Growing Pains

 

 

China's dramatic economic growth is now presenting a new challenge: urban policy. Mass migration to cities is leading to the loss of arable land and urban sprawl; spiraling demand for energy and natural resources; and the rising challenge of providing social services like education and health care, particularly to migrants. It's time for policy makers to rethink their approaches to all these problems.

About 600 million Chinese already live in cities, but that represents only 45% of the population, compared to over 80% in the United States. That suggests Chinese cities are likely to grow considerably. New research by the McKinsey Global Institute projects China's cities will add another 350 million to their populations by 2025, of which 240 million will be migrants from the countryside.

This influx could push cities to their breaking point. By our estimates, demand for energy in urban areas will likely more than double; demand for water will increase by between 70% and 100%. Providing healthcare and education to new migrants will severely strain cities' ability to fund these critical services. Depending on the shape that urbanization takes -- more concentrated, or more dispersed -- arable land could be depleted by 7% to 20% nationwide.

Rather than addressing each problem on its own, it's time to think of all these problems as facets of a bigger underlying challenge: how to increase urban productivity to enable both economic growth and more livable cities. By urban productivity, we mean an agenda for both the public and private sectors that would improve the quality and efficiency of urbanization, while moving away from the current focus on maximizing GDP growth of China's cities at any cost.

This approach would require systematically tackling the factors that currently make Chinese cities so inefficient. Urban planners would focus on growing its cities up, not out. Using zoning laws to encourage the more efficient clustering of taller buildings, along with a beefed-up investment in transportation infrastructure, would create more livable city environments while containing land and resource pressures. Policy makers would also devote more attention to managing the demand for resources, rather than simply building supply infrastructure as needed. By introducing peak-hour electricity price premiums, deregulating gas prices, and mandating the use of more energy efficient technologies such as compact fluorescent lighting and light-emitting diodes in the construction of all new buildings, urban China could reduce its energy demand growth and potentially cut oil demand by more than four million barrels per day.

Improved urban productivity will also deliver real financial benefits, particularly to small- and medium-sized cities which are finding the funding of urbanization itself more challenging. Sourcing sufficient funds to provide for adequate infrastructure and to improve public services for migrant populations without raising taxes is a challenge that all urban planners already face. One step will be improving the productivity of the public services that cities deliver. For example, deploying capital investment in transit infrastructure more efficiently through better rail network planning and increasing non-fare revenue, or better managing the more than $100 billion spent annually by local governments on fixed asset expenditures.

Despite the expense and challenges, this kind of holistic strategy is the best -- and perhaps the only -- way forward. And the benefits could be considerable. Our research suggests that such policies could help reduce government spending in 2025 by more than 1.5 trillion yuan ($215 billion at today's exchange rate) per year, the equivalent of 2.5% of China's projected GDP that year.

A comprehensive 'urban productivity' model is already working -- in China, no less. Since 2006, the central city of Wuhan has launched a progressive, transparent performance-management system designed to promote sustainable economic development and raise public-sector productivity. Wuhan has implemented a broader set of performance measures for government entities that reward the reduction of energy consumption, or the design of more environmentally friendly economic development policies. Since these measures have been put into place, Wuhan has reduced energy consumption per unit of GDP by 4.5%, compared with the nationwide average of around 3%, and cut administrative red tape in half. At the same time, GDP growth has increased to 15.5%, from the average 13% growth of previous years.

Through policy direction and incentives, the central government can do much to influence how urbanization plays out in China. But while Beijing plays an important role in guiding the overall direction of urbanization at the national level, it is city leaders who make many of the key decisions that shape the path and pace of urbanization. For the long-term sustainability of China's new urban economy, it is vital that the broad swathe of China's cities -- rather than a far-sighted few -- adopt an urban productivity agenda. Getting the process right now will be far less costly than attempting to fix problems further down the road.

Jonathan Woetzel / Janamitra Devan


中国经济的高速增长正带来一个新的挑战，这就是城市政策。涌入城市的大量移民导致了耕地的不断减少和城市的无序扩大；对能源和自然资源的需求节节上升；城市居民，尤其是新移民所面临的教育和医疗等社会服务方面的挑战不断加大。如今，政策制定者是应该好好反思一下他们针对所有这些问题的做法了。

中国目前生活在城市的人口数量约为6亿人，但这仅占全国人口的45%，而美国的城市人口比例超过了80%。这说明中国的城市人口还有可能大大增长。麦肯锡全球学会(McKinsey Global Institute)新近完成的一项研究预计，在2025年之前，中国的城市人口数量还将增加3.5亿人，其中2.4亿将是来自农村的移民。

如此规模的人口流入会让城市面临重大转折。根据我们的预测，城市地区对能源的需求可能增加一倍；对水的需求可能增长70%至100%。对新移民提供医疗和教育将严重制约城市为这些至关重要的服务提供资金的能力。根据城市化发展形式的不同──更集中或是更加分散──全国的耕地面积可能会减少7%至20%。

现在要做的不是逐一解决各个问题，而是将所有这些问题视为一个更大实质性挑战的方方面面加以考虑，即如何提高城市的生产率以促进经济增长和建设更宜居的城市。就城市生产率而言，我们指的是公有和民营企业能将提高城市化的质量和效率提到议事日程上来，同时放弃目前所强调的不惜任何代价最大限度提高中国城市国内生产总值(GDP)增长率的做法。


广告
这种做法要求系统地解决目前导致中国城市如此低效的问题。城市规划者的关注重点应该是城市的发展，而不是扩大。采用分区法鼓励更集中高效的高层建筑群，并加大对交通基础设施的投资，这不但会创造更宜居的城市环境，也会缓解土地和资源方面的压力。决策者还应加强对资源需求的管理，而不是简单地根据需要建设供应设施。通过引入高峰电价上涨、放开汽油价格、在所有新建建筑中强制使用荧光灯和发光二极管等更为节能的技术，中国城市的能源需求增速有望减缓，对石油的需求也可能会每天降低400万桶以上。

城市生产率的提高还将带来真正的经济效益，尤其是对那些筹措城市化所需资金面临较大困难的中小城市来说，情况更是如此。在不提高纳税者负担的情况下获得充足的资金为移民提供适当的基础设施和完善公共服务是所有城市规划者目前面临的挑战。做法之一是改进城市所提供公共服务的效率。比如，通过更科学的轨道网络规划和增加车票以外的收入，或是更好地管理地方政府每年投入的1,000多亿美元固定资产投资，将资金更高效地投入到交通基础设施中。

尽管面临经费问题和其他一些挑战，但这种全局策略是未来的最佳途径，也可能是唯一的途径。由此产生的效益也将十分可观。我们的研究显示，这种政策有望在2025年将政府开支每年缩减人民币1.5万亿元（按当前汇率折算合2,150亿美元）以上，相当于中国届时预计GDP的2.5%。

综合性的“城市生产率”模型已经在中国发挥了作用。自2006年以来，武汉市推出了先进透明的绩效管理体系，以促进经济持续发展和提高公共领域的生产率。武汉对政府部门实施了更广泛的绩效措施，对降低能耗的做法以及更具环保性的经济发展方案予以奖励。这些措施逐步到位后，武汉市的单位GDP能耗降低了4.5%（同期全国的平均降幅约为3%），行政手续也大为减少。与此同时，GDP增长率也从前些年约13%的增速上升至15.5%。

通过政策指导和激励措施，中央政府能够对中国的城市化进程施加更大影响。虽说中央在把握全国城市化的总体方向上发挥着重要作用，但就城市化的具体方式和进程而言，许多关键决策仍要靠地方领导者做出。中国的新城市经济要想长期持续地发展，需要有一大批中国城市采取提高城市生产率的措施，而不能仅仅是其中几个有远见的城市。现在就落实这些措施要比未来才试图解决问题要付出少得多的代价。

Jonathan Woetzel / Janamitra Devan