点击排行
 
正文
全文下载次数:154
2023年第5期   DOI:10.19830/j.upi.2023.406
跨边界区域作为一种价值空间类型——界定、治理与规划
Trans-boundary Areas as a Type of Valuable Space: Definition, Governance and Planning

王世福 麻春晓 李欣建 孟梦

Wang Shifu, Ma Chunxiao, Li Xinjian, Meng Meng

关键词:跨边界区域;空间单元;治理主体;价值空间;新规划类型

Keywords:Trans-boundary Area; Spatial Unit; Governance Actor; Valuable Space; New Planning Type

摘要:

跨边界区域因地理邻近性而具有特殊的资源交换和利益共享、功能协作和服务共治、空间协同和结构演进的战略价值,作为一种新的空间治理与规划对象,可能启发一种新的规划研究与实践类型。由于其具有空间单元组合、治理主体分异、多属性交互、多尺度整合等特征,跨边界区域的空间治理需要遵循“去中心”的整体性思维导向,常采用基于包容性的柔性规划和基于长期监测的动态规划等方式,是对传统注重中心体系、内向分区型的空间规划的重要补充,具有释放边界空间潜能和重构区域秩序的重要作用。文章以空间单元、治理主体及其是否形成共治关系作为解释跨边界区域界定、治理与规划三方面的分析主线,归纳欧盟经验模式并比照分析中国实践。总体而言,欧盟的跨边界治理可从界定制度性的空间单元载体,倡导多维交互合作的空间治理创新,探索柔性规划和动态规划的空间规划实践三方面对我国跨边界区域的空间规划与治理有所启示。

Abstract:

Trans-boundary areas are characterized by their geographical proximity and so as holding unique strategic value in terms of resource exchange, value sharing, functional collaboration, service co-governance, spatial synergy, and evolved structure. Trans-boundary areas thus offer a unique opportunity to explore a new type of research and practice on spatial planning. Transboundary areas reveal complex features (e.g., multi-scale integrations and different governance actors) so as to be governed through holistic thinking, soft planning and dynamic approach, complementing traditional approaches that focus on the core-and-periphery system. This paper focuses on spatial units, governance actors and their collaborative relationship, and analyses the definition, governance and planning of trans-boundary areas. Drawing insights from the European experience, this paper identifies that defining the institutional spatial units, advocating interactive spatial governance innovation, and exploring soft and dynamic spatial planning practice can provide enlightment to the spatial planning and governance of trans-boundary areas in China.

版权信息:
基金项目:国家社科基金重大研究专项研究成果(22VHQ009)
作者简介:

王世福,博士,华南理工大学建筑学院,教授,副院长,博士生导师;亚热带建筑与城市科学全国重点实验室,教授;粤港澳大湾区规划创新研究中心,主任。archcity@scut.edu.cn
麻春晓,华南理工大学建筑学院,博士研究生;南宁师范大学地理科学与规划学院,高级城市规划师。250002@nnnu.edu.cn
李欣建,博士,华南理工大学建筑学院,助理研究员。lxj20229093@scut.edu.cn
孟梦(通信作者),博士,华南理工大学建筑学院,助理研究员。mmeng@scut.edu.cn

译者简介:

参考文献:
  • 参考文献
    [1] DAI L, ZHAN Z, SHU Y, et al. Land use change in the cross-boundary regions of a metropolitan area: a case study of Tongzhou-Wuqing-Langfang[J]. Land, 2022, 11(2): 153.
    [2] 陈德宁, 吴康敏, 吴家瑜, 等. 欧盟跨边界合作研究对粤港澳大湾区协同治理的启示[J]. 热带地理, 2022, 42(2): 283-292.
    [3] HERZOG L A. The US–Mexico transfrontier metropolis: theoretical and empirical explorations[M] // BEZDECNY K, ARCHER K. Handbook of emerging 21st-century cities. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018: 222-243.
    [4] BRENNER N. Globalisation as reterritorialisation: the re-scaling of urban governance in the European Union[J]. Urban studies, 1999, 36(3): 431-451.
    [5] 沈海梅. 近二十年国际学术界跨边界研究动态及其理论视点[J]. 西南民族大学学报(人文社科版), 2019, 40(9): 38-44.
    [6] 徐佳. 跨边界地区经济一体化的阶链模式[J]. 学术交流, 2012, 215(2): 88-91.
    [7] 蒋凯, 昝骁毓, 李政寰. 城镇体系识别及空间结构特征比较——以北京、上海、东京都市圈为例[J]. 城市发展研究, 2020, 27(4): 55-61, 2.
    [8] 熊健, 孙娟, 屠启宇, 等. 都市圈国土空间规划编制研究——基于《上海大都市圈空间协同规划》的实践探索[J]. 上海城市规划, 2021, 158(3): 1-7.
    [9] LINGUA V, DE LUCA G, PISANO C, et al. METRO–the role and future perspectives of cohesion policy in the planning of metropolitan areas and cities[R]. Luxembourg: ESPON, 2021.
    [10] ZHAO C, JENSEN J, ZHAN B. A comparison of urban growth and their influencing factors of two border cities: Laredo in the US and Nuevo Laredo in Mexico[J]. Applied geography, 2017, 79: 223-234.
    [11] CASTANHO R A. The relevance of political engagement and transparency in Cross-Border Cooperation (CBC) environments: analyzing border cities in Europe[J]. Journal of local  selfgovernment, 2020, 18(3): 502-516.
    [12] GUALINI E. Cross-border governance: inventing regions in a trans-national multi-level polity[J]. The planning review, 2003, 39(152): 43-52.
    [13] 谢正峰, 冯亚芬. 中国城市群空间结构研究进展[J]. 云南地理环境研究, 2020, 32(5): 39-45, 53.
    [14] 黄艳, 安树伟. 中国都市圈:识别、特征与发展态势[J]. 中国投资(中英文), 2022, 539(Z2): 29-36.
    [15] 钟一鸣, 徐智邦, 焦利民. 1990—2018年中国实体城市形态模式识别与演变特征[J]. 测绘地理信息, 2023, 48(2): 70-74.
    [16] 徐佳. 跨边界地区经济一体化的阶链模式[J]. 学术交流, 2012(2): 88-91.
    [17] Eurostat. Methodological manual on territorial typologies (2018 edition)[R] Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019.
    [18] Ruro Funding. Interreg programmes are kicking off[EB/OL]. [2023-04-05]. https://eurofunding.com/en/blog/interreg-programmes-arekicking-off/ .
    [19] Eurostat. Statistics explained[EB/OL]. [2023-04-05] . https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Territorial_typologies_manual_-_cities,_commuting_zones_and_functional_urban_areas#Examples.
    [20] VAN HOUTUM H, VAN NAERSSEN T. Bordering, ordering and othering[J]. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 2002, 93(2): 125-136.
    [21] ROSSIGNOL N. Cross-border public services in Europe–updating and upgrading the inventory[R]. Luxembourg: ESPON, 2022.
    [22] European Commission. White paper on the future of Europe: reflections and scenarios for the EU27 by 2025[M]. Luxembourg: European Comission, 2017.
    [23] BRENNER N. Metropolitan institutional reform and the rescaling of state space in contemporary Western Europe[J]. European urban and regional studies, 2003, 10(4): 297-324.
    [24] NEWMAN D. The lines that continue to separate us: borders in our borderless' world[J]. Progress in human geography, 2006, 30(2): 143-161.
    [25] European Commission. Territorial cooperation in Europe–a historical perspective[R] Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2015.
    [26] CHILLA T, EGTC E. ESPON ACTAREA: thinking and planning in areas of territorial cooperation Final Report[R]. Luxembourg: ESPON, 2017.
    [27] European Commission. EU Cross-border cooperation survey (2020)[EB/OL]. [2023-04-05]. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/reports/2020/eucross-border-cooperation-survey-2020.
    [28] VAROL C, SOYLEMEZ E. Border permeability and socio-spatial interaction in Turkish and the EU border regions[J]. Regional science policy & practice, 2018, 10(4): 283-297.
    [29] European Commission. Cross-border public transport (CBPT) services in EU[EB/OL]. [2023-04-05]. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/assets/scripts/map/regio-gis-maps/cbpt/cbpt.html.
    [30] RATTI R. Spatial and economic effects of frontiers: over-view of traditional and new approaches and theories of border area development[M] // RATTI R, REICHMAN S, eds. Theory and practice of transborder cooperation. Baseland Frankfurt Main: Verlag Hebing & Lichtenhahn, 1993: 23-53.
    [31] HOOPER B, KRAMSCH O. Cross-border governance in the European Union[M]. London: Routledge, 2004.
    [32] DURAND F, DECOVILLE A. A multidimensional measurement of the integration between European border regions[J]. Journal of European integration, 2020, 42(2): 163-178.
    [33] WU C T. Cross-border development in Europe and Asia[J]. Geojournal, 1998, 44(3): 189-201.
    [34] SOHN C. Modelling cross-border integration: the role of borders as a resource[J]. Geopolitics, 2014, 19(3): 587-608.
    [35] DüHR S, COLOMB C, NADIN V. European spatial planning and territorial cooperation[M]. London: Routledge, 2010.
    [36] BACHTLER J, MCMASTER I. EU Cohesion policy and the role of the regions: investigating the influence of Structural Funds in the new member states[J]. Environment and planning c: government and policy, 2008, 26(2): 398-427.
    [37] BARCA F. Agenda for a reformed cohesion policy[M]. Brussels: European Communities, 2009.
    [38] DEL BIANCO D, JACKSON J. Cross-border co-operation toolkit[R]. Council of Europe, 2012.
    [39] BRIOT N, BOULINEAU E, COUDROY DE LILLE L, et al. Mapping international cooperation between European Cities: a network analysis of the Interreg C and Urbact programs[J]. European journal of geography, 2021. DOI:  10.4000/cybergeo.37538.
    [40] CHILLA T, CORBINEAU C, GLOERSEN E, et al. ESPON ACTAREA: Thinking and planning in areas of territorial cooperation European Atlas of Soft Territorial Cooperation[R]. Luxembourg: ESPON, 2017.
    [41] DURAND F. Challenges of cross-border spatial planning in the metropolitan regions of Luxembourg and Lille[J]. Planning practice and research, 2014, 29(2): 113-132.
    [42] European Commission. North Sea-Mediterranean Corridor[EB/OL]. [2023-01-09]. https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport-themes/infrastructure-and-investment/trans-europeantransport-network-ten-t/north-sea-mediterraneancorridor_en.
    [43] ESPON. Unveiling the interregional trade between Spain, France and Portugal[R] Luxembourg, 2021.
    [44] DECOVILLE A, DURAND F. An empirical approach to cross-border spatial planning initiatives in Europe[J]. Regional studies, 2021, 55(8): 1417-1428.
    [45] HALL P, PAIN K, eds. The polycentric metropolis: learning from mega-city regions in Europe[M]. London: Routledge, 2006.
    [46] European Commission. Collecting solid evidence to assess the needs to be addressed by Interreg cross-border cooperation programmes[R]. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016.
    [47] ULYSSES E. Using applied research results from ESPON as a yardstick for cross-border spatial development planning[R]. Final Report 30/04/12, 2012.
    [48] ESPON. ESPON Regico comparing regions in multiple contexts[EB/OL].[2023-04-05]. https://regico.espon.eu/regico/tool.
    [49] PAAS A, ZIMMERBAUER K. Penumbral borders and planning paradoxes: relational thinking and the question of borders in spatial planning[J]. Environment and planning a, 2016, 48(1): 75-93.
    [50] WATERRHOU B. The institutionalisation of European spatial planning[M]. Delft: IOS Press, 2008.
    [51] HUANG Y, LANG W, CHEN T, et al. Regional coordinated development in the megacity regions: spatial pattern and driving forces of the Guangzhou-Foshan cross-border Area in China[J]. Land, 2023, 12(4): 753.
    [52] 张颖, 卓贤. 城镇化2.0 的新动力与新特征——基于手机用户大数据的分析[J]. 改革, 2021, 323(1): 146-155.
    [53] 叶银忠. 长三角城市发展报告:新一轮长三角一体化视角下的城市建设、管理与服务[M]. 上海: 上海交通大学出版社, 2018.
    [54] 王世福, 梁潇亓, 赵银涛, 等. 粤港澳大湾区空间发展的制度响应[J]. 规划师, 2019, 35(7): 12-17.
    [55] SHEN J. Cross-border connection between Hong Kong and mainland China under ‘two systems’ before and beyond 1997[J]. Human geography, 2003, 85(1): 1-17.
    [56] TAN Z, XUE C Q L, Xiao Y. The fusion of dimensions: planning, infrastructure and transborder space of Luohu Port, Shenzhen, China[J]. Cities, 2018, 73: 14-23.
    [57] YANG C. The Pearl River Delta and Hong Kong: an evolving cross-boundary region under “one country, two systems”[J]. Habitat international, 2006, 30(1): 61-86.
    [58] 郑晴晴, 周素红, 文萍. 边界效应下居民跨珠海—澳门边界活动特征与机制分析[J]. 世界地理研究, 2022, 31(3): 662-672.
    [59] 广东省大湾区办. 广东省大湾区办关于印发广东省推进粤港澳大湾区规则衔接机制对接典型案例(第一批)的通知[EB/OL]. [2023-04-10]. http://drc.gd.gov.cn/ywgg/content/mpost_4148701.html.
    [60] 匡贞胜, 林晓言. 边界视角下中国京津冀地区协调发展的壁垒与破解[J]. 技术经济, 2015, 34(2): 68-76.
    [61] XU J. Governing city -regions in China: theoretical issues and perspectives for regional strategic planning[J]. Town planning review, 2008, 79(2/3): 157-187.
    [62] 卢轶. 粤港澳共建世界级城镇群[N]. 南方日报, 2009-10-29(A03).
    [63] 许志桦, 刘云刚, 胡国华. 从珠三角到大珠三角再到粤港澳大湾区:改革开放以来中国的国家尺度重组[J]. 热带地理, 2019, 39(5): 635-646.


《国际城市规划》编辑部    北京市车公庄西路10号东楼E305/320    100037
邮箱:upi@vip.163.com  电话:010-58323806  传真:010-58323825
京ICP备13011701号-6  京公网安备11010802014223

7855369