China has the second-largest population of any country in the world, at 1.4 billion people—just behind India. And of that total, two-thirds—more than 900 million—live in urban areas. So If you’re interested in learning about urban planning, there’s no better place to go than China.
Thanks to the efforts of Yingling Fan, associate dean of faculty and an urban planning professor at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs, a group of nine students from the School did just that earlier this year. Fan, a native of China, led them on a two-week tour of five cities in China to experience alternative ways of urban planning and urban life.
Fan has offered this course in the past, but this year’s trip was the first since 2019—before the COVID-19 pandemic.
Lessons from five cities
Each of the cities they visited has a unique set of challenges to urban planning, said Fan. Take Shenzhen, for example. Over the past 40 years its population has exploded—transforming it from a fishing town of 30,000 residents to the fourth largest city in China, with a population approaching 20 million. That rapid growth has caused tremendous demand for housing, education, and other public services, Fan said.
The capital city of Beijing faces different challenges. It’s one of the world's oldest cities, with a history that dates back some 3,000 years. So planners there must balance the desire to preserve the city’s historical elements with the need to provide modern services to its 22 million residents.
City leaders have developed a variety of policies to relieve the city’s density. For example, Beijing limits how many residents can own a car, so officials devised a lottery system to decide who can get a license and then buy a vehicle.
“Those decisions are made depending upon the size of the household, the number of children you have, how many years you’ve lived in your home, to make sure the lottery is fair and equitable,” Fan explained. “Our students were impressed by how much deliberation went into that policy.”
A larger example: To help relieve some of the congestion in Beijing, a brand new city called Xiong’an about 60 miles away is being built from the ground up, at the behest of Chinese President Xi Jinping. Xiong’an is an integral part of Xi’s plan to transform the region southwest of Beijing into a high-technology hub. Some of the institutions and companies currently located in Beijing have or will soon move there.
Xiong’an is designed as a modern city based on the idea of the "15-minute life cycle," in which all the goods and services a resident would need are available within a 15-minute walk. It’s also a smart city, with a vast array of digital technologies that collect data from devices, buildings, sensors, and cameras to improve the efficiency of public services such as transportation, utilities, street lights, and public safety.
Comparing the two countries
One of the students on the trip, Grace DeLee (MURP ‘24) said it was a valuable experience for her. DeLee, who now works for the Federal Highway Administration in Lansing, Michigan, said she was impressed with how quickly Chinese officials can complete major projects.
In Shenzhen, the group met with an architect who designed one of the city’s subway stations. “It’s very large and has lots of amenities—things like a climbing gym, shopping, and restaurants. And it was built in just two years. That’s incredible,” she said.
Another group member, PhD student Mauricio Leon Mendez, described the trip as “mind blowing. It was incredible to see how a place with so many people could organize and provide services” such as mass transit, bike sharing, green spaces, and walkable cities.
That’s due primarily to China’s centralized planning approach that allows the government to make and implement decisions swiftly, enabling large-scale projects to progress rapidly. In contrast, the U.S. system prioritizes community engagement and public input, fostering inclusive decision-making but often resulting in a lengthier process.
“As a student of policy, it’s really important to understand how different systems influence outcomes,” said Leon Mendez. “In the U.S. we have a democratic system and we like deliberation. We like everyone to be on the same page. It’s a different ideology [compared to China], and therefore we move slower and more intentionally.”
While the two countries have different approaches to urban planning and policy making, Fan said their goals are similar: prosperity, equity, community health, and livability for their residents. “Engagement occurs in China, but it’s different from what happens in the U.S.”
New perspectives
The students on the trip had a positive experience, Fan said, even accounting for the language barrier and the current political tensions between the U.S. and China.
“Because we visited so many cities, we got a good perspective on a different form of government and how they run things,” said DeLee. “Now in my role as a federal employee, I really got to understand how policy can impact planning.”
Leon Mendez said the trip to China had him thinking about its relationship with the United States.
“China is so big, and I don’t know if that’s something to fear or respect,” he said. “I have a lot of issues with the repression there. It’s something we need to accept. We’re not doing ourselves a favor if we don’t have a collaborative relationship with China.”
Fan hopes the students’ visit to China will help them as they move forward into their careers in planning and public policy.
“This course forces the students to have a different perspective and an open mind to alternative ways of living and policy making, and maybe see the limitations of U.S. policy,” she said.
“Enabling these interactions is no less important than a diplomat working on foreign policy. What’s most important is to recognize our shared humanity. Don’t make assumptions about other countries. There are a lot of similarities rather than differences. I think that is most important in terms of what inspires me to do this work.”
--
Professor Fan is offering this course again this coming spring. The application deadline is February 1, 2025. More information is available in the class syllabus.
