|
Longer-term solutions are required
2006-06-05
China Daily
For quite some time now, the problems in the real estate market, and the complaints about them, have occupied much space in the Chinese press.
They gave rise to the "eight points" guidelines for regulating the market issued by the State Council, China's cabinet, in the middle of last year, followed by the State Council's "six points" in mid-May this year, then followed by the "15 points" last week, jointly signed by a number of key central government agencies.
No doubt these guidelines will do their bit to dampen the rapidly growing enthusiasm for property investment and stabilize housing prices in major cities.
Restrictions will be heavy for certain buyers of certain types of housing, particularly those who expect to turn property ownership into a kind of investment by buying large units and renting them to expatriate tenants working for multinational corporations.
Their purchasing plans are identified as the major factor driving up housing prices.
At the same time, developers are required to build more small units, which will have to be no less than 70 per cent of their total offerings. The supply of small units is likely, as a result, to see an increase over the next six months, and this enlarged supply will probably help stabilize overall housing prices.
These are necessary moves to cool down a market driven by unbridled growth and perhaps waste. A relatively quiet real estate industry will help China rein in its overall GDP growth for the year by reducing the demand for some key production materials.
But these are all policies to bring about short-term assistance. Housing problems, especially in large cities like Beijing and Shanghai, have some deeper-level significance and require policies featuring greater foresight and long-term benefits.
First of all, the current attempt to slow down real estate investment cannot be, as some commentators in the Chinese-language press seem to suggest, a war between the government acting on behalf of the public interest and unruly property developers.
Those merchants may not be particularly attractive personalities. Nor does their industry have much to boast about in technological progress or managerial expertise.
But they are the ones that happen to operate in a market that generates more economic growth and consumer spending than many other things can do especially at the stage when every Chinese household is looking for ways to improve its housing conditions.
It is not right, of course, for property developers to hijack public policies because of their importance by doing whatever brings them the highest returns. But those who make policies should also do more to define the role of the business.
However, for quite long and longer than the time that officials have been busy with such details as the size of houses and their maximum prices some more important questions have remained unanswered.
Should, for instance, Chinese cities have a distinctive division between rich people's living quarters and those belonging to the rest of society? Some developers said yes. While their critics, arguing from a moralistic standpoint, said no.
But if in reality, there are customers who aspire for larger units, whether for investment or for their own use, where should those houses be? Should they occupy locations best equipped with public facilities, which I tend to think belong to average homeowners, or should they be built in some distant spots?
At the same time, should cities like Beijing and Shanghai consider moving some of their cities' functions to new cities in nearby provinces? Why should they, for instance, keep so many crammed university campuses in their cities? After all, they have little room to develop.
Why must every corporation keep its headquarters, along with a whole army of supporting staff, in a major city in order to claim national importance?
Why, in the era of the Internet and mass communications, must every media organization keep its general office in downtown to advertise its presence?
Again, there is the question I raised one year ago when I started this column, why would any rational person want to work in Beijing's central business district? The traffic jam has never relaxed a bit since I worked there for an investment firm in 2000. No improvement in six years, what development is that?
|
