In this guest post, Dr Can Cui describes the results of the research “Housing wealth accumulation and inequality in urban China”, funded by an International Fellowship from the Urban Studies Foundation and developed at the Department of Geography, Planning and International Development at the University of Amsterdam under the mentorship of Prof. Richard Ronald.
The project focuses on unravelling the intricate interplay between household characteristics and housing market circumstances in the process of wealth accumulation, with specific attention to the role of price appreciation. The fellowship has been instrumental in advancing this research by providing dedicated time, mentorship, and opportunities for international collaboration, thereby directly supporting the development of high-quality outputs, including journal articles, a funded collaborative research project, and organised conference sessions.
Background
In today’s society, inequality has largely shifted from disparities in labour income to disparities in wealth, with a growing trend of wealth concentration. Over the past 20 years, China’s ratio of household wealth to income has risen sharply, surpassing that of most developed economies, and wealth has become increasingly concentrated among a small group of people.
Housing wealth constitutes a major component of household wealth across countries. In China in particular, with the advancement of housing reform and marketisation, the share of housing wealth in total household wealth has increased significantly (see Figure 1). Housing has become the main channel through which residents share the dividends of economic growth, closely linked to the country’s institutional design.
(Source: Center for National Balance Sheet, Seafarer, https://www.seafarerfunds.com/prevailing-winds/chinas-household-balance-sheet/)
Under an asset-based welfare system, housing — due to its asset attributes — functions as a substitute for social security. The state promotes homeownership and stimulates rising housing prices to expand household assets and thus enable families to provide for their own welfare. Meanwhile, this approach has increased the degree of household financialization and indebtedness, further exacerbating inequalities in housing ownership and personal wealth.
Housing wealth differentiation in China
We conducted a series of empirical analyses using data from the 2017 and 2019 China Household Finance Survey (CHFS). Data analysis shows that the average household housing wealth and per capita housing wealth in China are 1.69 million yuan and 610,000 yuan, respectively. Overall, both total and per capita housing wealth display a spatial pattern of high values in coastal regions (Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong, Tianjin, Fujian, Zhejiang, and Jiangsu all exceed the national average) and low values in inland areas (see Figure 2).
When classified by region, city administrative level, and level of urban development, household housing wealth exhibits even greater disparities (see Figure 3). The housing wealth of residents in eastern China is about three times that of those in the central regions. Significant differentiation is also observed across cities of different administrative levels. By city tier, the average housing wealth in first-tier cities reaches 4.29 million yuan, nearly three times that of the new first-tier cities. Our calculations show that the Gini coefficient for household housing wealth is 0.6, which is broadly consistent with the findings of previous studies.
The classification statistics by individual and household socioeconomic attributes are largely consistent with expectations: household heads with higher education levels, higher occupational status, employment in the public sector, Communist Party membership, and urban household registration (hukou) tend to possess greater housing wealth.
The disparities in household housing wealth—whether across regions or among individuals—are shaped by a complex interplay of factors and processes under China’s institutional transformation.
First, the channels for acquiring housing property have changed substantially. Over the past two decades, the welfare-based housing allocation system of work units has gradually faded, giving way to a market-oriented system dominated by home purchases. Financing methods have also transformed (see Figure 4): while full cash payment used to be the mainstream form of home purchase, its share has declined in recent years. Now, more than half of homebuyers use some form of loan. The proportion of provident fund loans has grown slowly, while the use of commercial loans has increased rapidly, and combined loans have also become more common in recent years.
Second, the appreciation of housing wealth has become increasingly uneven. With rising housing prices—particularly since 2008—the cost of home purchase has increased, meaning that homes acquired between 1998 and 2003 experienced the greatest appreciation. From the perspective of the rate of housing wealth appreciation, properties purchased between 1989 and 1998 showed a rising trend, with a slight decline around 2014, followed by a rapid increase afterwards (see Figure 5).
In addition, different channels of housing acquisition are associated with distinct appreciation rates. Policy-based housing, including early-reformed housing and collectively built housing, has appreciated much more than commercial housing. Before 2001, the appreciation rate of policy-based housing was around 12%, gradually rising to approximately 20% by 2017. In contrast, the appreciation rate of commercial housing was markedly lower, remaining around 6% between 1989 and 2014 and increasing to 10% in 2017. These differences largely stem from the much lower purchase costs of policy-based housing, which yield significantly higher investment returns than those of commercial housing.
To summarise, Housing wealth inequality in urban China is shaped by spatial disparities, market forces, and institutional structures. Locational advantages in higher-tier or eastern cities facilitate greater housing wealth accumulation. Market mechanisms—particularly income, education, occupation, and multi-property ownership—have become the primary drivers of unequal housing wealth and appreciation, with gaps especially pronounced in first-tier cities. Institutional factors exert indirect influence through their effects on households’ financial capacity and access to policy-based financing. Overall, rising housing prices have disproportionately benefited certain groups, further widening household wealth disparities.
Reflecting on the fellowship experience
The USF International Fellowship has been a highly meaningful period that advanced my research on housing and migration while deepening my international collaboration and professional development at the University of Amsterdam. Stepping outside my familiar environment allowed me to pause, reflect, engage with new ideas, and observe how a different academic system operates in practice.
The fellowship created the time and space needed to make concrete research progress, resulting in several collaborative papers and a funded research project. Under the mentorship of Prof. Richard Ronald, we completed and submitted the co-authored paper “The Temporal and Spatial Dynamics of Housing Wealth: Inequality and Uneven Housing Appreciation in Urban China.” Building on this collaboration, we initiated a second paper, “Reconfiguring Housing, Debt, and Wealth in China’s Post-Boom Cities” for a special issue on “Debt Urbanism and the Housing Question.” In addition, I serve as co-editor of the Handbook of China Housing, for which Professor Ronald and Junru Cui contributed a chapter that is now nearing completion. During the fellowship period, I also worked with researchers from Radboud University, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, and Nanjing Agricultural University on the Sino-Dutch project proposal “AReNA — AI-enabled, Resilient Neighbourhood Agency”, which has been granted recently.
The fellowship also enabled me to participate actively in academic events, expand my international network, and enhance my professional skills. At the International Sociological Association Forum in Rabat, I organised three sessions on “Housing Inequality and Justice” and presented my research findings. In the Netherlands, I attended several PhD defences and delivered a presentation at the PEG group meeting, receiving valuable interdisciplinary feedback that helped refine my work. Besides, I completed UvA’s “Superb Supervision Training”, which significantly enhanced my supervisory, communication, and intercultural mentoring capabilities. Other training sessions—such as “AI Chatbot in Research” and “Leading Effective Meetings”—further strengthened my academic leadership and collaborative skills.
Reflecting on this journey, the USF International Fellowship has been a pivotal experience that enabled me to make substantial research progress, expand international networks, and generate new opportunities for future collaboration. After this period of refreshment, the fellowship has provided clarity and direction for the next stage of my academic career.