Panel Paper: Urban Management through Para-Policing and the Exclusion of Urban Poor in Chinese Cities

Monday, June 13, 2016 : 3:15 PM
Clement House, 3rd Floor, Room 06 (London School of Economics)

*Names in bold indicate Presenter

Yimin Li, The New School University
Chengguan, or the Bureau of Integrated Administrative-Law Enforcement for Urban Management, is a local-level government agency created in the late 1990s in China to centralize the enforcement of administrative laws (in regard to the management of the informal economy on city streets, sanitation, environmental protection, urban planning and construction, etc. It used to be responsibilities shared by several government departments, such as the Bureau of Industry and Commerce, Bureau of Public Security, Bureau of Environmental Protection, and Bureau of Urban Planning). Such a centralizing design was meant to guard citizens and enterprises against overlaps of administrative interferences. Unfortunately, since the first Chengguan bureau was created in Beijing in 1997, this government organization has gradually grown into a miniature Leviathan: its responsibilities seem all-encompassing, and its presence is almost everywhere. As reports of Chengguan power abuse (usually in dealing with street vendors) appear frequently in the media, the bureau has become a symbol of the Chinese government’s authoritarian rule.

Not satisfied with the reductionist view that confrontations between Chengguan and street vendors symbolize power struggle between the state and the society, this paper attempts to understand the Chengguan problem in the context of China’s dual urban-rural system (China’s development/modernization with an urban bias, and migrant workers’ lack of access to basic social welfares). Through the lens of the street-level bureaucracy theory, this paper argues that as interests in the Chinese society get increasingly diversified, Chengguan has gradually become a coordinator of conflicting interests on city streets (no longer simply an enforcer of government interest). Faced with competing demands from various stakeholders in the community, the bureau must adopt a more inclusive and equitable approach towards urban management. Society-led initiatives must be encouraged.