| 摘要: |
| 韧性作为现代城市应对不确定性变
化和威胁的新范式，也是维持城市系统正
常运行的有效途径，明确韧性城市的定义内
涵、核心机制和评估策略对其实践建设具有
重要意义。首先，总结韧性的研究缘起、核心
机制和认知观点。其次，阐释韧性城市理论
的内涵与外延，从多个角度对其定义进行梳
理，简要分析韧性与适应性、可持续性间的
关系。根据研究对象的不同将城市韧性归纳
为两种类型：城市“特定韧性”和城市“一般
韧性”，在此基础上对韧性城市的评估体系
和提升策略进行归纳。结果发现韧性模式的
确为城市复杂问题的解决的有效范式，但仍
需要在韧性分类研究和因地制宜的标准体系
等方面进行继续提升和完善。 |
| 关键词: 韧性城市 可持续性 适应性 实践
途径 评估方法 |
| DOI：10.13791/j.cnki.hsfwest.20200215 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目:国家重点研发计划资助项目（2018YFC0704600） |
|
| Progress on the Theory and Practice of Resilient City |
|
YAN Shuiyu,TANG Jun
|
| Abstract: |
| Since the concept of resilience was first introduced into the scientific research
field by Canadian biologist Holling C. S. in 1973, it has been widely used in social-ecology,
urban economics and other fields, and has become a hot issue in the research of complex
system science. For urban complex systems, resilience thinking is not only a new paradigm
for modern urban systems to cope with uncertainties and threats, but also an effective way to
maintain the normal functioning of urban functions and structures. As a descriptive concept
and boundary object, resilience can promote multidisciplinary collaboration, but also has the
characteristics of conceptual extensibility and ambiguity, which determines the difficulty
in quantifying and practicing research of resilience. However, it is of great significance to
analyze the core mechanism of resilience and define the connotation and extension of the
resilient city, the same is true to summarizing the resilience assessment strategies for the
quantitative research and practice construction of the resilient city. Therefore, in this paper, it
focuses on the following three problems: 1) Since the existing definitions of resilience cities
are numerous and diverse, where are their main differences and contradictions, and are there
any systematic concepts applicable to multidisciplinary and research fields? 2) What is the core
connotation and operational mechanism of the theory of resilient cities? 3) It is obvious that the
construction strategies, content frameworks and implementation approaches of resilient cities
are not uniform and inconsistent. Based on the different development stages and backgrounds,
how to build corresponding resilient assessment systems and adaptive strategies to improve the
general ability of urban systems to cope with uncertainties and disturbances? From this point,
the article begins with a summary of the research origins, cognitive perspectives, and core
mechanisms of resilience. It is found that the concept of resilience was first used in engineering
and psychology, and then widely used in medicine, ecology, sociology, economics and other
fields. The concept of resilience has experienced three cognitive processes: engineering
resilience, ecological resilience and social-ecological resilience. The early concept of resilience
is more inclined to engineering thinking. It has the characteristics of hypothetical equilibrium
paradigm, which rarely exists in reality. It is called engineering resilience and can be measured
by the time to return to the original state. Holling has found that there could be more than one
steady state in the ecosystem when he studied the changes of animal populations. The ability of
the system to adjust to change is called ecological resilience and can be measured by the amount
of interference, and the system can be absorbed before it turns to another state. When resilience
thinking is used to study complex systems and the interactions between them, it is called social-ecological resilience or evolutional resilience. It focuses on the maintenance of system structure and function, and is often measured by the ability
of system self-organizing learning and the ability to absorb interference and recombination before it changes. Adaptive cycle and Panarchy theory
are the core mechanisms of resilience. According to this, the dynamic operation process of social ecosystem can be divided into four stages:
development, preservation, release, and recombination. However, the dynamic change of the system is not limited to the four stages, any two-stage
conversion can be performed on multiple scales in special cases. Panarchy is a multiple cross-scale, nested adaptive loops, which can be used to
describe unpredictable changes in systems and hierarchical connections across scales. Secondly, the article explains the connotation and extension
of the theory of resilience city, and sorts out its definition from various angles. It’s found that the contradiction of the definition of resilient city
mainly focuses on different six aspects: different definition of city, the divergence of equilibrium notions, the positive or not of resilience concept,
various pathways to urban resilience, diversified understanding of adaptability, and the time scale. Combining the above contradictions, urban
resilience refers to the ability of an urban system and all its constituent socio-ecological and socio-technical networks across temporal and spatial
scales to maintain or rapidly return to desired functions in the face of a disturbance, to adapt to change, and to quickly transform systems that
limit current or future adaptive capacity. Then, the article briefly analyzes the relationship between resilience, adaptability and sustainability.
Adaptability can be understood as the ability of people or group to manage resilience. This kind of management ability determines whether the
system can successfully transit to an ideal state or avoid transit to an unexpected state. From the perspective of resilience, the urban sustainable
development is not to maintain the system in a stable state by reducing dynamic changes or optimizing performance, but to objectively recognize
the threat of unknown changes to urban development, while emphasizing the integrity of the urban system and the normal operation of urban
functions. Urban resilience can be classified into two types according to different research objects: urban specified resilience and urban general
resilience. On this basis, it summarizes the evaluation system and promotion strategy of the resilient citie. Finally, it recognizes that the resilience
is indeed an effective paradigm for complex urban problems, however, it is still necessary to improve the classification research and the standard
system adapted to local conditions. |
| Key words: Resilient City Sustainability Adaptability Practical Approach Evaluation Method |
