CHINESE HOUSING REGISTRATION (HUKOU): BRIDGE OR WALL? ANDREW KRYSHAK WHAT IS HUKOU?
Created in 1958. Internal Passport system Three main reasons for its creation 1. Promote Urban Development 2. Resource Allocation 3. Control Urban Development Assigned at birth Benefits LUO, THE HUKOU SYSTEM IN CHINA RESEARCH TOPIC
• Research Question: • Does the Chinese housing registration system (Hukou) act as a bridge encouraging socioeconomic growth, or as a wall preventing such growth? • Goal • If the hukou system is indeed a bridge for an individual’s socioeconomic growth, it could be possible to provide a guideline to help migrants increase their success in receiving an urban hukou. LITERATURE REVIEW
Primary Focus Internal migration within China. Different ways of obtaining an urban hukou. Who converts? Difference between Provinces. LITERATURE REVIEW
Rumin, L. (2012). Across the Institutional Passage of Migration: The Hukou System in China. Inter Disciplines, 120-147. History of the hukou system. Different provinces use different methods. Zang, Z., & Treiman, D. J. (2011). Social Origins, Hukou Conversion, and the Wellbeing of Urban Residents in Contemporary China. California Center for Population Research, 1-52. Who is most likely to convert their hukou. Challenges converters face. HYPOTHESES
Hypothesis I Men are more likely than women to obtain an urban hukou through means other than buying a hukou. Hypothesis II Those who are members of the Communist Party of China (CPC) are more likely to obtain an urban hukou through means other than buying a hukou. Hypothesis III Those who are college educated are more likely to obtain an urban hukou through school rather than other means. DATA AND VARIABLES
Data Chinese Household Income Project, 2002 Independent Variable Year someone obtained their urban hukou Dependent Variable How someone obtained their urban hukou Control Variables Gender Party Membership Education E G E L L O C O T G N I O G Cramer’s V=.187 P=.000 Chi
25.4% -
Square=548.384 33.0%
16.8%
31.1%
24.8% OFFICIAL A I C I F F O G N I M O C E B 1976-1985 (Gang of Four) 1950-1957 (Rise of Mao)
6.8% HUKOU THEIR OBTAINED SOMEONE HOW
4.4%
5.9%
2.6%
.9% THE ARMY M R A E H T G N I N I O J
12.8%
24.3% 1986-2002 (Modernization) 1958-1965 (Five Year Plan) 27.5%
10.0%
3.4% OCCUPIED Y B D E I P U C C O D N A L GOVERNMENT N E M N R E V O G E H T
.8%
1.1%
1.8%
5.0% 1966-1975 (Cultural Revolution) 12.2% IN N I E S U O H A G N I Y U B
7.6% CITY T I C E H T 2.5%
1.8%
2.6%
6.9% U O K U H A G N I Y U B
46.6%
34.9%
46.1%
48.7%
51.7% E G E L L O C O T G N I O G Cramer’s V= .207 P=.000 Chi
27.8% -
Square 31.4%
17.6%
38.1%
- 31.6% 351.055 OFFICIAL A I C I F F O G N I M O C E B 1976-1985 (Gang of Four) 1950-1957 (Rise of Mao) 9.7%
4.9%
4.0%
2.5%
1.0% THE ARMY M R A E H T G N I N I O J
20.3%
38.6% 1986-2002 (Modernization) 1958-1965 (Five Year Plan) 41.1%
17.2%
7.5% MEN OCCUPIED Y B D E I P U C C O D N A L GOVERNMENT N E M N R E V O G E H T
.4%
.4%
1.7%
3.8% 1966-1975 (Cultural Revolution) 11.1% IN N I E S U O H A G N I Y U B
4.6% CITY T I C E H T 3.1%
1.1%
2.1%
6.6% U O K U H A G N I Y U B
37.1%
21.5%
34.6%
36.3%
42.2% E G E L L O C O T G N I O G Cramer’s V=.142 P=.000 Chi
21.9% 1950-1957 (Rise of Mao) - Square=149.48 35.4%
15.3%
22.7%
20.1% OFFICIAL A I C I F F O G N I M O C E B
2.5% 1958-1965 (Five Year Plan)
3.5%
9.5%
2.7%
.8% THE ARMY M R A E H T G N I N I O J
1.9%
2.1% 1966-1975 (Cultural Revolution)
2.1% WOMEN 1.2%
.6% OCCUPIED Y B D E I P U C C O D N A L GOVERNMENT N E M N R E V O G E H T
1.3%
2.1%
2.1%
6.5% 1976-1985 (Gang of Four)
13.0% IN N I E S U O H A G N I Y U B
11.9% CITY T I C E H T 1.4%
3.2%
3.3% 1986-2002 (Modernization) 7.2% U O K U H A G N I Y U B
60.6%
55.6%
67.7%
63.7%
58.3% Cramer’s V=.153 P=.000 Chi E G E L L O C O T G N I O G -
Square=212.293 17.6%
34.5%
16.0%
22.1%
21.3% OFFICIAL A I C I F F O G N I M O C E B 1976-1985 (Gang of Four) 1950-1957 (Rise of Mao) 4.9%
2.9%
3.0%
.9%
.4% THE ARMY M R A E H T G N I N I O J
7.8%
7.5% 1986-2002 (Modernization) 1958-1965 (Five Year Plan) 10.1% NO PARTY NO 3.3%
1.0% OCCUPIED Y B D E I P U C C O D N A L GOVERNMENT N E M N R E V O G E H T
1.5%
2.3%
2.5%
8.0% 1966-1975 (Cultural Revolution) 14.2% IN N I E S U O H A G N I Y U B
10.3% CITY T I C E H T 2.3%
3.0%
3.4%
8.2% U O K U H A G N I Y U B
57.8%
50.6%
65.4%
62.3%
54.8% Cramer’s V=.178 P=.000 Chi E G E L L O C O T G N I O G -
Square=166.729 34.1%
31.7%
16.6%
47.0%
42.9% OFFICIAL A I C I F F O G N I M O C E B 1976-1985 (Gang of Four) 1950-1957 (Rise of Mao) 9.3%
5.4%
8.7%
5.8%
3.4% THE ARMY M R A E H T G N I N I O J COMMUNIST PARTY COMMUNIST 19.2%
40.9% 1986-2002 (Modernization) 1958-1965 (Five Year Plan) 42.9%
21.3%
16.4% OCCUPIED Y B D E I P U C C O D N A L GOVERNMENT N E M N R E V O G E H T
1.0%
.7% 1966-1975 (Cultural Revolution) 5.9% IN N I E S U O H A G N I Y U B
3.3% CITY T I C E H T 2.2%
1.0%
1.2%
2.1% U O K U H A G N I Y U B
34.1%
19.9%
29.8%
24.0%
29.4% Cramer’s V=.247 P=.000 Chi E G E L L O C O T G N I O G -
Square=245.599 11.7%
13.4%
2.5%
1.6%
2.6% OFFICIAL A I C I F F O G N I M O C E B 1976-1985 (Gang of Four) 1950-1957 (Rise of Mao) 7.4%
4.0%
3.5%
.3%
.4% LESS THAN HIGH SCHOOL SCHOOL HIGH THAN LESS THE ARMY M R A E H T G N I N I O J
14.4%
29.5% 1986-2002 (Modernization) 1958-1965 (Five Year Plan) 27.6%
8.0%
1.4% OCCUPIED Y B D E I P U C C O D N A L GOVERNMENT N E M N R E V O G E H T
.5%
1.3%
2.5%
13.1% 1966-1975 (Cultural Revolution) 17.5% IN N I E S U O H A G N I Y U B
8.5% CITY T I C E H T 4.0%
3.0%
3.2%
7.7% U O K U H A G N I Y U B
57.4%
47.7%
60.8%
73.9%
70.4% E G E L L O C O T G N I O G Cramer’s V=.204 P=.000 Chi
40.4% - Square=205.7 44.4%
25.8%
23.5%
20.5% OFFICIAL A I C I F F O G N I M O C E B 1976-1985 (Gang of Four) 1950-1957 (Rise of Mao) 8.1%
4.0%
7.1% SCHOOL TECH AND SCHOOL HIGH
3.8%
.9% THE ARMY M R A E H T G N I N I O J
11.1%
20.2% 1986-2002 (Modernization) 1958-1965 (Five Year Plan) 25.3%
12.0%
5.1% OCCUPIED Y B D E I P U C C O D N A L GOVERNMENT N E M N R E V O G E H T
.8%
2.2%
2.8% 1966-1975 (Cultural Revolution) 12.4% IN N I E S U O H A G N I Y U B
6.1% CITY T I C E H T 2.4%
2.8%
8.3% U O K U H A G N I Y U B
34.3%
28.2%
39.6%
55.3%
52.9% Cramer’s V=.185 P=.000 Chi E G E L L O C O T G N I O G -
Square=145.423 63.9%
57.7%
26.7%
60.5%
65.4% OFFICIAL A I C I F F O G N I M O C E B 1976-1985 (Gang of Four) 1950-1957 (Rise of Mao) 4.9%
5.1%
8.2%
3.5% JR. COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGE JR. 1.8% THE ARMY M R A E H T G N I N I O J
13.1%
21.8% 1986-2002 (Modernization) 1958-1965 (Five Year Plan) 32.9%
10.2%
5.3% OCCUPIED Y B D E I P U C C O D N A L GOVERNMENT N E M N R E V O G E H T
.7% 1966-1975 (Cultural Revolution) 3.7% IN N I E S U O H A G N I Y U B
3.3% CITY T I C E H T
2.7%
1.7%
4.5% U O K U H A G N I Y U B
14.8%
15.4%
29.5%
23.3%
19.3% FINDINGS
Social mobilization varies across different political regimes throughout Chinese history. Men were more likely to obtain a hukou through means other than buying a hukou. Being a member of the Communist Party makes other methods of receiving an urban hukou more accessible. Those with a Jr. College or University level of education are more likely to have obtained their urban hukou through attending college than other means.