| 摘要: |
| 在十九大新时代发展背景下，城市
双修工作对宜居社区评估提出了更高的要
求。本文首先对宜居社区评估的理论研究与
问题进行了阐述；其次，基于评估的四个难
点提出了宜居社区评估的四项技术方法和优
势；最后，以福州市为例，阐述了该评估方法
的实际操作，形成了具有双修可实施性的评
估结论。 |
| 关键词: 共同缔造 双修 宜居社区 社区
评估 民生 满意度调查 |
| DOI：10.13791/j.cnki.hsfwest.20190211 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目: |
|
| Evaluation Method and Practice of Livable Community Based on City Betterment and EcologicalRestoration—A Case Study of Fuzhou City |
|
WANG Xuan
|
| Abstract: |
| In April 2017, Fuzhou was listed as the second batch of city betterment and ecological
restoration pilot cities nationwide. Under the background of new era, “people centered”
has become the important content of adhering to and developing socialism with Chinese
characteristics, therefore, the city betterment and ecological restoration of Fuzhou is based on
the state of “blessed” as the goal which Xi Jinping is proposed. On the basis of city betterment
and ecological restoration, more attention should be paid to promoting happiness of the city,
and the livable community construction should be brought into the work system. In view of the
implementation characteristics of the city betterment and ecological restoration, we must first
evaluate the livable community and find out the livable shortcoming of the community, so as
to carry out targeted construction work. Therefore, it is necessary to study and develop a set of
livable community assessment methods suitable for the characteristics of city betterment and
ecological restoration work.
At present, the domestic theoretical research on livable communities mainly focuses on
the construction of index system, and the application of evaluation model is gradually in line
with the international standards. Many evaluation systems are built with the comprehensive
evaluation model of community development. In the current “residents participation, jointly
created”, the development trend of livable community planning has been on the agenda, but
specific operation about livable community comprehensive evaluation in China and guidance on
the implementation of research is still not sufficient. Meanwhile, the application of the evaluation
index system mainly focuses on community comparison and merit, and on problems, found that
short plate screening application obviously is inadequate.
However, the city betterment and ecological restoration work is not a planning, but a specific
construction project to make up for the shortcoming of the city. Therefore, it also puts forward
higher requirements for the corresponding livable community evaluation: firstly, it should look
for livable short board. As the community problem is all-encompassing, detailed data of the
community must be collected through a variety of ways. Through scientific data analysis, the
shortcoming of livable community construction must be identified to point out the direction for
the city betterment and ecological restoration work. Secondly, it should determine the object of
transformation. The number of communities is generally relatively large, and the communities
or areas with prominent problems must be identified as the focus and object of city bettermentand ecological restoration work, so as to provide a basis for the project library. Thirdly, it should indicate the construction path. According to the
characteristics and specific problems of the community, it provides a reference construction path for city betterment and ecological restoration work,
such as classified governance, hierarchical promotion or itemized breakthrough, etc. It can be seen that the traditional livable community assessment
is difficult to meet the specific requirements of city betterment and ecological restoration work, which needs further research and practice.
According to the requirements of city betterment and ecological restoration work for livable community assessment, this paper puts forward
four technical points. Firstly, it formulates unified standards to ensure the systematicness and standardization of evaluation contents. Secondly, a
variety of evaluation methods should be combined to avoid the uniqueness of the evaluation subject. Thirdly, the evaluation and the quantitative data
statistics unifies, enhances the operability of evaluation conclusion. Fourthly, combining GIS digital means to realize information spatialization and
enhance the accuracy and scientificity of evaluation and analysis.
Taking Fuzhou City as an example, this paper then expounds the practical operation process of the evaluation method. There are mainly four
evaluation methods: the first method is the resident questionnaire, through which to solicit the residents’ overall emotional evaluation of the city’s
livable degree. The second way is self-assessment of community neighborhood committee, which solicits the evaluation of community livability.
The third way is collecting the basic information of community neighborhood committee. The fourth way is to visit key communities to understand
the livable conditions of some representative communities. Through data analysis and comparison, a relatively comprehensive evaluation conclusion
of livable community is formed, which provides a basis for city betterment and ecological restoration work.
First of all, the evaluation conclusion identified 13 specific livable shortcomings of Fuzhou city from the complex community livable content, to
achieve the goal of finding the shortcomings. Secondly, from the evaluation of 276 communities, the “uninhabitable” communities were identified.
As the key object of city betterment and ecological restoration work, the communities’ governance project library was set up. Thirdly, the three types
of old community, new community and mixed community are evaluated, which provide the ideas of classification construction and guidance for the
city betterment and ecological restoration work. Finally, the evaluation constructed the GIS-based Fuzhou community management database, and
provides a platform for the subsequent community construction and management.
In the practice of Fuzhou livable community evaluation, a set of evaluation methods with high practicability has been developed, and
good results have been achieved in the actual operation process. This evaluation method is still the first time to explore, there are still many
shortcomings. Taking community neighborhood committee as the object of investigation also has certain limitations and subjectivity, which still
needs to be studied and improved. |
| Key words: City Betterment and Ecological Restoration Programs Livable Communities Community Assessment People’s Livelihood Satisfaction
Survey |
