Project outline

CHINA 4.2 - How to be holistic?

Editor Neville Mars, Layout Lu Jia

Urban China Magazine; introduction

Post-Olympic visions for the hybrid market

Harmonizing the hybrid
Market capitalism in its purest form received a deathblow in 2008. Not because of the global economic melt-down, but because of the sudden erosion of its underlying ideology. Alan Greenspan, the oracle of the free market, conceded incompetence: “The idea of the last forty years, that the markets were best to regulate themselves was flawed [...] some of the critical pillars underlying market competition arguably, have failed”. In the months that followed stimulus packages took the world by storm. Words like bailout were uttered by the starkest economic conservatives, while American liberals suddenly opposed the idea of government spending fearing it might just line the pockets of those who corrupted the system in the first place. The world’s political financial logic turned upside down. The contradictions in the economic belief system brutally revealed themselves in sheer apathy. Billions of dollars were allocated to rescue the economy, but no clear objective to spend the money could be formulated.

Warnings
Much critique has also been raised about China’s 4.2 trillion RMB stimulus package. It might be too impulsive, difficult to implement and indeed too expensive at a time of a real-estate slow-down for local governments to cough up 3/4 of the sum. However, assuming the effectiveness of this measure, there is a more profound question we should raise. Why must an impressive 8% annual growth rate be upheld in the first place? This decade old concept aimed to artificially safeguard employment - and with it stability - flies in the face of China’s move to a market economy, moreover it contradicts the stated ambitions to prevent its economy from overheating. The task of this balancing act is undeniably daunting, yet it seems clear the central government will invariably opt for faster growth over a slow down. The extensive crisis in the West should provide a strong warning, yet fundamental questions about China’s future are still not addressed.

Unlearning modernity
A strong economy depends on fast urbanization. Yet many basic problems can be contributed to the accelerated pace of construction, ranging from housing shortage as a result of large-scale demolition policies to rampant speculation. After precisely 30 years of flash urbanization we need to ask if this is still a desired, even acceptable model. We need to assess the specific qualities of high-speed growth and the type of environments and society it produces. Unfortunately there are no precedents. We cannot evaluate the direction of this fast moving train based on the conditions it left behind 30 years ago. Nor can China determine its intended direction based on what other countries have achieved. In three decades the world has dramatically changed. Linear economic development along the lines of western industrial nations will no longer suffice. The minute interconnections between individual prosperity and collective (even global) progress have surfaced. This is true for the crises in the housing market, but equally for the augmenting environmental pressures felt particularly at an individual level in the emerging economies. So far government initiated urbanization has been an effective tool to offset mounting social tensions against bright new developments. In a magical show of central might the outside world (and China’s hinterland), were presented with the highest achievement of three decades of top-down planning and orchestration. For a month in August the air was clean, even the rain was controlled, but soon after smoggy clouds rolled back over Beijing. Similarly actions to tackle the post-Olympic slowdown were confronted with the harsh reality of a real-estate slum. The limits of artificial growth have been reached.

Preconditions
In addition to the strategic contradictions, there are plenty of practical challenges facing China’s stimulus package. But unlike Wall Street's demand for a blind check, at least China has been extremely precise in defining how it wants to allocate the money. The targets primed for investment range from society and livelihood (housing security, medical care and education), to infrastructure (rural infrastructure, the power grid, railways, highways and airports), the environment (ecological protection and water treatment), to post-disaster reconstruction. All are hands-on projects with a clear directive and purpose that should help give nuance to China’s ongoing development. This method of nation building, based on large-scale incentives coupled with a careful release of bottom-up entrepreneurialism has been the success formula from the beginning of the reform era. It is, for lack of a definition, the best way to describe the socialist market hybrid. With Western capitalism in disrepair China’s stimulus package presents a real opportunity to mindfully define the socialist market economy. But there is a precondition: that we consider and map how it will likely shape society and landscape.

One Nation, Two Forces
Unlike three decades ago, China’s map can no longer be approached as a tabula rasa*. Today, China’s economy - as any where else - is entirely interconnected with its urban geographic conditions. Unfortunately, the success of the socialist-market hybrid is increasingly at odds with the blurred rural-urban hybrid it produces. The new landscape is complex and dynamic; ill-suited to investments as a blunt listing of isolated objectives. Precisely the awe-inspiring gains that have been made, now dictate a shift towards coordinated spatial-economic planning. Parallel to the top-down economy and its planning apparatus a powerful bottom-up economy has generated a pervasive organic growth. Two worlds that fear each other, yet feed off each other. While China macro-plans its cities and icons, aggregated micro-projects expand the urban landscape in the form of more Market-driven Unintentional Development, or MUD* (as illustrated below).

Concealed reality
Observing MUD formations fractures the persistent beliefs in both the grass-roots city and the orchestrated landscape. At street level China's new urban realms look perfectly micro-planned while the same polished island developments at the scale of the region merge together to reveal macro-organic systems. The biggest challenge for China’s next phase is to consciously address these two forces as a single dynamic. This is difficult, not just because of the development speed, but because of the counterintuitive reality China is producing. Increasingly slick and superficially modern, the organic nature of its urbanization remains concealed. As a result policies and planning measures are rational only to the extent that they address what is seemingly in front of us today. Unresponsive to an inevitably different reality tomorrow they ultimately contribute to the problems. Spatially fragmented, socially divided the schisms that characterize China’s urban landscape widen. The window of opportunity is closing.

Defying patterns
While the building industry has evolved, tremendously accelerating its operations to meet the demand for new cities, a comprehensive design, research and education system needed to answer how best to produce the future landscape is still not in place. The components of China's cities are designed in days; the ensuing MUD configurations then fixed for decades. Yet the economy is no longer just a prerequisite for urbanization, instead urban patterns are increasingly shaping future economic potential. The long-term effects can hardly be overestimated. A comparison between the spatial constitution of American, Asian and European cities reveals the impact on energy use, productivity, creativity, even crime rates and happiness. Designing the city beyond the scale of the compound or development zone is becoming as difficult as harmonizing society itself.

But unlike the rest of the world, China can anticipate another three decades of growth; a unique opportunity to coordinate its scattered organic expansion. Embracing the dynamic nature of the city, density itself becomes an effective tool to streamline growth. We can still abandon the static and sterile layouts the state-market machine generates, if we encourage a free free market to adopt flexible urban frameworks - this is not just more sustainable but more investment-friendly in these turbulent times. Short-term economic growth might support stability, fast pace urbanization discourages developers and institutes alike to innovate and diversify, undermining the quality-driven competition we could expect as the real-estate market moves away from a suppliers’ market.

Roadmap
Any ambition to either support the economy or engineer the harmonious society hinges on our commitment to an holistic urban vision. Ironically, pre-Olympic Chinese planning can best be compared to Western medicine: fast and powerful in tackling isolated problems. Now half-way complete, post-Olympic China must start drawing on its own models, and switch from crude mega-project medication to a broader planning philosophy. This change is both urgent and drastic; its implementation needs to be both immediate and long-term. Designers can no longer hide behind the much vaunted excuse ‘endless flexibility is acceptable’ in order to survive in the Chinese market. While developers will need to accept that design is not drafting, and that the design the process is less a question of applying stylistic cues than a means to overcome the contradictions and hurdles that plague China’s development. All of us involved in the urbanization process are accomplices and we are all an integral part of the solution.

This issue of Urban China offers a roadmap to mark out a collective route to an alternative future. Based on the research by the Dynamic City Foundation and with contributions from designers and institutes from across the globe, we have produced a framework in which the individual ideas come together to form a larger conceptual patchwork. Step by step correlations are forged between the scales on which the city operates and between the components of China’s stimulus package. But be warned: it is not as straight-forward as join-the-dots, no longer as black and white as good and bad options. Instead, at every junction, we’ll need to think twice about short-term gains and long-term investment.

4万亿，如何把握大局=

二元制市场的后奥运愿景

和谐二元体

2008年，市场资本主义最单纯的形式遭受了致命一击。原因并非全球经济的崩溃，而是其基本意识形态受到突然冲蚀。艾伦·格林斯潘，自由市场的大哲人，承认了能力不足：“在过去40年，相信市场最好还是自我调控的观点是有误的……某些支撑市场竞争的关键支柱，可以说倒塌了”。之后数月，各种经济刺激方案席卷全球。最顽固的经济保守派大喊“救市”时，美国的自由派却突然反对政府大量开支，担心这只会让罪魁们中饱私囊。整个世界的政治金融逻辑瞬间颠倒。经济信仰体系的矛盾暴露。美国政府亦拨款数十亿拯救经济，却未有清楚的目标。

警告
中国4.2万亿经济刺激方案引来了大量争议。也许是太冲动、难以实施，而且让地方政府承担总预算的四分之三，在房地产业不景气的时刻未免牵强。然而，即使这一措施有效，我们仍需提出一个更深刻的问题——为什么一定要维持8％的GDP增长率？这一贯彻了十年之久的观念最初是为了人为地保障就业及社会稳定，却是违背市场经济原则、并与防止经济过热的目标相冲突。不可否认，维持平衡相当艰难，但很明显，中央政府将一如既往地选择更快增长而非放缓。波及西方世界的危机应该是有力的警告，但事关中国未来发展的根本问题却未涉及。

审视现代性
强大的经济倚赖于快速城市化。然而，建设的加速度导致了许多根本问题，从大规模拆迁所致的住房短缺到肆无忌惮的市场投机。当闪电式城市化已过而立之年，我们应该问，这是否仍是人们想要的、或者可被接受的模式。我们需要评估高速增长的质量，以及它塑造的社会。可惜并无先例。我们不能根据前30年的经验来预测这辆‘东方快车’的方向；中国也不能照搬其他已成功国家曾经的方向。30年间，世界已翻天覆地。西方工业国家的线性经济发展已经不够。个人财富和整体进步（甚至全球进步）之间的微妙关联已浮出水面。这不仅在危机突现的房地产市场、也在个体所承受的新兴经济上升的环境压力中表现出来。迄今为止，政府启动的城市化已成为一个有效工具，成功打消了新开发所加剧的社会对立情绪。在显中央神威的魔法秀中，摆在外国（和中国内陆）面前的是30年自上而下的规划与协调的最高成就。整个八月，空气清新，连雨水也受控，但不久后烟雾即滚滚回京。类似应对后奥运经济放缓的措施还遭遇了房地产市场的严峻现实。人为促增长的界限似乎已经到来。
前提Preconditions 除了战略性矛盾外，中国的经济刺激方案面临诸多现实的挑战。然而与华尔街只要空白支票不同，中国在界定这笔钱的拨配问题上非常明确。准备投资的领域包括从社会、民生（住房保障、医疗保健和教育）、基础设施建设（农村基础设施、电网、铁路、公路和机场）、环境（生态保护和水治理）到灾后重建。这些都是有明确方针和目标的实干工程，将为中国的发展带来一丝新变。这一国家建设的方法，是以大规模的刺激为基础、附加谨慎放行的自下而上的创业精神，而从改革伊始，这就被证明是成功的妙方。在没有更好定义的时候，社会主义与市场经济的二元体恐怕是最佳描述。当西方资本主义岌岌可危之时，中国的经济刺激方案提供了一次认真定义社会主义市场经济体制的良机。但这有一个前提：我们需要思考并追踪它将如何塑造社会与景观。

一国两力
迥异于30年前的是，中国地图不再是可任意作为的白板*。今天，中国的经济――与其他任何地方一样――与城市的地理条件完全关联。不幸的是，成功的社会主义－市场经济的二元体与它一手造成的界限模糊的城乡结合体越来越不融合。新的城市景观复杂多变；如规划只是排列组合孤立的项目，是与投资有先后不符的。我们需要空间－投资关系的协调规划。与自上而下的经济及其规划机制平行，一种强大的、自下而上的经济也在广泛而体系化地生长。尽管是两个遥远的世界，却彼此促进。当中国宏观规划着它的城市和形像，累加的微观项目也在扩张着城市景观，以市场化无序开发的形式，或者说MUD* （如下图所示）。
隐蔽的现实Concealed reality 观察MUD的构成会粉碎对草根城市与协调景观的坚定信仰。在街道层面，中国新城市空间被细致地规划得十分完美，而同样精致的孤岛型开发项目连绵成片，两者共同展现了宏观规划的有机体系。中国下一阶段的最大挑战就是如何自觉地将这两束力量汇成一股动力。这很困难，不仅因为发展的速度，更由于中国有悖常理的现实。与日俱增的华丽与貌似现代的外表，城市化的有机本质却被隐蔽。其结果是，政策和规划措施仅在特定范畴内合理，即今天我们所面对的问题。对明天将必然出现的情势却全无应对，他们终成了问题制造者。空间碎片化，社会分层化等中国城市景观的种种分立又加深了。机会之窗亦被关上。

界定形态
建筑业不断发展，疯狂地加速运转以满足新城市的需求，全面的融设计、研究及教育于一体、能创造未来景观的的系统却未出现。中国城市的组件寥寥数日即可设计出炉，但之后的MUD布局却要被固化数十年。经济不再是城市化的唯一前提，城市形态反而日益重要地塑造着经济潜力。其长期影响难以被高估。一项美洲、亚洲和欧洲城市空间构成的比较研究显示了它在能耗、生产力、创意甚至包括犯罪率和幸福感方面的作用。超越建筑群或开发区的范畴进行设计，与打造我们的和谐社会一样艰巨。

与世界其他地区不同，中国还可期待下一个30年的增长，以及唯一的机会去调合散点城市扩张的结果。接纳了城市的动态本质，密度便可成为让发展流畅的有效工具。我们依然可以放弃国家－市场机器安排的静态的、了无生气的布局，前提是我们鼓励一个（真正自由的）自由市场采纳灵活的城市框架――它不仅更具可持续性，在这个跌宕起伏的时代也更利于投资。短期的经济增长可能有助于稳定，快速城市化阻碍了开发商和类似机构进行革新、寻求多元，并破坏了质量导向的竞争。当房地产市场走出供方市场时，这本是我们的期待。

路线图
任何推动经济发展或让社会和谐的理想，其关键都在于我们对城市愿景的全局把握。讽刺的是，中国的前奥运规划好比西医：治疗单独病症时又快又猛。现在完成了一半，后奥运中国必须开始启用自己的模式，从粗糙的超大工程疗法转向更广泛的规划哲学。这个改变既紧迫又重大；既需即刻执行也需持之以恒。规划师不能再躲在“不能不无限妥协”这类借口背后，仅仅为了在中国市场立足。规划师必须承认，设计不是画草图，设计过程也不是选用哪种风格的问题，而是克服困扰中国式地产开发的一切固有矛盾与障碍。我们大家都是城市化进程的同谋，也是解决方案不可缺少的一分子。

本期《城市中国》的路线图为我们展示了通向另一种未来的道路集合。基于动态城市基金会的研究，以及来自世界各地设计师和机构的投稿，我们构建的框架让独立的点子汇聚成了一幅更大的概念拼图。 在城市运转的不同规模之间，在中国的经济刺激方案的各部分之间，关联性一点点被塑造。但要警告的是：这并不像连线游戏那样简单，它不再是黑与白、好与坏的选择。相反，在每一个交汇点上，我们都需要对短期收益和长期投资进行反复思量。

--
Ascertained hope

Mapping China’s urbanization, the problems often become daunting, but there are also moments of hope. The day after Chinese New Year I experienced such a moment in the smallest village in the hills of the Chongqing countryside. A humble new year’s lunch in the village restaurant had exhilarated me and my extended family. After many years in China it seemed like enjoying Chinese food for the first time. The fish, the meat and green, even the peppers and garlic were sweeter, juicer, more fragrant than I could remember tasting before. Praise to the experience and passion of the chef. But as the elderly lady was quick to reveal there was still another reason for these remarkable flavors. “Here the fish, the pigs and the plants are all happy” she explained. We learned Mr Ming Ke, the chef’s relative and entrepreneur of Caijiawan Village was engaged in setting up a farming collective based on “the traditional ways”, or what I would call progressive sustainable agriculture. A remarkable endeavor based on common sense and a grass-roots love for the environment that reveals ambitions at the top and bottom are sometimes perfectly aligned.

The central governments green ambitions are impressive, but like many plans have trouble trickling down the long chain of command. Only grass-roots efforts can truly bridge this gap, but they require a helping hand. Political incentives are by nature short-lived, and the Chinese system even accelerates operations and shortens their time-span. The patient approach crucial for sustainable projects is discouraged. In the words of this local pioneer “the government should set a strong example how to be green, and offer information and incentives for the rest to follow”.

-- 确知的希望Ascertained hope

追溯中国的城市化，其问题往往令人望而却步，但也总有充满希望的时刻。今年农历初二，我在重庆一个小山村就体验了这样的时刻。一顿简朴的年饭就让我和我的家人无比欣喜。 在中国已居数年，这却像是我第一次享受中国菜。鱼、肉、青菜甚至连辣椒大蒜都更鲜美多汁，比我记忆中所有的都更美味。对这次经历和那位大厨，我有太多溢美之词。但随后这位老太太就揭晓了菜色如此美味的另一个原因。“这里的鱼、猪和农作物都很快乐”，她解释说。我们了解到，大厨的亲戚也是蔡家湾村的企业家明科先生正在筹备以“传统方法”为基础的集约化农业，我更愿意称其为先进的可持续农业。一次基于常识的可贵实践以及一种草根的对环境的热爱，说明上层与基层的抱负有时也会呈完美一致。

中央政府的绿色抱负令人赞叹，但像许多计划一样，有指挥链过长、传导过慢的问题。惟有基层的努力才能真正弥合这一沟壑，但他们需要援助之手。政治激励先天注定只是昙花，而中国的体制更加速流程、缩短时限。有耐心的方法对可持续式项目至关重要，但却阻碍重重。引用这位当地先锋的话，“政府应该树立一个有力的榜样告诉我们怎么绿色发展，并为效仿的人们提供信息和奖励才对。”