Liu Di, Tang Jingxian, Zhao Xianfeng, Liu Haoyi

Keywords： Urban Regeneration; Institution System; Governance; Comparative Study; Urban Regeneration Regulations; Competitiveness; Community Regeneration

Abstract：

Urban development in China is in a period of transition from large-scale urban growth to quality-led urban regeneration. One of the major issues is to establish a well-organized institutional system, ensuring that the comprehensive improvement activities are carried out in an orderly manner. Based on the comparative study of urban regeneration systems in France, Germany, Japan, Britain and the United States, this research puts forward a fundamental framework for regeneration consisting of law system, management system, plan system and operation system, as well as suggestions for a system adapted to China’s institutional environment. There are two main forms of law system in the five countries. In countries using civil law system, the regulation system of urban regeneration consists of top-down laws, regulations and decrees. In comparison, countries using common law system mainly regulate urban regeneration in the form of “legal bundles” promulgated by sub-national administrative levels. Regeneration management shows obvious characteristics of decentralization. National and municipal levels are the relatively critical in actual affairs management. Projects running in the five countries are mostly conducted by market-oriented cooperative entities authorized by the administrative agencies. Regeneration projects are divided into two main types, one orients to enhance the competitiveness of cities, which mostly happens in comprehensive commercial zone in urban center, in contrast, the other aims at social justice, which is mainly community regeneration considering environment improvement and housing supply. Top-down elite decision-making and bottom-up autonomous declaration are both common in terms of regeneration project operation. Governments have adopted various creative institutional approaches in land management, financing, and space monitoring based on political intention and financial capabilities. Suggestions are put forward considering the current institutional environment and urban management characteristics in China.

Funds：

• [1] 邹兵 . 增量规划、存量规划与政策规划 [J]. 城市规划 , 2013, 37(2): 35-37, 55. 

  [2] 邹兵 . 增量规划向存量规划转型 : 理论解析与实践应对 [J]. 城市规划学 刊 , 2015(5): 12-19. 

  [3] 赵燕菁 . 存量规划 : 理论与实践 [J]. 北京规划建设 , 2014(4): 153-156. 

  [4] 施卫良 , 邹兵 , 金忠民 , 等 . 面对存量和减量的总体规划 [J]. 城市规划 , 2014, 38(11): 16-21. 

  [5] ROBERTS P, SYKES H, eds. Urban regeneration: a handbook[M]. California: Sage, 2000. 

  [6] TALLON A. Urban regeneration in the UK[M]. London: Routledge, 2013. 

  [7] ST?HR W B, ed. Global challenge and local response: initiatives for economic regeneration in contemporary Europe (Vol. 2)[M]. Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 1990. 

  [8] LICHFIELD D. Urban regeneration for the 1990s[M]. London: London Planning Advisory Committee, 1992. 

  [9] 周俭 , 阎树鑫 , 万智英 . 关于完善上海城市更新体系的思考 [J]. 城市规 划学刊 , 2019(01): 20-26. 

  [10] Loi n° 2003-710 du 1 ao?t 2003 d’orientation et de programmation pour la ville et la rénovation urbaine (1)[EB/OL]. (2003)[2020-02-01]. https://www. legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000428979. 

  [11] Baugesetzbuch(BGB) §136-§191[EB/OL]. 2004. [2020-02-01]. https:// dejure.org/gesetze/BauGB. 

  [12] New York State Legislature. New York Consolidated Laws[DB/OL]. (2018) [2020-02-01]. http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/navigate.cgi. 

  [13] Office of the Law Revision Counsel, The United States Code[DB/OL]. (2018) [2020-02-01]. https://uscode.house.gov/. 

  [14] Stationery Office. Localism Act 2011[EB/OL]. (2011)[2020-02-01]. http:// www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/20 /contents. 

  [15] DCLG. Regeneration to enable growth: a toolkit supporting community-led regeneration[R]. London: DCLG, 2012. 

  [16] 日本内务与通信部 . 都市计划法（昭和 43 年法律第 100 号）[EB/OL]. (1968)[2020-02-01]. http://elaws.e-gov.go.jp/search/elawsSearch/elaws_ search/lsg0500/detail?lawId=329AC0000000061. 

  [17] 日本内务与通信部 . 都市再开发法（平成 26 年法律第 42 号）[EB/ OL]. (1998)[2020-02-01]. http://elaws.e-gov.go.jp/search/elawsSearch/elaws_ search/lsg0500/detail?lawId=478GB0000000049. 

  [18] 日本内务与通信部 . 都市再生特别措置法（平成 30 年法律第 72 号） [EB/OL]. (2002)[2020-02-01]. https://elaws.e-gov.go.jp/search/elawsSearch/ elaws_search/lsg0500/detail?lawId=415AC0000000100&openerCode=1. 

  [19] KO Youngho. The different urban efforts to revitalize urban neighborhoods in the United States and the United Kingdom: comparative case study based on governmental responses focusing on urban neighborhood revitalization[D]. Texas: Texas A&M University, 2008. 

  [20] 巴里·卡林沃思 , 艾森特·纳丁 . 英国城乡规划 [M]. 陈闽齐 , 周剑云 , 戚冬瑾 , 等译 . 南京 : 东南大学出版社 , 2011. 

  [21] 刘晓逸, 运迎霞, 任利剑. 2010年以来英国城市更新政策革新与实践[J]. 国际城市规划 , 2018, 33(2): 104-110. DOI :10.22217/upi.2017.088. 

   [22] DBIS, HCA, HCLG. 2010 to 2015 government policy: Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) and enterprise zones[EB/OL]. (2015)[2020-02-01]. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2010-to-2015-governmentpolicy-local-enterprise-partnerships-leps-and-enterprise-zones/2010-to-2015- government-policy-local-enterprise-partnerships-leps-and-enterprise-zones. 

  [23] HCLG. National Planning Policy Framework[EB/OL]. London: HCLG. (2019)[2020-02-01]. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2010- to-2015-government-policy-local-enterprise-partnerships-leps-and-enterprisezones/2010-to-2015-government-policy-local-enterprise-partnerships-leps-andenterprise-zones. 

  [24] HCLG. Community Infrastructure Levy[EB/OL]. (2019)[2020-02-01]. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2010/9780111492390/contents.