Changing neighbourhood cohesion under the impact of urban redevelopment: a case study of Guangzhou, China

Figures & data

Figure 1. Location of sampled sites in Guangzhou.

Source: Authors.

Figure 2. Conceptual model predicting neighbourhood attachment, neighbourly interaction, and community participation.

Table 1. Summary statistics of endogenous and exogenous variables in the path analysis.

		Urban village			Liede Community
		Total	Villagers	Tenants	Total	Villagers	Tenants
Number of cases		400	87	313	271	118	153
Exogenous variables
Age (years)	Mean	36.71	47.94	33.59	38.27	44.67	33.34
	S.D.	12.32	12.89	10.16	14.21	14.99	11.38
Marital status (percentage)	Married	72.50	96.60	65.80	63.10	78.00	51.60
	Single/divorced/widowed	27.50	3.40	34.20	36.90	22.00	48.40
Educational attainment (years of education)	Mean	9.80	9.16	9.97	13.48	11.81	14.76
	S.D.	3.45	3.48	3.42	3.58	3.74	2.87
Income (yuan/month)	Mean	2179.99	1643.29	2329.17	6247.31	4267.66	7774.10
	S.D.	3258.06	1929.85	3527.84	7118.12	5572.87	7791.49
Length of residence (years)	Mean	11.28	35.40	4.58	13.24	27.12	2.54
	S.D.	16.44	19.46	5.81	17.63	19.21	1.80
Household registration (percentage)	Guangzhou hukou	27.80	100.00	11.20	60.10	100.00	32.00
	Hukou of elsewhere	72.30	0.00	88.80	39.90	0.00	68.00
Endogenous variables
Neighbourhood attachment (scale from 1to 5)	Mean	3.00	4.06	2.71	3.42	4.14	2.86
	S.D.	1.13	0.94	1.00	1.10	0.77	0.99
Neighbourly interaction (scale from 1 to 5)	Mean	3.24	3.85	3.07	2.93	3.60	2.41
	S.D.	1.06	0.83	1.05	1.19	1.16	0.92
Community participation (scale from 1 to 5)	Mean	2.32	2.82	2.19	2.01	2.41	1.71
	S.D.	0.95	1.06	0.87	0.84	0.84	0.71
Satisfaction with the residential environment (scale from 1 to 5)	Mean	2.83	3.03	2.77	3.47	3.44	3.49
	S.D.	0.63	0.57	0.64	0.50	0.51	0.49

Table 2. Standardized effects of the endogenous variables on each other.

Variables	Effect	Neighbourhood attachment	Community participation	Neighbourly interaction	Satisfaction with the residential environment
Overall Model
Neighbourhood	Direct	–	–	0.361**	0.258**
attachment	Indirect	–	–	–	0.096**
	Total	–	–	0.361**	0.326**
			–
Community	Direct	0.348***	–	0.202**	–
participation	Indirect	–	–	0.111**	0.130***
	Total	0.348***	–	0.279**	0.130***
Neighbourly	Direct	–	–	–	0.294**
interaction	Indirect	–	–	–	–
	Total	–	–	–	0.294**
Urban village Model
Neighbourhood	Direct	–	–	0.337***	0.147**
attachment	Indirect	–	–	-	0.096**
	Total	–	–	0.337***	0.243**
			–
Community	Direct	0.305***	–	0.124**	–
participation	Indirect	–	–	0.103**	0.109***
	Total	0.305***	–	0.227**	0.109***
			–
Neighbourly	Direct	–	–	–	0.284***
interaction	Indirect	–	–	–	–
	Total	–	–	–	0.284***
Liede Community Model
Neighbourhood	Direct	–	–	0.251***	0.187***
attachment	Indirect	–	–	–	0.035**
	Total	–	–	0.251***	0.222***
			–
Community	Direct	0.197***	–	0.080	–
participation	Indirect	–	–	0.050***	0.055***
	Total	0.197***	–	0.129	0.055***
			–
Neighbourly	Direct	–	–	–	0.138*
interaction	Indirect	–	–	–	–
	Total	–	–	–	0.138*

Note: *, **, *** stand for a statistical significance at the 5%, 1%, and 0.1% level, respectively;– represents that the link is not included in the path analysis.

Figure 3. Diagrammatic representation of the estimates of the path coefficients for the relationships between four endogenous variables.

(The number represents the standardized direct effect. Upper diagram: the overall model; lower left diagram: The urban village model; lower right diagram: the Liede community model. *, **, *** stand for a statistical significance at the 5%, 1%, and 0.1% level, respectively)

Table 3. Standardized effects of exogenous variables on endogenous variables.

Variables	Effect	Age (year)	Marital Status (married = 1)	Education (year)	Income (yuan)	Length of Residence (year)	Household Registration (Guangzhou hukou = 1)	Social group (tenant = 1)	Neighbourhood Type (urban village = 1)
Overall Model
Neighbourhood attachment	Direct					0.256**		−0.207**
	Indirect					0.109**		−0.004*
	Total					0.325**		−0.255**
Community participation	Direct	−0.010*				0.218*			0.355**
	Indirect					0.132**		−0.068***
	Total	−0.002*				0.309***	0.194*	−0.049**	0.359**
Neighbourhood interaction	Direct					0.347**		−0.022*	0.337**
	Indirect								−0.062***
	Total					0.341**		−0.024*	0.231**
Satisfaction with the residential environment	Direct								−0.375**
	Indirect								–
	Total								−0.375**
Urban villages Model
Neighbourhood attachment	Direct					0.235**		−0.181**
	Indirect						0.052*
	Total					0.268**		−0.221**
Community participation	Direct	−0.172**			0.083*
	Indirect					0.094**		−0.082*
	Total	−0.137*				0.175*		−0.199*
Neighbourhood interaction	Direct
	Indirect			−0.024*			0.050**
	Total
Satisfaction with the residential environment	Direct						0.175*
	Indirect						-
	Total						0.175*
Liede Community Model
Neighbourhood attachment	Direct							−0.422**
	Indirect							−0.061*
	Total					0.179**		−0.483**
Community participation	Direct						0.228***
	Indirect					0.064*		−0.105***
	Total					0.235*	0.229***
Neighbourhood interaction	Direct			−0.189*		0.384***
	Indirect					−0.022*	−0.027*
	Total			−0.180*		0.362***
Satisfaction with the residential environment	Direct						0.193*
	Indirect						–
	Total						0.193*

Note: *, **, *** stand for a statistical significance at the 5%, 1%, and 0.1% level, respectively.