Disentangling the intersectional field of education and housing in China: Genesis, strategies and discontents

Qiong He and Shenjing He
Additional contact information
Qiong He: Department of Urban Planning and Design, Urban Systems Institute, Social Infrastructure for Equity and Wellbeing (SIEW) Lab, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
Shenjing He: Department of Urban Planning and Design, Urban Systems Institute, Social Infrastructure for Equity and Wellbeing (SIEW) Lab, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

Environment and Planning A, 2024, vol. 56, issue 5, 1462-1481

Abstract: Drawing on the Bourdieusian concept of ‘field’ and the theorization of ‘intersectionality’, this paper proposes a concept ‘intersectional field’ to disentangle the complex interrelations between housing and education in China, where they mutually constitute and co-produce yet trouble and counteract with each other, whereby exerting simultaneous exclusion in cultural and economic (re)production. Drawing on policy documents and 38 in-depth interviews with various stakeholders in China, we first delineate the genesis and evolvement of this intersectional field. We then demonstrate how middle-class parents rationalize and strategize their heavy investment in cultural and economic reproduction against the most recent policies that seemingly aim to de-intersect/decouple these two fields. We show that the intersectional field of housing and education in China emerges from state-imposed rules while being increasingly self-reinforced. It was also temporarily counteracted and suspended responding to the escalated crises of housing unaffordability and over-competition over quality schooling opportunities, through policies like franchising key schools from the city centre to the suburb and random allotting enrolment. These changes in the ‘rules of the game’ indeed bring uncertainties to the intersectional field. However, while discontent to this intersectional field abound, these actions are self-constrained by the internal logic of the intersectional field and thus unable to bring fundamental changes. Those with limited socio-economic capacities remain extremely disadvantageous in both fields. The policy intervention turns out to be merely a spatial reordering that relocates and expands the fierce competition from the city centre to the suburbs while repositioning the suburbs to be the focal point for strategic investment in the intersectional field.

Keywords: Intersectional field; housing; education; state; misrecognition; China (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0308518X241228453 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:envira:v:56:y:2024:i:5:p:1462-1481

DOI: 10.1177/0308518X241228453

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Environment and Planning A
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().