Between Beijing and Bucharest: Case Analyses of Housing Policy Changes in Socialist and Postsocialist Cities for Implications for Pyongyangs Transition

Abstract

This research attempts to investigate the history and spatiality of public housing developments in Bucharest, Romania and Beijing, China, in the context of economic reform and system transition for the purpose of providing insights on the future housing reform and transition in Pyongyang, North Korea. This research will base its research target on the socialist public housing estates in Pyongyang, Bucharest and Beijing with a temporal boundary from the start of the socialist regime until roughly 20 years after the initial reform of the economy and polity. The key questions this study will attempt to answer are: first of all, what will be the relationship between the political nature of regime and its approach toward structural reforms in housing? (the speed and direction of reform and institutional-policy approach)

secondly, what will be the dialectics of institutional-policy approach and social-spatial changes and problems in public housing estates? (changes in urban spatial structure, residential landscape, public housing estates, tenant social composition, and all of its problems)

and thirdly, what will be the possible strategies to cope with the existing and speculated problems during the transition from the viewpoint of public intervention? (Urban Renewal VS Urban Rehabilitation). In order to answer these questions, this research will first look at the larger question of system transition and economic reform to understand the structural conditions affecting the national system changes and urban spatial changes. Then it will look at the historical example of each city of Beijing and Bucharest, with its background of national development, housing policy, and spatial changes in both socialist and postsocialist eras. It will then focus on the problems that have arisen out of the system transition/reform and try to provide solutions to the problems. At last, it will try to apply the lessons learned to the historical and current situation facing Pyongyangs public housing developments. The key lessons from the research are that for the public housing provision under transitional context: first of all, Pyongyangs change may more likely follow the path of Romania (Bucharest) than China (Beijing) both politically and economically due to the political nature of the regime change, with the decentralization of government powers by taking on more marketized roles

secondly, mass privatization, capitalization, and commodification of socialist public housing may result in problems of residential differentiation, social filtering, and gentrification of the city center

thirdly, quick privatization of housing assets in a form of public sale to sitting tenants may likely occur within the context of transfer of old communist powers and networks and restitution to former pre-socialist owners will be difficult

fourthly, there may be a sharp drop in the provision of social housing in the form of public and private rental housing against the backdrop of massive homeownership campaign with the resulting consequences of housing unit deterioration

fifthly, there may be a breakdown of workplace-residence proximity and the evolution of microdistricts (subdivision, gentrification, and gating) to take on new marketized functions while the middle and lower class groups will continually depend on these socialist public housing estates for their housing welfare

sixthly, the issue of incremental urban rehabilitation rather than large-scale urban renewal in the form of wholesale demolition and redevelopment may be more pressing for the lower-income households

and seventhly, there may be large migration of populations in and out of Pyongyang, resulting in migrant enclaves and shantytowns in inner city and peripheral locations and increasing pressure on social housing.