A Report on the Influence of Housing and Schooling for their Children ...
A Report on the Influence of Housing and Schooling for their Children on Migrants' Integration into Cities A survey based in Beijing and Shenzhen China Rural Labour Association I. Foreword Since reform and opening, industrialization and urbanization in China has been accompanied by the flow of the rural labor force into cities. Today, the vast majority of Chinese cities have sizable groups of migrant workers, already “holding up half the sky” in urban societies. They are active in sectors such as manufacturing, construction, service, and sanitation, taking on various positions and putting the sweat of their labor into urban economies. However, they are isolated from mainstream urban society and are not considered city residents, merely migrants. Migrants face many serious difficulties in survival and development in cities. Salaries are low, hours are long, and they are the primary victims in work place accidents. More than 80% do not have social security, and opportunities for job skills training are few. They lack rights to participate in social management, and the high threshold for changing their household registrations (hukou) means that they always have with them a mark of inequality. In many of their difficulties, housing and education for their kids are two important factors. Accommodations are small, facilities are crude, the environment is lacking, they don't have permanent housing, and their movement to the peripheries of the cities is a physical manifestation of their marginalization in these new environments. The love, care, and expectations that migrants have for their children is not any less than any other social group, yet there is still a huge gap between the education received by the children of migrants and their rights to equal education. Some, in public schools, still have “temporary school fees” and “donations,” while others rely on privately-run migrant schools. Others can only spend their childhoods in their hometowns away from their parents. Although, through adjustments in national policy towards migrants, some problems have recently been resolved to some degree, they still, to different degrees, seriously affect the existence, development, and basic rights of migrants. And they obstruct their efforts at rising out of poverty. At the same time, it is easy to incite the contradictions in co-existing with permanent city residents. This benefits neither their assimilation into urban society nor the harmonious development of society. In 2008, the China Rural Labor Institute, with financial assistance from UNESCO, conducted a survey in Beijing and Shenzhen aimed at understanding how housing and education for their children affects migrants' integration into cities. The project spent a few months conducting the 1
survey in Haidian district in Beijing and Nanshan, Futian, Yantian, and Bao'an districts in Shenzhen. The project carried out face-to-face interviews with six hundred migrants, and visited relevant municipal government offices to talk to employees in order to understand relevant policy and implementation. In understanding the circumstances of housing and schooling for the children of current migrants, as well as how these two factors affects the degree of assimilation into cities and taking from relevant domestic and international experience and research, the project proposes policy suggestions for advancing the integration of migrant workers into cities as well as how NGOs can sufficiently enhance their role.
II. Housing and education situation for migrants and problems faced Educational characteristics, employment, and salary of surveyed population Educational characteristics of the surveyed population A few things need to be explained: first, Beijing, Shenzhen and other cities are the same in that the main group of migrants are workers who perform physical labor, but there is also a group without local household registrations who have degrees from technical colleges or higher levels of education and are self-employed. This survey considered this characteristic. Second, most migrants who come to cities to work are male, but since the turn of the century, there is a clear trend towards the migration of entire families. In this survey, females made up almost half of survey participants. These two factors could cause the analysis based on the questionnaire to have a certain bias. However, those surveyed can still represent the basic situation of integration into cities of those who migrate from other places. At the same time, the research group combined current documents and materials with the practical experience of this survey, revising the quantitative results to a certain degree, in the hope of getting close to the actual situation. From Table 1, it can be seen that young people make up the majority of the surveyed migrants, with 52.5% under 35, while those with a middle or high school education, 58.8%, also make up the majority. Most – 86.1% - are married, while almost half migrated with their entire families. Table 1: Characteristics and education of surveyed population Category
Options
Number
Percentage
Gender
Male Female
309 291
51.4 48.5
Age
25 and below 26 – 30 31 – 35 36 – 40 40 – 50 over 50
70 134 111 163 88 34
11.7 22.3 18.5 27.1 14.7 5.7
2
Education Level
None or little Elementary Junior High Senior High Technical Secondary Technical college/above
7 87 232 121 65 88
1.2 14.5 38.7 20.1 10.8 14.7
Marital Status
Single Married Divorced
81 517 2
13.5 86.1 0.4
Children
0 1 2 3 or more
89 268 184 59
14.8 44.7 30.7 9.8
Whole family migrated?
Yes No
269 331
44.8 55.2
Employment and salary characteristics of surveyed population Migrants began coming to cities for employment in the mid-1980s.
In this survey, 52.4% had
been away from their hometowns for 1 – 5 years, while 47.6% had been away for five or more years. Additionally, 71.8% had been in their current city for 1 – 5 years, while 28.2% had been there for five or more years (see Figures 1 and 2).
16-19年 20年及以上 1.0% 1.9%
20年及以上 16-19年
9.7%
10-15年
4.9%
18.4% 10-15年
1-5年
22.3%
52.4%
5-9年 6.8%
1-5年 71.8%
5-9年 10.7%
Figure 1: Time away from hometown Figure 2: Time in current city 1-5 years: Blue 1-5 years: Blue 5-9 years: Green 5-9 years: Green 10-15 years: Gray 10-15 years: Gray 16-19 years: Purple 16-19 years: Purple 20 or more years: Yellow 20 or more years: Yellow Most migrants work in construction or service, as 27.2% of those surveyed work in construction, between 60 and 70% work in commerce and service, and about 12% do other work (see Figure 3). 3
Of the surveyed migrants, those with family net incomes of between 10,000 and 30,000 yuan in 2008 made up the largest group – 41.7% of the total.
Those with family net incomes above 30,000
yuan made up 35.2%, while 9.8% had family net incomes below 10,000 yuan. The other 12.6% did not respond to this question (see Figure 4). 没回答 12.6% 10万元以上 8.7% 6-10万元 1万元以下 12.6% 9.7%
其它
写字楼人员 11.7%13.6%
服务人员 18.4%
个体商户 29.1%
1-3万元 41.7%
建筑工人 27.2%
Figure 3: Field of current occupation Office work: Blue Entrepreneurship (small scale, such as working in small shops or markets): Green Construction: Gray Service: Purple Other: Yellow
3-6万元 14.6%
Figure 4: 2008 net income Less than 10,000: Yellow 10,000-30,000: Purple 30,000-60,000: Gray 60,000-100,000: Green More than 100,000: Blue No answer: Red
Housing problems for migrants For China's more than 130 million migrant workers, those that go to large and medium sized cities at the prefecture level and above make up more than 60% and comprise the main group of migrants.
Clothing, food, and housing are the most basic requirement for personal and societal
development.
In order to survive and develop in cities, migrant workers first need to resolve the
issue of housing. However, migrants are pushed outside of the social system that guarantees long term housing in cities, so they lack fixed housing.
Relevant surveys make clear, close to 40% of
migrant workers live in collective dormitories or makeshift shelters because the monthly rent for typical urban apartments has unceasingly gone up.
A considerable portion of migrants rent
accommodations in the chaotic area between cities and the countryside.
Space is small, and most
lack necessary sanitary, heating, cooling, ventilation, natural lighting, fire prevention, and other basic facilities. The environment is disorderly, dirty, and poor, and transportation is not convenient. Because migrant workers' salaries are low, even if they live in places with the worst conditions and lowest rent, rent still makes up a pretty large part of their salaries. Many married migrant workers live separately. 4
This survey took a step towards illustrating the housing problems for migrants, which seriously influence their quality of life, also affecting healthcare and education for their children and becoming one of the largest obstacles towards their assimilation into cities and towns. Housing conditions and problems The distribution of migrant workers in large and medium sized cities determines their housing requirements. Of the migrants surveyed, 53.4% live in the city, while 46.6% live in the outskirts of the city, the area between the city and countryside. Currently, those who live in cities primarily use three channels to resolve their housing problem: first, some buy their own property. This group makes up a small proportion, 5.8%. Second, they live in collective dormitories provided by their employers. This group primarily works in construction, housing accommodations, food service, and other service enterprises, and some enterprises at large-scale industrial parks. Those who go through this channel made up 40.8% of those surveyed. The majority of migrant workers rent a place to live on the market, as individuals or families. This group made up 53.4% (see Figure 5).
自有住房 5.8%
其他 25.2%
集体宿舍 40.8%
楼房 39.8%
个人租赁 53.4%
平房 29.1%
地下室 5.8%
Figure 5: Current housing Own house or apartment: Blue Rent house or apartment: Green Collective dormitory: Gray
Figure 6: Housing characteristics Standalone house: Blue Underground: Green Apartment: Gray Other: Purple From this survey we can see that as a whole, the quality of accommodations for migrants is low, and the problem is primarily focused in a few areas: 1.
Space is small, environment is poor
Most individuals or families that migrate live in places with an area of 20 or fewer square meters. The survey illustrates that 53.4% live in rooms that are 20 square meters or smaller, with 10.7% living in places that are smaller than 10 square meters. Only 39.8% live in multi-story apartment buildings. Of the rest, many live in the outskirts of the city with dirty, disorderly, and poor surroundings that lack educational, cultural, and healthcare facilities.
The places where they
live are also rather far from their workplaces. An additional 5.7% live in rooms that are 5
underground. Common problems that migrants face in accommodations are small spaces and poor environment (see Figure 6).
1
2. Housing facilities are lacking; most do not have standalone kitchens or sanitation facilities Of the surveyed migrants, 62.1% do not have standalone kitchens; 68% do not have standalone bathrooms; 53.4% do not have heat, and 49.5% do not have gas. Winters are cold, summers are not, and sanitation conditions are lacking, which seriously affects the lives and study of migrants and their children. Table 2: Size and facilities of accommodations Area Percentage Facilities Less than 10 sq. meters 10.7 No standalone kitchen 10 – 20 sq. meters 42.7 No standalone bathroom 21 – 30 sq. meters 22.3 No heat 31 – 99 sq. meters 14.6 Water More than 100 sq. meters 9.7 No gas
Percentage 62.1 68 53.4 99 49.5
3. A considerable number live illegally, accommodations are not stable Of migrants' who rent, including those who rent rooms in the outskirts of the city or underground, a considerable portion have not received legal permission from the relevant department.
They could be evicted at any time, causing shelter to not be stable. Furthermore,
policy-wise, residents renting rooms or provision of collective dormitories by employers both do not fall under the scope of “legal fixed shelter” for integration into cities. 4. High rent Those surveyed who pay 500 yuan per month or less in rent make up 49.5% of the total, with a large portion of those living in housing provided by their employers (40.8% of the total use housing provided by their employers). Those who pay 500 yuan or more in rent make up 50.5% of the total.
For migrants, rent makes up more than 30% of their monthly net income. Because their
income is low, as migrant workers and service employees, the main part of the group can only rent accommodations in the city with the worst conditions and lowest rent.
Still, rent makes up a large
share of their salaries. Additionally, with rent making up 30% of their income, this has already reached a precautionary rate, as it can seriously affect
1
improvement of their standard of living.
According to a 2007 survey by a Ministry of Housing and Construction research group, more than a quarter of migrants' accommodations is 5 square meters or less, while one third have accommodations of 5 – 10 square meters. This is far below the standard of 16 square meter standard for city households with economic difficulties. Surveyed construction workers in Wuhan have an average of 1.5 square meters, while migrants who work in food service and at the shipyard have accommodations with an average of 2 square meters. In Shanghai in 2005, the average for city residents was 15.5 square meters, but for migrant workers in Shanghai who were surveyed about their housing situation in 2004 and 2007, the average for most was below 10 square meters, as 74.9% had below 10. 6
In order for their rent expense to fall by a large degree, they often rent rooms in groups, which can lead to problems.2 2001元以上 4.9% 1001-2000元 15.7%
0-100元 37.3%
501-1000元 29.4%
101-500元 12.7%
5.
Figure 7: Monthly housing expense 0 – 100: Blue 101 – 500: Green 501 – 1000: Gray 1001 – 2000: Purple 2001 and above: Yellow Many married migrant workers live separately.
Of the migrants surveyed, 79.6% are married, and 32% of them live in the same city as the rest of their family, which illustrates that more than 60% of married couples live apart.
Migrants have no choice and no hope about housing The first thing discovered by the survey is that migrants, especially laborers, despite living in considerably poor conditions, mostly felt they were “somewhat satisfied” with their accommodations. Additionally, a large portion do not have plans to improve their housing conditions.
This means they don't have any options. The primary reason, especially for migrant
workers, is because of their salaries. Their salaries are low, and house prices and rent are high, so they lower their demands for housing conditions. The survey shows that the largest group – 41.7% - said they are “somewhat satisfied with their accommodations; only 16.6% said they are “not satisfied,” which is a lot lower than the 38.8% who expressed that they are “satisfied.” Those without plans to improve their housing situation make up 54.4% of the total, while those with plans to improve their situation make up 45.6%.
2
According to the findings of a 2007 survey of close to 4000 migrants workers in Shanghai conducted by the Ministry of Housing and Construction, 69.2% made less than 1500 yuan per month, while 7.4% made less than 750 yuan per month. An individual with the burden of an average 232.9 yuan monthly rent pays 31% of his monthly salary in rent. For the 61.8% with monthly salaries from 750 – 1500 yuan, an individual with an a average monthly rent of 197 yuan pays 17.5% of his salary in rent. 7
In understanding why they do not plan to improve their housing situation, 78% said it was because of economic reasons.
This shows the substance of the problem: the largest reason that
they do not plan to improve their housing situation is economic difficulties, mainly the contradiction that their salaries are low and housing prices and rent are high. Table 3: Level of satisfaction with housing and plans to improve Level of Options Percentage satisfaction with Very satisfied 2.9 current housing Satisfied 38.8 conditions Somewhat satisfied 41.7
Do you have plans to improve your housing situation? Reason for not planning to improve housing conditions
Not satisfied Very much not satisfied Options Yes No
16.6 0.0 Percentage 45.6 54.4
Options Policy reasons Economic reasons
Percentage 0.0 78.0
Other 22.0 The second thing that the survey discovered is that in terms of planning to live permanently in the city, other than those who have not yet decided, the number who plan to live permanently in the city surpasses the number who do not plan to.
This shows that even though housing conditions are
poor, they do want to integrate into cities and have the intention to make the cities their permanent residences. The survey shows that 23.3% of migrant workers are not sure whether they want to make the city their permanent home; 39.8% plan to live permanently in the city, which is more than the 36.9% who do not plan to live there permanently.
8
不确定 23.3%
是 39.8%
否 36.9%
Figure 8: Do you plan to live in the city permanently? Yes: Blue No: Green Not sure: Gray Education Problems for Children of Migrants Migrants generally attach great importance to the education of their children. It is an important sign of their job stability and integration into cities that a growing number of their children migrate with them and attend schools in the cities. National compulsory education policy in recent years has required local governments to provide education for migrant workers‟ children who live in the city, primarily at public schools. The implementation of this policy has scored great achievements toward reducing education discrimination for children of migrant workers. Nonetheless, public schools in some cities still charge migratory children extra fees for attending their schools, such as “temporary school fees” or “donations.” Consequently, a considerable number of migrant workers‟ children either still have to attend private schools of low quality or become left-behind children in their hometowns. All these problems affect children‟s education, increase migrants‟ burdens and have become another obstacle preventing migrants‟ integration into cities. The state of education for children of migrants and problems Among the 600 migrant workers surveyed, nearly half of the families have one child, 184 families have two children, and 59 families have three or more children. Of these children, 469 are attending school; these include 179 in preschool, 157 at the compulsory education level, 105 at high schools or technical secondary schools, and 28 at technical colleges or higher. Forty-two children are not attending schools; these include 24 who are less than 5 years old and 18 who are older than 20. The vast majority of migrants attach great importance to the education of their children. When asked “would you be willing to pay higher fees for your children to receive a better education?” 93.5% answered positively. However, this survey reveals the following education problems for children of migrant workers: 9
1.
Family separation, large number of left-behind children, and middle and high
school in their hometowns The survey shows that 36.8% of these children migrate with their parents and attend schools in cities; 19.7 % attend schools in other cities; left-behind children who attend schools in their hometowns account for the largest percentage, at 43.5%. The survey indicates an even higher percentage of migrant workers‟ children who attend middle school and high school in their hometowns, at 62.5%. Table 4--School Location for Children of Migrants
In cities with parents Other cities Hometown
Preschool
Elementary school 68
Junior high school 12
Senior high school 16
58 49 72
12 27
6 32
14 48
Technical secondary school 15
Technical college & higher 4
12
11 13
Of surveyed migrants, 78.8 say they leave their children in their hometowns for financial factors, while 10.6 percent attribute it to policy. From our analysis, we believe that the financial and policy factors are interrelated. Financially, on the one hand, most migrant workers have low incomes; on the other hand, the fees are high for their children to attend schools in the cities where they reside. Many, even during their compulsory education years, would have to pay fees to attend city schools, while these have been eliminated in their hometowns. Policy plays a role in causing this difference. In addition, many of these children attend junior and senior high schools in their hometowns as the result of unfairness in the current education system. This system bars migrants‟ children from taking the college entrance examination outside their hometowns, and since text books and education quality differ from place to place, many of these children are forced to attend high schools back at home in order to have a better shot at passing their local college entrance examinations. Relevant studies have shown that some of the left-behind children who live with their grandparents are being spoiled.
It is easy for them to develop a self-centered mentality; they do
not know how to appreciate and show concern for elders and are not good at getting along with their peers. Most grandparents are illiterate or semi-literate and thus cannot provide any guidance for these children‟s study. Because they are deprived of parental affection and care, with no one to communicate with or complain to when encountering problems and less interaction with their peers, left-behind children are prone to becoming introverted, unsociable, eccentric, have low selfesteem, and develop extreme character and other psychological issues. Schools where left-behind children are enrolled also tend to have no regular teachers to provide life-counseling services to 10
students. Left-behind children all face many safety problems. All of these things are not conducive to the education and development of migrants‟ children. 2.
Some children of migrants attend ill-equipped private schools
The survey shows that 72.3 percent of migrants‟ children attend public schools, so the other 27.7 percent attend private schools.
In total, 75.7 percent attend public schools at cities where
their parents work, and 24.3 percent attend private schools in cities where their parents work. Table 5—Types of Schools Attended by Children of Migrants Children Who Attend Schools
Type of school
Total children
Percentage
Public School
339
72.3
131
75．7
Private School
130
27.7
42
24．3
Where Parents Work & Percentage
There are several major problems. First, more than 10 percent of migrants‟ children who attend public schools still have to pay “temporary school fees”. Second, most of those who attend privately-run migrant schools do not yet receive public education subsidies even though they fit the age requirement for compulsory education. They have to pay tuition fees of more than 1000 yuan each year and other miscellaneous charges. Third, the operation of private schools primarily relies on fees collected from students, to pay for room and board, teacher salaries, and other operation expenses; these not only increase the burden on migrants, but also lead to financial difficulties for the schools. Teachers salaries are low and turnover is high, which affects the quality of teaching. Fourth, only some of the privately-run schools for migrants‟ children in cities are approved by relevant education departments; conditions are difficult and children studying at these schools do not have equal status compared to their peers at public schools. 3.
Migrants have a heavy burden in supporting their children's eduction
The survey shows that 22.4% of migrant workers pay 500 yuan or less for their children‟s education expenses each year; 10.5% pay 500 to 1000 yuan; 31.6% pay 1000 to 5000 yuan; and 35.5% pay 5000 yuan or more. Within education expenses, tuition and miscellaneous fees account for 31.6% and 48.7% respectively; temporary school fees account for 10.5%. In total these three categories add up to 90.8% of education-related expenses. Migrants‟ annual education expense for left-behind children at the stage of compulsory education is all under 500 yuan for those surveyed (12 families pay 0 yuan; 48 families pay 200 to 300 yuan; and 30 families pay 400 to 500 yuan). By contrast, migrant workers‟ annual education expense for their children living in cities at the stage of compulsory education ranges from 1000 to 5000 yuan, which is far higher than the fees for left-behind children. 11
Of migrants surveyed, 36.8% consider their children‟s education expenditure as too high or relatively high when compared to total household expenditure. Migrants evaluation on their children's education and a confusion of choices The survey shows that the majority of migrants are not satisfied with the cities‟ education policy for their children, as 60.5% answered “no” to the question of whether the cities‟ education policy is conducive to the education of their children (Figure 9). Similarly, 84.6% indicate they would send their children back home to attend schools because of difficulties in attending schools in the cities where they work, while 61.5 % state they would send their children back to hometowns to attend schools because of higher education costs in cities. (Figure 10) However, at the same time, most migrants surveyed also indicated satisfaction with the current state of education for their children, accounting for 75.3%, while 24.7% said they were not satisfied (Figure 11). Furthermore, 93.5% say they are willing to spend more for a better education for their children, and 55.3 percent would choose to stay in cities long-term so that their children could receive a better education (Figure 12).
否 60.5%
否 38.5%
是 39.5%
Figure 9: Does city education policy for migrant workers' children make it easy for your children to attend school? Yes: Blue No: Green
是 61.5%
Figure 10: Would you send your child back to your hometown to attend school because fees are too high in the city? Yes: Blue No: Green
12
否 24.7%
否 44.7%
是 75.3%
Figure 11: Are you currently satisfied with your child's eduction? Yes: Blue No: Green
是 55.3%
Figure 12: Would you stay in the city long-term so that your child could receive a good education? Yes: Blue No: Green
Such contradiction in migrants‟ evaluation and choices suggests that although migrant workers are not satisfied with cities‟ education policy toward their children, they acknowledge the quality of education in the cities. Their preference is for their children to accompany them to the cities and receive better education, and so they demand improvement of cities‟ education policy toward the children of migrants.
III. Regional innovations to solve the problems of migrant workers’ housing and education for their children Under the pressure of the market economy and urbanization in the 21st century, the central government has implemented a development strategy of uniform management of urban and rural areas and has dramatically changed its policies regarding migrant workers. For example, in 2003, the General Office of the State Council issued the “Announcement on Bettering Migrant Workers‟ Urban Employment Management and Services.” The State Council also issued the “Some Suggestions on Solving Migrant Workers‟ Problems” in 2006. These policy directives require the government to protect migrant workers‟ legal rights, strengthen employment services and training, and improve public services to migrant workers based on the principle of fairness. In this policy environment, some local innovations to solve the problems of housing and education for migrants have attracted attention.
13
Multiple channels to improve housing conditions for migrants have been explored To include migrants in the urban welfare housing system with government sponsorship. In late June 2008, Yangzhou's city government issued the “Implementation Suggestion on Further Resolving the Housing Challenge for Low Income Households.” For the first time, this policy directive addressed the migrants' difficult housing problems. It required the city‟s economic development zone and other districts to design and implement uniform housing welfare measures. The city was to provide certain amount of compensation and rewards. For those enterprises that had established apartments for migrant workers on their own, the supervising department in the city government and the economic development zone or industrial park management office were to offer rewards as opposed to compensation to the enterprises. Migrant workers with official proof of having lived in Yangzhou for over five years would be eligible, just as the urban residents are, to rent or purchase affordable apartments, both of which are subsidized by the local government. Due to the government support on land use and subsidies, enterprises were enthusiastic in building apartments for migrant workers. Industrial parks in some districts built migrant workers‟ apartments and leased them to companies for free. So far, over 800,000 square meters of migrant workers‟ apartments have been built and about 40,000 people have moved in. Most of these rooms only cost 1-2 yuan in monthly rent or are completely free. In Hangji Township of Hanjiang District, where many migrants live, nearly 150,000 square meters of apartments were built by 10 enterprises, which provided lodging for about 10,000 workers.3 Use multiple models to address the housing problem for migrant workers. When the General Office of the Fujian government delivered the “Announcement on the Instructions for Improving Housing Conditions for Migrant Workers” issued by the Ministry of Construction and other ministries in 2008, it planned to incorporate the housing issue for long-term migrant workers into the urban housing construction plans. In the cities of Fuzhou and Quanzhou, a trial program went on in which industrial parks built accommodations and enterprises leased them to migrant workers for a low prices or for free. In this model, local governments and enterprises together sponsored construction of dorms for lease to migrant workers. In Xiamen, some apartments for migrants were built by the neighboring villages using a shareholding model. The village committees invested collective assets and individual farmers invested personal savings in building residential complex. Shares of individual peasants could be inherited only and not withdrawn, and transfers of shares were only allowed among the villagers. Currently there are seven projects of apartment construction for migrants in Xiamen. The total area is about 307,000 square meters which would be able to take care of housing for 60,000 migrant workers. The city of Longyan has made migrant workers‟ housing issue part of its plan for building affordable apartments. The Changting Tengfei Economic 3
Yangzhou Daily, January 2, 2009 14
Development Zone built eight economical apartment buildings with a total of 502 apartments and sold them to migrant worker couples. Over 1,000 workers have moved in these new apartments, each about 40-60 square meters. Migrants’ children should have equal access to education In order to solve the education problem for migrant workers‟ children, the city of Hefei in Anhui Province relaxed the admissions requirements and designated 87 schools to accept migrant workers‟ children. These children could also take the national college entrance exam in Hefei, a move which was unprecedented in China. Shanghai has posited that compulsory education should be guaranteed for all children of migrants who meet the requirements and that these children should receive the same education as their peers with urban household registrations. The children of migrants living in the four districts in the city center have all started school locally. About 60% of the total migrants‟ children in Shanghai have entered local schools. In addition, the education bureau incorporated the schools run by migrants themselves into the official management system, standardizing education and improving the quality, and let them use the unused classrooms, desks and chairs from public schools for free. The city government of Kunshan acknowledged the importance of strengthening moral education for the children of “New Kunshan Residents”, and aimed to leave nobody behind in recruiting school-age children. While government funding was the main resource for building schools for migrants' children, the government also encouraged the contribution of private capital. The city issued the “Suggestions on Providing Education for the Children of „New Kunshan Residents‟”. The 28 public middle and primary schools in Kunshan have all opened their doors to migrant workers‟ children and waived the temporary schooling fees and school selection fees. There are another 11 schools built specifically for the children of migrants, with a total investment of 35 million yuan and occupying a total of 40,000 square meters, which have recruited about 17,000 students. After the mission of leaving nobody behind was basically accomplished, the city shifted its focus to improving education quality. The education bureau established a special department to handle the issue of non-public schools for migrant workers‟ children. The department hired nine senior educators to be superintendents and advise those schools on standardization. The textbooks used by those schools were instructed by the bureau to be compatible with the public school system. Most schools have been equipped with overhead projectors and computer labs. In total there are 500 computers in these schools. Three schools‟ labs have Internet access and three schools have rubberized running tracks. The improvement of educational facilities and management has laid a foundation for ensuring that migrant workers‟ children receive decent education based on the city government‟s directive. Non-governmental organizations and volunteers are active in helping non-public schools for 15
migrant workers’ children Since the late 1990s, student organizations and volunteers from Beijing Normal University, Renmin University, China Youth University for Political Science and other schools have maintained consistent contact with some private schools for migrant workers‟ children such as the Xingzhi school, Shuren school and Huaao school. Students have volunteered to teach at those schools and brought their teaching methods to local teachers. Their help has made the long-discriminated against children of migrants feel welcomed by society and been a force for development in these schools. Many NGOs in Beijing and Shenzhen have offered great support to non-public schools and to migrant workers. The Maple Center has been offering help for teaching and learning at home at three non-public schools for migrants' children(Jinghua Hope School, Huaao School and Daxing Xingzhi New Citzien School) and in Guangan Middle School since 2007. The Center edited a “Home Teaching Manual for Migrant Workers” and organized a home teaching activity called “Three Ten-Minute” (ten minutes each on education of love, intelligence, and morality). The activity lasted for a year and its experience could be extended to other regions. Hong Kong’s experience in provision of low-rent apartments to migrants and low-income residents With a small area and high population density, Hong Kong has been widely recognized as one of the places to have best addressed the housing issue. Through a public housing plan, the Hong Kong‟s government provides low-rent housing to low-income households and encourages other local residents to find their own housing, which greatly improved the housing conditions for migrants and low-income residents whose number has sharply increased. Hong Kong‟s public housing system is a valuable example for the mainland to follow when resolving the housing issue for migrant workers.. After WWII, Hong Kong‟s population increased from 600,000 to over 2 million in the period of 1945-1950, to 3 million in 1961, and to nearly 7 million today. The high population density makes Hong Kong severely short of housing, and the housing issue for both local and migrant residents is a serious problem for Hong Kong‟s development. The process of finding a solution included three phrases. In the beginning, the government ignored the housing problem. A big fire in late 1953 left about 50,000 residents homeless. In order to resettle the victims, the British government established a Moving and Resettling Affairs Office in 1954 to be in charge of building accommodations for moving and resettling, which started the great plan of constructing public housing. In 1954, the Hong Kong Housing Construction Commission (the predecessor of the Hong Kong Housing Commission) was founded to be responsible for building public rental apartments for middle income families. In 1961, the government made a “Low Cost Housing Plan” to provide low-rent 16
housing to low-income families. The quality of public housing built in the 1950s was quite low and the per capita living area was only 2.2 square meters. The 1960s saw Hong Kong‟s economic takeoff and the “Low Cost Housing Plan” provided a large number of houses and rooms for Hong Kong‟s laborers. The rent was only 15-20% of the market value and thus the labor costs were low, which was conducive to the development and prosperity of Hong Kong‟s manufacturing industry. In 1972, Hong Kong‟s government announced a “Ten-Year Housing Plan” aimed at building better housing for Hong Kong‟s residents from 1973-82 based on the minimum requirement of 3.3 square meters per person. It was also aimed at rebuilding the low quality moving-and-resettling houses. The “Ten-Year Housing Plan” was extended for another five years in 1982. In order to implement the plan, the government carried out a “New City and Town Plan” to reduce population density. The construction of new public housing was centered in nine new cities and towns such as Tsuen Wan District and Sha Tin District in the New Territories in order to relieve traffic pressure in the downtown area. The government then pushed forward the plans of “Room for Everyone” and “Construction in Partnership with Private Institutions” in 1977 and 1978 respectively. According to the plan of “Room for Everyone”, the government provided free land and the housing commission built houses which were to be sold to residents for a price 30-45% lower than market value. In 1987, the government made a long-term housing development strategy and encouraged residents to purchase private homes on their own. Among all homes, the percentage of those owned by residents increased from 42% in 1987 to 53% in 2000. And among the public housing built by the government, privately-owned homes increased from 12% in 1987 to 33% in 2000. After the 1997 Asian financial crisis, the government shifted the policy back to provision of public housing. The government consolidated its resources to provide rental houses to those that needed them. At the same time, the government stopped being a real estate developer and stopped building and selling government-subsidized houses. The government intervention in the market was reduced to a minimum. Throughout the process of providing low-rent housing to low-income residents, the Hong Kong government has formed an effective system and measures to provide land, invest capital, set housing standards, distribute low-rent housing, manage real estate property, and instruct residents on renting apartments or buying private homes.
IV.
Research results and policy recommendation
Research Results Migrants have become a new and ever-growing source of labor during China‟s Reform and Opening, industrialization and urbanization processes. A new phrase of development is such that 17
migrants‟ employment has gradually stabilized, they have established their families in cities, and they have increasingly demanded integration into cities and the ability to become true city residents. Successful resolution of their problems has direct impact on the resolution of the three main rural issues, industrialization, healthy development of urbanization, and social justice and harmony. The central government has paid extraordinary attention to migrant workers and their employment problems. In the 21st century, the government has made a series of policy decisions and issued “Some Suggestions on Solving Migrant Workers‟ Problems”. The government has made obvious progress in improving the protection of migrant workers‟ rights and providing training and public services to migrants. However, the policy of putting the people first and the policy of equal treatment and uniformization of urban and rural economic and social development, is not equal to the eradication of the rural-urban dichotomous system. Migrants still face many problems of life and development in cities, which are obstacles to their employment stability and integration into cities. Some of these problems include lack of protection of labor rights and interests, inaccessibility of urban public services, the urban housing welfare system‟s non-inclusion of migrants, lack of social security, difficulty in registering a hukou, lack of democratic rights, and the challenges faced by children, women and the elders left behind in the countryside. As shown in this survey, many migrant workers are separated from their families and faced with the contradiction of low salaries and high housing costs. The poor housing conditions and instability of housing significantly influence their life and development. The children of migrants have not received fair treatment in education, and there are also challenges for children left behind in their hometowns for school. Both housing and education of their children are the two main problems that demand attention in order to ensure their basic rights and help them integrate into cities. There is also a need for a serious of social management reforms in order to implement the policy of fair treatment of migrant workers, achieve uniform citizenship identity, equal opportunities and equal rights, and allow migrant workers to fully assimilate into cities. Policy Recommendations Include migrant workers in the urban housing welfare system and improve their housing conditions through various channels The housing issues of those migrants who have stable urban employment need to be incorporated into urban housing plans and needs to be addressed through various channels. The current mainstream resolution is to rely on enterprises to provide housing. We have issues with this solution. Housing is a citizen‟s basic right and is a very important requirement in the Millennium Development Goals. The government has an inescapable responsibility to ensure housing conditions for its citizens and cannot leave the responsibility to enterprises. We suggest that, for those workers who have stable employment and have continuously lived in cities for a certain amount of time (for 18
example, five years), the government should gradually make their housing part of the urban housing welfare system, and make sure that their housing rights are at least equal to that of urban lowincome residents. First, the government should motivate employers to provide clean and safe housing for migrant workers, give favorable policies to the enterprises that build their own dorms, and increase public facility construction in migrants‟ residential areas. Second, plans for constructing villages within cities need to fully consider migrants‟ residential needs. A significant percentage of migrant workers live in the outskirts of cities and rent local residential houses or in migrant worker dormitories. The phenomenon has become part of today‟s socioeconomic development. Also, the government should make plans to encourage villages in these areas to make use of unused construction land and noncontracted agricultural land, through a shareholding model, to build residences for migrants. At the same time, the government should provide accompanying infrastructure, legalize the renting of houses on rural collective land, and regulate management services. Third, the government should gradually include the families of migrant workers who have stable employment and at least a year of urban residence into the category eligible for government-subsidized low-rent and affordable apartments. In regions of dense migrant worker populations, the government should plan to allocate a certain percentage of construction land to build low-rent apartment complexes for migrant workers and urban low-income residents. The government should establish a special management system and a fair distribution system and rent these apartments for below-market prices to those who have stable employment but low income. Fourth, the government should use financial policy to support housing for migrants. It should encourage financial institutions to provide low-interest longterm loans to developers that build housing for migrants. The central and local governments should subsidize the construction of accompanying facilities in these residential areas. They should adopt such favored policies as reducing or waiving administrative fees for using public land and motivating residential communities, industrial parks and enterprises to build accommodations and rent them specifically to migrants at a suggested price. Fifth, the government should combine the policies of constructing temporary housing and encouraging migrants to purchase private homes. Improve the system to allow migrants’ children to receive complete and equal compulsory education and to ensure that they receive equal educational resources Maintaining equal education for migrants‟ children is the foundation for ending the cycle of poverty and helping migrant workers and their children integrate into cities. The government should insist on making regions with a net inflow of migrants take care of education for their children. Public schools should be where most of these children go for education. Local governments should include education for migrants' children into their education plans and budgets, allocate money on the basis of the real number of students, and ensure that migrant workers‟ children receive free 19
compulsory education and treatment equal to that afforded local urban children. The government should make efforts to correct the discriminatory behavior of some local public schools that charge migrants “temporary schooling fees” and “donations.” The government should change the current situation where the percentage of migrants' children in public schools is very low. It should make full use of the current education resources in public schools and, in areas there are a lot of migrant workers, allocate state budget to build more public schools. The government should actively support and regulate non-public schools for migrant workers‟ children and make efforts to satisfy their needs. For those private schools that undertake the government‟s responsibility providing compulsory education to migrants‟ children, the government should include them in the teacher training and management systems and provide subsidies based on the number of registered students. Students in these schools should also have their tuition and fees waived and receive the same subsidies and treatment as that for their counterparts in public schools. Currently, many migrant workers' children receive compulsory education in cities but have to return to their rural hometowns for high school, which is bad for educational continuity and does not lead to healthy development. The government should gradually separate school registration from hukou registration and start experimenting in cities below the provincial capital level in granting migrants' children the right to take high school and college entrance exams in the cities where their parents work. Allow NGOs to play a further role in improving migrant workers’ housing conditions and their children’s education conditions Areas in which NGOs could play a role include: First, NGOs could conduct research at migrant workers‟ workplaces, residences, and their children‟s schools. The research would be meant to reveal migrants' contribution to urban socioeconomic development and identify their difficulties in housing and in their children‟s education, so that the issues could attract societal attention and drive local governments to properly solve them. Second, by focusing on private migrant schools, NGOs could organize volunteers to offer teaching support, train teachers on instructing migrant workers on education in the home, and facilitate exchange and communication among different schools. Third, NGOs could provide help for children left in rural areas while their parents are working in cities. NGOs could provide learning and life counseling services to these children and support the Women‟s Federation and other mass organizations in carrying out activities for these children. Fourth, NGOs could help urban pre-schools and kindergarten classes at migrant schools to provide early childhood education, and at the same time, explore the future development of rural pre-schools to allow rural kids to receive pre-school education. 20
survey in Haidian district in Beijing and Nanshan, Futian, Yantian, and Bao'an districts in Shenzhen. The project carried out face-to-face interviews with six hundred migrants, and visited relevant municipal government offices to talk to employees in order to understand relevant policy and implementation. In understanding the circumstances of housing and schooling for the children of current migrants, as well as how these two factors affects the degree of assimilation into cities and taking from relevant domestic and international experience and research, the project proposes policy suggestions for advancing the integration of migrant workers into cities as well as how NGOs can sufficiently enhance their role.
II. Housing and education situation for migrants and problems faced Educational characteristics, employment, and salary of surveyed population Educational characteristics of the surveyed population A few things need to be explained: first, Beijing, Shenzhen and other cities are the same in that the main group of migrants are workers who perform physical labor, but there is also a group without local household registrations who have degrees from technical colleges or higher levels of education and are self-employed. This survey considered this characteristic. Second, most migrants who come to cities to work are male, but since the turn of the century, there is a clear trend towards the migration of entire families. In this survey, females made up almost half of survey participants. These two factors could cause the analysis based on the questionnaire to have a certain bias. However, those surveyed can still represent the basic situation of integration into cities of those who migrate from other places. At the same time, the research group combined current documents and materials with the practical experience of this survey, revising the quantitative results to a certain degree, in the hope of getting close to the actual situation. From Table 1, it can be seen that young people make up the majority of the surveyed migrants, with 52.5% under 35, while those with a middle or high school education, 58.8%, also make up the majority. Most – 86.1% - are married, while almost half migrated with their entire families. Table 1: Characteristics and education of surveyed population Category
Options
Number
Percentage
Gender
Male Female
309 291
51.4 48.5
Age
25 and below 26 – 30 31 – 35 36 – 40 40 – 50 over 50
70 134 111 163 88 34
11.7 22.3 18.5 27.1 14.7 5.7
2
Education Level
None or little Elementary Junior High Senior High Technical Secondary Technical college/above
7 87 232 121 65 88
1.2 14.5 38.7 20.1 10.8 14.7
Marital Status
Single Married Divorced
81 517 2
13.5 86.1 0.4
Children
0 1 2 3 or more
89 268 184 59
14.8 44.7 30.7 9.8
Whole family migrated?
Yes No
269 331
44.8 55.2
Employment and salary characteristics of surveyed population Migrants began coming to cities for employment in the mid-1980s.
In this survey, 52.4% had
been away from their hometowns for 1 – 5 years, while 47.6% had been away for five or more years. Additionally, 71.8% had been in their current city for 1 – 5 years, while 28.2% had been there for five or more years (see Figures 1 and 2).
16-19年 20年及以上 1.0% 1.9%
20年及以上 16-19年
9.7%
10-15年
4.9%
18.4% 10-15年
1-5年
22.3%
52.4%
5-9年 6.8%
1-5年 71.8%
5-9年 10.7%
Figure 1: Time away from hometown Figure 2: Time in current city 1-5 years: Blue 1-5 years: Blue 5-9 years: Green 5-9 years: Green 10-15 years: Gray 10-15 years: Gray 16-19 years: Purple 16-19 years: Purple 20 or more years: Yellow 20 or more years: Yellow Most migrants work in construction or service, as 27.2% of those surveyed work in construction, between 60 and 70% work in commerce and service, and about 12% do other work (see Figure 3). 3
Of the surveyed migrants, those with family net incomes of between 10,000 and 30,000 yuan in 2008 made up the largest group – 41.7% of the total.
Those with family net incomes above 30,000
yuan made up 35.2%, while 9.8% had family net incomes below 10,000 yuan. The other 12.6% did not respond to this question (see Figure 4). 没回答 12.6% 10万元以上 8.7% 6-10万元 1万元以下 12.6% 9.7%
其它
写字楼人员 11.7%13.6%
服务人员 18.4%
个体商户 29.1%
1-3万元 41.7%
建筑工人 27.2%
Figure 3: Field of current occupation Office work: Blue Entrepreneurship (small scale, such as working in small shops or markets): Green Construction: Gray Service: Purple Other: Yellow
3-6万元 14.6%
Figure 4: 2008 net income Less than 10,000: Yellow 10,000-30,000: Purple 30,000-60,000: Gray 60,000-100,000: Green More than 100,000: Blue No answer: Red
Housing problems for migrants For China's more than 130 million migrant workers, those that go to large and medium sized cities at the prefecture level and above make up more than 60% and comprise the main group of migrants.
Clothing, food, and housing are the most basic requirement for personal and societal
development.
In order to survive and develop in cities, migrant workers first need to resolve the
issue of housing. However, migrants are pushed outside of the social system that guarantees long term housing in cities, so they lack fixed housing.
Relevant surveys make clear, close to 40% of
migrant workers live in collective dormitories or makeshift shelters because the monthly rent for typical urban apartments has unceasingly gone up.
A considerable portion of migrants rent
accommodations in the chaotic area between cities and the countryside.
Space is small, and most
lack necessary sanitary, heating, cooling, ventilation, natural lighting, fire prevention, and other basic facilities. The environment is disorderly, dirty, and poor, and transportation is not convenient. Because migrant workers' salaries are low, even if they live in places with the worst conditions and lowest rent, rent still makes up a pretty large part of their salaries. Many married migrant workers live separately. 4
This survey took a step towards illustrating the housing problems for migrants, which seriously influence their quality of life, also affecting healthcare and education for their children and becoming one of the largest obstacles towards their assimilation into cities and towns. Housing conditions and problems The distribution of migrant workers in large and medium sized cities determines their housing requirements. Of the migrants surveyed, 53.4% live in the city, while 46.6% live in the outskirts of the city, the area between the city and countryside. Currently, those who live in cities primarily use three channels to resolve their housing problem: first, some buy their own property. This group makes up a small proportion, 5.8%. Second, they live in collective dormitories provided by their employers. This group primarily works in construction, housing accommodations, food service, and other service enterprises, and some enterprises at large-scale industrial parks. Those who go through this channel made up 40.8% of those surveyed. The majority of migrant workers rent a place to live on the market, as individuals or families. This group made up 53.4% (see Figure 5).
自有住房 5.8%
其他 25.2%
集体宿舍 40.8%
楼房 39.8%
个人租赁 53.4%
平房 29.1%
地下室 5.8%
Figure 5: Current housing Own house or apartment: Blue Rent house or apartment: Green Collective dormitory: Gray
Figure 6: Housing characteristics Standalone house: Blue Underground: Green Apartment: Gray Other: Purple From this survey we can see that as a whole, the quality of accommodations for migrants is low, and the problem is primarily focused in a few areas: 1.
Space is small, environment is poor
Most individuals or families that migrate live in places with an area of 20 or fewer square meters. The survey illustrates that 53.4% live in rooms that are 20 square meters or smaller, with 10.7% living in places that are smaller than 10 square meters. Only 39.8% live in multi-story apartment buildings. Of the rest, many live in the outskirts of the city with dirty, disorderly, and poor surroundings that lack educational, cultural, and healthcare facilities.
The places where they
live are also rather far from their workplaces. An additional 5.7% live in rooms that are 5
underground. Common problems that migrants face in accommodations are small spaces and poor environment (see Figure 6).
1
2. Housing facilities are lacking; most do not have standalone kitchens or sanitation facilities Of the surveyed migrants, 62.1% do not have standalone kitchens; 68% do not have standalone bathrooms; 53.4% do not have heat, and 49.5% do not have gas. Winters are cold, summers are not, and sanitation conditions are lacking, which seriously affects the lives and study of migrants and their children. Table 2: Size and facilities of accommodations Area Percentage Facilities Less than 10 sq. meters 10.7 No standalone kitchen 10 – 20 sq. meters 42.7 No standalone bathroom 21 – 30 sq. meters 22.3 No heat 31 – 99 sq. meters 14.6 Water More than 100 sq. meters 9.7 No gas
Percentage 62.1 68 53.4 99 49.5
3. A considerable number live illegally, accommodations are not stable Of migrants' who rent, including those who rent rooms in the outskirts of the city or underground, a considerable portion have not received legal permission from the relevant department.
They could be evicted at any time, causing shelter to not be stable. Furthermore,
policy-wise, residents renting rooms or provision of collective dormitories by employers both do not fall under the scope of “legal fixed shelter” for integration into cities. 4. High rent Those surveyed who pay 500 yuan per month or less in rent make up 49.5% of the total, with a large portion of those living in housing provided by their employers (40.8% of the total use housing provided by their employers). Those who pay 500 yuan or more in rent make up 50.5% of the total.
For migrants, rent makes up more than 30% of their monthly net income. Because their
income is low, as migrant workers and service employees, the main part of the group can only rent accommodations in the city with the worst conditions and lowest rent.
Still, rent makes up a large
share of their salaries. Additionally, with rent making up 30% of their income, this has already reached a precautionary rate, as it can seriously affect
1
improvement of their standard of living.
According to a 2007 survey by a Ministry of Housing and Construction research group, more than a quarter of migrants' accommodations is 5 square meters or less, while one third have accommodations of 5 – 10 square meters. This is far below the standard of 16 square meter standard for city households with economic difficulties. Surveyed construction workers in Wuhan have an average of 1.5 square meters, while migrants who work in food service and at the shipyard have accommodations with an average of 2 square meters. In Shanghai in 2005, the average for city residents was 15.5 square meters, but for migrant workers in Shanghai who were surveyed about their housing situation in 2004 and 2007, the average for most was below 10 square meters, as 74.9% had below 10. 6
In order for their rent expense to fall by a large degree, they often rent rooms in groups, which can lead to problems.2 2001元以上 4.9% 1001-2000元 15.7%
0-100元 37.3%
501-1000元 29.4%
101-500元 12.7%
5.
Figure 7: Monthly housing expense 0 – 100: Blue 101 – 500: Green 501 – 1000: Gray 1001 – 2000: Purple 2001 and above: Yellow Many married migrant workers live separately.
Of the migrants surveyed, 79.6% are married, and 32% of them live in the same city as the rest of their family, which illustrates that more than 60% of married couples live apart.
Migrants have no choice and no hope about housing The first thing discovered by the survey is that migrants, especially laborers, despite living in considerably poor conditions, mostly felt they were “somewhat satisfied” with their accommodations. Additionally, a large portion do not have plans to improve their housing conditions.
This means they don't have any options. The primary reason, especially for migrant
workers, is because of their salaries. Their salaries are low, and house prices and rent are high, so they lower their demands for housing conditions. The survey shows that the largest group – 41.7% - said they are “somewhat satisfied with their accommodations; only 16.6% said they are “not satisfied,” which is a lot lower than the 38.8% who expressed that they are “satisfied.” Those without plans to improve their housing situation make up 54.4% of the total, while those with plans to improve their situation make up 45.6%.
2
According to the findings of a 2007 survey of close to 4000 migrants workers in Shanghai conducted by the Ministry of Housing and Construction, 69.2% made less than 1500 yuan per month, while 7.4% made less than 750 yuan per month. An individual with the burden of an average 232.9 yuan monthly rent pays 31% of his monthly salary in rent. For the 61.8% with monthly salaries from 750 – 1500 yuan, an individual with an a average monthly rent of 197 yuan pays 17.5% of his salary in rent. 7
In understanding why they do not plan to improve their housing situation, 78% said it was because of economic reasons.
This shows the substance of the problem: the largest reason that
they do not plan to improve their housing situation is economic difficulties, mainly the contradiction that their salaries are low and housing prices and rent are high. Table 3: Level of satisfaction with housing and plans to improve Level of Options Percentage satisfaction with Very satisfied 2.9 current housing Satisfied 38.8 conditions Somewhat satisfied 41.7
Do you have plans to improve your housing situation? Reason for not planning to improve housing conditions
Not satisfied Very much not satisfied Options Yes No
16.6 0.0 Percentage 45.6 54.4
Options Policy reasons Economic reasons
Percentage 0.0 78.0
Other 22.0 The second thing that the survey discovered is that in terms of planning to live permanently in the city, other than those who have not yet decided, the number who plan to live permanently in the city surpasses the number who do not plan to.
This shows that even though housing conditions are
poor, they do want to integrate into cities and have the intention to make the cities their permanent residences. The survey shows that 23.3% of migrant workers are not sure whether they want to make the city their permanent home; 39.8% plan to live permanently in the city, which is more than the 36.9% who do not plan to live there permanently.
8
不确定 23.3%
是 39.8%
否 36.9%
Figure 8: Do you plan to live in the city permanently? Yes: Blue No: Green Not sure: Gray Education Problems for Children of Migrants Migrants generally attach great importance to the education of their children. It is an important sign of their job stability and integration into cities that a growing number of their children migrate with them and attend schools in the cities. National compulsory education policy in recent years has required local governments to provide education for migrant workers‟ children who live in the city, primarily at public schools. The implementation of this policy has scored great achievements toward reducing education discrimination for children of migrant workers. Nonetheless, public schools in some cities still charge migratory children extra fees for attending their schools, such as “temporary school fees” or “donations.” Consequently, a considerable number of migrant workers‟ children either still have to attend private schools of low quality or become left-behind children in their hometowns. All these problems affect children‟s education, increase migrants‟ burdens and have become another obstacle preventing migrants‟ integration into cities. The state of education for children of migrants and problems Among the 600 migrant workers surveyed, nearly half of the families have one child, 184 families have two children, and 59 families have three or more children. Of these children, 469 are attending school; these include 179 in preschool, 157 at the compulsory education level, 105 at high schools or technical secondary schools, and 28 at technical colleges or higher. Forty-two children are not attending schools; these include 24 who are less than 5 years old and 18 who are older than 20. The vast majority of migrants attach great importance to the education of their children. When asked “would you be willing to pay higher fees for your children to receive a better education?” 93.5% answered positively. However, this survey reveals the following education problems for children of migrant workers: 9
1.
Family separation, large number of left-behind children, and middle and high
school in their hometowns The survey shows that 36.8% of these children migrate with their parents and attend schools in cities; 19.7 % attend schools in other cities; left-behind children who attend schools in their hometowns account for the largest percentage, at 43.5%. The survey indicates an even higher percentage of migrant workers‟ children who attend middle school and high school in their hometowns, at 62.5%. Table 4--School Location for Children of Migrants
In cities with parents Other cities Hometown
Preschool
Elementary school 68
Junior high school 12
Senior high school 16
58 49 72
12 27
6 32
14 48
Technical secondary school 15
Technical college & higher 4
12
11 13
Of surveyed migrants, 78.8 say they leave their children in their hometowns for financial factors, while 10.6 percent attribute it to policy. From our analysis, we believe that the financial and policy factors are interrelated. Financially, on the one hand, most migrant workers have low incomes; on the other hand, the fees are high for their children to attend schools in the cities where they reside. Many, even during their compulsory education years, would have to pay fees to attend city schools, while these have been eliminated in their hometowns. Policy plays a role in causing this difference. In addition, many of these children attend junior and senior high schools in their hometowns as the result of unfairness in the current education system. This system bars migrants‟ children from taking the college entrance examination outside their hometowns, and since text books and education quality differ from place to place, many of these children are forced to attend high schools back at home in order to have a better shot at passing their local college entrance examinations. Relevant studies have shown that some of the left-behind children who live with their grandparents are being spoiled.
It is easy for them to develop a self-centered mentality; they do
not know how to appreciate and show concern for elders and are not good at getting along with their peers. Most grandparents are illiterate or semi-literate and thus cannot provide any guidance for these children‟s study. Because they are deprived of parental affection and care, with no one to communicate with or complain to when encountering problems and less interaction with their peers, left-behind children are prone to becoming introverted, unsociable, eccentric, have low selfesteem, and develop extreme character and other psychological issues. Schools where left-behind children are enrolled also tend to have no regular teachers to provide life-counseling services to 10
students. Left-behind children all face many safety problems. All of these things are not conducive to the education and development of migrants‟ children. 2.
Some children of migrants attend ill-equipped private schools
The survey shows that 72.3 percent of migrants‟ children attend public schools, so the other 27.7 percent attend private schools.
In total, 75.7 percent attend public schools at cities where
their parents work, and 24.3 percent attend private schools in cities where their parents work. Table 5—Types of Schools Attended by Children of Migrants Children Who Attend Schools
Type of school
Total children
Percentage
Public School
339
72.3
131
75．7
Private School
130
27.7
42
24．3
Where Parents Work & Percentage
There are several major problems. First, more than 10 percent of migrants‟ children who attend public schools still have to pay “temporary school fees”. Second, most of those who attend privately-run migrant schools do not yet receive public education subsidies even though they fit the age requirement for compulsory education. They have to pay tuition fees of more than 1000 yuan each year and other miscellaneous charges. Third, the operation of private schools primarily relies on fees collected from students, to pay for room and board, teacher salaries, and other operation expenses; these not only increase the burden on migrants, but also lead to financial difficulties for the schools. Teachers salaries are low and turnover is high, which affects the quality of teaching. Fourth, only some of the privately-run schools for migrants‟ children in cities are approved by relevant education departments; conditions are difficult and children studying at these schools do not have equal status compared to their peers at public schools. 3.
Migrants have a heavy burden in supporting their children's eduction
The survey shows that 22.4% of migrant workers pay 500 yuan or less for their children‟s education expenses each year; 10.5% pay 500 to 1000 yuan; 31.6% pay 1000 to 5000 yuan; and 35.5% pay 5000 yuan or more. Within education expenses, tuition and miscellaneous fees account for 31.6% and 48.7% respectively; temporary school fees account for 10.5%. In total these three categories add up to 90.8% of education-related expenses. Migrants‟ annual education expense for left-behind children at the stage of compulsory education is all under 500 yuan for those surveyed (12 families pay 0 yuan; 48 families pay 200 to 300 yuan; and 30 families pay 400 to 500 yuan). By contrast, migrant workers‟ annual education expense for their children living in cities at the stage of compulsory education ranges from 1000 to 5000 yuan, which is far higher than the fees for left-behind children. 11
Of migrants surveyed, 36.8% consider their children‟s education expenditure as too high or relatively high when compared to total household expenditure. Migrants evaluation on their children's education and a confusion of choices The survey shows that the majority of migrants are not satisfied with the cities‟ education policy for their children, as 60.5% answered “no” to the question of whether the cities‟ education policy is conducive to the education of their children (Figure 9). Similarly, 84.6% indicate they would send their children back home to attend schools because of difficulties in attending schools in the cities where they work, while 61.5 % state they would send their children back to hometowns to attend schools because of higher education costs in cities. (Figure 10) However, at the same time, most migrants surveyed also indicated satisfaction with the current state of education for their children, accounting for 75.3%, while 24.7% said they were not satisfied (Figure 11). Furthermore, 93.5% say they are willing to spend more for a better education for their children, and 55.3 percent would choose to stay in cities long-term so that their children could receive a better education (Figure 12).
否 60.5%
否 38.5%
是 39.5%
Figure 9: Does city education policy for migrant workers' children make it easy for your children to attend school? Yes: Blue No: Green
是 61.5%
Figure 10: Would you send your child back to your hometown to attend school because fees are too high in the city? Yes: Blue No: Green
12
否 24.7%
否 44.7%
是 75.3%
Figure 11: Are you currently satisfied with your child's eduction? Yes: Blue No: Green
是 55.3%
Figure 12: Would you stay in the city long-term so that your child could receive a good education? Yes: Blue No: Green
Such contradiction in migrants‟ evaluation and choices suggests that although migrant workers are not satisfied with cities‟ education policy toward their children, they acknowledge the quality of education in the cities. Their preference is for their children to accompany them to the cities and receive better education, and so they demand improvement of cities‟ education policy toward the children of migrants.
III. Regional innovations to solve the problems of migrant workers’ housing and education for their children Under the pressure of the market economy and urbanization in the 21st century, the central government has implemented a development strategy of uniform management of urban and rural areas and has dramatically changed its policies regarding migrant workers. For example, in 2003, the General Office of the State Council issued the “Announcement on Bettering Migrant Workers‟ Urban Employment Management and Services.” The State Council also issued the “Some Suggestions on Solving Migrant Workers‟ Problems” in 2006. These policy directives require the government to protect migrant workers‟ legal rights, strengthen employment services and training, and improve public services to migrant workers based on the principle of fairness. In this policy environment, some local innovations to solve the problems of housing and education for migrants have attracted attention.
13
Multiple channels to improve housing conditions for migrants have been explored To include migrants in the urban welfare housing system with government sponsorship. In late June 2008, Yangzhou's city government issued the “Implementation Suggestion on Further Resolving the Housing Challenge for Low Income Households.” For the first time, this policy directive addressed the migrants' difficult housing problems. It required the city‟s economic development zone and other districts to design and implement uniform housing welfare measures. The city was to provide certain amount of compensation and rewards. For those enterprises that had established apartments for migrant workers on their own, the supervising department in the city government and the economic development zone or industrial park management office were to offer rewards as opposed to compensation to the enterprises. Migrant workers with official proof of having lived in Yangzhou for over five years would be eligible, just as the urban residents are, to rent or purchase affordable apartments, both of which are subsidized by the local government. Due to the government support on land use and subsidies, enterprises were enthusiastic in building apartments for migrant workers. Industrial parks in some districts built migrant workers‟ apartments and leased them to companies for free. So far, over 800,000 square meters of migrant workers‟ apartments have been built and about 40,000 people have moved in. Most of these rooms only cost 1-2 yuan in monthly rent or are completely free. In Hangji Township of Hanjiang District, where many migrants live, nearly 150,000 square meters of apartments were built by 10 enterprises, which provided lodging for about 10,000 workers.3 Use multiple models to address the housing problem for migrant workers. When the General Office of the Fujian government delivered the “Announcement on the Instructions for Improving Housing Conditions for Migrant Workers” issued by the Ministry of Construction and other ministries in 2008, it planned to incorporate the housing issue for long-term migrant workers into the urban housing construction plans. In the cities of Fuzhou and Quanzhou, a trial program went on in which industrial parks built accommodations and enterprises leased them to migrant workers for a low prices or for free. In this model, local governments and enterprises together sponsored construction of dorms for lease to migrant workers. In Xiamen, some apartments for migrants were built by the neighboring villages using a shareholding model. The village committees invested collective assets and individual farmers invested personal savings in building residential complex. Shares of individual peasants could be inherited only and not withdrawn, and transfers of shares were only allowed among the villagers. Currently there are seven projects of apartment construction for migrants in Xiamen. The total area is about 307,000 square meters which would be able to take care of housing for 60,000 migrant workers. The city of Longyan has made migrant workers‟ housing issue part of its plan for building affordable apartments. The Changting Tengfei Economic 3
Yangzhou Daily, January 2, 2009 14
Development Zone built eight economical apartment buildings with a total of 502 apartments and sold them to migrant worker couples. Over 1,000 workers have moved in these new apartments, each about 40-60 square meters. Migrants’ children should have equal access to education In order to solve the education problem for migrant workers‟ children, the city of Hefei in Anhui Province relaxed the admissions requirements and designated 87 schools to accept migrant workers‟ children. These children could also take the national college entrance exam in Hefei, a move which was unprecedented in China. Shanghai has posited that compulsory education should be guaranteed for all children of migrants who meet the requirements and that these children should receive the same education as their peers with urban household registrations. The children of migrants living in the four districts in the city center have all started school locally. About 60% of the total migrants‟ children in Shanghai have entered local schools. In addition, the education bureau incorporated the schools run by migrants themselves into the official management system, standardizing education and improving the quality, and let them use the unused classrooms, desks and chairs from public schools for free. The city government of Kunshan acknowledged the importance of strengthening moral education for the children of “New Kunshan Residents”, and aimed to leave nobody behind in recruiting school-age children. While government funding was the main resource for building schools for migrants' children, the government also encouraged the contribution of private capital. The city issued the “Suggestions on Providing Education for the Children of „New Kunshan Residents‟”. The 28 public middle and primary schools in Kunshan have all opened their doors to migrant workers‟ children and waived the temporary schooling fees and school selection fees. There are another 11 schools built specifically for the children of migrants, with a total investment of 35 million yuan and occupying a total of 40,000 square meters, which have recruited about 17,000 students. After the mission of leaving nobody behind was basically accomplished, the city shifted its focus to improving education quality. The education bureau established a special department to handle the issue of non-public schools for migrant workers‟ children. The department hired nine senior educators to be superintendents and advise those schools on standardization. The textbooks used by those schools were instructed by the bureau to be compatible with the public school system. Most schools have been equipped with overhead projectors and computer labs. In total there are 500 computers in these schools. Three schools‟ labs have Internet access and three schools have rubberized running tracks. The improvement of educational facilities and management has laid a foundation for ensuring that migrant workers‟ children receive decent education based on the city government‟s directive. Non-governmental organizations and volunteers are active in helping non-public schools for 15
migrant workers’ children Since the late 1990s, student organizations and volunteers from Beijing Normal University, Renmin University, China Youth University for Political Science and other schools have maintained consistent contact with some private schools for migrant workers‟ children such as the Xingzhi school, Shuren school and Huaao school. Students have volunteered to teach at those schools and brought their teaching methods to local teachers. Their help has made the long-discriminated against children of migrants feel welcomed by society and been a force for development in these schools. Many NGOs in Beijing and Shenzhen have offered great support to non-public schools and to migrant workers. The Maple Center has been offering help for teaching and learning at home at three non-public schools for migrants' children(Jinghua Hope School, Huaao School and Daxing Xingzhi New Citzien School) and in Guangan Middle School since 2007. The Center edited a “Home Teaching Manual for Migrant Workers” and organized a home teaching activity called “Three Ten-Minute” (ten minutes each on education of love, intelligence, and morality). The activity lasted for a year and its experience could be extended to other regions. Hong Kong’s experience in provision of low-rent apartments to migrants and low-income residents With a small area and high population density, Hong Kong has been widely recognized as one of the places to have best addressed the housing issue. Through a public housing plan, the Hong Kong‟s government provides low-rent housing to low-income households and encourages other local residents to find their own housing, which greatly improved the housing conditions for migrants and low-income residents whose number has sharply increased. Hong Kong‟s public housing system is a valuable example for the mainland to follow when resolving the housing issue for migrant workers.. After WWII, Hong Kong‟s population increased from 600,000 to over 2 million in the period of 1945-1950, to 3 million in 1961, and to nearly 7 million today. The high population density makes Hong Kong severely short of housing, and the housing issue for both local and migrant residents is a serious problem for Hong Kong‟s development. The process of finding a solution included three phrases. In the beginning, the government ignored the housing problem. A big fire in late 1953 left about 50,000 residents homeless. In order to resettle the victims, the British government established a Moving and Resettling Affairs Office in 1954 to be in charge of building accommodations for moving and resettling, which started the great plan of constructing public housing. In 1954, the Hong Kong Housing Construction Commission (the predecessor of the Hong Kong Housing Commission) was founded to be responsible for building public rental apartments for middle income families. In 1961, the government made a “Low Cost Housing Plan” to provide low-rent 16
housing to low-income families. The quality of public housing built in the 1950s was quite low and the per capita living area was only 2.2 square meters. The 1960s saw Hong Kong‟s economic takeoff and the “Low Cost Housing Plan” provided a large number of houses and rooms for Hong Kong‟s laborers. The rent was only 15-20% of the market value and thus the labor costs were low, which was conducive to the development and prosperity of Hong Kong‟s manufacturing industry. In 1972, Hong Kong‟s government announced a “Ten-Year Housing Plan” aimed at building better housing for Hong Kong‟s residents from 1973-82 based on the minimum requirement of 3.3 square meters per person. It was also aimed at rebuilding the low quality moving-and-resettling houses. The “Ten-Year Housing Plan” was extended for another five years in 1982. In order to implement the plan, the government carried out a “New City and Town Plan” to reduce population density. The construction of new public housing was centered in nine new cities and towns such as Tsuen Wan District and Sha Tin District in the New Territories in order to relieve traffic pressure in the downtown area. The government then pushed forward the plans of “Room for Everyone” and “Construction in Partnership with Private Institutions” in 1977 and 1978 respectively. According to the plan of “Room for Everyone”, the government provided free land and the housing commission built houses which were to be sold to residents for a price 30-45% lower than market value. In 1987, the government made a long-term housing development strategy and encouraged residents to purchase private homes on their own. Among all homes, the percentage of those owned by residents increased from 42% in 1987 to 53% in 2000. And among the public housing built by the government, privately-owned homes increased from 12% in 1987 to 33% in 2000. After the 1997 Asian financial crisis, the government shifted the policy back to provision of public housing. The government consolidated its resources to provide rental houses to those that needed them. At the same time, the government stopped being a real estate developer and stopped building and selling government-subsidized houses. The government intervention in the market was reduced to a minimum. Throughout the process of providing low-rent housing to low-income residents, the Hong Kong government has formed an effective system and measures to provide land, invest capital, set housing standards, distribute low-rent housing, manage real estate property, and instruct residents on renting apartments or buying private homes.
IV.
Research results and policy recommendation
Research Results Migrants have become a new and ever-growing source of labor during China‟s Reform and Opening, industrialization and urbanization processes. A new phrase of development is such that 17
migrants‟ employment has gradually stabilized, they have established their families in cities, and they have increasingly demanded integration into cities and the ability to become true city residents. Successful resolution of their problems has direct impact on the resolution of the three main rural issues, industrialization, healthy development of urbanization, and social justice and harmony. The central government has paid extraordinary attention to migrant workers and their employment problems. In the 21st century, the government has made a series of policy decisions and issued “Some Suggestions on Solving Migrant Workers‟ Problems”. The government has made obvious progress in improving the protection of migrant workers‟ rights and providing training and public services to migrants. However, the policy of putting the people first and the policy of equal treatment and uniformization of urban and rural economic and social development, is not equal to the eradication of the rural-urban dichotomous system. Migrants still face many problems of life and development in cities, which are obstacles to their employment stability and integration into cities. Some of these problems include lack of protection of labor rights and interests, inaccessibility of urban public services, the urban housing welfare system‟s non-inclusion of migrants, lack of social security, difficulty in registering a hukou, lack of democratic rights, and the challenges faced by children, women and the elders left behind in the countryside. As shown in this survey, many migrant workers are separated from their families and faced with the contradiction of low salaries and high housing costs. The poor housing conditions and instability of housing significantly influence their life and development. The children of migrants have not received fair treatment in education, and there are also challenges for children left behind in their hometowns for school. Both housing and education of their children are the two main problems that demand attention in order to ensure their basic rights and help them integrate into cities. There is also a need for a serious of social management reforms in order to implement the policy of fair treatment of migrant workers, achieve uniform citizenship identity, equal opportunities and equal rights, and allow migrant workers to fully assimilate into cities. Policy Recommendations Include migrant workers in the urban housing welfare system and improve their housing conditions through various channels The housing issues of those migrants who have stable urban employment need to be incorporated into urban housing plans and needs to be addressed through various channels. The current mainstream resolution is to rely on enterprises to provide housing. We have issues with this solution. Housing is a citizen‟s basic right and is a very important requirement in the Millennium Development Goals. The government has an inescapable responsibility to ensure housing conditions for its citizens and cannot leave the responsibility to enterprises. We suggest that, for those workers who have stable employment and have continuously lived in cities for a certain amount of time (for 18
example, five years), the government should gradually make their housing part of the urban housing welfare system, and make sure that their housing rights are at least equal to that of urban lowincome residents. First, the government should motivate employers to provide clean and safe housing for migrant workers, give favorable policies to the enterprises that build their own dorms, and increase public facility construction in migrants‟ residential areas. Second, plans for constructing villages within cities need to fully consider migrants‟ residential needs. A significant percentage of migrant workers live in the outskirts of cities and rent local residential houses or in migrant worker dormitories. The phenomenon has become part of today‟s socioeconomic development. Also, the government should make plans to encourage villages in these areas to make use of unused construction land and noncontracted agricultural land, through a shareholding model, to build residences for migrants. At the same time, the government should provide accompanying infrastructure, legalize the renting of houses on rural collective land, and regulate management services. Third, the government should gradually include the families of migrant workers who have stable employment and at least a year of urban residence into the category eligible for government-subsidized low-rent and affordable apartments. In regions of dense migrant worker populations, the government should plan to allocate a certain percentage of construction land to build low-rent apartment complexes for migrant workers and urban low-income residents. The government should establish a special management system and a fair distribution system and rent these apartments for below-market prices to those who have stable employment but low income. Fourth, the government should use financial policy to support housing for migrants. It should encourage financial institutions to provide low-interest longterm loans to developers that build housing for migrants. The central and local governments should subsidize the construction of accompanying facilities in these residential areas. They should adopt such favored policies as reducing or waiving administrative fees for using public land and motivating residential communities, industrial parks and enterprises to build accommodations and rent them specifically to migrants at a suggested price. Fifth, the government should combine the policies of constructing temporary housing and encouraging migrants to purchase private homes. Improve the system to allow migrants’ children to receive complete and equal compulsory education and to ensure that they receive equal educational resources Maintaining equal education for migrants‟ children is the foundation for ending the cycle of poverty and helping migrant workers and their children integrate into cities. The government should insist on making regions with a net inflow of migrants take care of education for their children. Public schools should be where most of these children go for education. Local governments should include education for migrants' children into their education plans and budgets, allocate money on the basis of the real number of students, and ensure that migrant workers‟ children receive free 19
compulsory education and treatment equal to that afforded local urban children. The government should make efforts to correct the discriminatory behavior of some local public schools that charge migrants “temporary schooling fees” and “donations.” The government should change the current situation where the percentage of migrants' children in public schools is very low. It should make full use of the current education resources in public schools and, in areas there are a lot of migrant workers, allocate state budget to build more public schools. The government should actively support and regulate non-public schools for migrant workers‟ children and make efforts to satisfy their needs. For those private schools that undertake the government‟s responsibility providing compulsory education to migrants‟ children, the government should include them in the teacher training and management systems and provide subsidies based on the number of registered students. Students in these schools should also have their tuition and fees waived and receive the same subsidies and treatment as that for their counterparts in public schools. Currently, many migrant workers' children receive compulsory education in cities but have to return to their rural hometowns for high school, which is bad for educational continuity and does not lead to healthy development. The government should gradually separate school registration from hukou registration and start experimenting in cities below the provincial capital level in granting migrants' children the right to take high school and college entrance exams in the cities where their parents work. Allow NGOs to play a further role in improving migrant workers’ housing conditions and their children’s education conditions Areas in which NGOs could play a role include: First, NGOs could conduct research at migrant workers‟ workplaces, residences, and their children‟s schools. The research would be meant to reveal migrants' contribution to urban socioeconomic development and identify their difficulties in housing and in their children‟s education, so that the issues could attract societal attention and drive local governments to properly solve them. Second, by focusing on private migrant schools, NGOs could organize volunteers to offer teaching support, train teachers on instructing migrant workers on education in the home, and facilitate exchange and communication among different schools. Third, NGOs could provide help for children left in rural areas while their parents are working in cities. NGOs could provide learning and life counseling services to these children and support the Women‟s Federation and other mass organizations in carrying out activities for these children. Fourth, NGOs could help urban pre-schools and kindergarten classes at migrant schools to provide early childhood education, and at the same time, explore the future development of rural pre-schools to allow rural kids to receive pre-school education. 20
