Zhang Ji, Li Yazhou, Liu Guannan, Ye Chenxi

Keywords： Spatial Planning; Central-Local Government Relationship; Urban Growth Boundary (UGB); Urban Development Boundary; Ecological Zones; Land Development Rights

Abstract：

As a direct means of spatial resource governance in China, the major focus of spatial planning is the balance and co-governance of central and local authorities. In this context, the urban development boundary and ecological zones become the focal points for balancing central and local authorities and focusing on the demands of “central control and local development”. However, due to the great differences in institutional settings, development stages, and planning systems, there are huge disparities in terms of the prerequisites, priorities, and measures for cogovernance between different countries. Taking Portland Metropolitan area in the USA, Randstad in the Netherlands, and Greater London in the UK as examples, this paper discusses the good governance practices of urban growth boundary (UGB) and ecological zones in three different types of spatial planning systems respectively, which could be concluded as “local-led”, “moderated”, and “central-controlled” modes. The paper demonstrates that in both central-controlled and localled spatial planning systems, both the central government and local authorities are committed to wrestling over land development rights through specific planning tools, such as “regional coordination”and “flexible mechanism”, to find the best balance between the top-down strong regulation and bottom-up development demands. On this basis, the paper puts forward some suggestions on the demarcation of UGB and ecological zones, as well as balancing the economic development with ecological protection for China’s territorial spatial planning.

Funds：

• [1] 张京祥. 治理现代化目标下国家空间规划体系的变迁与重构[J]. 自然资源学报, 2019(10): 2040-2050.

  [2] 武廷海. 国土空间规划体系中的城市规划初论[J]. 城市规划, 2019(8): 9-17.

  [3] 赵民. 国土空间规划体系建构的逻辑及运作策略探讨[J]. 城市规划学刊, 2019(4): 8-15.

  [4] 郝庆. 对机构改革背景下空间规划体系构建的思考[J]. 地理研究, 2018(10): 1938-1946.

  [5] 赵广英, 李晨. 基于立法视角的空间规划体系改革思路研究[J]. 城市规划学刊, 2018(5): 37-45.

  [6] 沈洁, 李娜, 郑晓华. 南京实践：从“多规合一”到市级空间规划体系[J]. 规划师, 2018(10): 119-123.

  [7] 张媛明. 市—区府际事权视角下国土空间规划编制思考[J]. 现代城市研究, 2019(12): 47-53.

  [8] 林坚, 乔治洋. 博弈论视角下市县级“多规合一”研究[J]. 中国土地科学, 2017, 31(5): 12-19.

  [9] 林坚, 许超诣. 土地发展权、空间管制与规划协同[J]. 城市规划, 2014(1): 26-34.

  [10] 宣晓伟. 中国空间规划体系的构建和完善——以中央与地方关系为视角[J]. 区域经济评论, 2019(2): 15-31.

  [11] 袁奇峰, 谭诗敏, 李刚, 等. 空间规划：为何？何为？何去？ [J]. 规划师, 2018(7): 11-17, 25.

  [12] 林坚, 赵晔. 国家治理、国土空间规划与“央地”协同——兼论国土空间规划体系演变中的央地关系发展及趋向[J]. 2019(9): 20-23.

  [13] 桑劲, 董金柱.“ 多规合一”导向的空间治理制度演进——理论、观察与展望[J]. 城市规划, 2018(4): 18-23.

  [14] 张兵, 林永新, 刘宛, 等. 城镇开发边界与国家空间治理——划定城镇开发边界的思想基础[J]. 城市规划学刊, 2018(4): 16-23.

  [15] 张衔春, 龙迪, 边防. 兰斯塔德“绿心”保护：区域协调建构与空间规划创新[J]. 国际城市规划, 2015(5): 57-65.

  [16] 袁琳. 荷兰兰斯塔德“绿心战略”60 年发展中的争论与共识——兼论对当代中国的启示[J]. 国际城市规划, 2015(6): 50-56.

  [17] 文萍, 吕斌, 赵鹏军. 国外大城市绿带规划与实施效果——以伦敦、东京、首尔为例[J]. 国际城市规划, 2015( 增刊1): 57-63.

  [18] 周姝天, 翟国方, 施益军. 英国空间规划经验及其对我国的启示[J]. 国际城市规划, 2017(4): 82-89. DOI: 10.22217/upi.2016.520.

  [19] 周静, 沈迟. 荷兰空间规划体系的改革及启示[J]. 国际城市规划, 2017(3): 113-121. DOI: 10.22217/upi.2016.345.

  [20] 蔡玉梅, 高延利, 张建平, 等. 美国空间规划体系的构建及启示[J]. 规划师, 2017(2): 28-34.

  [21] Metro. Concepts for growth: report to council[R]. Portland: Metro Collection, 1994.

  [22] Metro. 2040 growth concept[EB/OL]. (2014-12-19)[2020-06-26]. http://www.oregonmetro.gov/2040-growth-concept.

  [23] Ministry of Housing and Spatial Planning. First memorandum on spatial planning[R]. 1960.

  [24] Ministry of Housing and Spatial Planning. Second memorandum on spatial planning[R]. 1966.

  [25] Ministry of Housing and Spatial Planning. Third memorandum on spatial planning[R]. 1974.

  [26] Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment. Fourth memorandum on spatial planning[R]. 1988.

  [27] Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment. Fifth memorandum on spatial planning: making space, sharing space[R]. 2001.

  [28] 张书海, 王小羽. 空间规划职能组织与权责分配——日本、英国、荷兰的经验借鉴[J]. 国际城市规划, 2020(3): 71-76. DOI: 10.19830/j.upi.2018.323.

  [29] 严雅琦, 田莉, 范晨璟. 城乡边缘区的开发与保护：英国空间规划的经验及对我国的启示[J]. 上海城市规划, 2019(8): 91-97.

  [30] MACE A, BLANC F, GORDON I R, et al. A 21st century metropolitan green belt[R]. London: London School of Economics, 2016.

  [31] 贾俊, 高晶. 英国绿带政策的起源、发展和挑战[J]. 中国园林, 2005(3): 69-72.

  [32] Harlow Council. Harlow local development plan: green wedge review[R]. 2014.

  [33] 荀春兵, 李荣, 韩永超, 等．“央地关系”改革视角下国土空间规划体系构建思考[J]. 规划师, 2020(10): 58-63.

  [34] 边晓慧, 张成福. 府际关系与国家治理：功能、模型与改革思路[J]. 中国行政管理, 2016(5): 14-18.

  [35] 杨馥源, 陈剩勇, 张丙宣. 城市政府改革与城市治理：发达国家的经验与启示[J]. 浙江社会科学, 2010(8): 19-23, 126.

  [36] 吴巍. 跨区域的土地指标交易及风险分析——以鄂州市为例[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2016.

  [37] 李新仓, 阎其华. 土地开发权转移框架下我国建设用地指标行政配置的法律规制[J]. 广东社会科学, 2018(5): 229-236.