Zhang Jingxiang, Wang Yu

Keywords： Regional Integration; Regional Governance; Institutional Distance; New York Metropolitan Area; Tokyo Metropolitan Area

Abstract：

The current pace of reshaping the global city-regional competition pattern has accelerated, and as China proposes to build a “dual circulation” national development pattern and a “national united market”, regional integration and promoting the formation of a complementary pattern of advantages have gained more urgent significance. Regional spaces such as metropolitan areas and urban agglomerations have become essential space unit. However, there are still significant institutional factors restricting regional  integration in China, which means the traditional administrative division system and localized management system can no longer meet the increasing needs of cross-border public affairs. The exploration of regional institutional space construction in New York metropolitan area and Tokyo Metropolitan Area has provided experience for China. This paper constructs the restriction mechanism of institutional distance on regional integration from three aspects of institutional space boundary, institutional space resources and institutional space scale. Based on the analysis framework, it analyzes the experience and shortcomings of the two metropolitan areas, including regional government structure, cooperation mode and regional spatial planning. Finally, combined with China’s governance system and development stage, for the problems such as insufficient institutional supply, weak non-governmental forces and mismatch of spatial planning in the current process of regional integration, it provides a possible solution to reduce the institutional distance effects from three parts: the extension and integration of institutional spatial boundary, the diversification of subjects in resource allocation and the supply of regional spatial planning.

Funds：

• [1] NI H, TIAN Y. China’s industrial upgrading and value chain restructuring under the new development pattern[J]. China economist, 2021, 16(5): 72-102.
  [2] 彭彦强. 长三角区域地方政府合作与资源的跨行政区配置[J]. 经济体制改革, 2012(4): 37-41.
  [3] 刘汉屏, 刘锡田. 地方政府竞争：分权、公共物品与制度创新[J]. 改革, 2003(6): 23-28 .
  [4] HARRISON J, HOYLER M. Governing the new metropolis[J]. Urban studies, 2014, 51(11): 2249-2266.
  [5] World Bank. World development report 2009: reshaping economic geography[M]. The World Bank, 2008.
  [6] 张京祥. 全球化背景中的区域发展与规划转变[J]. 国外城市规划, 2004(3): 1-4.
  [7] NORTH D C. Institutions[J]. Journal of economic perspectives, 1991(5): 97-112.
  [8] 顾朝林. 城市群研究进展与展望[J]. 地理研究, 2011, 30(5): 771-784.
  [9] PIERRE J. Can urban regimes travel in time and space? urban regime theory, urban governance theory, and comparative urban politics[J]. Urban affairs review, 2014, 50(6): 864-889.
  [10] 傅沂, 赵子奇. 经济地理学制度理论的发展与建构的重要方向[J]. 热带地理, 2019, 39(5): 711-720.
  [11] 徐承红. 新熊彼特主义区域经济理论研究进展[J]. 经济学动态, 2012(7): 143-151.
  [12] KOSTOVA T. Success of the transnational transfer of organizational practices within multinational companies[D]. Minnesota: University of Minnesota, 1996.
  [13] 代佳欣. 城市公共资源配置失衡的三重归因：制度壁垒、发展主义与自我建构[J]. 现代经济探讨, 2016(8): 19-23.
  [14] 殷洁, 罗小龙. 尺度重组与地域重构：城市与区域重构的政治经济学分析[J]. 人文地理, 2013, 28(2): 67-73.
  [15] 杨逢银. 行政分权、县际竞争与跨区域治理[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2015.
  [16] 王雨, 张京祥. 区域经济一体化的机制与效应——基于制度距离的空间发展解释[J]. 经济地理, 2022, 42(1): 28-36.
  [17] 罗震东. 改革开放以来中国城市行政区划变更特征及趋势[J]. 城市问题, 2008(6): 77-82.
  [18] 陈浩, 张京祥. 功能区与行政区“双轨制”：城市政府空间管理与创新——以南京市区为例[J]. 经济地理, 2017, 37(10): 59-67.
  [19] 王开泳, 陈田, 刘毅.“ 行政区划本身也是一种重要资源”的理论创新与应用[J]. 地理研究, 2019, 38(2): 195-206.
  [20] 张京祥, 殷洁, 罗小龙. 地方政府企业化主导下的城市空间发展与演化研究[J]. 人文地理, 2006(4): 1-6.
  [21] 匡贞胜, 虞阳. 中国行政区划改革的内卷化风险及其生成机制[J]. 人文地理, 2020, 35(2): 93-101.
  [22] 张可云, 李晨. 新中国70 年行政区划调整的历程、特征与展望[J]. 社会科学辑刊, 2021(1): 2, 118-128.
  [23] 李郇, 谢石营, 杜志威, 等. 从行政区划调整到同城化规划——中国区域管治的转向[J]. 城市规划, 2016, 40(11): 72-77, 86.
  [24] 张衔春, 唐承辉, 许顺才, 等. 中国城市群空间规划的历史演化与空间逻辑——基于新国家空间视角[J]. 城市规划, 2021, 45(5): 21-29.
  [25] 史晋川, 谢瑞平. 区域经济发展模式与经济制度变迁[J]. 学术月刊, 2002(5): 49-55.
  [26] 李金龙, 翟国亮. 撤县设区的科学规范探究[J]. 云南社会科学, 2016(5): 18-22.
  [27] 王旭. 城市地域扩大，政府规模变小——20 世纪美国城市和区域发展的基本走向[J]. 求是学刊, 2008(1): 127-132.
  [28] KANTOR P, NELLES J. Global city region governance and multicentered development: a North American perspective[J]. Environment and planning c: government and policy, 2015, 33(3): 475-495.
  [29] 谭康林. 美国的特别区治理与公共服务提供[J]. 甘肃行政学院学报, 2011(2): 43-51, 119.
  [30] 马祖琦“. 行政区经济”的弊端及其解决方略[J]. 城市问题, 2010(6): 79-84, 90.
  [31] BAHL R W, LINN J F. Urban public finance in developing countries[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.
  [32] KANTOR P, LEFèVRE C, SAITO A, et al. Struggling giants: city-region governance in London, New York, Paris, and Tokyo[M]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2012.
  [33] 杨爱平, 张吉星. 纽约—新泽西港务局运作模式对粤港澳大湾区跨境治理的启示[J]. 华南师范大学学报( 社会科学版), 2019(1): 102-108, 191.
  [34] 孟美侠, 张学良, 潘洲. 跨越行政边界的都市区规划实践——纽约大都市区四次总体规划及其对中国的启示[J]. 重庆大学学报(社会科学版), 2019, 25(4): 22-37.
  [35] 陶希东. 美国纽约大都市区治理：经验、教训与启示[J]. 城市观察, 2021(2): 85-95.
  [36] 周素红, 陈慧玮. 美国大都市区规划组织的区域协调机制及其对中国的启示[J]. 国际城市规划, 2008, 23(6): 93-98.
  [37] 马祖琦. 大都市政区：理论探讨·经验借鉴·实证分析——兼论上海直辖市政区改革[D]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2004.
  [38] 李媛媛, 王泽. 东亚地区大都市的管理层级设置及启示——基于对东京、首尔、台北和香港的归纳分析[J]. 地方治理研究, 2018(3): 30-41, 79.
  [39] 杨爱平, 林振群. 世界三大湾区的跨域治理机构：模式分类与比较分析[J]. 公共行政评论, 2020, 13(2): 40-57, 194-195.
  [40] 杨达. 日本“广域连携”区域治理模式探析[J]. 政治学研究, 2017(6): 69-80, 127.
  [41] 白智立. 日本广域行政的理论与实践：以东京“首都圈”发展为例[J]. 日本研究, 2017(1): 10-26.
  [42] 赵岩, 郭小鹏. 日本大都市圈广域联合治理模式创新研究——以首都圈首脑会议为例[J]. 日本问题研究, 2019, 33(3): 73-80.
  [43] SAITO A. Recentralization of Tokyo: contradiction and political struggle for regional policy in Japan[J]. International journal of Japanese sociology, 2021, 30(1): 80-93.
  [44] 符天蓝. 国际湾区区域协调治理机构及对粤港澳大湾区的启示[J]. 城市观察, 2018(6): 20-27.
  [45] 马璇, 张振广. 东京广域首都圈构想及对我国大都市圈规划编制的启示[J]. 上海城市规划, 2019(2): 41-48.
  [46] 杨官鹏. 日本跨行政区域组织机构管理经验及其对长三角一体化发展的启示[J]. 云南行政学院学报, 2020, 22(2): 135-143.
  [47] 刘焱. 日本地方自治的表里[J]. 日本学论坛, 2006(4): 24-29.
  [48] SLACK E. Metropolitan governance: principles and practice[R]. Washington: Inter-American Development Bank, 2019.
  [49] KITCHIN R, MOORE-CHERRY N. Fragmented governance, the urban data ecosystem and smart city-regions: the case of Metropolitan Boston[J]. Regional studies, 2021, 55(12): 1913-1923.
  [50] GODO Y. Thriving Tokyo and declining Osaka: the role of the local governance system[M] // SHAN W, YANG L, eds. Metropolitan circles development and the future of urbanization. Singapore: World Scientific, 2020: 19-33.
  [51] 张京祥, 刘荣增. 美国大都市区的发展及管理[J]. 国外城市规划, 2001(5): 6-8.
  [52] SHI Y. The rise of specialized governance in American federalism: testing links between local government autonomy and formation of special district governments[J]. Publius: the journal of federalism, 2017, 47(1): 99-130.
  [53] SIGLER T J, MOUAT C M, SEARLE G, et al. “Networked coalitions” as metropolitan governance: lessons from the emergence of Australia’s Committees for Cities and Regions[J]. Journal of urban affairs, 2021, 43(1): 182-200.
  [54] GALLAND D, HARRISON J, TEWDWR-JONES M. What is metropolitan planning and governance for?[M] // Metropolitan regions, planning and governance. Cham: Springer, 2020: 237-256.
  [55] 申兵, 赵斌. 完善区域合作型功能区协同共治机制[J]. 宏观经济管理, 2021(5): 21-27.
  [56] 陶希东. 美国旧金山湾区跨界规划治理的经验与启示[J]. 行政管理改革, 2020(10): 83-91.
  [57] 易承志. 跨界公共事务、区域合作共治与整体性治理[J]. 学术月刊, 2017, 49(11): 67-78.
  [58] 张紧跟. 新区域主义：美国大都市区治理的新思路[J]. 中山大学学报(社会科学版), 2010, 50(1): 131-141.
  [59] 李兰冰, 刘秉镰“. 十四五”时期中国区域经济发展的重大问题展望[J]. 管理世界, 2020, 36(5): 8, 36-51.
  [60] ZIAFATI BAFARASAT A, PUGALIS L. In search of cohesive metropolitan governance: enticements and obligations[J]. European planning studies, 2020, 28(8): 1474-1492.
  [61] 何登辉, 王克稳. 我国区域合作：困境、成因及法律规制[J]. 城市规划, 2018,42(11): 64-70.
  [62] 易承志. 超越行政边界：城市化、大都市区整体性治理与政府治理模式创新[J]. 南京社会科学, 2016(5): 48-52, 99.
  [63] 肖庆文. 省管县体制改革的政府行为差异与推进策略选择[J]. 中国行政管理, 2011(9): 109-113.
  [64] MARGERUM R D, LEWIS R, DOBRINICH S. Collaborative metropolitan governance: an evaluation of local adoption in Denver[J]. Cities, 2019, 93: 136-144.
  [65] BAHL R. The decentralization of governance in metropolitan areas[J]. Financing metropolitan governments in developing countries, 2013: 85-105.
  [66] TAYLOR Z. Regionalism from above: intergovernmental relations in Canadian metropolitan governance[J]. Commonwealth journal of local governance, 2022, 26: 139-159.
  [67] MOORE-CHERRY N, TOMANEY J. Spatial planning, metropolitan governance and territorial politics in Europe: Dublin as a case of metrophobia?[J]. European urban and regional studies, 2019, 26(4): 365-381.