The frenetic pace of change in China, and Beijing in particular, has exposed some interesting social phenomena in recent times. One of these is the ongoing process surrounding the movement of people. As the urban landscape feels the wrath of the wrecking ball, Beijingers are having to say goodbye to areas they grew up in, in an ongoing inner-city migration that until now has gone on undisturbed.

In the past, when parts of the city was demolished to make way for the convenience of modern life, local residents were compensated, in cash or housing, for agreeing to relocate. However, little discussion took place in advance when it came to the standards of compensation.

Times have changed. So much so, that history was made this June, when, for the first time, residents of the old quarter of Jiuxianqiao in Chaoyang District, Beijing took part in a referendum to decide their own fate. To go or to stay. Leave and set up home elsewhere with financial assistance, or return to the area to a new home after reconstruction? In the largest-ever urban renewal project in the capital, media were quick to report on the referendum and its results.

The housing vote, which received wide publicity, yielded a diverse result. Among the 5,473 households eligible for the poll, 2,451 agreed to the relocation plan, while 1,228 voted against, 32 votes received were invalid and others abstained, indicating a 44.7 percent of support to the plan. Following this, the grassroots government in the Jiuxianqiao area said it would assess the results of the poll and carry out a new plan after consultation with the developer to propel the project.

What the referendum has done is to prevent the dingzihu (nail houses) that have become a trend recently in China. Dingzihu refers to residents who refuse to move from their homes for resettlement, when space is required for new development. One of the most well-known cases of this was in Chongqing Municipality, where a couple held out for almost three years in a battle to prevent developers from demolishing their home. The quirky sight of a solitary two-storey brick building still standing in a development zone was daily news fodder. In April this year, the couple became urban legends when they negotiated a compensation settlement to move, far in excess of that originally offered.

Observers say that compared with previous forceful confiscation of land, the housing vote in Jiuxianqiao allows householders to take part in the decision-making process that ultimately affects their lives. They claim that the process of voting on where one is ultimately to live respects the voice of the people and this will influence other spheres of social life.

But opinions differ. Some say that under the disguise of democracy, those residents who are not willing to move out may be hurt financially by the offer of unacceptable compensation, which would make it difficult to buy a new apartment elsewhere in the city. A look at the Jiuxianqiao area reveals that the buildings, constructed in the1950-60s in the Soviet style, are falling apart. Public safety is at risk from cracking walls, sinking floors, and aging electricity, water and heating facilities. Upgrading this area would therefore be highly beneficial to residents who wish to return there to new homes.

With development comes a massive wealth gap between different social classes, something the government needs to address with improved social systems. By allowing residents to vote for their own property rights, this could be a step in the right direction to address this social gap.

People's voice counts

Yang Xia (www.people.com.cn): Before the Jiuxianqiao project, what mattered in urban renewal was the government's decisions. The residents had no right to argue, and naturally mounting disputes arose. The housing vote in Jiuxianqiao is a new step forward in the process of harmonious governance, thanks to the collective decision made by all residents involved.

We cannot deny the significance of this social progress, though the transfer of residents is very likely to be prolonged.