如果韩俊是正确的，未来30年将有相当于德国、法国、英国、意大利、韩国、南非、西班牙、波兰和加拿大人口总和的中国人，迁居到该国不断膨胀的城市里。韩俊是中国国务院发展研究中心农村问题专家。他估计，到2040年，中国将仅有4亿农村人口，较目前减少5亿。按照这一假定，中国的城市居民数量将远远超过10亿，从而推动城市居民人口在总人口中所占比例从45%升至70%左右。
这些令人吃惊的数字，不禁让人脑海里浮现出大规模人口迁徙、北京、上海和广州这样的大城市人口规模增长三、四倍的情景。实际上，情况不太可能是那样的。毕竟，中国是一个计划经济国家。既便如此，研究了中国城市化趋势的麦肯锡全球研究所(McKinsey Global Institute)，描绘了这样一幅情景：到2025年，中国将出现15座超级城市，每座城市平均拥有2500万人口。与此同时，随着国家在内陆大举建设新的城镇中心，以及土地用途的改变使城乡之间的差别变得模糊，许多城市将"搬到"农村。
这并非未来主义的幻想。根据某些统计数据，目前中国已经有170座人口超过100万的城市。相比之下，美国有9座，而英国只有2座。就人口规模而言，天津就是中国的纽约，青岛是洛杉矶。
中国拥有庞大人口规模的二、三线城市的出现，令企业对可能产生的消费热潮垂涎不已。源源不断的城市新居民，的确可能成为未来厨房电器、保险和汽车的购买者。市政当局将需要公共交通系统、电网和电信设备。正如麦肯锡所言，中国城市化可能成为未来数十年最重要的商业机遇。
这里有一个问题。规划者不仅需要建设实体基础设施来适应这种城市化潮流，更艰难的是，中国将不得不制定一个法律框架。就目前而言，在已经从农民变身为工厂或建筑工人的大约2亿人中，大部分没有获得城市的永久居住权。毛泽东在上世纪50年代为限制国内人口流动而制定的户籍制度，将中国的城市人口划分为两个等级――拥有特权的正式居民和被边缘化的民工。
根据北京理工大学的研究，仅在北京一地，在过去3年出生的46万名婴儿中，就有一半左右无法登记为正式居民。中国有数千万人生活在法律的中间状态。他们被列为农村居民――尽管这些人可能大部分时间甚至一直在城市工作――因此无法获得各种社会服务，包括有补贴的住房，收入补助和子女教育。麻省理工学院(MIT)的中国问题专家黄亚生表示，该制度是"不人道的"，并对经济具有损害作用。他称，废除户籍制度，将会一举缩小城乡收入差距，释放出社会上弱势群体被压制的需求，鼓励他们消费。
中国领导人多年来一直在谈论户籍制度改革。这一主题切合当前领导层（胡锦涛和温家宝）的工作重心。对他们而言，建设和谐社会是一个不变的主题。最近温家宝在互联网聊天论坛上――想象一下在"聊天轮盘"(Chat Roulette)上不经意间遇到中国总理――表示，户籍改革是工作重点，这稍稍提高了人们对于改革的期盼。更不寻常的是，13家报纸共同发表社论，以近乎革命性的措辞，（相当准确地）谴责户籍制度违反中国宪法，变成了困住中国人的"无形枷锁"。它发出震耳发聩的声音："不合时宜地存在数十年之久之弊政至今仍时时困扰着我广大民众。"
这篇社论似乎有些过头。它冒犯了共产党的宣传部门。该文已在多数网站上消失，其中一位作者还丢掉了高级编辑的职位。温家宝上周在全国人大上作报告时，只是含糊地谈到有必要逐步推进户籍制度改革，这让那些期盼大胆改革的人失望。
不难看出中国政府为何对过快推进户籍改革感到紧张。如果处理不当，它可能导致人们蜂拥而至比较富裕的中心城市。即使修订了相关法律，让那些已经住在城市的农民工得到合法地位，多数地方政府仍缺乏资金，难以为这些新近得到资格的城市居民提供住房、教育和其它福利。
突兀的变革可能带来革命性的影响。革命当然是中国政府最不愿看到的局面。然而，中国政府确实希望改革，原因之一是农村的贫穷也同样是潜在的不稳定因素。逐步向城市转移人口可能带来巨大的经济效益。的确，至少10座城市（包括深圳和武汉）已经尝试了户籍制度改革。全球最大规模的城市化进程难以阻挡。现在是立法跟上现实的时候了。
译者/何黎
http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001031699
If Han Jun is right, over the next three decades a population the combined size of Germany, France, Britain, Italy, South Korea, South Africa, Spain, Poland and Canada will up sticks and move to China's swelling cities. Mr Han, a rural expert at the Development Research Council, reckons that by 2040, the number of people in China's countryside will have shrunk by 500m to just 400m. On that assumption, China's city-dwellers would rise to well over 1bn, catapulting the urban population from 45 per cent of the total to around 70 per cent.
The startling numbers conjure up images of mass migrations and the trebling or quadrupling in size of big cities such as Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou. In practice, it is unlikely to be quite like that. China, after all, is a planned economy. Even so, McKinsey Global Institute, which has researched China's urbanisation trends, paints one scenario under which, by 2025, the country will have 15 super-cities with an average population of 25m people each. Meanwhile, many cities will "move" to the countryside as the state frantically constructs new urban centres in the interior and as changing land use blurs the distinction between village and town.
This is not futurism. By some counts, China already has some 170 cities with a population above 1m. That compares with nine in the US and two in the UK. In population terms, Tianjin is China's New York and Qingdao its Los Angeles.
The emergence of second and third-tier Chinese cities with big populations has businesses salivating at the prospects of a consumer bonanza. A steady stream of urbanites could indeed become tomorrow's purchasers of kitchen appliances, insurance and cars. City authorities will need mass-transit systems, power grids and telecoms equipment. Chinese urbanisation could, as McKinsey says, be the biggest business opportunity of the next several decades.
There is a hitch. Not only will planners need to build the physical infrastructure to accommodate this urban groundswell. Harder still, China will have to erect a legal framework. As things stand, of the estimated 200m migrants who have already swapped their hoe for factory aprons or a hard hat, the bulk have no right to permanent residence in the cities. The so-called hukou registration system, instituted by Mao Zedong in the 1950s as a way of limiting internal migration, divides China's urban population into two castes � privileged official residents and marginalised migrants.
In Beijing alone, according to work carried out at the Beijing Institute of Technology, about half the 460,000 children born over the past three years cannot be registered as official residents. China has tens of millions of people living in legal limbo. Designated as rural-dwellers � though they may spend most or all of their time working in the cities � they are denied access to social services, including subsidised housing, income support and education for their children. Yasheng Huang, a China expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, says the system is "inhumane" and economically damaging. Scrapping it, he says, would narrow the rural-urban income gap at a stroke, unleashing the pent-up demand of people too socially vulnerable to spend freely.
China's leaders have been talking about modifying the system for years. The theme plays into the priorities of the current leadership � Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao � for whom building a harmonious society has been a constant theme. Hopes for change were recently raised a notch when Mr Wen said on an internet chat forum � imagine inadvertently coming across China's premier on Chat Roulette � that hukou reform was a priority. More unusually still, 13 newspapers printed a joint editorial complaining in almost revolutionary terms about a system they (quite accurately) denounced for being unconstitutional and placing "invisible fetters" on China's population. "Bad policies unsuitable to these times enrage the people," it thundered.
The editorial seems to have gone too far. The piece fell foul of the Communist party's propaganda department. The editorial has since disappeared from most websites and one of its authors has lost his senior editing position. When Mr Wen addressed the National People's Congress last week, he disappointed those hoping for bold changes by talking only vaguely about the need for gradual change.
It is not hard to see why Beijing is nervous about moving too quickly. Mishandled, it could trigger a stampede to the richer urban centres. Even if the law were changed to regularise the status of those migrants already living in cities, most local governments lack the money to provide the housing, education and other benefits to which newly designated city-dwellers would become entitled.
An abrupt change could have a revolutionary impact. Revolution is, of course, the last thing Beijing wants. Yet it does want change, not least because rural poverty is potentially just as destabilising. Gradually shifting people to the cities could bring big economic benefits. Indeed, change is being orchestrated at a local level. At least 10 cities, Shenzen and Wuhan among them, have already tinkered with their hukou system. The world's biggest experiment in urbanisation is unstoppable. It is about time legislation caught up with reality.
没有评论:
发表评论