradual marginalization of this system.
Hukou's origins appear to be related to the Great Leap Forward, but its timing may have been coincidental. At this point, I'm not sure whether the origins are relevant, and the world will never be perfect.
I think it's a matter of perspective, and what you compare the present with. This research obviously is drawing a comparison between the present with 20, 30 years ago and the conclusion is that the Hukou system nowadays is merely a shadow of what it was then. And it's generally expected that it will continue to lose relevance down the road.
Don't those giving up registration in their old locality give up property rights when they move registration?
I do not know if those rights are valuable but I am baffled as to why this issue has not been resolved.
Also wonder if hurdles to moving registration are such that many simply do not apply as they would be denied. In other words, the study might not mean anything at all. Not saying I know this is the case, but I know I've seen plenty of similar studies in areas I was familiar with and I found them laughably off-base.
Thanks for the thoughtful questions. If you hold a rural residence, or in plain speak a farmer, then yes, moving your hukou to the city would mean giving up your land rights. However, in most cases, the benefits of moving to a city far outweigh the benefits of staying in a rural area. It's mostly when you are from a village close to a city and have the prospect of getting large sums of money when the sprawling city takes over your land, then moving hukou to the city is not a good deal. But in any case, it's a trade-off people have the liberty to choose for themselves.
As to your second question, the research is based on the hypothetical premise that everyone residing in a city applies for the hukou of that city. Yes in reality, not everyone applies for Hukou, due to many reasons such as the one above, but it is still meaningful to measure the accessibility of hukous using this premise.
Thanks for your response. It sounds like the authors of the study did a fine job.
Have to share something that I think is true in the US. Obviously, it has its history of segregation but one of the reasons it was "kind of but not really" easy to get rid of and something that I think has benefitted the US is the Equal Protection clause of the constitution. That particular provision was added after the US Civil War for good reasons but it wound up providing lots of other benefits that were not anticipated at the time of its passage. Lucky is always better than good!
I'm horrified by hukou but hopefully, it will wind up being lucky for many. That is part of reason I never really get upset when things aren't like I prefer. I start thinking about unanticipated benefits.
I think Hukou is a policy devised at a certain era that suited the needs of that time, and the consensus is that it's something China can do away with down the path, hence the gradual marginalization of this system.
Hukou's origins appear to be related to the Great Leap Forward, but its timing may have been coincidental. At this point, I'm not sure whether the origins are relevant, and the world will never be perfect.
You must live in an unceasing state of terror. You have my sympathy.
Hukou barriers persist exactly where coordination density is highest.
That suggests the system isn’t obsolete, it’s concentrating around the few cities that still matter institutionally.
I think it's a matter of perspective, and what you compare the present with. This research obviously is drawing a comparison between the present with 20, 30 years ago and the conclusion is that the Hukou system nowadays is merely a shadow of what it was then. And it's generally expected that it will continue to lose relevance down the road.