Background to China-Related HRM Research Research focusing on HRM in China was prompted by economic reforms initiated by the Communist

government in the late 1970s.The two major components of the Chinese command economy (i.e., central planning and public ownership)were targeted for reforms to intro-duce a market-oriented economic system and a mixed ownership structure that would stimulate economic growth. In-creasing participation in the world economy, foreign direct investment (FDI), and the continuous process of societal and economic transition have resulted in considerable changes in management practices in China. These changes hold significant implications for the management of people. Al-though HRM has become common terminology in Chinese enterprises, Warners observation that people mostly use HRM as a synonym for personnel management was still valid seven years later, especially in state-owned enterprises (SOEs). However, the term HRM increasingly has been used in a wider context than the traditional notions of personnel and labor administration, and has attracted more researchers to examine its development. Chinas unique political and social environment, flourishing FDI inward and outward, serial reforms launched by its government, and the ability to apply different research approaches and methods offer ample justification for China becoming an attractive topic for managerial researchers. As an example, China retains its social is tone-party government system as well as its socialist ideology while moving from a highly centralized command economy to a more market-driven economy. It can be used as a test case for socialist and post socialist economic reform and its impact on HR practicesfor instance, the political influence on staffing and performance management and socialist ideology on reward and compensation (e.g., Warner, 1995).There has been an unprecedented enthusiasm for the establishment of foreign-in-vested enterprises (FIEs) in China for more than two-and-a-half decades. Many foreign companies have expanded their operations into China, attracted mainly by the fast growth in the economy, the sheer size of the potential market, and the abundant labor re-sources. FDI in China has grown from U.S. $4 billion in 1990 to U.S. $72 billion in 2005(United Nations Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD], 2006). China has received over U.S. $48 billion in FDI from the United States since 1979.

According to the Chinese government official report (UNCTAD, 2006), by the end of 2005, cumulative real use of FDI had reached over U.S. $660 billion, and 90% of the 500 top companies in the world reported by Fortune had invested in China. Employment in FIEs increased to over 23.5million by mid 2004 (i.e., over 10% of the whole workforce in the urban area), rising from 550,000 employees in 1986. As a recipient of FDI, China is the largest recipient among the developing countries and second only to the United States. Meanwhile, China is ranked as one of the largest outward investors among developing economies. In 2005, China invested U.S. $11.3billion overseas (UNCTAD, 2006). By the end of 2005, the cumulated outward FDI from China was U.S. $57.2 billion. China is facing major challenges about HRM Recruiting Guangdong, one of the economic powerhouses in South China Province, reported a shortage of half a million workers after the Spring Festival this year as business has skyrocketing for many companies. Hence the provincial authority has adjusted the minimum wage by an average of 21% to attract the labor mainly blue collar. Similarly to other booming regions like coastal cities of Fujian Province, Zhejiang Province, Shanghai City and Beijing City increased their minimum wage for manual laborer by 24 to 30% in Q2' 2010. The labor shortage at the booming coastal cities is partly because the west of China (Sichuan Province), where many of the migrant laborers come from, is also developing. And workers are choosing to stay closer to home because of culturally and dialects differences from coastal cities. The new generation of workers born in the 1980s and 1990s are aware of their employment rights. They not only demand higher pay but also ask for better opportunities for career development. They also have cultural and spiritual needs. Hiring of manual workers is getting tougher and tougher in China because of one-child policy adopted by China in 1978. The parents with child born in late 1980 and early1990s are normally at middle-class income groups; as a result they can afford to send their children up to colleges.

Overtime these group of children are in the age of 20s now and are more educated and hence do not want manual labor works. The minimum wage rise will result in more financial burdens to smaller companies. These companies should attach more important to industrial and technology upgrades with more automations to reduce the use of more workers. Most people still think of China as a country with an inexhaustible supply of cheap labor. But China's booming coastal cities are now actually facing a shortage of manual labor. That's partly because the west of China, where many of the migrant laborers come from, is also developing. And workers are choosing to stay closer to home. China Government is rich in cash with very healthy foreign reserves and is expected to introduce more preferential policies such as tax reductions for companies to avoid labor costs being going to fast hence reduce competitiveness to world market. China has 1.35 billion people to feed; they cannot afford to see closure of companies both foreign and local. There is no problem is to attract white collar employees like Technicians, Engineers, Accountants, Government servants and job related in technical fields because China produced far too many graduates. There were 4.8 million graduates in 2008, and went up to 5.45m graduates in 2009. This year 2010 Government's statistics shows 6 million graduates will pour into labor market in July. And the year after is minimum 10% increases of graduates in each year. China's new challenge is on how to create enough jobs for these highly educated graduates. The China Government continues need to attract foreign investments while working on their own branding. Global Changes: How the International Production and Trading Systems Have Changed and What These Changes Mean for Pakistan In the design of an industrial policy appropriate for the country at this time, Pakistan must factor in the changes that are taking place in the global economic system. Three of these are important. The global production system is changing rapidly as multinational corporations are able to use the rapid development in information and communication technologies to disperse their activities. The firms located in the industrial world are either outsourcing a great deal of what they used to do themselves or are taking their operations to the places that offer better prices for

their inputs. This dispersal of activity has led to the second important change in the structure of the global economy. Now parts and components have become the largest component of international trade. That the changes in the global system of production and trade would suggest an industrial policy aimed at the development of small and medium industries with the ability to exploit external markets is reinforced by the fact that Pakistan today confronts a serious problem of poverty. What is the incidence of poverty is a hotly debated subject in the country. The previous governments claim that the incidence had declined by 10 percentage points is contested by a number of independent analysts, most notably Akmal Hussain and the Karachi-based Social Policy and Development Centre. Hussain claims that during 1998-99 and 2004-05, there was no significant reduction in the level of poverty. The SPDC found that the decline in poverty in 2004-07 was of the order of 3 to 3.5 percentage points rather than the much larger figure suggested by the previous government. The reason for recalling this debate is not to settle it one way or the other. The purpose is to underscore the important point that the laissez faire approach to economic development that guided Islamabad did not do much to the incidence of poverty and to narrow the widening inter-personal and inter-regional disparities. The policymakers during this period placed their faith in what was once called the trickle down approach to economic development. If alleviating poverty is to be one of the main objectives of public policy, then it is clear that a new approach to industrialization should be one of its important components. Generation of employment should, therefore, be built into the industrial policy. This is one additional reason why Pakistan needs to focus public policy on the development of small and medium sized industries. Why cant investment choices be left to the private sector as advocated by the exponents of The Washington Consensus? This approach, articulated by the development finance institutions located in Washington, sought to reduce the role of the state in the management of the economy and promoting that of private enterprise. It also advocated more openness of the economy to the outside world by removing constraints on trade and the movement of capital. It may work in the economies where the private sector has developed without much handholding by the government. That is not the case in Pakistan. As noted below in the discussion of the

history of industrial policy in the country, it was the government that was behind the development of private enterprise. Given that leaving further industrial development to private entrepreneurs is not likely to serve national interests, the state will need to play an important role. The Need for a Larger Provincial Role in the Making of Industrial Policy and if That Were to Happen What is the Most Appropriate Course the Government Should Adopt? For the reasons already discussed, the state has a diminished role to play in industrial development compared to its very active involvement in earlier times. The withdrawal of the state does not mean completely surrendering the area to the private sector. If that were to be done and to some extent this was done during the just concluded Musharraf era the pace of industrial progress would be slow and its direction not totally appropriate for the country. I believe that the state needs to be invited back to play a more significant role in industrialization than was advocated by those who believed in The Washington Consensus. Given Pakistans history and the structure of its politics it would be right to divide the role of the state into five fairly distinct parts. These are picking the winners towards which the private sector should be guided but not forced. The ultimate decision to invest should be entirely the responsibility of the private entrepreneur. Second, once the decision has been taken to invest, a number of facilitation activities should be carried out, preferably by government agencies. The type of facilitation functions that state agencies can meaningfully perform were discussed above in the context of the mandate currently available to SMEDA. Third, better cooperation between the industrial and financial sectors should be encouraged so as to meet the financial needs of industry. Fourth, there must be attention paid to research and development, without which the industries located in the country, will not be able to increase the level of productivity required for competing in the global market place. Fifth, a regulatory system needs to be in place aimed at preventing the development of monopolies in various sectors of the economy in which private entrepreneurs are actively involved. Once we disaggregate governments functions, we need to identify what is the most appropriate place for their location. In the past, the central government has tended to concentrate these activities in its hands, leaving out the provinces. This tendency to centralize economic

policymaking needs to change in favor of greater involvement of the provinces. Were those to happen, the policies each province will adopt will better suit their circumstances? I will develop this point with reference to Punjab. I believe that the province of Punjab, recognizing its endowment and recognizing also its geographic location should pay particular attention to the development of small and medium enterprises. It has a well developed skill base for developing a number of industries for which appropriate inputs are available. These include ag-processing, small-scale engineering, leather products, and the IT industry. This is an illustrative list of possible winners needing the support of the government. They could become the focus of the states attention. Having chosen the winners, the province should redefine the role of the SMEDA. The corporation should be divided into six separate entities, four for each of the four provinces and one each for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and Azad Jammu and Kashmir. These corporations should work to promote the development of the industrial sector in ways that conform to the comparative advantage of each geographic entity. By focusing on the development of an existing corporation, the Pakistani state will not need to create a new government enterprise. As already discussed, the SMEDA is concentrating its attention on what I called facilitation helping the selected enterprises and entrepreneurs to establish new production facilities or improve those they are Industrial Policy: Domestic Challenges, Global Imperatives and Pakistans Choices 33 already operating. In addition, the corporation should stretch its mandate at both ends of the spectrum it is currently engaged in. It should do more analytical work aimed at identifying the winners and in helping its clients access sources of finance. Winners should be identified by carefully studying the opportunities available in both domestic and external markets for products. This examination should lead to the identification of niches into which the country could move. For the Punjab, these niches are likely to be in the areas already indicated. Having picked the winners, the corporation should continue with its facilitation work but with greater attention given to developing appropriate technologies aimed at improving the productivity of the sectors chosen for attention. For that to be done effectively, the SMEDA will

need to build the capacity to do R&D work. Ideally this should be done in association with the private sector with the private entrepreneurs required to pay for the help they are receiving. Another new area for the SMEDA would be to get engaged in facilitating the access to sources of finance by the selected winners. It would be important to acquaint the people and enterprises being helped with new instruments of finance that have been developed in recent years. These include private equity and venture capital which provide equity rather than loans in return for claiming a significant share in future profits once the selected enterprises become successful. I will conclude by summing up the argument presented in this short paper. I have argued for the adoption of an industrial policy to provide Pakistan with an industrial base (so far not developed) that would exploit its many advantages. The five approaches towards industrial policy adopted for the last six decades lacked a long-term vision; they were mostly responses to the problems the policymakers thought they faced when they held the reins of power. In designing an industrial policy it would be much more efficient to shift the locus of policymaking to the provinces rather than retain it in the center. In applying this approach to the province of the Punjab, I have argued that the list of winners the government should work on should be focused on the development of small and medium enterprises. In developing this approach the government needs to create a new entity but work on the evolution of the one that has done some interesting and useful work in the last decade. The Small and Medium Enterprise Development Authority has been effective in developing some new areas but it needs to expand its activities to include analytical work aimed at selecting the winners as well as helping the winners access new sources of finance. AGRICULTURAL POLICY IN PAKISTAN Agricultural policy is a very vast subject. It hounds in controversies and misconceptions. A large part of the field remains unexplored and little attempt seems to have been made in this country to deal with the problem systematically and scientifically. If we look through the published records of the past eight years in Pakistan, we may find some patchy and spotty statements on agricultural policy, but there has been no methodical, comprehensive and coordinated treatment of the problem.

Normally, the framing of policies should precede the formulation of programmes and development plans. Usually major agricultural policies are laid down in clear-cut and unequivocal terms. All sub-policies and programmes must be devised in the light of the major policies already formulated. It is rather difficult and unscientific to decide upon the individual programmes, schemes and projects without first deciding upon the policies, sub-policies and subsub policies involved. Policy making in agriculture is a difficult job. It pre-supposes a sound knowledge on the part of a policy maker, of not only agricultural economics but also of sociology, political science, law and the technical side of the agriculture. Also reasonably accurate and adequate data are needed for passing judgements on policy matters. Without such statistics and basic research on controversial issues, all policy making may just be a leap in the dark. The purpose of this paper is not at all to present a blueprint of our agricultural policy. It would be almost preposterous to think of that, especially in view of our inadequate statistics and acute lack of research in agricultural economics. The purpose of this paper is much more modest. It attempts to apply a somewhat systematic approach to policy making in agriculture taking some policy questions as examples and to prepare an outline which might serve as a general framework for the official policy statements given out from time to time to fit in. It may also enable us to bring out some serious gaps in our farm economics research which ought to be filled up immediately in order to facilitate the framing of sound agricultural policies. THE OUTLINE OF AN AGRICULTURAL POLICY FRAMEWORK I. OVERALL OBJECTIVES 1. Preservation of Political Freedom 2. Raising the standard of living of the masses 3. Maximizing the national income 22 II. GOALS FOR AGRICULTURAL POLICY 1. Maximizing the agricultural output in line with consumer demand (selective expansion)

2. Achieving national self sufficiency in food production 3. Raising the living standard of the farm families 4. The conservation of Agricultural Resources 5. To reduce the pressure of population in the agricultural sector. N.B. The goals may have a different order of priority from that given in the above list. III. SOME POLICIES TO ACHIEVE THE ABOVE MENTIONED GOALS The policies given here by no means exhaust the list of such policies for achieving the given ends. They are examples just to show the type of policies needed under this heading in the framework. I. For Maximizing Agricultural Production in Line with Consumer Demand In framing major agricultural policies, sub-policies and sub-sub-policies, we should always bear in mind the distinction between long-run and short-run policies. Shortrun policies are designed to meet specific urgencies in the immediate future. The long-run policies on the other hand, aim, at devising means to achieve the set goals eventually. A. Some of the major Policies (1) Short-Term: Out of the two general ways to increase production, i.e. (i) by increasing the area under production and (ii) by raising the yields per acre. The former may be expected to yield better and surer results than the latter in the short-run. Increasing the area under cultivation may, therefore, receive priority as a policy in the short-run for the maximizing agricultural output, (2) Long-Term: Raising the yields per acre is a very desirable policy and perhaps the only practicable policy for maximizing agricultural output in the long-run. In the short-run, however, this policy is beset with serious institutional limitations which are likely o render it practically ineffective.

Some of the other major long-term policies for raising agricultural output are: Security of tenure, provision of credit facilities, rural cooperative re-organization etc. As the purpose of the paper is just to present a framework, these policies will not be discussed here. It should be noted that short-term policies are accompanied by the initial installments of longrun policies. They run simultaneously, although priority is assigned to the short-run policies. B. Sub-Policies 1. Area under production (our policy in the short-run) may be increased by (1) colonizing new area and by (2) increasing the intensity of cropping on the presently cultivated area. Now, it is rather difficult to say which one of them should be adopted as a sub-policy. Here is a problem for research. We will have to compare the net produce per unit of the irrigation water used on the new land with that obtained from fallow land in the already irrigated area. The problem of credit supply in the newly-settled areas on the one hand and the social benefits of settling landless farm families on the other will have to be given due consideration in weighing the above matter. Nevertheless, it may be ventured, that colonizing new areas may form our sub-policy for the short-run, while increasing the intensity of cropping may be an essential component of a long-run policy. 2. Mechanization of agriculture can result in tremendous displacement of farm labor which cannot be absorbed elsewhere in the economy, especially in the short-run. In the shortrun, therefore, our policy should be to use machinery for a limited number of operations, e.g. for opening up of new lands, anti-erosion work, eradication of deep rooted weeds etc. in the long-run, however, we should aim at introducing mechanization for a much larger number of farm operations. The speed of its introduction will have to be adjusted to the rate of growth of opportunities for alternative employment of the displaced labor. In the long-run, we have to decrease the pressure of population in the agricultural sector. That would mean the diversion of farm labor into secondary and tertiary industries. This would make partial farm mechanization desirable. We would have to move in this direction very slowly and carefully. 3. Out of the different means of improving the yields per acre (in the long run policy) it is possible to give priorities for the immediate installment of the policy. Top priorities may be given to (1) adequate and regular water supply, (2) improved seed and (3) fertilizers in

the order as they are listed. This seems to be more realistic than any other order in view of the institutional and economic barriers against the widespread use of fertilizers, pesticides and other useful tools in the kit of modern agricultural technology. 4. There are several alternative systems of farming and one can choose from them a suitable system for the county to achieve the goals set above. They are: (a) individual farming, (b) community farming, (c) state-sponsored commercial farming,(d) state farming. 5. It is a question for research to decide which one of them would be best for our conditions. However, ore thing is quite clear. Each of the systems given above is best for achieving one or the other goal but not for all the goals, we may have to give priority to each in accordance with the order of priority of the policy goals. More than one system can go side by side, contributing toward the achievement of the goals for which they are best suited. It would appear that while individual farming and community farming may best be suited for achieving goal No. 3 (raising the living standard of farm families), statesponsored commercial farming and state-farming may be best for achieving goal No. 1 (maximizing the agricultural output in line with consumer demand). The questions, however, is highly controversial and without adequate research, it would be unwise to pronounce any judgement.

C. Sub-sub-policies 1. Subsidies for popularizing the use of fertilizers, improved seeds and other developmental measures are considered desirable but only in the short-run. In our long-run policy they should have no place. 2. We should try to localize crops in the regions where they are best suited. This alone might increase our overall agricultural production by about 5 to 10 per cent. This, however, cannot be done overnight, because it involves several institutional and political difficulties. It will have to be done very gradually. It should, therefore, be a part of our long-run policy.

II.

For Achieving National Self-Sufficiency in Food

The goal of national self-sufficiency in food is rather broad and vague. Two important questions must be answered before any food policy may be framed, viz., (a) What is the level of nutrition at which the national self-sufficiency is being sought? (b) In what particular food items should we aim at national self sufficiency? The first question in itself is a policy question. Perhaps the best answer to it would be to secure self-sufficiency at our present levels of nutrition in the short-run and at optimum levels in the long-run. In regard to the second question, the answer would be wheat and rice in the shortrun and carbohydrates plus animal proteins in the long-run. Some of the major policies to achieve the goal of natural sufficiency in food production would be as given: 1. Forward Pricing for rice and wheat 2. Proper storage facilities for building food-grain reserves. 3. Control of stored-grain pests.

Sub-Policies 1. Development of fisheries, poultry, fruits and vegetable etc. 2. Stoppage of exports and smuggling of food grains. 3. Over-hauling of the distributive machinery.

III.

Raising the Living Standard of the Farm People In order to raise the living standard of the farmer, we have not only to raise production but also to improve the distributive machinery so that the cultivators reap the benefits of their hard work. Some of the major policies in this connection would be: 1. To prevent the prices of farm products from falling too low. 2. To guarantee to the farmer a fair share of the consumers rupee. 3. Equitable distribution of the product between the tenant and the landlord. 4. Revision of the current regressive agricultural taxation system.

Some sub-policies: 1. International commodity agreements may be entered into to secure better returns to the producers.

2. Go-operative marketing may be encouraged. 3. Putting of more teeth in the Tenancy laws. It may be pointed out here that the obtaining of reasonably high prices for the farm products, however crucial to the producer, is not at all an easy matter. Sometimes, it may be entirely beyond the means of an under-developed country to support a price, especially in case of a commodity whose prices are determined in the world market. IV. Conservation of Agricultural Resources Under agricultural resources, we will include (a) soil and (b) water. Some authors may like to include farm labor also in the above list. From the point of view of conservation, however, it is soil and water which would merit our attention most. Soil erosion and water-logging have been described as creeping death and cancer of soil respectively by some authors. They constitute a real threat to our agricultural and hence to our economy in general. It goes without saying that the conservation and judicious utilization of these resources is not only important for the coming generations but also and probably more so for the present generation. The long-run policy for the conservation of agricultural resources should aim at maximum community participation in conservation practices. The state participation, however, would be required to a large degree in the short-run because the problems of water-logging, alkalinity and soil erosion are serious national problems which cant be coped with effectively by individuals or even communities, in their present state. They need government action immediately. Once, however, the problem has been reduced in magnitude, and the communities have been trained and indoctrinated in the use of conservation practices, governments, role may be gradually reduced.

Rail transport is a fundamental mode of long-distance transportation in the People's Republic of China with a rail network that is the third largest in the world. Almost all rail operations are handled by the China Railway Corporation, serving all provinces with the exception of the special administrative region of Macau. By the end of 2012, the conventional rail network covered a total length of 98,000 km (60,894 mi) and the high speed rail network was 9,356 km (5,814 mi).[1] China's rail transport volume is world's largest and in terms of transport volume growth also the highest, having six percent of the world's operating railways, but carrying 25 percent of the world's total railway workload. Driven by need to increase freight capacity, the country budgeted $105.9 billion for railway investment in 2013, and has a long term plan to expand the network to 272,000 km by 2050.[1] Qing Dynasty era (18761911 The first railway to be built in China was the Woosung Railway in 1876, which was a 9-mile railway from Shanghai to Woosung (modern Shanghai's Baoshan District). The railway was dismantled only one year later by the Qing governor. Until the defeat of China in the First SinoJapanese War, only very little development had been made. After the defeat, direct connection to the imperial capital Beijing was permitted: several lines were expanded towards the city, the three main lines being the Jinghan, Jingfeng, and the Jinpu Railways, which today are still some of the busiest lines in China. By 1911, there were around 9,000 km of tracks in China. However, many railways were designed, constructed, or even owned by foreign companies. The first indigenously designed and constructed railway by Chinese is the Jingzhang railway built from 1905 to 1909, a difficult job due to the mountainous terrain. The chief engineer of this railway was Zhan Tianyou, who is known as the Father of China's Railway Republic of China era (19121949) During the Republic of China era from 1912 until 1949, the development of the railway network in China was slowed down. This was due to repeated civil wars and the invasion of Japan in the Second Sino-Japanese War. One of the few exceptions was in Northeastern China (Manchuria). During the reign of the Fengtian warlord from 1912 till 1931, several railway lines were built. The South Manchuria Railway Company by Japanese was founded in 1906 and after

the Russo-Japanese War (19041905), Japan took over the operation of the Chinese Far East Railway () at Changchun city and southward and kept development going vigorously. In 1945, just after the Second Sino-Japanese War, there were 27,000 km of rail, nearly half of which, 13,000 km, was located in Manchuria.[2] People's Republic of China era (1949) After the establishment of the People's Republic of China, the new government underMao Zedong invested heavily in the railway network. From the 1950s to the 70s, lines, especially those in western China, were expanded. One example is the 1900 km railway from Lanzhou to rmqi, which was built between 1952 and 1962. In Southwestern China, where difficult terrain prevails, several mountain railways were constructed, such as the BaojiChengdu Railway, built in the 1950s, and theChengkun Railway, built in the 1970s. The railway to Xizang (Tibet), the Qingzang railway, was one of the most difficult to build; the line was finally completed and opened to the public in 2006. Today, every province-level entity of the People's Republic, with the exception of Macau, is connected to the railway network. Not only has the Chinese railway network expanded in size since 1949, but it has also seen great technological advances. Before the 1980s, most of the railways were powered by steam, due to low labour costs and cheap coal prices.[citation needed] However, the first diesel locomotive, the Dongfeng, was introduced in 1959. During the 1980s and 90s, diesel and electric locomotives gradually replaced the steam engines on main lines. However, steam locomotives didn't retire from some provincial railways until the 21st century. In December 2005, the world's last regular revenue mainline steam train finished its journey on the Jitong railway, marking the end of the steam era. Nevertheless, there are still some steam locomotives used in the industrial railways in China. From 1990 to 2001, on average some 1,092 km of new railways, 837 km of multiple-track, and 962 km of electrified railways were opened to traffic annually, 2.4-fold, 1.7-fold and 1.8-fold increases respectively over the previous 10 years. At the end of 2004, railways in operation reached 74,200 km, including 24,100 km of multiple track and 18,900 km of electrified railways.

Since 1997, train speed has been raised significantly six times. The top speed of express trains increased from 120 km to 200 km per hour, and passenger trains can reach maximum speed of 350 km per hour on some sections of the arterial railways. In March 2013, the Ministry of Railways was dissolved and its safety and regulation duties were taken up by the Ministry of Transport, inspection duties by the State Railway Administration and construction and management by the China Railway Corporation(CR). Railway Management There are three levels of management in the national railway system of China

China Railway Corporation(CR) Railway Bureaus or Railway Group Companies Railway Stations

There are sixteen Railway Bureaus and two Railway Group Companies under the Minister of Railways. There are also some local railway lines operated by local state-owned companies. The only private-owned railway line in mainland China is Luoding Railway in Guangdong province. Railway bureau

Beijing Railway Bureau Chengdu Railway Bureau Guangzhou Railway Group Co. Ltd. Harbin Railway Bureau Hohhot Railway Bureau Jinan Railway Bureau Kunming Railway Bureau Lanzhou Railway Bureau Nanchang Railway Bureau Nanning Railway Bureau Qinghai-Tibet Railway Group Co., Ltd. Shanghai Railway Bureau

Shenyang Railway Bureau Taiyuan Railway Bureau Wulumuqi (rmqi) Railway Bureau Wuhan Railway Bureau Xi'an Railway Bureau Zhengzhou Railway Bureau

Passenger Transport Rail is one of the principal means of transport in China, with over 1.3 billion railway trips taken in 2007 and 1.4 billion estimated for 2008.[3] In 2008, 1.456 billion people travelled 772.8 billion km b rail.[4] As the above numbers indicates, an average trip length in 2008 was about 500 km, which means that people in China now use railways primarily for long-distance trips, while more local travel is accomplished by bus. This contrasts greatly with countries such as Germany, where an average rail trip is only about 40 km long (39.7 billion passenger-km on just over a billion passenger trips over the DB system during the first 6 months of 2012).[5] This difference may be explained by the near-absence of traditional commuter rail systems (low cost, frequent service, frequent stops) in China; the incipient Beijing Suburban Railway may perhaps be their only specimen in the country. However, a number of high-speed intercity railways have been opened since 2005, and many more are under construction; they may attract an increasing share of short-distance trips, at least among the better-off segment of the population. The Spring Festival Travel Season is the peak railway travel season of the year.