What are the reasons urbanization has cooled down?

Rural areas should not copy the model of big cities, especially some small towns. Only by letting residents build houses on their own land can there be individuality, and only on that basis can service industries develop, can there be vitality and energy, and can people see the mountains, gaze upon the water, and remember their nostalgic ties.

Recently, at the “Opportunities for Re-urbanization” sub-forum of the China Green Companies Annual Meeting, Li Tie, director of the China Center for Urban Development under the National Development and Reform Commission, held an in-depth dialogue with various guests. The following is a summary of the views.

Why has urbanization “cooled” down?

Today, the past model of urbanization has basically reached its end, and houses cannot be sold. Now, the model of relying on land sales is already difficult to sustain, and local officials do not know what to do in the future. And what situation are real estate developers facing? Due to various reasons such as anti-corruption efforts and structural oversupply, the houses they develop cannot be sold, ultimately leading to downward pressure on the entire economy. The urbanization of “going all out” has reached its end, while at the same time encountering the trough of cyclical fluctuations in economic development, so the enthusiasm is gone.

When we look at urbanization, we should mainly look at two points.

The first point: has urban life become more convenient? Take Shenyang as an example. From Shenyang Airport all the way to the hotel, there are very wide two-way lanes, and beside the roads there are green separation belts. It is extremely extravagant and luxurious, but what practical use does it have? Not many people or vehicles are seen. After nine or ten at night, many lights are still on. This is called a “lighting project.” Many projects in China are about appearances. Money is spent on face projects for people to see, yet they are useless for making residents' lives more convenient.

In European and American countries, such as Switzerland and the Netherlands, after 8 p.m. it is already pitch dark. Even in some countries with rich nightlife, streetlights are not all turned on and the place is not brightly lit at night. Only in areas with nightlife and where atmosphere is needed, and only when businesses proactively propose lighting up to attract customers, is there “lighting up.” But we invest a large amount of money in image projects. If a city's roads are very wide and the scene is grand, but everywhere is inconvenient and you have to drive, then I think there is a problem. Where is the problem? First, resource allocation is poor. Second, city dwellers feel that there is “only face, no substance,” and life is inconvenient. Third, having lights on every night causes serious waste, yet cities large and small are all doing this.

⟦NL> The second point: many cities are far more luxurious than Western countries. Cities in Western countries developed over hundreds of years, but can our cities let rural migrant workers in? Many city managers believe that seeing rural migrant workers on the streets is incongruous, so they stipulate that rental housing cannot be provided, small stalls cannot be set up, and various low-end service jobs cannot be engaged in. In fact, this development path runs counter to the two goals proposed by the central government of “putting people first” and “sustainable development.” But in our lives, it is precisely a basic model being followed by cities large and small. If urbanization under this model continues so vigorously, then does it still have value?

At present, China does not yet have a true “smart city”

Let us start with green cities. In foreign countries, the core issue of “low-carbon, green, and ecological” is not that “green is visible” but rather a substantial improvement in the efficiency of resource allocation. Therefore, green cities are also called compact cities. The so-called compact city means that citizens can obtain the largest consumption radius and living radius and the most consumption choices within the shortest distance and the shortest time. This is the first concept of “green.” But to achieve compactness and high efficiency in cities, corresponding technical means must be used, and we now have the ability to achieve this goal.

Next, regarding smart cities. The world has different understandings of smart cities. For example, Songdo Smart City in South Korea installed countless cameras throughout the city, some for traffic and some for public security. All cameras are connected to an intelligent control center, which can see what happens in every corner and handle emergencies. This is called a smart city. Another example is cities such as Changwon in South Korea, which established a public rental bicycle control system. This is also called a smart city. Another example is some cities in Japan that digitize new energy things, while some cities in European and American countries extensively use modern technology and intelligent energy management methods. These are all called smart cities.

In China, because there is the Internet, big data, and cloud platforms, many people wonder: does it mean that as long as the government establishes big data and cloud platforms, a smart city has been built? According to my understanding, some cities in China may currently use modern technology in urban management, but there is not yet a truly comprehensive smart city.

Which city in the world is relatively smart?

Among the better-built smart cities in the world, Kashiwa-no-ha in Japan, which I have seen, counts as one. Its focus is that it has fully realized intelligent management of household energy and community energy. As soon as a person leaves home, all energy at home is turned off or kept on as needed; before returning home, if one wants to preheat in advance, preheating can be done. During the day when energy use is relatively low, all energy is concentrated into a large power storage system; when energy use enters peak hours at night, it automatically flows back from the power storage system to each household. All of this is controlled through the control center. At the same time, each household's energy consumption is recorded statistically, and those who consume less energy are rewarded with community services. This is the best comprehensive smart city I have seen.

But in China, our goals are not limited only to energy management. In other aspects, such as the need for convenience in life, they are also very important. When shopping online and completing different payment services such as electricity fees, property management fees, and water fees, can the problem be solved with just one card? Today's houses only provide the single function of residence. In the future, can services such as health, medical care, and insurance penetrate into family life through the intelligent control system of housing? In addition, can the government's public services penetrate into every corner through the entire community intelligent system? We have the conditions for this.

Let me give an example. A while ago, a hit-and-run car incident occurred at Xibianmen in Beijing. We saw almost the entire live coverage on WeChat and Weibo, but by the time the police arrived at the scene, the car had already fled. Every mobile phone user's feedback of information or provision of the scene of any incident contains enormous resources. If the information published on the Internet could be fully utilized, the fleeing car might be caught every minute, because Weibo and WeChat can publish information in real time, making it very convenient to catch the perpetrator. Unfortunately, at present these two systems have not yet been able to play a role in handling the incident.

How to use existing resources to improve public services is the key. Today's intelligent control centers only provide limited control. If massive data can be transmitted to the control center, a monitoring platform can be formed and play a fuller role. For example, if the toilet lid at home breaks or a child is injured, this information can be quickly transmitted to the control center and promptly fed back to the information processing center. Although we are not doing this at present, we can do it. South Korea's smart home modules allow every remote system to be operated through a mobile phone. In the past, whatever the TV station broadcast, viewers passively watched and could not choose. Now we can treat smart TVs as a massive data information platform. Whatever viewers want to watch, it plays on demand. If in the future this function can evolve further, then all public services can be seen and solved through only one mobile phone terminal. Then how convenient life would be.

Smart cities give us infinite room for imagination, but they are by no means any single content.

It is not a good thing for everyone to move into the city

First, we now have a population of 1.34 billion, and at the population peak it will be 1.42 billion. If the two-child policy is generally relaxed, the population peak may be as high as 1.44 billion. This is a population issue. Second, our urbanization rate of registered residents is 39%, less than 40%, and more than 800 million or even 900 million farmers are still in rural areas. Third, the urban-rural gap has not narrowed as much as we imagine. Looking at the central and western regions, the urban-rural gap is still very large. Therefore, this project requires a very long time.

Many people look at rural areas while standing in cities, but if all rural problems are brought into cities to be solved, then even greater problems will be created. The urbanization we imagine is different from the urbanization that actually occurs. If out of good intentions farmers are forced into cities, then after they enter the cities, although they have exchanged for new houses, what will they eat and drink? What about income, and how will consumption increase? It is not a good thing for everyone to move into the city. If there is no work while consumption costs increase greatly, then it is not a good choice either. To sum it up in one sentence: one cannot use city dwellers' ideals to make demands of rural areas.

Rural areas should not copy the big-city model; they need individuality

In countries around the world, during the first process of urbanization, houses were all built on one's own land; during the process of re-urbanization, as urban land prices rise, urban renewal will take shape. This is a common phenomenon. South Korea and China have similar phenomena of new city construction, and both have demolition and relocation. But for rural areas and townships, I especially hope to let them build houses on their own land and not demolish them.

Now it is very difficult to find cities with historical traces and cultural deposits from the past. Why? They were all demolished and built into the same appearance. Why do many people like ancient towns? Because the houses in ancient towns were all built by the families themselves. There were gaps between rich and poor, forming large houses and small houses, row upon row, and in the end they were all preserved.

Rural areas should not copy the model of big cities, especially some small towns. Only by letting residents build houses on their own land can there be individuality, and only on that basis can service industries develop, can there be vitality and energy, and can people see the mountains, gaze upon the water, and remember their nostalgic ties. This is the rule.