Is Poverty Concentrated in Shanghai? Spatial Patterns in Social Housing and Their Implications for Social Equality in Chinese Cities

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for the opportunity to read the paper "Does the poverty concentrate in Shanghai? – Spatial patterns of social housing and its implications for social equality in Chinese cities".

 

Review.

- The paper touches on a important topic concerning to social housing and poverty hotspots in Shanghai, China.

- I found this paper well written.

- The title is suitable for the paper and the abstract is good and clear.

- The introduction/theoretical part is in accordance with the main theme.

- I found the Literature review, section 2, well written and I believe well developed.

- The methodology section is adequately explained.

- The final findings and remarks are interesting. 

- I think the paper could be improved if the authors developed a few more ideas in the “conclusions”. That section is not very in-depth compared to the others.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your time involved in reviewing the manuscript and your very encouraging comments on the merits.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors:

Thank you for the opportunity to read the paper "Does the poverty concentrate in Shanghai? – Spatial patterns of social housing and its implications for social equality in Chinese cities".

We also appreciate your clear and detailed feedback and hope that the explanation has fully addressed all of your concerns. In the remainder of this letter, we discuss each of your comments individually along with our corresponding responses.

To facilitate this discussion, we first retype your comments in italic font and then present our responses to the comments.

Comment:

I think the paper could be improved if the authors developed a few more ideas in the “conclusions”. That section is not very in-depth compared to the others.

Response:

We reorganize the conclusion part. First, we answer the three questions addressed in introduction part. Second, we offer some policy recommendations in aspects of deconcentrating poverty, specifying policy regulations, constructing urban amenities, and accepting public opinions. We supplement some examples into the recommendation ‘construct urban amenities in broader regions of the city’. Moreover, we propose that in order to promote the quality of housing, local authorities should take public opinions into consideration in the process of policy making.

Finally, we would like to take this opportunity to thank you for all your time involved and this great opportunity for us to improve the manuscript. We hope you will find this revised version satisfactory.

Sincerely,

Yuan Li, Xin Feng

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper is presenting an interesting study on examining whether the low-to-moderate income populations concentrated citywide and how things changed in a given period, in order to understand the social inequality issues in urban China. The study employed multiple approaches to understand the spatial distribution and concentration patterns of social housing in Shanghai from 2008 to 2020. It is a complete work and timely research with extensive literature review and comprehensive analyses providing new contributions to the body of knowledge in the associated field.

1. What is the main question addressed by the research?

The main question addressed by this research is as the tile states; Does the poverty concentrate in Shanghai? – Spatial patterns of social housing and its implications for social equality in Chinese cities…

2. What parts do you consider original or relevant for the field? What specific gap in the field does the paper address?

This study conducted a system examination of the spatial patterns of social housing across Shanghai in the period of regulating housing market and emphasizing housing security system from 2008 to 2020, which is considered original and relevant to the field, as well as addressing such specific gaps in the particular field.

3. What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?

The article examines whether the low-to-moderate income populations concentrated citywide and how things changed in a given period (2008-2020), in order to understand the social inequality issues in urban China where Shanghai is chosen as a case study, while most studies out there on poverty concentration is mostly conducted in developed countries, especially in the United States, the United Kingdom and the Continental Europe.

4. What specific improvements should the authors consider regarding the methodology? What further controls should be considered?

The work is already comprehensive and complete, well written and organised. The methodology is sound and explained in great detail so no further improvements necessary.

5. Please describe how the conclusions are or are not consistent with the evidence and arguments presented. Please also indicate if all main questions posed were addressed and by which specific experiments.

Yes, the conclusions are consistent with the evidence and arguments presented.

6. Are the references appropriate?

Yes, they are appropriate and sufficient.

7. Please include any additional comments on the tables and figures and quality of the data.

Both the tables and figures included are clear and sufficient.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your time involved in reviewing the manuscript and your very encouraging comments on the merits.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors:

The paper is presenting an interesting study on examining whether the low-to-moderate income populations concentrated citywide and how things changed in a given period, in order to understand the social inequality issues in urban China. The study employed multiple approaches to understand the spatial distribution and concentration patterns of social housing in Shanghai from 2008 to 2020. It is a complete work and timely research with extensive literature review and comprehensive analyses providing new contributions to the body of knowledge in the associated field.

Finally, we would like to take this opportunity to thank you for all your time involved and this great opportunity for us to improve the manuscript. We hope you will find this revised version satisfactory.

Sincerely,

Yuan Li, Xin Feng

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study uses spatial data on subsidised housing in Shanghai from 2008-2020 to examine changes in the pattern of concentration of low- and middle-income groups, focusing on how poverty is concentrated in cities. The article has a novel research perspective and is of practical significance. However, the article still has some shortcomings:

1, the data of the article partly refer to the data of the real estate agency shell website, the data selection lacks authority, and it is suggested that the author use the crawler to select more authoritative data for the reference of the research.

2, the authors in the selection of variables in the variables are not representative or lack of other significant variables and other endogenous problems, for example, in the measurement of social and economic characteristics of high and low social housing agglomeration in the region through the demographic characteristics of the population, the urban spatial structure, accessibility and affordability, etc., there may be a more suitable target for the measurement of the independent variables for inclusion in the considerations.

3. The article only discusses the problem of poverty concentration in cities on behalf of Shanghai, and it is difficult to extend it to all provinces in China, in which the problem of regional heterogeneity is difficult to be avoided, and it is suggested that the authors select appropriate panel data to study the phenomenon of poverty in other provinces in the future.

The article does not take into account the endogeneity of policies when studying the role of policies, and it is suggested that the authors increase the discussion of this part of the study.

5. The policy recommendations in the article are too concise, and it is suggested that the authors make further modifications.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

6. The language of the article still needs to be further modified.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your time involved in reviewing the manuscript and your very encouraging comments on the merits.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors:

This study uses spatial data on subsidised housing in Shanghai from 2008-2020 to examine changes in the pattern of concentration of low- and middle-income groups, focusing on how poverty is concentrated in cities. The article has a novel research perspective and is of practical significance. However, the article still has some shortcomings.

We also appreciate your clear and detailed feedback and hope that the explanation has fully addressed all of your concerns. In the remainder of this letter, we discuss each of your comments individually along with our corresponding responses.

To facilitate this discussion, we first retype your comments in italic font and then present our responses to the comments.

Comment 1:

the data of the article partly refer to the data of the real estate agency shell website, the data selection lacks authority, and it is suggested that the author use the crawler to select more authoritative data for the reference of the research.

Response 1:

We access the data of Shanghai Statistical Yearbook 2020 as a reference. In section 3.2 Data sources, the comparison of data between real estate agency shell website and Shanghai government website indicates that data from shell website is accurate and qualified to reveal real situation of housing construction in Shanghai.

Comment 2:

the authors in the selection of variables in the variables are not representative or lack of other significant variables and other endogenous problems, for example, in the measurement of social and economic characteristics of high and low social housing agglomeration in the region through the demographic characteristics of the population, the urban spatial structure, accessibility and affordability, etc., there may be a more suitable target for the measurement of the independent variables for inclusion in the considerations.

Response 2:

We supplement three independent variables in Table. 1 and Table. 4: Density of schools, Density of commercial facilities, and Density of entertainment facilities. These three variables can furthermore depict the environment surrounding the social housing, and then the Mann-Whitney U test reflect the disparities between residents in the social housing and those in other types of urban housing.

Comment 3:

The article only discusses the problem of poverty concentration in cities on behalf of Shanghai, and it is difficult to extend it to all provinces in China, in which the problem of regional heterogeneity is difficult to be avoided, and it is suggested that the authors select appropriate panel data to study the phenomenon of poverty in other provinces in the future.

Response 3:

We add one paragraph in the final stage of this article to give advices for the future research. Owing to the regional heterogeneity, we might utilize the panel data from other cities such as Nanjing, Wuhan, Lanzhou et al., to study the phenomenon of poverty concentration. The series of research in different cities is expected to constitute a panorama with regards to housing for the poor in urban China.

Comment 4:

The article does not take into account the endogeneity of policies when studying the role of policies, and it is suggested that the authors increase the discussion of this part of the study.

Response 4:

We make a further explanation in the Discussion. Since the construction of social housing is a top-down process in the Chinese context, the policy plays the most crucial role in it. The housing security system in Shanghai has gradually transformed from CRH to a multi-level system since 2008, therefore the quantity issue is the priority from the perspective of local government. The Table. 5 indicates that local authorities placed greater emphasis on the quantity of social housing rather than their locations, albeit with some vague regulations.

Comment 5:

The policy recommendations in the article are too concise, and it is suggested that the authors make further modifications.

Response 5:

We provide some policy recommendations in the Conclusions from aspects of deconcentrating poverty, specifying policy regulations, constructing urban amenities, and accepting public opinions. We supplement some examples into the recommendation ‘construct urban amenities in broader regions of the city’. Moreover, we propose that in order to promote the quality of housing, local authorities should take public opinions into consideration in the process of policy making.

Comment 6:

The language of the article still needs to be further modified.

Response 6:

We have used the English editing service from MDPI.

Finally, we would like to take this opportunity to thank you for all your time involved and this great opportunity for us to improve the manuscript. We hope you will find this revised version satisfactory.

Sincerely,

Yuan Li, Xin Feng

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper deals with very important and topical issues such as the poverty, social housing and city layout.

Generally, the paper is well-prepared; however, I find some drawbacks which should be corrected before publication:

1.     1. The paper is based on an implicit assumption that poverty (monetary poverty) equals social housing and thus spatial pattern of social housing specifies poverty concentration. However, in the paper there isn’t presented any scientific justification of such an assumption. It is necessary to either discuss such connections (basing on the literature) or avoid too wide generalization of the issue of social housing into poverty or social equity (which requires i.e., correction of the title). Such misleading identification is strongly visible i.e. in lines 465-466, where authors meaning reallocation of social housing write that “low-to-moderate income groups have relocated” (by the way “low” income is only one from many indicators of a multidimensional phenomenon of poverty).

2.     2. The paper would have gained value if the system of social housing used in the city of Shanghai was described. A separate paragraph could be devoted to an explanation of the system of provision of social housing (e.g. who is responsible for the task, what are the criteria used to apply for and rules for distribution the rights to social housing among people and in the city space and so on). It is possible that such a description could, to some extent, explain the association between low income (monetary poverty) and social housing.

3.    3.  The contribution of the study to the literature should be presented already in the Introduction (instead of point 2.2 – lines 178-192).

4.     4. Some variables expressing socioeconomic characteristics of spatial units are presented in table 1 and classified into “types” (demographic, urban spatial structure, accessibility, affordability) – however, it is not explained what criteria were used to classify variables into each type. It is difficult to understand the choices, e.g. why density of road network is in “urban spatial structure”, while “density of metro stations” is in “accessibility” and so on. Moreover, the authors mention about education as an important socioeconomic feature influencing housing, but this factor is not taken into account in the analytical framework. By the way, the “types” (dimensions) are not analyzed later as well, but only the individual indicators, what puts some doubts about purposefulness of such classification. Please, consider adding analyses of the dimensions.

5.     5. Section 4.1 presents results of LISA clusters; however it is not explained and interpreted what some associations mean (e.g. High – High; Low – Low and so on). Also in the methodological section (3.1.1) there are no indices about possible interpretation of the outcomings.

6.     6. Section 4.2 presents some intervals of LQ; however there are not proportionately. Please, explain why those unequal intervals were used.

7.    7.  Please, correct some minor technical mistakes (e.g. Tab.4: Mann-Whgitney, Land prices: 36,.9; line 444: 73]]; line 465: out instead of our)

Despite the shortcomings mentioned above, the paper is interesting and can be published after considering the remarks.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your time involved in reviewing the manuscript and your very encouraging comments on the merits.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors:

The paper deals with very important and topical issues such as the poverty, social housing and city layout.

Generally, the paper is well-prepared; however, I find some drawbacks which should be corrected before publication.

 

We also appreciate your clear and detailed feedback and hope that the explanation has fully addressed all of your concerns. In the remainder of this letter, we discuss each of your comments individually along with our corresponding responses.

To facilitate this discussion, we first retype your comments in italic font and then present our responses to the comments.

Comment 1:

The paper is based on an implicit assumption that poverty (monetary poverty) equals social housing and thus spatial pattern of social housing specifies poverty concentration. However, in the paper there isn’t presented any scientific justification of such an assumption. It is necessary to either discuss such connections (basing on the literature) or avoid too wide generalization of the issue of social housing into poverty or social equity (which requires i.e., correction of the title). Such misleading identification is strongly visible i.e. in lines 465-466, where authors meaning reallocation of social housing write that “low-to-moderate income groups have relocated” (by the way “low” income is only one from many indicators of a multidimensional phenomenon of poverty).

Response 1:

We make a further explanation in the Introduction part for the relationship between the social housing and the residents in it. In Shanghai only individuals or households with Shanghai Hukou or in some cases with residence permit have the chance to apply for social housing. Generally, people with Hukou are considered as an invulnerable group in urban China. However, our study focuses on the vulnerable part of this group. Despite with Hukou, they have little space to live in owing to their low incomes, and therefore they are beneficiaries of housing security system.

Comment 2:

The paper would have gained value if the system of social housing used in the city of Shanghai was described. A separate paragraph could be devoted to an explanation of the system of provision of social housing (e.g. who is responsible for the task, what are the criteria used to apply for and rules for distribution the rights to social housing among people and in the city space and so on). It is possible that such a description could, to some extent, explain the association between low income (monetary poverty) and social housing.

Response 2:

We add one paragraph in the Introduction part to explain the provision of social housing. In Shanghai it is built by the local government managed by Shanghai Housing Management Bureau. Only individuals or households under certain standards of income and living space are qualified to apply for the social housing. Therefore, in most cases the residents in the social housing are low-to-moderate income groups.

Comment 3:

The contribution of the study to the literature should be presented already in the Introduction (instead of point 2.2 – lines 178-192).

Response 3:

The paragraph of contributions has been moved from Literature review part to Introduction part, following the explanation of provision of social housing in Shanghai.

Comment 4:

Some variables expressing socioeconomic characteristics of spatial units are presented in table 1 and classified into “types” (demographic, urban spatial structure, accessibility, affordability) – however, it is not explained what criteria were used to classify variables into each type. It is difficult to understand the choices, e.g. why density of road network is in “urban spatial structure”, while “density of metro stations” is in “accessibility” and so on. Moreover, the authors mention about education as an important socioeconomic feature influencing housing, but this factor is not taken into account in the analytical framework. By the way, the “types” (dimensions) are not analyzed later as well, but only the individual indicators, what puts some doubts about purposefulness of such classification. Please, consider adding analyses of the dimensions.

Response 4:

We classified variables into four types in order to make them more understandable. However it seems to confuse readers. We add three variables including Density of schools into Table. 1, and remove the “types” (dimensions). It will not change the results of analysis.

Comment 5:

Section 4.1 presents results of LISA clusters; however it is not explained and interpreted what some associations mean (e.g. High – High; Low – Low and so on). Also in the methodological section (3.1.1) there are no indices about possible interpretation of the outcomings.

Response 5:

We supplement explanations for LISA clusters in section 4.1. For the High-High, Low-Low, High-Low, and Low-High, we explain their meanings in the description of Figure 4.

Comment 6:

Section 4.2 presents some intervals of LQ; however there are not proportionately. Please, explain why those unequal intervals were used.

Response 6:

We choose a broadly acceptable intervals- the Jenks natural breaks classification to replace the unequal intervals previously used. This method is able to guarantee the maximum disparities between different intervals. The revision will result in slight differences among the intervals of values in different study years, but it will not affect the analysis on social housing agglomerations.

Comment 7:

Please, correct some minor technical mistakes (e.g. Tab.4: Mann-Whgitney, Land prices: 36,.9; line 444: 73]]; line 465: out instead of our)

Response 7:

We have corrected the technical mistakes.

Finally, we would like to take this opportunity to thank you for all your time involved and this great opportunity for us to improve the manuscript. We hope you will find this revised version satisfactory.

Sincerely,

Yuan Li, Xin Feng

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript has been well revised and is recommended for acceptance.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The manuscript has been well revised and is recommended for acceptance.