The relationship between urbanization and economic growth has been perplexing. In this paper, we identify the pattern of global change and the correlation of urbanization and economic growth, using cross-sectional, panel estimation and geographic information systems (GIS) methods. The analysis has been carried out on a global geographical scale, while the timescale of the study spans the last 30 years. The data shows that urbanization levels have changed substantially during these three decades. Empirical findings from cross-sectional data and panel data support the general notion of close links between urbanization levels and GDP per capita. However, we also present significant evidence that there is no correlation between urbanization speed and economic growth rate at the global level. Hence, we conclude that a given country cannot obtain the expected economic benefits from accelerated urbanization, especially if it takes the form of government-led urbanization. In addition, only when all facets are taken into consideration can we fully assess the urbanization process.

In late November 2014, while attending a science exhibition on human settlement at the National Museum, Premier Li Keqiang posed a question to society and scientists regarding the Hu Huanyong Line, which the media subsequently dubbed “the Premier’s question”. This increased awareness and interest in the Hu Huanyong Line and launched a lively debate which provoked a variety of views. In an attempt to address the Premier’s question, this paper firstly reviews the origins of the Hu Huanyong Line, named after the famous population geographer who proposed it in 1935 as part of a wider debate on domestic overpopulation. Using demographic data from China’s first, fifth and sixth censuses, as well as the ArcGIS platform, we analyze the size, proportion and density of populations in the areas southeast and northwest of the Hu Huanyong Line, showing that urbanization and migration have not changed the pattern of population distribution observed by Hu Huanyong. Based on this, we suggest that the pattern of a dense population southeast of the line and sparse population northwest of the line will not fundamentally change for a relatively long time, nor will the situation of urban agglomerations being mainly found in the southeastern region. We also argue that climate and other physical geographic conditions determine that the Hu Huanyong Line shall remain in place. We believe that the question posed by Premier Li Keqiang is solvable, and that with positive policy guidance and rational spatial organization, the northwestern region can achieve more modernization and better quality urbanization, while the same is true for the central region.

This paper used a bootstrapped linear regression model to examine the role of amenities and economic opportunities in migration patterns in China based on the 2010 census at the city level. The results reveal that striking disparities characterize migration at the city level in China. Most migrants tend to move into several major cities in urban agglomerations in the eastern coastal region and provincial inland capitals. The cities farther away from provincial capitals have weak inflows and even suffer from serious population loss. The results suggest that job opportunities and wages contribute to the uneven pattern of migration in China even as amenities have also become important pull factors of migration. Regarding amenities, migrants prefer to move into cities with warm winters, less-humid summers, clean urban environments and friendly and open social climates. Social services, including facilities for education, recreation and commuting, also play an important role in attracting migrants. Findings from the study improve our understanding of China's internal migration and contribute to the debate on the role of economic opportunities and amenities in migration.