ABSTRACT
In the autumn of 2004, the local property grapevine in Shanghai was abuzz with news about an impending legal feud between residents of an up-market gated community and a property developer. Reportedly, the residents of Shanghai Spring City – a commodity housing enclave located southwest of the city – were infuriated that the developers had reneged on an earlier promise to fully enclose the entire private housing estate and had taken the developers to court (Dongfang Morning Post, 30 November 2004). According to the plaintiff, the developers had broken their contract by allowing several publicly accessible commercial shops and restaurants to operate within the estate’s compounds. Among some of the concerns cited by the residents were the loss of neighbourhood exclusivity and security as a result of the developers’ actions as well as worries that the ‘unruly public’ might trample upon and destroy the private facilities in the estate, echoing the classic ‘tragedy of the commons’ argument. As one resident (quoted in the news report) commented, the shops might encourage outsiders of ‘inferior quality’ (di suzhi),1 especially migrant workers, to enter the housing estate:
We are very worried about outsiders entering our neighbourhood, even if they are just here to patronize the shops. Once the shops are opened, all kinds of people will enter our estate and disrupt the order and peace . . . and spoil the image of the neighbourhood.
