|
Longer-term solutions required
By You Nuo (China Daily)
Updated: 2006-06-05 09:13 But these are all policies to bring about short-term assistance. Housing
problems, especially in large cities like Beijing and Shanghai, have some
deeper-level significance and require policies featuring greater foresight and
long-term benefits.
First of all, the current attempt to slow down real
estate investment cannot be, as some commentators in the Chinese-language press
seem to suggest, a war between the government acting on behalf of the
public interest and unruly property developers.
Those merchants may
not be particularly attractive personalities. Nor does their industry have much
to boast about in technological progress or managerial expertise.
But
they are the ones that happen to operate in a market that generates more
economic growth and consumer spending than many other things can do
especially at the stage when every Chinese household is looking for ways to
improve its housing conditions.
It is not right, of course, for property
developers to hijack public policies because of their importance by doing
whatever brings them the highest returns. But those who make policies should
also do more to define the role of the business.
However, for quite
long and longer than the time that officials have been busy with such
details as the size of houses and their maximum prices some more important
questions have remained unanswered.
Should, for instance, Chinese cities
have a distinctive division between rich people's living quarters and those
belonging to the rest of society? Some developers said yes. While their critics,
arguing from a moralistic standpoint, said no.
But if in reality, there
are customers who aspire for larger units, whether for investment or for their
own use, where should those houses be? Should they occupy locations best
equipped with public facilities, which I tend to think belong to average
homeowners, or should they be built in some distant spots?
At the same
time, should cities like Beijing and Shanghai consider moving some of their
cities' functions to new cities in nearby provinces? Why should they, for
instance, keep so many crammed university campuses in their cities? After all,
they have little room to develop.
Why must every corporation keep its
headquarters, along with a whole army of supporting staff, in a major city in
order to claim national importance?
Why, in the era of the Internet and
mass communications, must every media organization keep its general office in
downtown to advertise its presence?
Again, there is the question I
raised one year ago when I started this column, why would any rational person
want to work in Beijing's central business district? The traffic jam has never
relaxed a bit since I worked there for an investment firm in 2000. No
improvement in six years, what development is that?
(For more biz stories, please visit Industry Updates)
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Most Popular Stories in 48 Hours |
|
|
|
|
