点击排行
 
正文
全文下载次数:26
2021年第6期   DOI:10.19830/j.upi.2021.010
基于行动策划的街道公共空间治理路径研究——以2007—2020 年纽约市街道空间治理过程为例
Study on the Path of Street Public Space Governance Based on Programming: The Example of Street Space Governance Process in New York City (2007-2020)

陈煊 刘奕含 丁竹慧

Chen Xuan, Liu Yihan, Ding Zhuhui

关键词:行动策划;共识;街道;公共空间;治理路径;纽约市

Keywords:Programming; Consensus; Street; Public Space; Governance Path; New York City

摘要:

街道公共空间作为城市公共生活的重要载体,其治理水平历年来一直是地方政府公共服务能力的重要考核指标。当前我国街道公共空间治理包括规划、建设、管理、社会共治等阶段,并受市区级职能部门、街道、社区、企业、社会组织、市民等多个行动主体的共同影响。在此背景下,人民对街道生活的获得感成为地方政府执政的重要价值取向,然而现实中不同行动主体对同一政策目标的理解和执行存在巨大差异。针对近年来公共空间的公共性不断遭受质疑等具体问题,本研究以街道公共生活为载体,关注街道不同行动主体在公共空间的相互作用关系以及各主体间如何达成治理共识。文章以纽约街道公共空间的行动策划治理为例,探讨不同行动主体如何在行动试验过程中构建对公共性的共通并进行互识反馈,以及最终达成共识。本文结论指出,行动策划在纠正不同使用者的空间权益、认同感、参与度等方面具有重要价值,能真实有效地促进本地利益的保护以及地方文化和理念的传播。在弥补我国街道公共空间治理与公众互动板块的结构性缺失上,研究建议将行动策划凝练为稳定的空间治理技术环节,将末端的社会共治提前至设计规范和修订审批的前端,使街道公共空间的价值能够被重新认知、创造和使用。


Abstract:

As an essential carrier of urban public life, street public space’s governance capacity has been a vital assessment target for local governments’ public service capacity over the years. The local government’s governance of street space includes planning, construction, management and social co-governance. It has been influenced by various actors such as municipal and district-level functionaries, streets, communities, enterprises, social organizations and citizens. In this context, people’s sense of access to street life has become a strong value orientation for local governments to govern, yet there are huge differences in understanding and implementing the same policy goal by different actors in reality. In response to specific issues such as the publicness of public space being questioned in recent years, this study focuses on the relationship between different actors’ interactions in public spaces and how to reach a governance consensus. Using the example of programming in the governance of public spaces in New York’s streets, this paper explores how different actors construct a process of commonality, mutual knowledge and feedback, and finally consensus in the process of action experimentation. It is concluded that programming has an essential value in correcting the spatial rights, sense of identity and participation of different users. It can also contribute authentically and effectively to the protection of local interests, and disseminate local culture and ideas. In bridging the structural lack of interaction between the governance of street public space and the public segment in China, this study suggests condensing programming into a stable technical aspect of spatial governance, and advancing the end social co-governance to the front of the approval of design specifications and revisions, so that the value of street public space can be re-perceived, created and used.


版权信息:
基金项目:国家自然科学基金“基于自建街市及其邻域功能动态特征的协同规划方法研究”(51808205)
作者简介:

陈煊,博士,加州伯克利大学环境设计学院博士后,湖南大学建筑学院,丘陵地区城乡人居环境科学湖南省重点实验室,副教授。chenxuan@hnu.edu.cn

刘奕含,湖南大学建筑学院,硕士研究生。yihanliu62@hnu.edu.cn

丁竹慧,湖南大学建筑学院,博士研究生。dingzhuhui@hnu.edu.cn


译者简介:

参考文献:
  • [1] 张京祥, 陈浩. 空间治理:中国城乡规划转型的政治经济学[J]. 城市规划, 2014, 38(11): 9-15.

    [2] 孙施文. 解析中国城市规划:规划范式与中国城市规划发展[J]. 国际城市规划, 2019, 34(4): 1-7. DOI: 10.22217/upi.2019.305.

    [3] 《城市规划学刊》编辑部“. 城市精细化治理与高质量发展”学术笔谈[J]. 城市规划学刊, 2020(2): 1-11.

    [4] 石楠, 韩柯子. 包容性语境下的规划价值重塑及学科转型[J]. 城市规划学刊, 2016(1): 9-14.

    [5] SANDEL M J. The tyranny of merit: why the promise of moving up is pulling America apart[M]. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2020.

    [6] 刘佳燕. 规划公正:社会学视角下的城市规划[J]. 规划师, 2008, 24(9): 5-9.

    [7] 孙施文. 中国城乡规划学科发展的历史与展望[J]. 城市规划, 2016, 40(12): 106-112.

    [8] 张京祥, 林怀策, 陈浩. 中国空间规划体系40 年的变迁与改革[J]. 经济地理, 2018, 38(7): 1-6.

    [9] 王伟进, 毕蔚兰, 吕少德. 社会治理实践的国际经验及其启示[J]. 行政管理改革, 2020(5): 32-40.

    [10] 陈竹, 叶珉. 什么是真正的公共空间?——西方城市公共空间理论与空间公共性的判定[J]. 国际城市规划, 2009, 24(3): 44-49, 53.

    [11] SENNETT R. The conscience of the eye: the design and social life of cities[M]. WW Norton & Company, 1992.

    [12] YOUNG I M. The ideal of community and the politics of difference[J]. Social theory and practice, 1986: 1-26.

    [13] 王世福. 城市设计建构具有公共审美价值空间范型思考[J]. 城市规划, 2013, 37(3): 21-25.

    [14] DE MAGALH?ES C. Public space and the contracting-out of publicness: a framework for analysis[J]. Journal of urban design, 2010, 15(4): 559-574.

    [15] INNES J E, BOOHER D E. Consensus building and complex adaptive systems: a framework for evaluating collaborative planning[J]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1999, 65(4): 412-423.

    [16] INNES J E. Consensus building: clarifications for the critics[J]. Planning theory, 2004, 3(1): 5-20.

    [17] CARMONA M. Design governance: theorizing an urban design sub-field[J]. Journal of urban design, 2016, 21(6): 705-730.

    [18] 胡耀文. 国家治理现代化进程中的城市设计控制思考[J]. 城市规划, 2015, 39(9): 16-20.

    [19] 胡澎. 日本非营利组织参与社会治理的路径与实践[J]. 日本学刊, 2015(3): 140-158.

    [20] 吴祖泉. 解析第三方在城市规划公众参与的作用——以广州市恩宁路事件为例[J]. 城市规划, 2014(2): 62-68, 75.

    [21] 孙施文, 殷悦. 基于《城乡规划法》的公众参与制度[J]. 规划师, 2008, 24(5): 11-14.

    [22] 牛强, 董正哲. 基于移动社交平台的规划公众参与方法[J]. 规划师, 2017, 33(9): 46-51.

    [23] 周俭, 钟晓华. 城市规划中的社会公正议题——社会与空间视角下的若干规划思考[J]. 城市规划学刊, 2016(5): 9-12.

    [24] 龙元. 日常的输入[J]. 国际城市规划, 2019, 34(6): 2-5. DOI: 10.22217/upi.2019.507.

    [25] 陈煊, 玛格丽特·克劳福德. 日常都市主义理论发展及其对当代中国城市设计的挑战[J]. 国际城市规划, 2019, 34(6): 6-12. DOI: 10.22217/upi.2019.508.

    [26] INNES J E, BOOHER D E. Reframing public participation: strategies for the 21st century[J]. Planning theory & practice, 2004, 5(4): 419-436.

    [27] 祝贺, 唐燕. 英国城市设计运作的半正式机构介入:基于CABE 的设计治理实证研究[J]. 国际城市规划, 2019, 34(4): 120-126. DOI: 10.22217/upi.2018.156.

    [28] BALLON H, JACKSON K T. Robert Moses and the modern city: the transformation of New York[M]. WW Norton & Company New York, 2007.

    [29] SADIK-KHAN J, SOLOMONOW S. Streetfight: handbook for an urban revolution[M]. Penguin, 2017.

    [30] ARENDT H. The human condition[M]. University of Chicago Press, 2013.

    [31] PRYTHERCH D. “Streets for everyone”: intermodal equity and complete streets[M]. Springer, 2018.

    [32] 出口敦, 三浦詩乃, 中野卓, 等. ストリート·デザイン·マネジメント[M]. 学芸出版社, 2019.

    [33] SADLER R C. Strengthening the core, improving access: bringing healthy food downtown via a farmers’ market move[J]. Applied geography, 2016, 67: 119-128.

    [34] WOLF S A, GRIMSHAW V E, SACKS R, et al. The impact of a temporary recurrent street closure on physical activity in New York City[J]. Journal of urban health-bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 2015, 92(2): 230-241.

    [35] BRIDGES C N, PROCHNOW T M, WILKINS E C, et al. Examining the implementation of play streets: a systematic review of the grey literature[J]. Journal of public health management and practice, 2020, 26(3): E1-E10.

    [36] TUCKER J L, DEVLIN R T. Uncertainty and the governance of street vending: a critical comparison across the North/South divide[J]. International journal of urban and regional research, 2019, 43(3): 460-475.

    [37] HERMAN K, RODGERS M. From tactical urbanism action to institutionalised urban planning and educational tool: the evolution of Park(ing) Day[J]. Land, 2020, 9(7): 217-235.

    [38] BAX S, GIELEN P, IEVEN B. Interrupting the city: artistic constitutions of the public sphere[M]. 2015.

    [39] SHEPARD B. Urban spaces as living theater: toward a public space party for play, poetry, and naked bike rides (New York City, 2010-2015)[J]. Revue francaise detudes americaines, 2016(1): 107-124.

    [40] VIOLA R, ROE M, SHIN H-S. New York City pedestrian safety study & action plan[R]. New York City Department of Transportation, 2010.

    [41] New York City Department of Transportation. Sustainable streets index[R].

    [42] New York City Department of Transportation. Measuring the street: new metrics for 21st century streets[R]. 2012.

    [43] New York City Department of Transportation. Street design manual[R]. 2007, 2013, 2020.


《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

5604814