The formation logic and governance transition of slums: Lessons for urban village renewal

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2026.10.20250648

Abstract

Abstract:

The growth and upgrading of global slums represent one of the most pressing challenges for sustainable urban development in the 21st century. This paper clarifies the conceptual nuances of "slums" across different contexts, synthesizes theoretical explanations for their formation and persistence, and critically analyzes the logic, models, and outcomes of diverse slum upgrading strategies. Key findings include: ① Slum is an umbrella term encompassing varied meanings and categories across developmental contexts, yet remains universally stigmatized. ② Slums emerge not merely from insufficient industrialization or urbanization but persist due to complex local economic, political, and social drivers, indicating they will not vanish spontaneously with development. ③ Slum upgrading has evolved from bulldozer clearances to in-situ redevelopment and tenure security—reflecting a paradigm shift from space-oriented aesthetics to human-centered spatial justice in urban renewal. Historical lessons from global slum upgrading offer five insights for China's urban village renewal:① Space constitutes both physical sites and materialized social relations. Clearance fails to resolve social conflicts.② Resident agency must be prioritized through participatory upgrading.③ Partial property rights empower self-driven improvement.④ Caution should be exercised in managing the negative demonstration effects of regeneration, and in exploring diversified compensation mechanisms.⑤ Attention should be paid to the sustainability of the projects to avoid stalled renovations.

Key words: urban renewal, slums, informal settlements, urban villages, sustainable development

摘要：

世界贫民窟的增长与改善是21世纪全球城市可持续发展最紧迫的问题之一。本文在辨析贫民窟概念基础上，梳理贫民窟形成与存续的理论解释，重点分析了贫民窟不同改造策略的逻辑、模式和效果。主要结论如下：①贫民窟是一个集合概念，在不同发展语境下包括不同的含义和类别，但无论何种语境，贫民窟均受到污名化。②贫民窟不单是工业化和城市化不足的产物，其存续还受到当地经济、政治、社会等多种因素的驱动，这意味着贫民窟并不会简单地随经济发展而自然消失。③贫民窟改造经历了从“推土机式”清除到原地改造再到使用权保障的演变，这个变化体现了城市更新从注重物质环境改造的空间美学向注重人本主义的空间正义的理念转变。国外贫民窟改造的历史经验为城中村更新提供了5点启示：空间既是物理场所，也是社会关系的物质载体，清除行动无法解决社会矛盾；重视居民的主体性，发挥居民参与改造的作用；探索产权保障制度创新，激发居民自主改造的意愿和行动；慎重对待改造的负面“示范效应”，探索多元化补偿机制；关注改造可持续性，防止改造烂尾。

关键词: 城市更新, 贫民窟, 非正规聚落, 城中村, 可持续发展

Gengzhi HUANG, Xuesong YUAN, Jinnan QUE. The formation logic and governance transition of slums: Lessons for urban village renewal[J]. World Regional Studies, 2026, 35(10): 1-17.

黄耿志, 袁雪松, 阙槿楠. 贫民窟的形成逻辑、治理变迁与城中村更新借鉴[J]. 世界地理研究, 2026, 35(10): 1-17.

Figures/Tables 4

References 82

[1]	United Nations. Tracking Improvement in the Lives of Slum Dwellers Technical Report: Participatory Slum Upgrading Programme. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme, 2016: 1-98.
[2]	United Nations. World Cities Report 2020: The Value of Sustainable Urbanization. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme, 2020: 1377.
[3]	United Nations Human Settlements Programme. Second session of the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III): Conference proceedings (Distr.: Limited). Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme, 2023.
[4]	叶裕民,田光明,仝德.中国式现代化与超大特大城市城中村改造.规划师,2024,40(03):152-159.
	YE Y, TIAN G, TONG D. Chinese-style modernization and urban village redevelopment in megacities and super-large cities. Planners, 2024, 40(03): 152-159.
[5]	GEDDES P. Cities in Evolution: An Introduction to the Town Planning Movement and to the Study of Civics. London: Williams & Norgate, 1915.
[6]	JACOBS J. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Vintage Books, 1961.
[7]	TURNER J. Autoconstrucción: Por una autonomía del habitar. Escritos sobre vivienda, urbanismo, autogestión y holismo:Pepitas de calabaza, 2018. [TURNER J.Self-construction: Towards an autonomy of dwelling. Writings on housing, urbanism, self-management, and holism: Pepitas de calabaza, 2018.]
[8]	KAMALIPOUR H. Improvising places: The fluidity of space in informal settlements. Sustainability, 2020, 12(6): 2293.
[9]	AGNEW J A. Slums, ghettos, and urban marginality. Urban Geography, 2010, 31(2): 144-147.
[10]	United States Congress. Housing Act of 1949: Pub. L. No. 81-171, 63 Stat. 413. (1949-07-15)[2026-10-21]. .
[11]	JONES B. Slum clearance, privatization and residualization: The practices and politics of council housing in mid-twentieth-century England. Twentieth Century British History, 2010, 21(4): 510-539.
[12]	TCHUMKAM H. Of slums and banlieues: Spaciality and hopelessness in contemporary France. Impossibilia-Revista Internacional de Estudios Literarios, 2020, 19: 72–92.
[13]	DIDERO M. Cairo's informal waste collectors: A multi-scale and conflict sensitive perspective on sustainable livelihoods. ERDKUNDE, 2012, 66(1): 27-44.
[14]	VENKATACHALAM L. Informal water markets and willingness to pay for water: A case study of the urban poor in Chennai City, India. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 2014, 31(1): 134–145.
[15]	CLARK S, MADHAVAN S, COTTON C, et al. Who helps single mothers in Nairobi? The role of kin support. Journal of Marriage and Family, 2017, 79: 1186-1204.
[16]	ARIAS E. The dynamics of criminal governance: Networks and social order in Rio de Janeiro. Journal of Latin American Studies, 2006, 38(2): 293-325.
[17]	United Nations. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2001 Revision: Data tables and highlights. New York: United Nations Human Settlements Programme, 2002: 1-190.
[18]	Bank World, United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat). Cities alliance for cities without slums: Action plan for moving slum upgrading to scale. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank/UNCHS (Habitat), 2013.
[19]	United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT). The challenge of slums: Global report on human settlements. London: Earthscan, 2003.
[20]	SIBYAN I A. Rethinking slum planning: A comparative study of slum upgrading projects. Journal of Regional and City Planning, 2020, 31(1): 1-11.
[21]	KIM K. The role of mobile money in improving the financial inclusion of Nairobi's urban poor. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 2020, 12(7): 855-865.
[22]	郑文升,金玉霞,王晓芳,等.城市低收入住区治理与克服城市贫困——基于对深圳"城中村"和老工业基地城市"棚户区"的分析.城市规划,2007,31(05):52-56.
	ZHENG W, JIN Y, WANG X, et al. Urban low-income residence improvement and urban antipoverty. City Planning Review, 2007, 31(05): 52-56.
[23]	WEBSTER C, WU F, ZHANG F, et al. Informality, property rights, and poverty in China's "favelas". World Development, 2016, 78: 461-476.
[24]	陈果,顾朝林,吴缚龙.南京城市贫困空间调查与分析.地理科学,2004,24(05):542-549.
	CHEN G, GU C, WU F. Spatial analysis of urban poverty in Nanjing. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2004, 24(05): 542-549.
[25]	李培林.巨变:村落的终结——都市里的村庄研究.中国社会科学,2002(1):168-179.
	LI P. Great transformation: The end of villages-- A study of the villages located in southern urban China. Social Sciences in China, 2002 (1): 168-179.
[26]	魏立华,阎小培.中国经济发达地区城市非正式移民聚居区——"城中村"的形成与演进——以珠江三角洲诸城市为例.管理世界,2005(08):48-57.
	WEI L, YAN X. Urban informal migrant settlements in economically developed areas of China: The formation and evolution of "urban villages"—— Cases of cities in the Pearl River Delta. Management World, 2005(08): 48-57.
[27]	梁小薇,袁奇峰.珠三角商贸型城中村的领域政治——基于广州市中大布匹市场区的案例研究.城市规划,2018,42(05):39-46.
	LIANG X, YUAN Q. Territorial politics of commercial urban villages in the Pearl River Delta: A case study of the Zhongda fabric market district in Guangzhou. City Planning Review, 2018, 42(05): 39-46.
[28]	CELHAY P, UNDURRAGA R. Location preferences and slums formation: Evidence from a panel of residence histories. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 2022, 97: 103816.
[29]	Britain Great. Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act, 2012. London: The Stationery Office, 2012.
[30]	PARKER C. Tent city: Patterns of informality and the partitioning of sacramento. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 2020, 44(4): 704-719.
[31]	ORAM N. Towns in Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965.
[32]	CHOGUILL C. New Communities for Urban Squatters: Lessons from the Plan that Failed in Dhaka, Bangladesh. New York: Plenum Press, 1987.
[33]	STRUYK R, HOFFMAN M, KATSURA H. The Market for Housing in Indonesian Cities. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press, 1990.
[34]	SEELEY J. The slum: Its nature, use, and users. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1959, 25(2): 89-92.
[35]	SARKAR A. Informal water vendors and the urban poor: Evidence from a Nairobi slum. Water International, 2020, 45(5): 443-457.
[36]	RESNICK D. Opposition parties and the urban poor in African democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 2012, 45(11): 1351-1378.
[37]	BENJAMIN S. Touts, pirates and ghosts//SARAI. Sarai reader: Bare acts. New Delhi: Sarai Centre for the Study of Culture, 2005.
[38]	ROY A. Slum-free cities of the Asian century. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 2014, 35(1): 136-150.
[39]	HOME R. Of Planting and Planning: The Making of British Colonial Cities. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2013.
[40]	FOX S. The political economy of slums: Theory and evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. World Development, 2014, 54: 191-203.
[41]	PAYNE G. Getting ahead of the game: A twin-track approach to improving existing slums and reducing the need for future slums. Environment and Urbanization, 2005, 17(1): 135-146.
[42]	SINHAROY S S, PITTUCK R, CLASEN T. Review of drivers and barriers of water and sanitation policies for urban informal settlements in low-income and middle-income countries. Utilities Policy, 2019, 60: 100957.
[43]	CHOWDHURY F K, RAHMAN S Z. Slums and entrepreneurship as an impact of urban poverty and social exclusion in Dhaka, Bangladesh. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 2023, 19(4): 502-519.
[44]	SUBBARAMAN R, NOLAN L, SHITOLE T, et al. The psychological toll of slum living in Mumbai, India: A mixed methods study. Social Science & Medicine, 2014, 119: 155-169.
[45]	HARRIS R, GILES C. A mixed message: The agents and forms of international housing policy, 1945-1973. Habitat International, 2003, 27(3): 167-191.
[46]	CHADWICK E. Report on an Inquiry into the Sanitary Condition of the Labouring Population of Great Britain. London: Commissioners of Health Office, 1848.
[47]	BOOTH C. Life and Labour of the People in London. London; New York: Macmillan, 1902.
[48]	HOWARD E. Garden Cities of Tomorrow. London: Swan Sonnenschein & Co., 1898.
[49]	RIIS J. The Battle with the Slum . New York: Macmillan, 1902.
[50]	GREAT BRITAIN. Housing, Town Planning, &c. Act, 1919. London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1919.
[51]	ATKINSON G A. Mass housing in rapidly developing tropical areas. Town Planning Review, 1960, 31(2): 85-102
[52]	VARMAN R, VIJAY D. Dispossessing vulnerable consumers: Derealization, desubjectification, and violence. Marketing Theory, 2018, 18(3): 307-326.
[53]	BARDHAN R, SUNIKKA-BLANK M, HAQUE A N. Sentiment analysis as a tool for gender mainstreaming in slum rehabilitation housing management in Mumbai, India. Habitat International, 2019, 92: 102040.
[54]	GANS H J. Urban Villagers: Group and Class in the Life of Italian-Americans. New York: Free Press, 1962.
[55]	HARRINGTON M. The Other America: Poverty in the United States. New York: Macmillan, 1962.
[56]	ANDERSON M. The Federal Bulldozer: Clearances, Renewal, and Urban Development Policy Since 1949. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1964.
[57]	LOSSIER J-G. International survey of programmes of social development. Revue Internationale de la Croix-Rouge, 1957, 39(462): 350-351.
[58]	SHAN G, SHIVANAND S. (Un)Settling the city: Analysing displacement in Delhi from 1990 to 2007. Economic and Political Weekly, 2013, 48(13): 54-61.
[59]	MANGIN W. Latin American squatter settlements: A problem and a solution. Latin American Research Review, 1967, 2(3): 65-98.
[60]	ABRAMS C. Man's Struggle for Shelter in an Urbanizing World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1964.
[61]	PATEL K. A successful slum upgrade in Durban: a case of formal change and informal continuity. Habitat International, 2013, 40: 211-217.
[62]	WEST S E, BOWYER C J, APONDO W, et al. Using a co-created transdisciplinary approach to explore the complexity of air pollution in informal settlements. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 2021, 8: 285.
[63]	DAVIS M. Planet of Slums. London: Verso, 2006.
[64]	HARVEY D. Social Justice and the City. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1973.
[65]	NIJMAN J. Against the odds: slum rehabilitation in neoliberal Mumbai. Cities, 2008, 25(2): 73-85.
[66]	TURNER J. Housing priorities, settlement patterns, and urban development in modernizing countries. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 1968, 34(6): 354-363.
[67]	DE SOTO H. The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else. New York: Basic Books, 2003.
[68]	KIM H S, YOON Y, MUTINDA M. Secure land tenure for urban slum-dwellers: A conjoint experiment in Kenya. Habitat International, 2019, 93: 102048.
[69]	MINNERY J, ARGO T, WINARSO H, et al. Slum upgrading and urban governance: case studies in three South East Asian cities. Habitat International, 2013, 39: 162-169.
[70]	PORIO E, CRISOL C. Property rights, security of tenure and the urban poor in Metro Manila. Habitat International, 2004, 28(2): 203-219.
[71]	ABDILLAH K, MANAF A, AWANG A, et al. The application of temporary occupation license in providing land tenure security: The need for a human development approach. Geografia-Malaysian Journal of Society & Space, 2022, 18(2): 90-102.
[72]	BASILE P, EHLENZ M M. Examining responses to informality in the Global South: A framework for community land trusts and informal settlements. Habitat International, 2020, 96: 102108.
[73]	李立勋.城中村的经济社会特征——以广州市典型城中村为例.北京规划建设,2005(03):34-37.
	LI L. Economic and social characteristics of urban villages: A case study of typical urban villages in Guangzhou. Beijing City Planning & Construction Review, 2005(03): 34-37.
[74]	闫小培,魏立华,周锐波.快速城市化地区城乡关系协调研究——以广州市"城中村"改造为例.城市规划,2004,28(03):30-38.
	YAN X, WEI L, ZHOU R. Research on the coordination between urban and rural areas in the rapid urbanization with the redevelopment of Guangzhou village-amid-the-city as a case. City Planning Review, 2004, 28(03): 30-38.
[75]	中共广州市委办公厅,广州市人民政府办公厅. 关于"城中村"改制工作的若干意见: 穗办〔2002〕 17号, 2002-05-24.
	General Office of the CPC Guangzhou Municipal Committee, General Office of the Guangzhou Municipal People's Government. Several opinions on the restructuring of "urban villages" (Sui Ban [2002] No. 17.), 2002-05-24.
[76]	魏立华,闫小培."城中村":存续前提下的转型——兼论"城中村"改造的可行性模式.城市规划,2005,29(7):9-13.
	WEI L, YAN X. Transformation of "urban village" and feasible mode. City Planning Review, 2005, 29(7): 9-13.
[77]	吴智刚,周素红.城中村改造:政府、城市与村民利益的统一——以广州市文冲城中村为例.城市发展研究,2005,12(02):48-53.
	WU Z, ZHOU S. Urban village redevelopment: Unifying the interests of government, city and villagers——A case study of Wenchong urban village in Guangzhou. Urban Development Studies, 2005, 12(02): 48-53.
[78]	叶裕民.特大城市包容性城中村改造理论架构与机制创新——来自北京和广州的考察与思考.城市规划,2015,39(08):9-23.
	YE Y. Theoretical framework and mechanism innovation of the inclusive urban village reconstruction in Chinese megacities: Study and reflections on Beijing and Guangzhou. City Planning Review, 2015, 39(08): 9-23.
[79]	谭肖红,袁奇峰,吕斌.城中村改造村民参与机制分析——以广州市猎德村为例.热带地理,2012,32(06):618-625.
	TAN X, YUAN Q, LYU B. Analysis of the participation mechanism of villagers in urban village reconstruction: A case study of Liede Village in Guangzhou. Tropical Geography, 2012, 32(06): 618-625.
[80]	深圳市人民政府办公厅. 深圳市城中村综合整治项目投资管理暂行办法. 深府办〔2009〕 74号, 2009-06-18.
	General Office of the Shenzhen Municipal People's Government. Interim measures for the investment management of comprehensive renovation projects of urban villages in Shenzhen (Shen Fu Ban [2009] No.74), 2009-06-18.
[81]	赖亚妮,郑耀贤.城市更新背景下拆除重建和综合整治城中村改造实施效果评价与比较分析——基于村民和租户的视角.自然资源学报,2025,40(01):211-230.
	LAI Y, ZHENG Y. Evaluation and comparative analysis of the renewal implementation effect of demolition-reconstruction and comprehensive renovation in the context of urban renewal: Based on perspectives from villagers and tenants. Journal of Natural Resources, 2025, 40(01): 211-230.
[82]	黄耿志,李郇,张文忠,等.高质量发展转型背景下的中国城市更新:挑战与路径.自然资源学报,2025,40(01):1-19.
	HUANG G, LI X, ZHANG W, et al. Urban renewal in China with the transition to high-quality development: Challenges and paths. Journal of Natural Resources, 2025, 40(01): 1-19.

策略		清除	原地改造	使用权保障
产生背景		现代化思潮下认为贫民窟是城市病灶	实践失败的总结与人本主义思潮的兴起	土地非法性问题、产权正规化局限
改造模式		驱逐式	基础设施改善	临时许可
		驱逐式	整体升级	统一租赁
		移居式	整体升级	统一租赁
		移居式	非物质手段	权属信托
改造效果	正面效果	1）完全正规化 2）消除极端风险隐患 3）释放土地价值	1）改善物质环境 2）成本较低 3）居民适应性高	1）减少社会矛盾 2）避免产权纠纷与绅士化 3）避免权力寻租
改造效果	负面效果	1）破坏社会网络 2）居民难以安置 3）易催生新贫民窟	1）绅士化风险 2）延续社会不公 3）可持续性风险	1）易排斥租户与新移民 2）阻碍居民获得土地价值

策略		清除	原地改造	使用权保障
产生背景		现代化思潮下认为贫民窟是城市病灶	实践失败的总结与人本主义思潮的兴起	土地非法性问题、产权正规化局限
改造模式		驱逐式	基础设施改善	临时许可
		驱逐式	整体升级	统一租赁
		移居式	整体升级	统一租赁
		移居式	非物质手段	权属信托
改造效果	正面效果	1）完全正规化 2）消除极端风险隐患 3）释放土地价值	1）改善物质环境 2）成本较低 3）居民适应性高	1）减少社会矛盾 2）避免产权纠纷与绅士化 3）避免权力寻租
改造效果	负面效果	1）破坏社会网络 2）居民难以安置 3）易催生新贫民窟	1）绅士化风险 2）延续社会不公 3）可持续性风险	1）易排斥租户与新移民 2）阻碍居民获得土地价值