CHINESE HOUSING REGISTRATION (): BRIDGE OR WALL? ANDREW KRYSHAK WHAT IS HUKOU?

 Created in 1958.  Internal 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 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  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.