Can the launch of comprehensive pilot projects boost the urbanization process?
These visible benefits may prompt some places to blindly rush to create "cities" in order to "move up," affecting sustainable economic development
Recently, some media reported that 11 ministries and commissions including the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Land and Resources, and the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development jointly issued a notice on comprehensive pilot projects for a new type of urbanization, requiring each province to select eligible cities and towns at different levels as pilot projects and report them to the National Development and Reform Commission before the end of August.
The pilot content focuses on exploring the establishment of a cost-sharing mechanism for the citizenization of agricultural transfer population; a diversified and sustainable urbanization investment and financing mechanism; innovative administrative management and a city-establishment model that reduces administrative costs; and reforming and improving the rural homestead system, among other aspects.
Whether the comprehensive pilot projects can accelerate urbanization, public opinion has not yet reached a consistent conclusion.
Can reduce the risks of advancing urbanization
This "divide and rule" approach has been endorsed by some media, which believe the pilot projects will minimize urbanization risks. "Counties, towns, and new cities and districts have historically been the most basic and stable administrative governance units in our country. Their advantage lies in reducing the cost of urbanization and lowering the risks of social reform."
In recent years, multiple provinces and regions including Anhui, Zhejiang, Ningxia, Hunan, and Sichuan have explored relevant aspects of the pilot content, proving the above statement. Taking the homestead exit mechanism as an example, many problems have been exposed in pilot areas. For instance, the public suspects that after homesteads are exited, they will become construction land and a tool for government profit; if farmers who work in cities exit their homesteads, they may become homeless. Such issues have aroused deep public questioning. But conversely, the successive emergence of related problems has also accelerated the process of resolving them, making it easier for the government to achieve the greatest degree of "pursuing advantages and avoiding disadvantages."
Supporting systems determine pilot effectiveness
The comprehensive pilot targets focus on upgrading towns to cities, selecting organic towns with an urban population of more than 100,000 to carry out pilot projects for a new city-establishment model. This has led to public concern, with some netizens joking that "farmers have no money, so even if you upgrade the town to a province, it's useless."
As media reports have said, after becoming a city, the land system, household registration system, fiscal and tax system, public service system, and so on will naturally change from "town" standards to "city" standards. If only the name is changed without changing the "medicine," the further development of "town-level cities" will still be constrained by the town-level administrative system.
In addition, upgrading towns to cities may also lead to vicious local competition. After becoming a city, the administrative rank of officials is elevated, the quota for urban construction land requisition is increased, and they may even independently decide the collection and tax rates of urban construction taxes and fees. These visible benefits may prompt some places to blindly rush to create "cities" in order to "move up," affecting sustainable economic development.
Therefore, whether the pilot projects can achieve results ultimately depends on the improvement of supporting systems.